18:28:15 #startmeeting DebConf14 meeting 18:28:15 Meeting started Tue Jun 3 18:28:15 2014 UTC. The chair is moray. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:28:15 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:28:16 CarlFK: whiteboard.debian.net 18:28:21 * harmoney eyes vorlon. 18:28:23 #topic Introductions 18:28:29 #chair vorlon 18:28:29 Current chairs: moray vorlon 18:28:33 #chair harmoney 18:28:34 Current chairs: harmoney moray vorlon 18:29:01 Here, but warning - class in 1 hour, so in about 45 minutes, I'll be scarce. 18:29:35 * edrz waves 18:29:48 Agenda (current) is at https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf14/Meetings under the correct date/time/meeting place for those who want to follow along at home. 18:30:03 * cworth actually shows up this time 18:30:08 * gturner waves 18:30:24 Yay cworth! gturner! kees! PDX Represent! 18:30:29 \o/ 18:30:38 so, should we start ? 18:30:40 #topic Volunteer updates 18:30:52 I don't understand the wiki question, but apparently there is something on that topic now 18:31:01 harmoney: ? 18:31:14 I... I don't see that on the agenda. 18:31:20 Roll call? 18:31:23 moray: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf14/Meetings#Agenda_3 18:31:29 moray: you are looking at local team agenda for tonight 18:31:29 are you looking the correct agenda ? 18:31:30 moray: That's our local team meeting tonight. ;) 18:31:34 :) 18:31:34 Sorry! 18:31:39 Agenda 18:31:39 Roll Call 18:31:39 Team Status Updates 18:31:39 Bursaries/Attendee Sponsorship 18:31:39 Summit talk/event registration, CfP 18:31:41 Registration - outstanding issues 18:31:44 How to handle non-attendees; need to register in Summit? 18:31:46 Specific questions of PSU? 18:31:46 :O 18:31:49 Conference sponsorship/Budget Update 18:31:51 Video? 18:31:54 Networking/Hardware? 18:31:57 Daytrip/Conference Dinner 18:31:59 Next meeting 18:32:02 #topic Team status updates: Bursaries/Attendee Sponsorship 18:32:10 There we are. 18:32:17 faw: You want to take this, or are you present? 18:32:38 harmoney: I think faw said he will not be around 18:32:49 If not, for those who are not watching the list, bursaries is finished and emails have gone out to everyone who applied. 18:33:11 vorlon commented that there is leftover food/accom sponsorship monies, and he'd like to transfer some to fund a few more travel requests. 18:33:40 I do believe he intends to send a message to the mailing list, but I'm sketchy on details. 18:33:53 #topic Summit talk/event registration, CfP 18:34:12 This would be vorlon's, I think. Kees, do you have an update in his stead? 18:34:28 from talks point of view 18:34:34 oh bah, did I add stuff to the wrong agenda? I sure did 18:34:38 I don't, no. 18:34:51 * santiago_ is around 18:34:54 vorlon: I add it, since I think everyone around is wondering 18:35:06 about the CfP, better to have at least an idea where we are 18:35:14 (To avoid confusion in the future, I'm going to make a Local vs Global tree in the Meetings page.) 18:35:27 harmoney: ++ 18:35:32 #Action harmoney to sort through Meetings page and separate out local vs global 18:35:53 harmoney: hm, perhaps, though merged is good for checking history 18:36:08 rmayorga: no, I mean that I was adding entries to the local team agenda instead of this one, oops 18:36:23 moray: They can link to each other, I'm just concerned that we're going to have several local meetings over the next couple of months and that page is going to get spammy. 18:36:30 anyway, on the topic 18:36:38 harmoney: well, better that than hidden information 18:36:43 Yeah. 18:37:04 vorlon: Do you have Summit CfP update, or are you still on the phone with chatterbox? 18:37:07 CfP draft is ready, we just wait for the summit form 18:37:15 harmoney: the latter 18:37:30 but the status is that I haven't yet had time to work on it, but will do tonight 18:37:37 so we just assume "real soon now" and continue? 18:37:54 #action vorlon to Summit-ify the talks/event registration section. 18:37:57 Next! 18:38:15 #topic Registration - outstanding issues 18:38:22 "How to handle non-attendees; need to register in Summit?" 18:38:27 what non-attendees are meant? 18:38:33 if they're really non-attendees, then no 18:38:35 dependents 18:38:39 who will be on the day trip 18:38:39 but if they're attending anything at all then yes 18:38:47 if they're on the day trip, they are attendees :p 18:38:50 I'm not sure why this is an agenda question 18:38:51 We have a few people who are bringing families, and they need to be included in head counts for things like conference dinner and day trip 18:39:08 Because I have 3 outstanding requests on depedents. 