[23:00] <Eickmeyer> o/
[23:00] <toddy> o/
[23:01] <Eickmeyer> 2 more for quorum.
[23:02]  * Eickmeyer pokes jose and teward with a 4x4.
[23:02] <jose> give me a minute
[23:02] <Eickmeyer> haha k
[23:02] <jose> I'm finishing cooking a mugcake
[23:02] <toddy> :)
[23:02] <Eickmeyer> Ooooo! You and your sugary treats.
[23:03] <jose> sugar-free though :P it's a keto mugcake
[23:03] <Eickmeyer> Ohhh... you and your sweet yet weight-loss treats.
[23:03] <toddy> cake is cake. nice :)
[23:03] <Eickmeyer> ^ Facts.
[23:03] <jose> ^ true
[23:03] <jose> I'm ready now
[23:04] <Eickmeyer> Still missing 1 of teward, nhaines, or lina.
[23:04]  * Eickmeyer just tried pinging teward using other channels
[23:05] <teward> i am around but feeling a tiny bit bleh
[23:05] <Eickmeyer> Ah.
[23:05] <Eickmeyer> Well, there's quorum.
[23:05] <teward> ate waaaaay too much at lunch...
[23:05] <Eickmeyer> wxl: Are you here?
[23:06]  * Eickmeyer guesses no wxl
[23:07] <jose> we have quorum
[23:07] <Eickmeyer> Who wants to chair?
[23:07]  * Eickmeyer not it
[23:07] <teward> notme today
[23:07] <teward> *points at jose* they need to :P
[23:07] <jose> #startmeeting
[23:07] <meetingology> Meeting started Wed Nov 18 23:07:26 2020 UTC.  The chair is jose. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[23:07] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[23:07] <jose> Welcome to the CC meeting
[23:07] <jose> #chair Eickmeyer teward toddy
[23:07] <meetingology> Current chairs: Eickmeyer jose teward toddy
[23:08] <jose> so, what's up
[23:08] <jose> any topics y'all would like to discuss today?
[23:08] <jose> I do have one but would like to open the floor to all of you first
[23:08] <wxl> sorry it's been a day
[23:08] <teward> #topic Technical Board
[23:08] <jose> wxl you joining us for now?
[23:09] <wxl> i'm here
[23:09] <teward> nothing from Mark on the nominees so we'll have to extend existing TB through End of Year
[23:09] <jose> #chair Eickmeyer teward toddy wxl
[23:09] <meetingology> Current chairs: Eickmeyer jose teward toddy wxl
[23:09] <jose> I did send him a reminder another way
[23:09] <teward> Is there any objection with extending the existing TB members anyways until End of Year so that we have a TB in the interim?  We don't know when Mark'll get his nominees list in.
[23:10] <jose> none from me
[23:10] <Eickmeyer> Yeah, I'm all for extending TB through EOY. I doubt we'll be able to get through elections before EOY.
[23:10] <wxl> fine with me
[23:10] <jose> however
[23:10] <toddy> for me also fine
[23:10] <jose> I do suggest we reach out to them proactively and make sure that they're aware of the decision
[23:10] <jose> and if anyone wants to resign, they have the opportunity to do so gracefully
[23:10] <wxl> i say we continue to approach mark about it and perhaps suggest some other alternative, such as taking nominees as normal and allowing himm to confirm them as with the cc
[23:10] <Eickmeyer> ^ Yes, I agree.
[23:10] <jose> what do you think
[23:11] <Eickmeyer> So nominations curated by Mark? That could work.
[23:11] <teward> nominations have always been curated by Mark for TB
[23:11] <wxl> we make a call for nominations and then pass that to him to confirm
[23:12] <wxl> that at least eliminates some of the work required
[23:12] <Eickmeyer> True, that would be less onMark's plate.
[23:12] <jose> I have made sure that he gets the message though
[23:12] <jose> so we'll have an answer before EOY :)
[23:13] <Eickmeyer> So, let's let it sit for another two weeks with existing TB extended to EOY then.
[23:13] <Eickmeyer> If nothing, then we get more proactive.
[23:13] <jose> I agree that's a good choice.
[23:13] <wxl> i mean i can imagine sorting through all of the ubuntu developers to find appropriate candidates that want to sit on the board is a rather tiring situation
[23:13] <teward> I'm not opposed to discussing changing how TB is staffed, but I think we need, for now, to keep the process as is, and propose any changes to that to Mark
[23:14] <teward> and simply keep existing TB members through EOY given our proximity to the end of the year
[23:14] <Eickmeyer> wxl: I agree, but I think, considering *how* jose got through to him, that we need to sit this out a little longer.
[23:14] <wxl> works for me
[23:14] <jose> any objections about the proposals above?
[23:15] <toddy> hi linaporras
[23:15] <linaporras> Hi, sorry for the late
[23:15] <jose> #chair Eickmeyer teward toddy wxl linaporras
[23:15] <meetingology> Current chairs: Eickmeyer jose linaporras teward toddy wxl
[23:15] <teward> #action teward to extend current TB members roles through EOY and notify TB about it as well.
