Committers Meeting 20070711

From ADempiere ERP Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

(9:19:33) modo (+ns ) por simmons.freenode.net
(10:02:52) AS6 [i=AS6@56.18.111.218.klj04-home.tm.net.my] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:03:04) AS6: carlos, is there a meeting today?
(10:03:07) hengsin [n=chatzill@124.82.58.148] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:03:16) CarlosRuiz: yep
(10:03:53) CarlosRuiz ha cambiado el tema a: Review organization of new team of committers mentor/mentored
(10:06:18) red1 [n=red1@71.100.49.60.klj04-home.tm.net.my] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:06:27) red1: agree!
(10:06:46) CarlosRuiz: not enough quorun here
(10:06:54) red1: agree again
(10:07:12) Bahman [n=Bahman@vps131.zoner.fi] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:07:15) red1: btw since when we need quorom?
(10:07:31) red1: from the whole of SF?
(10:07:31) Bahman: Here I am!
(10:07:31) Bahman: Hello!
(10:07:36) red1: that be 1.5 m voters
(10:07:40) red1: bahman.. pls agree
(10:07:55) Bahman: I'm not aware of the context.
(10:08:04) Bahman: What are you discussing?
(10:08:59) teo_sarca [n=teo_sarc@86.35.58.87] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:09:12) red1: just agree
(10:09:16) CarlosRuiz: Red, there are 13 proposed committers, 9 hasn't formally accepted still
(10:09:17) teo_sarca: hi all
(10:09:40) fer_luck [n=fer_luck@201-40-40-163.cbace700.t.brasiltelecom.net.br] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:09:52) Bahman: Hi Teo!
(10:09:54) red1: oh.. i tot silence is consent
(10:09:55) muthah [n=Muthah@213.147.65.24] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:09:58) red1: ok i accept
(10:10:04) red1: i believe i m level 2
(10:10:07) red1: that is high enuf...
(10:10:12) red1: considering my skills
(10:10:25) red1: i wanted to laugh when i read your qualifications of me
(10:10:29) Bahman: Is it all about Carlos' last post in forums about new commit org?
(10:10:33) red1: must be some conflict here
(10:12:34) Bahman: Would anyone please give me the link to the proposed organisation?
(10:13:04) CarlosRuiz: http://adempiere.com/wiki/index.php/Commiters
(10:13:15) Bahman: Thanks Carlos!
(10:13:58) fer_luck: carlos, you can set me as mentored..
(10:14:02) fer_luck: no problems
(10:15:05) fer_luck: as a mentored commiter, I'll have no svn access?
(10:15:46) CarlosRuiz: "The mentor-mentored levels are not about power, is about mentoring. We're proposing here that every committer has the same rights, just that some developers (even very experienced) have a mentor when starting commits on the project to support them. "
(10:16:14) fer_luck: for me is good. is just a question..
(10:16:25) fer_luck: I can mark myself as mentored or I shall ask someone to do it?
(10:16:39) CarlosRuiz: you're in
(10:16:47) CarlosRuiz: look here -> http://adempiere.com/wiki/index.php/Commiters
(10:17:03) fer_luck: ok, but the pendinc acceptance status
(10:17:04) fer_luck: :-)
(10:17:29) CarlosRuiz: red1, Bahman, do you accept?  :-)
(10:17:53) Bahman: I see no problem, so my +1 vote.
(10:18:03) fer_luck: +1 too..
(10:18:28) teo_sarca: Ok, how we choose who we mentor ?
(10:18:36) CarlosRuiz: I mean, if you accept the MENTORED LEVEL NEEDED SKILLS
(10:18:40) CarlosRuiz: specially the 3rd
(10:18:46) CarlosRuiz: excuse me the 2nd
(10:18:56) CarlosRuiz: involves some time to review contributions from externals
(10:19:09) red1: i did from the first line
(10:19:10) red1: :D
(10:19:28) Bahman: Agree...this way fresh soldiers will learn how to join the ship.
(10:19:32) Bahman: I agree with 2.
(10:21:05) Bahman: So, +1 Fernando, +1 Bahman, +1 red1...
(10:21:08) Bahman: what about the others?
(10:21:20) Bahman: Teo? Hengsin? Carlos?!
(10:21:27) CarlosRuiz: we already accepted
(10:21:38) Bahman: Alright...I didn't know.
(10:21:41) trifon [n=Trifon@home-213-240-227-143.megalan.bg] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:22:08) CarlosRuiz: in my opinion there are two big questions
(10:22:14) CarlosRuiz: first one just Teo did
(10:22:32) CarlosRuiz: second one - how are we going to make the procedure of peer review
(10:23:19) CarlosRuiz: first one
(10:23:28) CarlosRuiz: currently there are 6 mentors, 8 mentored
(10:23:34) CarlosRuiz: how are we going to organize?
(10:23:47) CarlosRuiz: teo_sarca: Ok, how we choose who we mentor ?
(10:24:16) Bahman: Hmm...difficult question to answer.
(10:24:25) Bahman: Maybe we can set it right here?
(10:24:33) CarlosRuiz: yep, that's the intention
(10:24:47) Bahman: I mean mentors choose mentoreds.
(10:24:54) fer_luck: Well, what if mentoring was based on tasks
(10:25:06) fer_luck: I mean, this kind of tas for that mentor, that kind of task for the other mentor, and so on..
(10:25:10) fer_luck: interest based? :-)
(10:25:47) CarlosRuiz: agree, it can be for specific tasks, but it would be good every mentored has a mentor assigned
(10:26:12) trifon: let's aski in forums. mentored persons.
(10:26:32) fer_luck: Well, if you want to carlos, you can be my mentor.. :-P
(10:27:02) CarlosRuiz: Trifon, what I don't want is to create a situation where everybody chooses Trifon  ;-)
(10:27:15) trifon: ok. so we have to choose.
(10:27:42) CarlosRuiz: ok, I agree to mentor fer_luck
(10:28:19) CarlosRuiz: I think for the others (non-present) we must ask for acceptance privately
(10:28:23) fer_luck: nice.. I gotta leave now, will leave the chat open so I can read the transcript later...
(10:29:51) red1: i can only mentor myself.. mentors will kick me
(10:29:51) CarlosRuiz: Teo
(10:30:19) teo_sarca: yes?
(10:30:20) CarlosRuiz: Hengsin Trifon, do you want to choose someone(s) to mentor?
(10:30:36) red1: hengsin is already mentoring me ;D
(10:30:40) CarlosRuiz: I mean -> Teo, Hengsin, Trifon -> do you want to choose someone(s) to mentor?
(10:30:41) red1: so far so good
(10:30:51) red1: as long as i code nothing
(10:31:11) CarlosRuiz: I need to clarify something
(10:31:18) CarlosRuiz: for everybody here and everybody out there
(10:31:36) CarlosRuiz: -> commiters layer mentor/mentored IS NOT A CARLOS RUIZ PROPOSAL
(10:31:52) CarlosRuiz: is just a proposal that was raised in an IRC meeting
(10:32:06) CarlosRuiz: if there is not enough interest in following up this proposal we must review it again
(10:32:26) red1: this is not a CR proposal
(10:32:33) teo_sarca: Carlos, i will mentor Bahman
(10:32:57) Bahman: Thanks Teo...I agree.
(10:33:13) red1: i even see Rob accepting it
(10:33:14) fer_luck: c yall later..
(10:33:19) red1: ok fer_luck
(10:33:29) teo_sarca: ok, bye bye
(10:33:40) Bahman: Bye Teo!
(10:33:40) red1: i think most like to follow.. we just proceed till next review
(10:34:39) CarlosRuiz: Heng Sin, agree to mentor Red1?