18:39:11 if they want to attend something, they are an attendee 18:39:14 So, they're going to be added to Summit as attendees? 18:39:27 we already had an agreement to provide registration with a form for registering them out of band 18:39:36 Oh right - that's goign to be Front Desk stuff, isn't it? 18:39:38 harmoney: I think they should 18:39:38 yes 18:39:54 Ok. Question answered and now logged. 18:39:56 it may help figure out if the 3 talk rooms are going to overflow - 18:39:59 * gwolf gotta go - o/ 18:40:06 harmoney: if it's done out-of-band, there's a bigger risk of messing up numbers calculations, but ok 18:40:16 harmoney: and we have ana's request 18:40:38 n0rman: I know. PSU is working on seeing if they can get an infant bed. I've been nagging him about it. 18:40:39 (hm, is gwolf's client really announcing who he closed /query windows with?) 18:40:42 moray: I am not asking families to create accounts in the names of their two-year-old children 18:41:17 vorlon: I wouldn't expect 2-year-olds to take meals/regular bed places/etc. 18:41:32 so sure, that seems a special case 18:41:33 I think a sane way for Front Desk to be able to include "+3 dependents" or some such for event registrations is fine. 18:41:52 if they take up room on the bus, they need to be counted somehow 18:41:58 Exactly. 18:42:07 harmoney: but I think she was asking about if she will need to pay for her son 18:42:24 anyway, this does seem like something registration@/front desk can deal with 18:42:29 n0rman: Once I have all information, i'll get back to her; I let her know I'm working on it. 18:42:30 I think that is more PSU related n0rman 18:42:34 or at least to pay for an extra bed or something 18:42:38 I think we can give that group permission to do anything sensible, and not 100% require registration for such people 18:42:41 rmayorga: yes, I think :) 18:42:43 moray: Right. 18:42:56 gturner: You're still working on Front Desk Summit stuff, right? 18:43:05 "Specific questions of PSU?" <-- what is this about? 18:43:22 harmoney: yes i will be, but haven't started anything yet 18:43:24 moray: I'm not sure. I don't remember adding it. 18:43:29 gturner: No worries. 18:43:50 #action gturner to work with Front Desk team on their needs, including how to register non-"attendees" for conference events. 18:44:03 NEXT! 18:44:11 #topic Conference sponsorship/budget update 18:44:21 I can do this one! Proudly! 18:44:45 Sponsorship team is wrapping up actively seeking sponsorship (we'll still take any money given to us, but we're no longer chasing companies, except for one contact of mine). 18:45:06 And, we met, and exceeded, our goal. 18:45:18 #info Sponsorship is a solved problem 18:45:34 Conference, at this point, is fully funded, and we're now able to return funds to the Debian general fund. 18:45:42 I should point out that this must be, easily, a record 18:45:55 is it known about how much more will be needed to cover the deferred travel sponsorship queue? 18:46:17 edrz: We can poke at bursaries, and ask to extend the budget if the team so wishes. 18:46:18 note that "fully funded" does include up to $17k from existing Debian funds 18:46:42 But, at that point, we need to get permission to use Debian funds again. 18:46:50 which is quite a bit less than what was requested of the DPL, and the number may still go down 18:47:29 (i.e, we asked the DPL for up to $36k, and sponsorship means we're now taking no more than $17k) 18:47:31 edrz: We will probably get some extra money back from the budget when we ask for confirmations 18:47:40 moray: of course. 18:47:56 well, step one is to calculate more precisely how much we're paying for our sponsored attendees 18:48:04 i.e., accurately counting our person-nights 18:48:07 and seeing how much is left 18:48:10 (which is at least some) 18:48:25 we can't really tell that until we force more accurate dates 18:48:43 moray: the defaults already give us an upper bound 18:48:43 I think a lot of people haven't booked travel yet 18:48:55 We could ask faw to email those who received sponsorship and ask they book as soon as possible and adjust their dates. 18:49:05 To assist with bookkeeping. 18:49:19 right -- and to inform us of the final ticket price, presumably 18:49:21 I know that, with everyone funded, we already still have some money not used in the food/accom budget 18:49:26 (though we won't reimburse yet) 18:50:13 anyway, we can work out these questions later I think? 