[23:15] <meetingology> ACTION: teward to extend current TB members roles through EOY and notify TB about it as well.
[23:15] <teward> because we at least agreed on THAT
[23:15] <jose> and don't forget to document it in the bug please :)
[23:15] <teward> thats a given ;)
[23:15] <jose> :partyparrot:
[23:16] <wxl> what's next?
[23:16] <jose> good then
[23:16] <jose> I was just going to ask that :)
[23:16] <toddy> #topic LoCo Council nomination
[23:16] <wxl> since we're all chairs, i'm not who the actual one running the show is XD
[23:17] <jose> I am, but any of you can run commands :)
[23:17] <Eickmeyer> jose is *the* chair.
[23:17] <jose> :tada:
[23:17] <toddy> We have not received enough nominations for the LoCo council after our call.
[23:17] <wxl> Eickmeyer: does that make you the stool?
[23:17] <teward> wxl: jose's in the hotseat today, we just have perms to run the commands now lol.
[23:17] <toddy> hi nhaines
[23:17] <Eickmeyer> wxl: Usually. Because I'm always the butt of the joke when tsimonq2 isn't around (shameless ping because reasons)
[23:17] <linaporras> I  have a commment on that
[23:18] <linaporras> #idea
[23:18] <teward> not a command.  just make your comment RE: LoCo Council
[23:18] <teward> since that's the item we're looking at now
[23:18] <linaporras> RE: LoCo Council
[23:19] <wxl> Eickmeyer: fair point https://phab.lubuntu.me/file/data/vcfkt6x656czh7ao52u5/PHID-FILE-p7x4hnakcjuzjrp4nqey/simon_s_fault.jpg
[23:19] <Eickmeyer> ^ Yep. I know that reference, wxl! haha
[23:19] <jose> #chair Eickmeyer teward toddy wxl linaporras nhaines
[23:19] <meetingology> Current chairs: Eickmeyer jose linaporras nhaines teward toddy wxl
[23:19] <toddy> wxl: :D
[23:20] <wxl> linaporras: what are you thinking
[23:20] <wxl> ?
[23:20] <Eickmeyer> Wow, not only quorum, but FULL COUNCIL!!!
[23:20] <toddy> yes
[23:20] <nhaines> \o/
[23:20] <linaporras> RE: LoCo Council   I think that before an election we should take a look on the current status of the LoCos, which are active, how many members, and review the pending approvals of ubuntu members. Also I propose that with an initial status, we also see if is prudent to elect, or just empower the LoCos, and after that go to elections
[23:21] <linaporras> I was writing, sorry for the delay..... since been a long time not using IRC also... but, that's the idea for that topic!
[23:21] <toddy> how do we get a current status of the LoCos?
[23:21] <jose> we'd have to email loco contacts with an announcement and poll ourselves
[23:22] <wxl> this sounds a little bit like what i was thinking but i do know that one of the things that we've kind of always needed is a way for canonical to verify the validity of some indvidual or individuals to represent ubuntu at conferences and to get funding and resources related to that
[23:22] <jose> toddy, could you please mention some of the ideas that were mentioned today in the mailing list
[23:22] <wxl> which is why there is the whole loco verification thing
[23:22] <jose> as the mailing list is private
[23:22] <jose> and then I do have a comment, after toddy has debriefed :)
[23:23] <linaporras> That's a task, start reviewing Launchpad... and look for another way to contact people, in my LoCo there is active people, but we a fe years ago were discussing about the tools... because for many people was difficult to complete the process, so we were in real bigger thant the launchpad team...
[23:23] <toddy> We have discussed at the mailing list if we make a second call.
[23:24] <toddy> Or if we change the focus of the candidates
[23:24] <Eickmeyer> Another idea was to change the idea of LoCos altogether.
[23:24] <toddy> so that we are maybe should search for people who wants to change the process
[23:25] <linaporras> I am reading the list... maybe a meeting with the people that is still active, and listen what's going on, what are the barriers, coudl be a good idea...
[23:26] <jose> so, what about this
[23:26] <Eickmeyer> In the US, LoCos are pretty much dead. I, for one, have never been verified by a LoCo.
[23:26] <linaporras> I suggest this before thinkin in changing the process... or calling again to elections...
[23:27] <wxl> i think it's safe to say that the lack of interested candidates is probably a sign for concern
[23:27] <Eickmeyer> ^ Agreed.
[23:27] <nhaines> I agree.
[23:27] <jose> since we've been having difficulties, we convoke for a transition committee, who will help us in making that assessment and providing conclusions about the current status of the LoCo teams
[23:27] <toddy> I like the idea to discuss this topic with the loco contacts
[23:27] <wxl> perhaps we should reach out to previous council members and see if there are interested parties
[23:27] <linaporras> (talk with people not limited to people that is launchpad)
[23:27] <jose> peeps, I want to finish my idea without messages getting lost, one at a time?