(10:34:50) CarlosRuiz: hahaha, hard question
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: I don't imagine Heng Sin saying not  :-)
(10:35:04) Bahman: :-)
(10:35:12) red1: u have no idea
(10:36:02) hengsin: hmm ... mentoring the leader, sounds interesting.
(10:37:47) CarlosRuiz: personal opinion here -> what I see in most projects is you don't have lots of committers (like in postgresql just 7)
(10:37:56) hengsin: any procedure for this mentoring review things ? use patch tracker ?
(10:38:25) hengsin: or it is just informal communication on any channel ?
(10:38:38) CarlosRuiz: but as WE'RE OPEN TO EXPLORE we're just trying this proposal that community raised
(10:38:40) hengsin: yes, that's the norm, other just submit patch.
(10:39:05) CarlosRuiz: maybe we found the next wave of organizing open source projects !!!!
(10:39:08) red1: hengsin, forget about me as the leader
(10:39:14) red1: just think of me as a sefood friend
(10:39:21) red1: seafood eating friend i mean
(10:39:38) CarlosRuiz: the big question is
(10:39:43) CarlosRuiz: Heng Sin, about your question
(10:39:59) red1: i think the tracker is good
(10:40:06) CarlosRuiz: "Every mentor has a preferred way to communicate, so I think this is a personal preference that must be set by every mentor with his mentored-team. We encourage this communication to happen preferably in forums."
(10:40:54) jsSolutions [n=jsSoluti@ip72-197-81-229.sd.sd.cox.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:41:13) CarlosRuiz: do you agree?
(10:41:41) CarlosRuiz: now the big question is
(10:41:46) hengsin: hmm ... issue is it is time consuming to review if not using patch.
(10:41:51) CarlosRuiz: how do we organize to guarantee the peer review
(10:42:07) CarlosRuiz: yep Heng Sin, you set the rules for your team
(10:42:39) CarlosRuiz: the easier way is to have patches - patches generated without hardcoded directories
(10:43:18) teo_sarca: Carlos, i prefer svn branch then patch :)
(10:44:01) CarlosRuiz: well, we can have a Teo's branch for his team
(10:44:15) hengsin: > how do we organize to guarantee the peer review - only way I can think of is always use patch tracker or branch and must indicate who do the peer review either through patch tracker or in the svn commit log.
(10:44:22) red1: better ask my mentor here.. how come the trunk is broken? syntax error on tokens since my last update from source
(10:45:06) hengsin: red1: you means the trunk doesn't compile ?
(10:45:12) CarlosRuiz: the review is pre or post?
(10:45:18) hengsin: pre
(10:45:21) red1: it shows red Xs PAPanel
(10:45:36) red1: yes review shuld be pre
(10:45:40) CarlosRuiz: always?
(10:45:46) CarlosRuiz: what about bug fixing?
(10:45:51) red1: i hope agreeing with hengsin is not conflict of interest
(10:45:51) CarlosRuiz: little lines? can be post?
(10:46:01) CarlosRuiz: Moyses is not here
(10:46:05) CarlosRuiz: :-)
(10:46:13) red1: i think the mentor shuld decide
(10:46:14) CarlosRuiz: you'll be criticized after we publish this on wiki  ;-)
(10:46:36) red1: yes... no moyses nor mike... how sad :(
(10:46:57) hengsin: > criticized after we publish this on wiki - does that matter :)
(10:47:29) CarlosRuiz: ok, review pre always? even little bug fixing?
(10:47:52) CarlosRuiz: there are two reviews
(10:48:07) CarlosRuiz: mentor reviews to mentored - and also mentored reviews to mentor (as Joel proposed)
(10:48:20) CarlosRuiz: both must be pre?
(10:48:20) Bahman: Reviews are not mandatory, right?
(10:48:22) hengsin: well, peer review can be always ...
(10:48:28) Bahman: But the preferred time is pre.
(10:48:49) red1: CR,.. i think why not leave more room to mentors to decide
(10:49:07) hengsin: there is a problem with this arrangement here: you just won't know who is available for review ...
(10:49:09) red1: when there is doubt or conflicts... then we bring those up
(10:49:31) CarlosRuiz: I'm trying a way to guarantee a mandatory peer review
(10:49:36) CarlosRuiz: I'm thinking on quality
(10:49:55) CarlosRuiz: I know the pace can be slower, that's a problem
(10:49:58) red1: but their availablitity is not mandatory yet
(10:50:05) CarlosRuiz: but I think quality is more important than speed
(10:50:14) hengsin: I means for e.g, teo is suppose to review fer_luck but for a patch by fer_luck, teo might be not available but hengsin might be available ...
(10:50:17) red1: hmm.. see what u mean
(10:50:22) hengsin: I don't mean that.
(10:50:22) red1: trying not to agree with u
(10:50:35) red1: (hope this log is seen by others later)
(10:50:52) CarlosRuiz: yes, just a thought Redhuan, I remember the words from AS6 - balance
(10:50:53) ***AS6 suggests that Red1 post it to wiki
(10:50:56) trifon: i wanted to mentor Karsten, but he is level 1.
(10:51:00) red1: i agree with hengsin's point
(10:51:06) hengsin: so fixed assignment is problematic in this environment.
(10:51:13) trifon: "Every mentor has a preferred way to communicate, so I think this is a personal preference that must be set by every mentor with his mentored-team. We encourage this communication to happen preferably in forums."
(10:51:14) trifon: -->| jsSolutions (n=jsSoluti@ip72-197-81-229.sd.sd.cox.net) has joined #adempiere-team
(10:51:17) trifon: <CarlosRuiz> do you agree?
(10:51:18) trifon: yes.
(10:51:27) CarlosRuiz: in this case Teo could ask someone else to help with the review?
(10:51:42) hengsin: but I agree mandatory peer review could be a good thing, just that I don't like the fixed assignment approach.
(10:52:24) CarlosRuiz: we could think the "fixed assignment" as a mentor to be "available" to solve questions
(10:52:25) hengsin: I have see many that disapper for a unpredicatable time when really busy ( could happen to anyone )
(10:52:44) CarlosRuiz: must they be mentors?
(10:52:50) red1: then they must declare for how long they be having their conflict of time
(10:53:34) red1: or just negotiate along their present working focus... some may be involved in a business that is on one module and cannot look at others
(10:53:42) hengsin: so I prefer we make rule to enforce peer review before commit but anyone that have the permission can do the required review.
(10:53:42) CarlosRuiz: I was reading the forgotten project charter
(10:53:55) CarlosRuiz: committers must agree to give time to the project
(10:54:00) red1: how dare u forget CR
(10:54:12) red1: its our code of conduct
(10:54:28) red1: took it from eclipse charter
(10:54:32) red1: so its one big conflict
(10:54:36) CarlosRuiz: the project charter states:
(10:54:41) CarlosRuiz: At times, Committers may go inactive for a variety of reasons. The decision making process of the Project relies on active committers who respond to discussions and votes in a constructive and timely manner. The PMC is responsible for ensuring the smooth operation of the Project. A Committer that is disruptive, does not participate actively, or has been inactive for an extended period may have his or her commit status removed by the PMC.
(10:55:17) jsSolutions: is there a problem with this: so I prefer we make rule to enforce peer review before commit but anyone that have the permission can do the required review.
(10:55:50) jsSolutions: what if two committers from different teams work together on a shared functionality?
(10:56:09) jsSolutions: can there be assigned teams for convenience sake
(10:56:17) jsSolutions: but not hard rule?
(10:56:21) CarlosRuiz: yes Joel, good point
(10:56:22) red1: hsa to be pragmatic... if situation is so, then it is so
(10:56:35) CarlosRuiz: how can we ensure a peer review?
(10:56:41) CarlosRuiz: without slowing the pace too much?
(10:56:54) CarlosRuiz: that's because postgresql committers are expected to work full time and they're paid
(10:56:59) CarlosRuiz: no conflict of interests
(10:57:09) hengsin: exactly but we are not.