18:50:16 so, the answer is "more math needs to be done" 18:50:19 right 18:50:23 #topic Video team update 18:50:38 #action vorlon to determine costs per attendee to determine budget standing for attendee sponsorship. 18:50:45 CarlFK: You're up! 18:50:54 hi - I am fuzzy on who responsible for things I sometimes do 18:51:08 like arrange for internet and a podium 18:51:48 "arrange for internet" needs to be sorted with the venue team for now 18:51:54 kees is in charge of the Internet 18:51:56 later on with the network team if there is one :) 18:52:04 there is a venue team? 18:52:24 CarlFK: there would be if one were to draw an organisation map 18:52:28 vorlon kees and I are the venue team (for now), and Kees has been working on networking. 18:52:35 CarlFK: Are there specific questions you have on networking? 18:52:52 harmoney: mainly wanting to make sure I do not have to do anything about it 18:52:55 Bart and gturner are surely also part of the venue team; but networking -> kees 18:53:00 https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf14/Teams 18:53:23 same with making sure there is a podium in the 3 rooms 18:53:27 I don't think arranging a podium is the video team's responsibility 18:53:41 it shouldn't be 18:54:01 though the video team seems to sometimes slip into "run practical side of the talk rooms" 18:54:23 Can we make that the responsibility fo the Talks team this year? 18:54:31 right. and I need a table in each of the 3 rooms. 18:54:54 harmoney: we are not on site 18:55:03 rmayorga: For now. :) 18:55:06 CarlFK: that's stuff that can be figured out short-term, no? 18:55:13 CarlFK: ok. I think it's best if you write up all of these requirements in one place and hand them off to us, to take to SMSU facilities all at once 18:55:15 surely we don't need to source table suppliers right now 18:55:17 I think they will charge me very high if I take a podium as lugagge 18:55:23 rmayorga: neither are we; I'm not going down to PSU, I'm emailing them 18:55:25 CarlFK: Ok, 3 podiums and 3 tables per talk room for video. 18:55:41 azeem: I don't think we do. PSU has done multiple conferences in the past; these should be easy to acquire. 18:55:49 harmoney: 3 per room? :) 18:55:54 vorlon: right - I mainly wanted to know who I should be talking to about such things. now I know 18:56:06 Yes. Per room! No shortage of podiums at THIS conference! 18:56:16 CarlFK: harmoney and I will be the front line on dealing with facilities on this 18:57:00 CarlFK: Anything other outstanding concerns for video? 18:57:00 CarlFK: would be great if you could create a wiki page, list your requirements, and ask the list for other reqs 18:57:06 vorlon: good. I don't mind talking to them on the phone to work out details, but it is good to know who is responsible 18:57:16 harmoney: nope, that was it 18:57:19 yes. summit 18:57:28 oh right.. that is videoteam isn't it 18:57:35 #action CarlFK to create list of video team requirements so local team can ensure they're met at venue. 18:57:38 NEXT 18:57:39 harmoney: though if you say that too much, the video team might realise it's a good idea for avoiding the sunlight at different times of day :) 18:57:42 wait wait! 18:57:43 harmoney: wait 18:57:51 harmoney: we could rotate between podiums... 18:57:55 Oh. 18:58:04 Oh, video in summit. 18:58:09 we need to add videoteam role scheduling to summit 18:58:09 vorlon: video in summit plans? 18:58:27 I thought I had answered this question already when asked? 18:58:32 earlier vorlon said something like: "sure fine, just don't bother me, get in my way or break the schema" 18:58:47 it's on the list for summit development, but is not a blocker for DC14 18:58:49 Ah, that sounds like the man I know and love. 18:58:56 if we don't have it done, we'll fall back to penta 18:59:12 so, i've started browsing the code. and think it might well be within my reach. 18:59:14 (which then involves some database export and reimport; this is understood) 18:59:22 edrz: ok, that would be fine :) 18:59:25 shall I work on a seperate branch? 18:59:26 what, do I see pragmatism? 18:59:30 is this really Debian? 18:59:30 edrz: yes, please 18:59:33 + my own test server? 19:00:03 vorlon: i think falling back to penta is sub-optimal 19:00:03 edrz: if it's not too much trouble to set up your own test server that's easiest from my side, but you can also use the dc14-summit-test.dodds.net instance as long as we coordinate 19:00:18 #action edrz to work on video in Summit. 19:00:19 that was going to be my next question. 19:00:21 edrz: do you have some sort of "spec" for the video workflow that you're working towards? 