(10:57:21) red1: CR... we still need time
(10:57:30) CarlosRuiz: exactly, we're not, but people want speed and quality at the same time
(10:57:31) red1: ok.. u say can be slow.. that means we have to be patient
(10:57:33) hengsin: can't review while having seafood with red :)
(10:57:46) red1: hengsin.. that is post review
(10:58:00) red1: seafood dont happen before dinner
(10:58:46) red1: in reviewing what we did so far the last year, we can say we come far ahead.. so slowing down for quality makes sense
(10:59:06) karsten_thiemann [n=chatzill@p57A087C7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:59:09) red1: 2 days to go for another 13th of the month
(10:59:11) CarlosRuiz: Hi Karsten!
(10:59:16) karsten_thiemann: hi all
(10:59:22) karsten_thiemann: sorry for being so late
(10:59:22) hengsin: hi karsten
(10:59:38) red1: its ok.. u have no mentor above u
(10:59:40) CarlosRuiz: Karsten, do you accept the rules to be mentor?
(10:59:46) karsten_thiemann: yes
(10:59:50) CarlosRuiz: good
(11:00:02) CarlosRuiz: do you want to mentor someone specific from the list of mentored?
(11:00:13) karsten_thiemann: can I choose my level one developers?
(11:00:22) karsten_thiemann: oh - that was my question :)
(11:00:45) karsten_thiemann: hmm - fernando and johannes - if they like to
(11:01:02) karsten_thiemann: but anybody else is welcome too
(11:01:14) red1: must he be a rocker?
(11:01:28) teo_sarca: (preferable :) )
(11:01:36) CarlosRuiz: Fer is with me at this moment
(11:01:55) karsten_thiemann: no problem - guess it is more a matter of time zone
(11:02:17) karsten_thiemann: it's easier to discuss things in irc / on telephone
(11:02:31) red1: or in a concert
(11:02:36) karsten_thiemann: so who is left without mentor
(11:02:39) karsten_thiemann: :)
(11:02:41) CarlosRuiz: Karsten, are you in conflict of interest?
(11:02:49) CarlosRuiz: hahahaha, just joking
(11:02:53) karsten_thiemann: yes sometimes
(11:02:58) red1: i suspect also
(11:02:59) karsten_thiemann: ask my children
(11:03:27) red1: your wife involved in the conflict? or else we can ask her :D
(11:03:36) trifon: # Phib
(11:03:37) CarlosRuiz: we're trying to discuss two issues
(11:03:39) trifon: # Ashley
(11:03:42) karsten_thiemann: sometimes I dont know - shall I go to a concert or stay at home and play with them
(11:03:42) CarlosRuiz: mandatory peer review?
(11:03:45) CarlosRuiz: pre or post?
(11:03:52) CarlosRuiz: how must be the procedure?
(11:03:55) CarlosRuiz: pre or post in all cases?
(11:04:07) red1: we can try it and set a period to revist that
(11:04:18) karsten_thiemann: hmm - I guess pre is better to keep the trunk clean
(11:04:21) trifon: pre means that developer must submit patch. i donotlike it.
(11:04:34) trifon: but also means more work.
(11:04:40) CarlosRuiz: I think pre can be for risky or big contribs
(11:04:51) CarlosRuiz: post can be for little bug fixing or enhancements
(11:05:00) trifon: yes we can split.
(11:05:07) trifon: have both pre and post
(11:05:07) CarlosRuiz: the problem with post is that people get touched with reverts
(11:05:15) karsten_thiemann: so post is - I just commit and then my mentor has to review it?
(11:05:21) CarlosRuiz: yes
(11:05:27) trifon: not me. i'm developers and i know that i an make mistakes.
(11:05:31) karsten_thiemann: or if I am the mentor a level 1 committer
(11:05:56) CarlosRuiz: no, Johannes must review your commits
(11:06:02) CarlosRuiz: initially
(11:06:06) CarlosRuiz: we're discussing a little that also
(11:06:10) karsten_thiemann: ok
(11:06:11) red1: we shuld have mandatory reverts at least once.. so that they feel the kick
(11:06:15) CarlosRuiz: specific assignment has some problems
(11:06:54) red1: trust me.. its a spiritual thing
(11:06:54) karsten_thiemann: I don' have a problem with reverts - I think that rule pushes you to think twice before you do your commit
(11:07:17) red1: for all have sinned...
(11:07:35) karsten_thiemann: but to allow post does not mean that you can't do pre
(11:08:03) karsten_thiemann: so maybe it's up to the committers team (level 1/2)
(11:08:22) karsten_thiemann: to choose their favourite
(11:08:22) CarlosRuiz: yep, as red1 said, let's the mentor to decide
(11:08:56) karsten_thiemann: agreed
(11:09:10) CarlosRuiz: ok, how can we ensure the peer review?
(11:09:15) red1: found this in AMenu : ........... <<<<<<< .mine
(11:09:25) red1: thats what cause the red marks...
(11:09:37) red1: hope my mentor allow me to erase that
(11:10:40) CarlosRuiz: I think the tracker must not be put in pending until the peer review is done
(11:10:43) karsten_thiemann: by a gentlemens agreement :)
(11:10:58) CarlosRuiz: maybe the mentored just assigns the tracker to his mentor
(11:11:01) CarlosRuiz: and viceversa
(11:11:10) CarlosRuiz: and the peer review put it in pending status
(11:11:16) red1: smart idea
(11:11:48) CarlosRuiz: if any problem, the peer review change again the assigned
(11:11:50) CarlosRuiz: with comments
(11:11:55) trifon: yes, sunds good
(11:12:16) Bahman: I agree with that.
(11:12:21) CarlosRuiz: as Heng Sin said, if somebody is not available
(11:12:25) karsten_thiemann: yes I agree
(11:12:26) CarlosRuiz: other can do the peer review
(11:12:48) karsten_thiemann: the most important thing is - talking
(11:12:53) CarlosRuiz: ok, about pre/post every mentor decides with his mentored
(11:13:12) CarlosRuiz: and about procedure to the peer review is assigned / documented in trackers
(11:14:11) CarlosRuiz: and for special cases like Joel pointed, let's the team decides also
(11:14:59) red1: Cr.. u copying what every1 is saying
(11:15:06) Bahman: Yes, it's good to have clear but loose policies.
(11:15:12) CarlosRuiz: yes, I'm in conflict of interests
(11:15:18) red1: why r u trying to avoid conflict...
(11:15:26) CarlosRuiz: hahahaha
(11:15:39) red1: u conflict with yourself now
(11:16:01) CarlosRuiz: we don't know nothing how is going to be this new organization
(11:16:04) CarlosRuiz: we're exploring
(11:16:19) red1: and make mistakes
(11:16:28) red1: to learn from them
(11:16:39) CarlosRuiz: yes
(11:16:43) red1: welcome to the bazaar of mistakes!
(11:16:51) CarlosRuiz: also I think it's good to restart the CC meetings as Heng Sin pointed
(11:17:28) hengsin: or a discussion mailing list
(11:17:45) hengsin: where it is easier for people to comments at their convenient time.
(11:18:26) hengsin: red1 have suggested to me once forum is not good for busy people and I agree with that ...
(11:18:32) CarlosRuiz: I'm not proposing nothing - because I'm in conflict of interests - just bringing proposals from others with conflict of interests also
(11:19:09) karsten_thiemann: a discussion mailing list can be good - but why do you think it is better than sf tracker?
(11:19:30) karsten_thiemann: I guess all of us are getting the tracker changes from sf by mail
(11:20:06) trifon: i preffer email list or forums.
(11:20:11) CarlosRuiz: yes, again in project charter
(11:20:43) trifon: in fact i preffer forums.
(11:20:48) CarlosRuiz: "Committers are required to monitor the developer mailing list associated with all Projects and components for which they have commit privileges. This is a condition of being granted commit rights to the Project or component. It is mandatory because committers must participate in votes (which in some cases require a certain minimum number of votes) and must respond to the mailing list in a timely fashion in order to facilitate the smooth operation of the Project. When a Committer is granted commit rights they will be added to the appropriate mailing lists. A Committer must not be unsubscribed from a developer mailing list unless their associated commit privileges are also removed. Committers are required to track, participate in, and vote on, relevant discussions in their associated Projects and components. There are three voting responses: +1 (yes), -1 (no, or veto), and 0 (abstain). Committers are responsible for proactively reporting problems in the bug tracking system, and annotating problem reports with status information, explanations, clarifications, or requests for more information from the submitter. Committers are responsible for updating problem reports when they have done work related to the problem. "
(11:21:15) red1: it didnt say cannot use forums
(11:21:26) red1: perhaps eclipse that time has conflict with forums
(11:21:44) CarlosRuiz: for me forums are another mailing list
(11:21:50) CarlosRuiz: because I read them in my e-mail
(11:21:52) red1: and SF forums has mailling list feature
(11:22:00) red1: ah.. u said it first
(11:22:03) trifon: me too. only from emails.
(11:22:05) red1: now i m the parrot
(11:22:13) CarlosRuiz: hmmm
(11:22:16) hengsin: yes, but you can't reply to it
(11:22:22) CarlosRuiz: hope Moyses don't get angry because you repeated my words
(11:22:36) red1: the essence of that clause is about replying.. thus u re right .. oops
(11:23:00) red1: lets finished quickly.. then we can post this
(11:23:32) CarlosRuiz: I prefer forums
(11:23:39) CarlosRuiz: and CC meetings on IRC channel
(11:23:50) CarlosRuiz: and trackers when specific development
(11:24:05) red1: there are exceptions such as with Rob who is really busy but respond thru emails
(11:24:05) CarlosRuiz: but it's my preferred way, others can have a different preferred way
(11:24:39) red1: somehow maillists feel more safer than forums
(11:24:59) hengsin: ok, lets stick with what we have now.
(11:25:04) CarlosRuiz: it's easy to set up a maillist
(11:25:12) CarlosRuiz: there is one for TANG
(11:25:28) CarlosRuiz: we can set up an open and public maillist with committers there
(11:25:28) jsSolutions: i suspect functional people dont watch maillists
(11:25:36) karsten_thiemann: but it is more open/transparent to have it in the sf forums
(11:26:08) AS6 ha salido de la sala (quit: simmons.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
(11:26:20) CarlosRuiz: is what community is habituated
(11:26:33) CarlosRuiz: other communities have just e-mail list, nothing about forums
(11:26:46) CarlosRuiz: it's just a matter of registering in the maillist
(11:27:24) hengsin: agree, it is just a matter of preference, we can stick with what we are practising now.
(11:27:24) CarlosRuiz: what do you think?
(11:27:30) red1: agree
(11:27:50) red1: cant think of any conflict yet
(11:27:55) CarlosRuiz: :-)
(11:28:08) CarlosRuiz: sure others will find the conflict when published
(11:28:30) CarlosRuiz: don't worry about looking for conflict, there are people specialized in such contributions
(11:28:53) jsSolutions: LOL
(11:29:40) CarlosRuiz: ok, we have more clear rules now - good meeting
(11:29:54) CarlosRuiz: any other issue to review?
(11:30:04) red1: so the PMC ?
(11:30:07) CarlosRuiz: do you agree with CC meetings on tuesday same hour?
(11:30:28) CarlosRuiz: does someone else lead the PMC discussion?
(11:30:45) trifon: ok. Tuesday.
(11:30:55) red1: dowe endorse what is voted in the SF? That PMC is adopted?
(11:30:57) Bahman: Alright for me also.
(11:31:00) hengsin: tuesday is ok for me.
(11:31:15) red1: and do we consider this CL matter endorsed?
(11:31:18) hengsin: pmc is a split decision, maybe later ...
(11:31:37) red1: thats bad.. :)
(11:32:02) hengsin: well, it is just a name :)
(11:32:11) red1: told u so
(11:32:24) CarlosRuiz: CL was approved with 11votes
(11:32:27) red1: even the crabs try to have names
(11:32:28) hengsin: we are now having our first pmc meeting here :)
(11:32:29) CarlosRuiz: but can be reviewed any time
(11:32:42) CarlosRuiz: about PMC and CC
(11:32:45) CarlosRuiz: I don't know
(11:32:48) CarlosRuiz: CC still exists?
(11:32:58) CarlosRuiz: is there a Head of CC?
(11:32:59) red1: what about Council?
(11:33:12) jsSolutions: i suggest leave CC for now
(11:33:14) red1: i think he has offered to quit
(11:33:22) jsSolutions: until this clarifies
(11:33:25) CarlosRuiz: what would be the functions of Head of CC in new mentor/mentored approach?
(11:33:39) red1: CR.. u switch the CC to committers in wiki
(11:33:48) CarlosRuiz: yes
(11:33:49) CarlosRuiz: I did
(11:33:49) red1: so CC is gone
(11:33:51) karsten_thiemann: maybe to ensure that there is a peer review
(11:33:57) CarlosRuiz: so
(11:33:58) jsSolutions: to revert comitts when there is conflict of interest
(11:34:03) CarlosRuiz: there is no CC neither PMC at this moment
(11:34:16) CarlosRuiz: hahaha, revert commits is the bad work
(11:34:21) CarlosRuiz: unpopular
(11:34:22) red1: i think level 1 already seen as the right to stop commits
(11:34:23) karsten_thiemann: oh - and we are still alive?
(11:34:33) CarlosRuiz: there are people that don't understand a revert
(11:34:41) red1: so in a way they and the new committer page in wiki shuld be the official one
(11:34:42) hengsin: there is something missing here - we are only talking about quality but not evolvement of the product, something to think about.
(11:34:52) red1: otherwise there be confusion if we refer to CC
(11:35:16) CarlosRuiz: exactly Heng Sin
(11:35:25) CarlosRuiz: there is no CC, neither PMC, just committers
(11:35:32) CarlosRuiz: so nobody is going to think on new versions
(11:35:34) CarlosRuiz: when to release
(11:35:35) jsSolutions: maybe this is personal, but CC gave me confidence
(11:35:36) CarlosRuiz: what to release
(11:35:37) hengsin: what is a quality product ? It is more than just having no bug, again, food for thought ( read it in a book, actually :) )
(11:35:38) red1: yes stick to common terms
(11:36:04) red1: can u contribute that book
(11:36:05) red1: ?
(11:36:11) red1: better still, commit that book into SF
(11:36:14) jsSolutions: confidence that there were ppl who thought it was their jobn to protect stability first and foremost
(11:36:34) hengsin: I only have the translated version ( in mandarin ), need to find out what is the original title
(11:36:38) red1: i have confidence in Committers
(11:36:39) jsSolutions: now where is that confidence? entirely in a clear but loose procedure?
(11:36:53) red1: maybe an advertising campaign can help u jsSolutions
(11:36:55) trifon: Joel is right. business people feel confident if there is a structure whihc is responsible.
(11:37:08) red1: its all in the ad
(11:37:20) red1: Committers, the layer u can trust
(11:37:42) CarlosRuiz: what if a mentor find a problem with another mentor commit
(11:37:42) red1: a photoshoot of some users saying that
(11:37:57) CarlosRuiz: and there is a fight there - who is going to solve the discussion?