19:00:40 ftr, edrz this task relinquishes you from your promise from earlier. ;) 19:01:02 yeah. more or less. but, still early days. i'm just getting started on understanding summit. 19:01:21 presumably you can all continue to discuss outside the meeting? (I'm aware harmoney doesn't have long) 19:01:29 main piece we need is scheduling videoteam volunteers. 19:01:53 we can probably handle most of the other stuff penta used to do with CarlFK's veyepar app. 19:02:04 correct 19:02:21 NEXT 19:02:26 harmoney: ? 19:02:27 harmoney: there was no such earlier promise :-P 19:02:39 (intentionally reordering; I didn't miss an item) 19:02:42 + ;) 19:02:59 harmoney wants to shuffle the budget again ;) 19:03:03 Well, yes. :) 19:03:04 yes... 19:03:05 because the previous conference dinner venue fell through 19:03:20 and the new first choice is a bit higher 19:03:25 vorlon: well, I assumed she really wanted to increase both items without us noticing :P 19:03:26 (but still manageable) 19:03:35 she may! but she knows we'll notice 19:03:42 So, day trip, I have the park picnic area booked for our picnic lunch, and I have 6 coaches retained (and can cancel as many of them as necessary up to a month before the event). 19:03:53 Day trip is way under budget. 19:03:55 LIke, way. 19:04:05 so you haven't rented the timberline lodge yet 19:04:11 Mainly because I'm being cheap and expecting people to entertain themselves. 19:04:13 indeed not 19:04:21 Clint: They coudln't accommodate all the people. :( 19:04:29 * Clint blinks. 19:04:35 I have learned, however, that planning a dinner for 280 people is Very Complicated 19:04:58 harmoney: indeed it is :) 19:05:00 Clint: well, they couldn't accommodate them all for dinner. I'm sure they could accommodate them all for milling around aimlessly on a daytrip 19:05:20 So, the cheapest venue I've found so far is minimum $10k, and likely will be a little more than that. But, it's very distasteful for me to consider booking there considering it's ... well. 19:05:26 They serve *Colorado* beer. 19:05:28 * harmoney shudders. 19:06:19 The next best, which is actually a good option, is minimum $12k, can have minors in there up until 10pm (Oregon laws strike again), and has bowling and kareoke and shuffleboard and other musements that would be available. 19:06:26 Céilidh + pizza 19:06:48 harmoney: I thought the $10k was Jamison? 19:06:58 bowling + karaoke? :) 19:07:05 Yeah, and then when I asked for more information, she "suggested" I plan about $50/person. 19:07:09 And I stopped emaiing her. 19:07:14 ? 19:07:31 just because venue people have stupid suggestions doesn't mean they won't work 19:07:44 It's minimum $10k to rent out the restaurant. But, she was saying to expect $50/person. 19:07:47 did they not send a menu? 19:07:59 They did. She said they'd only serve that many people buffet style. 19:08:06 harmoney: how far away is the 10K place? 19:08:09 (Which is fair) 19:08:11 and charge $50/person for buffet? ok then 19:08:14 CarlFK: About 4 blocks. 19:08:18 *My* blocks. Not Steve's. 19:08:27 what's the $10k? Rock Bottom? 19:08:42 $10k is Rock Bottom, which may or may not have vegan options. 19:08:43 we should not do Rock Bottom 19:08:44 k - the Write The Docs conf was about a mile or so. but I think that is too far. It will rain ) 19:08:53 $12k is Punch Bowl Social, which will have vegan options. 19:08:54 CarlFK: ... 19:08:59 harmoney: which of you counts in superblock? 19:09:03 +s 19:09:29 harmoney: so what needs to be decided during this meeting? 19:10:40 sounds like nothing then :) 19:10:45 If it's feesible to ask for the increase, or if I should continue to hit my head against the wall trying to keep the price around $9100 USD 19:11:02 harmoney: but with Rock Bottom can't you ask about vegan options? is it impossible? 19:11:12 harmoney: I thought my guidance on this was clear; you should get a quote and then ask for the budget adjustment 19:11:20 and if the money's there, it should be non-controversial 19:11:35 right. we of course would like you to head bang until your limit first :p 19:11:42 n0rman: The food at Rock Bottom has ... never been particularly good. It may be cheaper, but all around, I fear it'll be a poorer experience. 19:12:04 #action harmoney to mail -team asking for budget transfer from day trip to conference dinner. Again. 