(11:37:58) red1: have a boxing match
(11:38:03) jsSolutions: I don't see a harm in leaving CC for now. even if they are just a figurehead
(11:38:15) jsSolutions: if after some time the new approach works
(11:38:23) jsSolutions: and CC is totally irrelevent, then disband
(11:38:39) CarlosRuiz: Joel
(11:39:04) red1: it doesnt serve a real purpose if the ppl are the same
(11:39:04) CarlosRuiz: there are currently functions beyond the scope of CC
(11:39:23) red1: and the head is the same too
(11:39:47) CarlosRuiz: I mean, we must have separate functions, one thing is committers and the way to commit/solve discussions
(11:39:51) red1: CC is now irrelevent.. its been diverted in the wiki
(11:40:15) CarlosRuiz: but another issue is "when to release, what to release, roadmap"
(11:40:23) CarlosRuiz: that's beyond the scope of committers
(11:40:26) jsSolutions: yes
(11:40:47) CarlosRuiz: We've assumed some of those tasks until now
(11:40:51) CarlosRuiz: but is not the best for the project
(11:41:15) red1: better spend more tots on what hengsin just read in a book
(11:41:16) jsSolutions: shouldnt that be the role of the council?
(11:41:27) red1: dont think so
(11:41:53) red1: another meeting perhaps?
(11:42:17) CarlosRuiz: there are two questions
(11:42:29) CarlosRuiz: how conflicts in mentor level will be solved?
(11:42:37) CarlosRuiz: PMC?
(11:42:51) red1: must be peers among their layer
(11:43:00) red1: others can mess up further
(11:43:08) hengsin: it can be just votting by all committers or open voting by community
(11:43:21) CarlosRuiz: nope, voting by committers
(11:43:23) CarlosRuiz: sounds good
(11:43:26) CarlosRuiz: is a technical issue
(11:43:40) hengsin: ok, voting by committers then, lets keep it simple.
(11:43:44) red1: unless one of them makes accusation in open SF
(11:43:48) jsSolutions: as long as it is a technical issue
(11:44:00) CarlosRuiz: that's not technical
(11:44:16) red1: then the Committer should expel for indiscipline
(11:44:34) CarlosRuiz: in Project Charter is stated that PMC can allow committers and drop committers
(11:44:37) CarlosRuiz: but we don't have a PMC
(11:44:43) red1: of course after 7 days to repent is exhuasted
(11:44:53) red1: we do.. just that its split
(11:45:06) red1: better than none
(11:45:13) CarlosRuiz: split?
(11:45:21) red1: hengsin said so
(11:45:21) CarlosRuiz: where is it?
(11:45:32) red1: remember we have a vote on it?
(11:45:38) red1: i think PMC won
(11:45:43) CarlosRuiz: 6/11 votes
(11:45:43) red1: cos i remember i voted against it
(11:45:54) red1: and i am in minority
(11:45:56) red1: as usual
(11:46:10) CarlosRuiz: but I didn't take the lead to organize the PMC - nobody took it
(11:46:25) red1: hengsin proposed it
(11:46:30) red1: then he shuld lead it
(11:46:37) red1: +1 on that
(11:46:52) red1: cmon.. more crabs...
(11:47:10) Bahman: Abstain here.
(11:47:13) CarlosRuiz: red1, you'll be accused of repeating what I wrote in the forum post
(11:47:22) red1: pls prove it
(11:47:31) CarlosRuiz: hahahaha
(11:47:31) red1: or retract your accusation
(11:47:40) CarlosRuiz: I retract, ok
(11:47:48) red1: u re lucky
(11:48:12) CarlosRuiz: Heng Sin, do you want to give form to the PMC proposal?
(11:48:12) jsSolutions: back to the voting...
(11:48:24) jsSolutions: sorry-go ahead
(11:48:37) red1: i think hengsin shuld lead the PMC..
(11:48:51) red1: cos he has much background on real ERP jobs before
(11:48:59) red1: and also have tackled accounting systems
(11:49:25) karsten_thiemann: hmm - if I remember right a -1 vote is like a veto
(11:49:25) CarlosRuiz: agree, but PMC is more open than committers
(11:49:26) hengsin: I don't think we have enough buy in for that, lets keep it simple for now.
(11:49:33) CarlosRuiz: I think it must be elected voting with community
(11:49:56) red1: if that -1 is against me, karsten_thiemann
(11:50:03) red1: so far all has been against me
(11:50:19) hengsin: just a layer of committer and voting by committer for technical issue, open voting for project matters.
(11:50:32) karsten_thiemann: thats not my understanding of a voting system but that is what we have in our wiki
(11:50:35) red1: and it has to be from a sober man.. who has stop drinking beer for the last 2 days
(11:50:43) CarlosRuiz: look
(11:50:49) jsSolutions: Carlos, part of your point is that no one has taken the lead to organize the PMC
(11:50:52) CarlosRuiz: those who voted against PMC
(11:51:01) CarlosRuiz: i.e. Bahman, red1
(11:51:09) CarlosRuiz: voted against PMC, but not against CC
(11:51:14) CarlosRuiz: I ask then
(11:51:17) karsten_thiemann: http://www.adempiere.com/wiki/index.php/Voting
(11:51:21) CarlosRuiz: now we don't have CC - just a committers layer
(11:51:22) red1: i tot my point was if there is still CC around
(11:51:31) red1: but if CC is no more, then a PMC sounds ok
(11:51:47) red1: moreover i read the long forgotten Charter and found the word PMC there
(11:51:49) CarlosRuiz: ah, that was the question
(11:51:54) red1: so i think Hengsin stole the idea
(11:51:57) Bahman: I'm still against PMC.
(11:52:06) CarlosRuiz: Bahman, against CC too?
(11:52:09) red1: Bahman, are u for the CC?
(11:52:16) red1: oops repeating
(11:52:17) Bahman: I should have read the charter well before joining ADempiere!
(11:52:33) Bahman: CC is technical...
(11:52:34) red1: u re free to discuss in the wiki talk there
(11:52:35) CarlosRuiz: Moyses will get angry again  :-)
(11:52:37) hengsin: Bahman: you are not the only one!
(11:52:43) red1: then we have to discuss further.. its no problem
(11:52:50) jsSolutions: CarlosRuiz: but I didn't take the lead to organize the PMC - nobody took it
(11:52:51) red1: dont want to see another wrestling match here
(11:52:53) Bahman: but some tasks in CC agenda are out of a technical boundary...
(11:52:59) CarlosRuiz: aha
(11:53:02) Bahman: and I'm also agains CC because of that.
(11:53:13) jsSolutions: can we pick someone to organize a clear proposal for the PMC?
(11:53:15) CarlosRuiz: so, what's your position?
(11:53:25) CarlosRuiz: no committees at all?
(11:53:34) Bahman: Yes.
(11:53:42) red1: no leader?
(11:53:54) karsten_thiemann: so when will we have the next release?
(11:54:02) Bahman: Leader is different from committees who will determine the bazaar's plociy...
(11:54:03) red1: 2 days more
(11:54:07) red1: on the 13th
(11:54:10) red1: oops repeating
(11:54:15) Bahman: that policy can only be set by community.
(11:54:16) CarlosRuiz: red1
(11:54:24) CarlosRuiz: there is no CC neither PMC to make the decision
(11:54:28) CarlosRuiz: Bahman
(11:54:33) Bahman: Yes?
(11:54:33) CarlosRuiz: let's do it bazaar way
(11:54:37) CarlosRuiz: let's vote when to release
(11:54:39) CarlosRuiz: what to release
(11:54:42) red1: yes bahman is right.. the community decide.. just like the roman senate of old
(11:54:48) CarlosRuiz: and then
(11:54:49) CarlosRuiz: voted
(11:54:53) red1: but the senate was formed from the ppl
(11:54:53) CarlosRuiz: who is going to make the work?
(11:55:00) CarlosRuiz: again
(11:55:05) Bahman: To make the work of what Carlos?
(11:55:09) jsSolutions: senate was a republic
(11:55:12) CarlosRuiz: i.e. releasing
(11:55:16) jsSolutions: only republics work
(11:55:18) CarlosRuiz: filling the wiki for the release
(11:55:19) karsten_thiemann: we vote again :)
(11:55:21) CarlosRuiz: uploading into sf
(11:55:24) red1: yes joel.. cos they didnt believe in god nor king
(11:55:36) red1: england wasnt born yet
(11:55:36) jsSolutions: Kings work
(11:55:47) Bahman: Carlos, ADempiere is a product...everything which is ready and useful goes into trunk...
(11:55:48) red1: no they dont actually
(11:55:54) karsten_thiemann: and they sometimes get executed..
(11:55:59) Bahman: We can't have a company-like policy.
(11:56:08) red1: not all of them karsten_thiemann
(11:56:12) CarlosRuiz: no, maybe I wasn't clear
(11:56:30) CarlosRuiz: some people take the decision, some people do the work
(11:56:35) red1: lets make sure we dont have company like policy
(11:56:40) red1: (now i have to work!)
(11:56:52) jsSolutions: can we pick someone to organize a clear proposal for the PMC?
(11:57:04) red1: leave it to the bazaar on this
(11:57:26) CarlosRuiz: ok, first, can we consider approved PMC proposal with 6/11?
(11:57:43) CarlosRuiz: red1, so -> I'm not going to answer about the release
(11:57:44) red1: but we shuld have someone to lead it same time
(11:57:46) CarlosRuiz: I'm just a committer
(11:57:53) red1: ooo
(11:57:53) CarlosRuiz: ;-)
(11:57:56) jsSolutions: i think the 6/11 will shift with a clear proposal
(11:57:57) CarlosRuiz: get the point?
(11:58:06) red1: didnt know that u finally figured that out
(11:58:20) jsSolutions: especially if CC is quitting
(11:58:23) red1: yeah i got the point...
(11:58:50) red1: the PMC in the charter says anything about letting SME into it too?
(11:59:03) red1: cos thats the one hengsin proposed
(11:59:11) red1: that PMC be of SMEs too
(11:59:14) hengsin: Joel, actually the original PCM proposal are quite clear ...
(11:59:19) red1: so ppl like Bahman and Mario shuld be in
(11:59:23) hengsin: PCM = PMC in project charter
(11:59:31) red1: cos they are into certain expertise
(11:59:54) CarlosRuiz: you have extended ideas for PMC, Heng Sin
(12:00:14) red1: i knew that hengsin stole that idea
(12:00:23) red1: now that he admits it
(12:00:33) red1: but i didnt have proof then
(12:00:38) red1: get the point?
(12:00:56) hengsin: sorry, don't realise that.
(12:01:05) red1: u re lucky too
(12:01:55) CarlosRuiz: Heng Sin words:
(12:01:55) CarlosRuiz: "Project Management Committee ( PMC ). The PMC should include functional experts, implementors and also key developers of the project and replace the current CC. The PMC would then make a group decision on who will have the commit right, what should goes into branch first, plan for next release etc."
(12:02:01) hengsin: frankly, it seems like many people are working off the main trunk for whatever reason ...
(12:02:51) red1: its an admin function this PMC
(12:02:59) red1: not political
(12:03:04) CarlosRuiz: aha
(12:03:09) red1: they dont determine so much policy then
(12:03:14) red1: can i say that?
(12:03:21) CarlosRuiz: not sure, is Heng Sin proposal
(12:03:31) red1: thats why i m asking
(12:03:49) hengsin: the decision making part is controversial ...
(12:03:58) CarlosRuiz: look, situation today
(12:04:00) jsSolutions: not 'determine' policy, but lead it
(12:04:04) CarlosRuiz: we don't have CC, we don't have PMC
(12:04:19) CarlosRuiz: who are you going to ask "when are we going to release 3.3.0?"
(12:04:24) red1: we may not even have the council soon
(12:04:27) CarlosRuiz: community?
(12:04:43) red1: Queen Eli
(12:05:02) CarlosRuiz: at this pace, we're not going to have Adempiere soon
(12:05:07) hengsin: to me, unless the project leader/council take the lead, otherwise it is something no others can push forward ...
(12:05:13) red1: i think Layer 1 and 2 can decide
(12:05:20) red1: cos they re handling the thick of it
(12:05:37) CarlosRuiz: that's again the CC
(12:05:40) jsSolutions: no red, they are technical
(12:05:53) CarlosRuiz: and CC is just technical, such decision is beyond
(12:05:56) red1: isnt release 33 a technicaol release?
(12:06:16) red1: what goes into the code can be functional + code.. that is solved via peer process
(12:06:37) red1: release is just biology
(12:06:43) red1: sorry technical
(12:07:14) jsSolutions: nope
(12:07:14) red1: release is the nature of this project
(12:07:28) jsSolutions: holding it till the 13th is a marketing decision, not a technical one
(12:07:34) red1: linus torvalds just release without consulting anyone
(12:07:41) CarlosRuiz: we have not linus here
(12:07:43) jsSolutions: so do we- to SF
(12:07:49) CarlosRuiz: we have not tech leader
(12:07:51) CarlosRuiz: we have not pmc
(12:07:53) CarlosRuiz: we have not cc
(12:08:01) red1: do we need a marketing decision?
(12:08:06) hengsin: haha ... linux is linus personal project, no one can vote against him :)
(12:08:14) ***jsSolutions Joel tries to remember vote to end CC
(12:08:28) jsSolutions: */ Joel tries to remember vote to end cc
(12:08:29) CarlosRuiz: no, it wasn't voted
(12:08:34) red1: well KISS
(12:08:51) CarlosRuiz: it was voted PMC to replace CC
(12:09:09) CarlosRuiz: better -> extend and embrace CC
(12:09:20) CarlosRuiz: not really
(12:09:23) red1: thus - PMC
(12:09:35) CarlosRuiz: it was -> replace CC (to avoid being accused of conflict)
(12:09:50) red1: the leader here says.. just get on with it
(12:10:11) red1: i have to go back to my business..
(12:10:14) red1: i have none now
(12:10:26) red1: otherwise there will be no leader
(12:10:38) red1: conflict of existence
(12:10:40) CarlosRuiz: situation is -> today we don't have CC neither PMC (and we're still alive as Karsten said)
(12:10:56) jsSolutions: for the past year we have had CC
(12:11:01) red1: actually versions since day one was decided by a few here
(12:11:04) jsSolutions: they protected and things have gone well
(12:11:07) red1: victor, carlos, me.. etc
(12:11:12) jsSolutions: they asked for help
(12:11:18) red1: and CC wasnt functioning either
(12:11:25) jsSolutions: now we have mentor
(12:11:32) red1: in fact there was even a quarrel
(12:11:40) CarlosRuiz: "CC wasnt functioning" ??
(12:11:46) CarlosRuiz: I think it was functioning too much
(12:11:48) red1: remember?
(12:11:50) CarlosRuiz: beyond his reponsibilities
(12:12:00) red1: when there was 3
(12:12:11) red1: victor broke everything
(12:12:18) red1: and trifon wasnt around
(12:12:25) red1: carlos left alone to think
(12:12:37) red1: well.. lonely times
(12:12:53) red1: but release did came out
(12:13:02) red1: cos carlos just went ahead
(12:13:24) CarlosRuiz: I think we need PMC - but nobody wants to take the lead to organize it, do you see?
(12:13:37) CarlosRuiz: people just like to criticize CarlosRuiz
(12:13:47) red1: then we here must understand just one thing
(12:13:52) red1: it doesnt matter
(12:13:55) CarlosRuiz: but sometimes I feel I'm the only one who takes the risk to lead some ugly things
(12:14:04) red1: a meeting like this is important
(12:14:10) red1: it makes decisions
(12:14:28) red1: but it is still up to those in it
(12:14:31) red1: if they wish to
(12:14:35) red1: or they wish not
(12:14:44) red1: main question is "What do we wish?"