19:12:08 NEXT 19:12:13 vorlon: wtd conf was http://www.crystalballroompdx.com/1905-cbr-event-rental and had catered food, the whole event charge was about 30k 19:12:20 #topic Conference schedule 19:12:28 with reference to http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20140517.203458.e3b8ad44.en.html 19:12:32 for my part: 19:12:36 CarlFK: the Crystal Ballroom was our first choice that didn't pan out because they're unavailable 19:12:39 (a) the bikeshed should be green 19:12:44 Crystal Ballroom is unavailable. When I tried to put in a reservation, I was told Portland FIlm Festival has them reserved the whole week. 19:12:51 (b) this version seems a bit like a poor man's debcamp to me 19:12:52 lol - doh. never mind then. 19:13:04 I preferred the original interleaved version 19:13:21 moray: do you have link? 19:13:28 to interleaved version? 19:13:31 moray: do you think the lunchtime BoFs on the "camp" days does not mitigate this? 19:13:46 (people seem to be overlooking that aspect quite a lot) 19:14:05 vorlon: not really, it's still splitting talks to a few days in a block 19:14:22 * blarson prefers interleaved as well. 19:14:31 and even if you want to do that, I'd have thought having the talks at the end would be better 19:14:40 rather than the *first* days 19:14:41 ok, well, we have a case of a disjoint set of preferences 19:14:45 indeed 19:14:55 I did include my (a) above intentionally 19:14:58 is interleaved roughly what it sounds like? talk day, camp day, talk day, day trip, etc? 19:15:02 edrz: yes 19:16:07 moray: so I agree with your preferences, but this seems to be the closest to a compromise we've been able to come up with; are you ok to confirm Noodles's proposal? 19:16:16 (you and the rest of everyone here) 19:16:49 vorlon: hm, it doesn't feel much of a compromise to me... 19:16:56 but if you want that, how about swapping the blocks? 19:17:23 it just seems to me that this version will give a feeling of the event trailing off 19:17:27 I don't really want to get into a long discussion here 19:17:31 and have people leaving early 19:17:38 when they look at this then book flights 19:17:39 I was looking for "yes, happy to confirm" or "no, let's discuss more" :) 19:18:07 FD 19:18:12 well, I'm also unsure we'll easily get a solution from the list thread 19:18:17 but sure, we can try for a few more days 19:18:26 CarlFK: ? 19:18:29 urm 19:18:30 I thought we had a solutino 19:18:30 Clint: ? 19:18:47 edrz: yes, lets have talks. 19:18:48 moray: How about a timeline? 19:18:49 edrz: he was clearly saying that Front Desk should solve it 19:18:54 haha 19:19:01 nattie: stop trolling :P 19:19:04 When do we need to have the schedule structure finalized? 19:19:11 Further Deskussion 19:19:15 moray: oh, *must* I? 19:19:24 it would be useful by the time the talks team decide on the talks to know how many slots there are 19:19:29 harmoney: we ought to have it finalized ASAP, so the talks team knows how many slots they have 19:19:44 but we can also calculate a number of slots and continue arguing what is on what day :) 19:19:45 for cfp purposes, also 19:19:47 So, discussions next next Tuesday, 10 June. 19:19:54 people need to know when they might be scheduled to talk 19:19:57 And we find a way to reach consensus (doodle poll or whatever). 19:20:01 in case they can't be there all week. 19:20:03 the problem is so far we don't even have an idea of the talks that will be submitter 19:20:11 edrz: the scheduling will happen rather later 19:20:17 And poll results must be in by Friday 16 June. 19:20:19 moray: and btw, I have had people already booking tickets around that proposal, since there had been no push back on the list about the order of talks vs. hack time. 19:20:20 Does that work? 19:20:22 edrz: certainly not until after the CFP deadline, not CFP opening time 19:20:29 moray: right ... but, 19:20:32 harmoney: no, we should not faff about with this for another 2 weeks 19:20:34 argh. nm. -> list 19:20:44 Fine. Discussion ends this weekend, poll results in by 10 June. 19:20:45 Does that work? 19:21:21 I'm happy to be the Decidor if it's necessary. 19:21:40 ok :) 19:21:42 I'm frustrated that new objections are being raised only when I've put this on the meeting agenda 19:21:57 when it's been on the list for discussion for weeks 19:22:31 #action Moray to open discussions on Schedule Structure. Discussion to conclude by end of Sunday, poll results up on Sunday and results available 1830 UTC on 10 June. 19:22:42 vorlon: you have a valid complaint 19:22:53 and I am not happy to decide this by poll 19:23:50 I think if we can't get a consensus on a new proposal within 5 days, the existing proposal should stand 19:23:54 if CfP is sent ready, we can have a number of talks being proposed and work on a better schedule structure 19:24:06 s/ready/early/ 19:27:17 so .. 19:27:41 i guess harmoney had to go to class? yes? 19:27:47 vorlon: I don't like polls much either, but it's clear already that more people have strong views than are voicing them on the list in response to long messages. 19:27:47 shall we move on/wrap up? 19:28:14 vorlon: and I agree people should have responded before, just that doesn't necessarily determine what we should do today given that they haven't 19:28:41 SOrry, was distracted for a sec. 19:28:47 But, yes, getting ready for class. 19:29:24 Let's get the discussion going on the list and see what evolves. 19:29:35 vorlon: but rather than hoping we can all be consenusal about whether there is consensus, how about e.g. "quick IRC discussion to make final decision at $TIMESLOT"? 19:29:43 or is that worse? I'm not sure :) 19:30:06 well, we never get everyone in one place in realtime 19:30:14 If it sincerely seems that we cannot reach a clear consensus by Sunday (Saturday night), then we'll need to do *something* to get a decision made. 19:30:25 I really don't have a better suggestion than poll. 19:30:50 Or a "formal" vote. 19:30:59 I could draft a GR? 19:31:01 again, I mention that people have already started booking tickets on the assumption that this draft schedule was at least roughly accurate 19:31:06 I'm not sure why vorlon has a specific dislike for a poll/vote in this case, since it really just comes down to people's preferences rather than logic 19:31:10 I don't think we should be making large changes to it now 19:31:38 I need to bow out for class now. I'm sorry, guys. 19:31:56 moray: because if we're just voting preferences, then there's no reason to think the people responding to the poll are representative 19:33:05 moray: if it comes to choosing between "talks as a block" vs "interleaving", I can see this being decided by a vote 19:34:04 but if moving the hacking block to the front of the week is still on the table, I don't think that's something that should be a matter of polling preferences within the team, given how long this draft has already been out there and affecting people's planning 19:34:43 vorlon: I'm afraid I feel you're overemphasising the "decided" nature of something that's a proposal in a list discussion that trailed off 19:34:51 also I think it's important to leave time for BoFs towards the end on things which come up during the first few days of the conf 19:35:03 vorlon: but I'm not trying to veto this proposal either 19:35:51 vorlon: btw, my preference for interleaving is really entirely based on arguments previously made by the Portland team... 19:36:14 moray: right, and I still prefer that personally ;) 19:36:24 but I'm also willing to back Noodles's "compromise" proposal 19:36:47 and if it gets us to a decision, I'm happy for us to have a quick vote on this 19:36:55 I didn't see Noodles' post at all as a "this is the final outcome unless there are objections" 19:37:04 seeing as it talks about making another suggestion etc. 19:37:20 I think someone will need to write up the converse position in that case 19:37:27 so we can decide, and let people plan 19:37:31 (though I realise now that the end of his post tries to imply that) 19:38:44 (there may be a morale about not hiding ultimatums in the last line of the post ... unless that was intentional in the hope people would fail to see it) 19:40:38 (hm, seems like we lost more people than harmoney by now) 19:40:54 (or is everyone else just bored with the topic?) 19:40:58 moray: so do you want to draft the "interleaved" schedule, post it to the list soonish (1-2 days?), and we'll put the two options to a quick vote so we can get closure? 19:41:26 moray: a bit. plus the meeting has exceeded 60 minutes and there is at least network to consider still. 19:41:38 s/consider/discuss 19:42:38 vorlon: I can raise the question at least, and sure a vote of some set of people is a reasonable way to decide quickly 19:43:07 * n0rman is just reading, nothing important/valuable to say 19:43:13 if there were lots of people currently jumping up to say that they liked that draft I wouldn't be going on :) 19:43:50 #action Moray to prod schedule discussion, vorlon to ensure we get an outcome in less than a week 19:43:58 #topic Networking/hardware 19:44:04 Does someone know what is wanted here? 19:44:24 nope 19:44:40 I think harmoney put it on the agenda as a standing "team check-in" item 19:45:02 well, no one's jumping up with questions 19:45:04 or updates 19:45:13