(12:14:49) red1: All else is noise
(12:15:01) CarlosRuiz: people voted 6/11 wish PMC
(12:15:13) CarlosRuiz: people voted 11/11 wish committer layers mentored
(12:15:19) CarlosRuiz: ok
(12:15:26) CarlosRuiz: I took the lead to organize the committers layer mentored
(12:15:33) CarlosRuiz: who is going to take the lead to organize PMC?
(12:15:47) red1: lets ask the proposer to do that
(12:16:00) CarlosRuiz: Heng Sin already answered
(12:16:01) red1: he has the first option to say so
(12:16:07) hengsin: red1: what is the role of the council ?
(12:16:15) red1: i already answered
(12:16:20) red1: let me check
(12:17:08) hengsin: sorry but I have to be direct on this, if the council is not going to do anything then lets get rid of it.
(12:17:48) red1: hmm...
(12:18:22) red1: a good idea to put to the vote in the bazaar
(12:18:27) CarlosRuiz: just to let you know, Joel is proposing in several parts that council must be PMC
(12:18:30) red1: guess it is true
(12:18:47) CarlosRuiz: but I think council is a different thing - I asked the same to council -> "What is the role of the council?"
(12:18:48) red1: sounds logical and in line with the small govt concept
(12:18:57) red1: i tot it as trustees
(12:19:09) CarlosRuiz: yes, trustees that can't take or avoid to take any decision
(12:19:09) red1: and founding pioneers
(12:19:25) red1: i see more conflict coming....
(12:19:31) red1: but it has to happen
(12:19:39) CarlosRuiz: what is a trustee that can't take decisions?
(12:19:48) red1: a trustee
(12:19:52) CarlosRuiz: a decorative figure
(12:19:57) red1: just hold onto that trust
(12:19:59) red1: yep
(12:20:03) hengsin: how about just take credit :)
(12:20:05) red1: seen alot of those
(12:20:12) CarlosRuiz: wow, I don't like to be a decorative figure for this project
(12:20:25) red1: yes very bad
(12:20:53) red1: so since meeting here thinks so, then it has to be considered
(12:21:03) CarlosRuiz: I think in council something like last point to make decisions when community asks or community can't
(12:21:41) red1: ok i have to agree
(12:21:46) red1: this is a functional bazaar
(12:21:49) red1: not a decorateive one
(12:22:03) red1: its an SF project after all
(12:22:14) CarlosRuiz: and council must be trustees!
(12:22:22) CarlosRuiz: trustee is a word that came from TRUST
(12:22:26) CarlosRuiz: not politics
(12:22:31) red1: agreed
(12:22:39) red1: so just trustees and PMC
(12:22:42) red1: ?
(12:22:56) red1: but its PMC that is the manager
(12:23:06) red1: they see to it on the issues and releases
(12:23:35) red1: and policy is left to bazaar when the PMC thinks its best that way
(12:23:53) CarlosRuiz: so, what's the role of council?
(12:24:09) CarlosRuiz: trustees to make decisions when community asks or community can't?
(12:24:23) red1: so far not many arguments for council as i can recalll...
(12:24:29) red1: i mean in present times
(12:24:44) red1: we seem to have migrated to a 'team'
(12:24:46) CarlosRuiz: I just made the first one
(12:25:02) CarlosRuiz: and council is struggling on how to act
(12:25:16) jsSolutions: still they are holders of passwords and 'assets'
(12:25:29) red1: yes as trustees and not managers
(12:25:34) CarlosRuiz: I remember also some words from Redhuan
(12:25:39) red1: confilct remember?
(12:25:45) CarlosRuiz: council is the people here since first day
(12:25:51) CarlosRuiz: people who trust in Adempiere when we had nothing
(12:26:19) red1: decorative words
(12:26:26) CarlosRuiz: not really
(12:26:27) CarlosRuiz: you said
(12:26:38) red1: i think Council cannot be the project manager
(12:26:41) red1: PMC shuld be the one
(12:26:44) CarlosRuiz: is easy to enter Adempiere now, we're number one
(12:26:49) red1: house of lords sit behind
(12:26:54) CarlosRuiz: but it was not easy to enter Adempiere when we started and number 12000
(12:27:23) jsSolutions: council gives continuity
(12:27:39) red1: so what is the feeling here?
(12:27:55) red1: council remains? or council as trustees and leave decisions to PMC?
(12:28:13) CarlosRuiz: I'm feeling that we must state what is the council role
(12:28:17) CarlosRuiz: many people ask about that
(12:28:22) red1: if JJ or IBM contacts us, they talk to PMC not Council
(12:28:28) jsSolutions: i could see council acting as manager, or PMC as manager
(12:28:33) jsSolutions: either way
(12:28:44) red1: i think as trustees and no more
(12:28:47) CarlosRuiz: the problem is that council is closed, PMC must not be closed
(12:28:49) red1: so as not to give conflict
(12:29:02) CarlosRuiz: but what decisions can/must take the trustees
(12:29:07) CarlosRuiz: I don't like a decorative council
(12:29:23) red1: only on matters of assets such as foundation
(12:29:35) CarlosRuiz: Joel, you proposed Sussane for PMC, it's not the same as proposing for council
(12:29:42) jsSolutions: correct
(12:30:07) jsSolutions: role of reviewing functional additions to the core
(12:30:10) CarlosRuiz: I really think that there are decisions that community can't take
(12:30:16) jsSolutions: is different from Strategy
(12:30:24) CarlosRuiz: like the one I put in council hands
(12:30:37) CarlosRuiz: I trust council can take a good decision
(12:30:37) red1: hmm
(12:30:43) CarlosRuiz: but what's the meaning if council can't
(12:30:55) CarlosRuiz: if council just think acting about politics?
(12:31:01) CarlosRuiz: not about trust?
(12:31:03) CarlosRuiz: trustees?
(12:31:21) red1: yes that sounds logical
(12:31:23) hengsin: frankly, it is not possible for a developer like me to lead the pmc, I already have too much on my shoulder.
(12:31:33) red1: we invite into trustees those who hold assets on behalf of bazaar
(12:31:55) CarlosRuiz: I don't like such type of council
(12:32:07) CarlosRuiz: I would like a strong council, that can take decision, that can gain trust from community
(12:32:11) red1: problem with me is i have none on my shoulder.. i need a job
(12:32:33) CarlosRuiz: that can take difficult decisions, when community can't or ask council to take
(12:32:34) red1: we dont have many candidates then for such a council
(12:32:46) CarlosRuiz: it's not a council currently?
(12:32:54) red1: shuld we then have a smaller council?
(12:33:06) red1: from berlin we have met more ppl
(12:33:16) red1: we can now remember who are better council ppl
(12:33:31) red1: ok we take note of this
(12:33:39) CarlosRuiz: hmmm
(12:33:42) red1: and discuss in council, whatever it is now
(12:33:44) CarlosRuiz: maybe I put the decision in wrong hands
(12:33:58) CarlosRuiz: ok, let's move to the PMC
(12:34:21) red1: so we accept that PMC be the leading decision maker for technicals?
(12:34:27) CarlosRuiz: today we don't have CC neither PMC
(12:34:36) CarlosRuiz: nope
(12:34:36) red1: and that it be comprised of the experts in the community
(12:34:44) jsSolutions: project road map
(12:34:47) CarlosRuiz: PMC is not technical, PMC is beyond that
(12:35:06) red1: and that involves road map, releases, development projects
(12:35:37) hengsin: yes
(12:35:42) red1: i wonder why hengsin cannot be PMC head
(12:35:48) jsSolutions: he does not want to be
(12:35:56) jsSolutions: some are devs, some are leaders
(12:36:20) red1: PMC head is a special kind of dev/leader
(12:36:29) CarlosRuiz: I would propose a community elected rotative PMC leader
(12:36:30) jsSolutions: some are shy and want to be told they are the best choice  ;-)
(12:36:30) hengsin: nope
(12:36:31) red1: that dont have to make long speeches
(12:37:09) red1: hengsin has strong but important relevant views for the project
(12:37:09) jsSolutions: carlos and I dont 'suffer from that kind of modesty'
(12:37:16) CarlosRuiz: hahahaha
(12:37:18) red1: i have heard them and i think shuld be given air
(12:37:41) red1: its time we change the Colombian guy
(12:37:57) CarlosRuiz: yes, specially when I'm thinking to quit
(12:38:12) red1: CR is still Layer chief
(12:38:12) jsSolutions: if there is no CC , then I would propose CR as PMC chair
(12:38:39) red1: i cannot comment (to avoid moyses)
(12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: three things:
(12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: - leader must want to do it
(12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: - must be elected publicly
(12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: - elections must be convoked every x time
(12:39:21) CarlosRuiz: I'm not sure if I want to do it, I'm waiting for some decisions
(12:40:14) CarlosRuiz: excuse me for being clear, direct and honest as I am normally
(12:40:27) hengsin: carlos, yes, we know you :)
(12:40:43) red1_ [n=red1@71.100.49.60.klj04-home.tm.net.my] ha entrado en la sala.
(12:41:44) CarlosRuiz: so, we need someone to give form to the PMC proposal
(12:41:45) jsSolutions ha salido de la sala (quit: Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
(12:42:05) jsSolutions [n=jsSoluti@ip72-197-81-229.sd.sd.cox.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(12:42:13) red1_: we take as it is from the charter plus the right points from hengsin's post
(12:42:13) CarlosRuiz: so, we need someone to give form to the PMC proposal
(12:42:30) karsten__ [n=chatzill@p57A087C7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] ha entrado en la sala.
(12:42:40) fer_luck: back
(12:42:43) CarlosRuiz: and I think we can propose here that PMC leader must be elected publicly between those who want to be leader
(12:43:01) hengsin: agree
(12:43:05) CarlosRuiz: and that elections can be repeated every x times
(12:43:17) red1_: i think it so too but not from those who WANT to be
(12:43:21) CarlosRuiz: Joel, the three things were:
(12:43:21) CarlosRuiz: (12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: - leader must want to do it
(12:43:21) CarlosRuiz: (12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: - must be elected publicly
(12:43:21) CarlosRuiz: (12:38:57) CarlosRuiz: - elections must be convoked every x time
(12:43:21) CarlosRuiz: (12:39:21) CarlosRuiz: I'm not sure if I want to do it, I'm waiting for some decisions
(12:43:21) CarlosRuiz: (12:40:14) CarlosRuiz: excuse me for being clear, direct and honest as I am normally
(12:43:22) red1_: its not the preidential elections
(12:43:36) karsten__: right - and at least every year
(12:43:42) red1_: candidates are shy ppl
(12:43:48) red1_: the right ones i mean
(12:44:01) CarlosRuiz: red1, but it's useless to have a leader that don't want to lead
(12:44:14) CarlosRuiz: you must convince him first
(12:44:22) red1_: one who puts himself as a leader is not fit to lead
(12:44:28) karsten__: :)
(12:44:28) karsten__: I nominate Carlos and Michael :)
(12:44:33) jsSolutions: ok, u r out  ;-)
(12:44:49) red1_: finally
(12:44:53) CarlosRuiz: I don't think so Red1, first needed skill for a leader is that he wants to lead
(12:45:03) CarlosRuiz: and he must show that he wants?
(12:45:10) hengsin: and I only wants to code here :)
(12:45:10) CarlosRuiz: how the rest are going to notice instead?
(12:45:20) red1_: there are those who has greed and politics behind to their motives
(12:45:49) CarlosRuiz: yes, you always trust in community wisdom
(12:45:51) red1_: i think u have to lead the PMC... u know how to so far
(12:45:54) CarlosRuiz: to avoid that
(12:46:13) red1_: unless u get me an older mexican
(12:46:31) CarlosRuiz: repeating myself: I'm not sure if I want to do it, I'm waiting for some decisions
(12:46:31) jsSolutions: that's why we choose from those who have contributed, no tthose that promise to....
(12:46:46) red1_: oh yes that decision..
(12:47:00) red1_: thats for another forum
(12:47:05) CarlosRuiz: aha
(12:47:06) jsSolutions: was there a volunteer to give form to the PMC proposal?
(12:47:23) CarlosRuiz: still not
(12:47:31) jsSolutions: if not, I will volunteer
(12:47:39) CarlosRuiz: +1
(12:47:42) red1_: finally
(12:47:49) red1_: (again i cannot comment)
(12:47:53) hengsin: +1 ( so that I have more time to code )
(12:48:11) red1_: +1 then.. so that i have more time to do nothing
(12:48:18) CarlosRuiz: hahahaha
(12:48:20) karsten__: I will support Carlos because he proofed that he can do the job
(12:48:21) CarlosRuiz: to evangelize
(12:48:34) karsten__: so +1 from me
(12:48:35) jsSolutions: i like to copy and paste in the wiki
(12:49:06) red1_: well one is qualified by his vocation of choice
(12:49:07) CarlosRuiz: we agreed to put in the proposal about PMC leader publicly elected?
(12:49:20) red1_: yes certainly
(12:49:32) red1_: and by simple majority for that
(12:49:40) CarlosRuiz: ok, let's move on the PMC
(12:50:18) CarlosRuiz: and I suppose some rules to enter/drop members of PMC - maybe they're already in charter
(12:50:36) red1_: yes too .. the last time i read this morning
(12:50:49) jsSolutions: should I recommend a starting membership?
(12:51:01) CarlosRuiz: yes, I think so
(12:51:08) red1_: go ahead
(12:51:35) red1_: well u can put in the wiki as starting lineup.. then others will follow suit
(12:52:23) red1_: are there any further matters then beyond this?
(12:52:41) jsSolutions: i guess the recommendations are already in the forum
(12:53:02) red1_: copy and paste
(12:54:04) CarlosRuiz: ok, another thing, but maybe for the next CC meeteing
(12:54:10) CarlosRuiz: we need to organize better how to release
(12:54:22) CarlosRuiz: split the tasks needed to release and look for volunteers
(12:54:56) red1_: yes ... we have to keep lobbying
(12:55:16) red1_: remember the red cross and red crescent
(12:56:03) CarlosRuiz: ok, so if we don't have more issues, I think we can finish the meeting
(12:56:03) CarlosRuiz: agree?
(12:56:36) jsSolutions: ok
(12:56:47) red1_: i dont mind been called a parrot for this one
(12:56:49) hengsin: ok ( so that I have more time to sleep )
(12:56:54) CarlosRuiz: thank you very much
(12:57:02) hengsin: thanks all
(12:57:08) red1_: gracias mucho
(12:57:44) red1_ ha salido de la sala ("before i get kicked...").
(12:58:15) karsten__: bye
(12:58:24) karsten__ ha salido de la sala (quit: "bye bye").
(13:00:09) karsten_thiemann ha salido de la sala (quit: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
(13:02:04) red1 ha salido de la sala (quit: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
(13:02:42) hengsin: bye all
(13:02:46) hengsin ha salido de la sala.
(13:11:10) teo_sarca ha salido de la sala (quit: Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
(13:13:43) jsSolutions ha salido de la sala (quit: simmons.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
(13:19:11) jsSolutions [n=jsSoluti@ip72-197-81-229.sd.sd.cox.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(13:31:14) Bahman ha salido de la sala ("Ave atque vale!").