[23:27] <linaporras> agree with wxl
[23:27] <jose> since we've been having difficulties, we convoke for a transition committee, who will help us in making that assessment and providing conclusions about the current status of the LoCo teams
[23:28] <wxl> jose: convoke?! i have never heard that word before and i'm the one who is actually from an english speaking country! go you.
[23:28] <jose> they can do whatever they deem necessary in order to analyze the status of loco teams
[23:28] <jose> emailing the mailing list, holding interviews
[23:28] <jose> maybe analyzing "the market"
[23:28] <jose> and then, they come up with a report saying
[23:28] <jose> 1.- what is the current status
[23:29] <jose> 2.- how can we improve participation
[23:29] <jose> 3.- any and all recommendations they have in order to improve the experience of loco teams (or if they wanna revamp them)
[23:29] <jose> that's it
[23:29] <jose> what do y'all think
[23:29] <teward> I'm just going to put this out there though in the interim:
[23:29] <linaporras> I am not a fan of comittees, prefer a meeting as wxl suggest and also... inviting more people... and maybe this is daring but evalutin not necessary this channel as the channel for that meeting.
[23:29] <teward> LoCo Teams are currently going to be impacted globally by the Pandemic
[23:30] <wxl> i assume you think that committee would be a subset of the cc?
[23:30] <teward> so that's one factor to consider in any way we move forward.
[23:30] <linaporras> *evaluating...
[23:30] <jose> I suggess the committee be a group of 3-5 people who we delegate to make this decision
[23:31] <jose> overseen by the community council, of course
[23:31] <wxl> i interpret teward's thought two ways:
[23:31] <wxl>  1. the need for people to get verified for funds and resources are going to be small, if at all
[23:31] <wxl>   (meaning we have some time)
[23:31] <linaporras> I think that for start this task we should all get involved, and having this meeting then plan a strategy...
[23:32] <wxl>  2. the activity may be decreased (so our investigations may not be indicative of "normal" activity)
[23:32] <jose> we would have to analyze historical data
[23:32] <jose> I can tell you for a fact the big decline happened in 2017ish
[23:32] <jose> we can mark 2020 with an asterisk, but the current level of participation is mostly an indicator of previous participation
[23:33] <jose> we could even give it a 50% handicap
[23:33] <jose> Eickmeyer, toddy, would love to hear your thoughts on the proposal
[23:34] <jose> nhaines too
[23:34] <Eickmeyer> I honestly don't know. I feel as though the historical verification reason for the LoCos might not exist at all.
[23:34] <wxl> right. so maybe for now we say that the cc will be responsibile for any verification that needs to happen. there aren't a lot of these happening, so that's probably not a big deal. i do like the idea of getting some more data together before making further decisions. and having a delegated group to do this is something i like (we've got a bunch of stuff on our plates so we probably don't want to go
[23:34] <wxl> crazy)
[23:34] <jose> yeah of course, we can take the verification responsibilities in the meantime, but I would like to get that committee together to analyze what we have
[23:35] <jose> I know of teams like US-AZ, for example, that still hold meetings :)
[23:35] <Eickmeyer> But are they functioning as a LoCo or a LUG?
[23:36] <jose> I haven't checked, but as meetingology's owner, I get messages saying they have ended a meeting :)
[23:36] <toddy> we can try it out with a committee. I think we should have in there some of active members of the locos
[23:36] <nhaines> I think contacting the teams that are verified or became unruffled I'm the last two years would be a good start.
[23:36] <nhaines> *unverified in the last two years
[23:36] <jose> right, but that in and of itself is a huge task. which is why I think a committee is a good idea
[23:36] <jose> be it verified or unverified
[23:37] <nhaines> Oh no, I see autocorrect has decided to sabotage me today! :)
[23:37] <Eickmeyer> I can also think of a few teams that need to be dissolved, if they aren't already.
[23:37] <wxl> i would like to see the committee include members of locos that are active and excited, even if they aren't verified
[23:37] <jose> totally!
[23:37] <Eickmeyer> Yep.
[23:37] <toddy> +1
[23:38] <nhaines> +1
[23:38] <jose> I would, however, require these people be ubuntu members.
[23:38] <wxl> and preferably, across a wide geographical makeup
[23:38] <jose> ^
[23:38] <Eickmeyer> wb linaporras
[23:38] <wxl> we can't just have people from asia or just from europe and certainly not just from north america
[23:38] <jose> if they are not ubuntu members but we feel like they have had enough participation like to become an ubuntu member, we can always ask them to go through the process
[23:38] <linaporras> I lost my connection :'(
[23:38] <jose> totally believe in diversity
[23:39] <jose> welcome back!
[23:39] <wxl> agree with the ubuntu members thing
[23:39] <wxl> the reason i want to see the wide grographical makeup is not because of diversity but because i think truly each location has different needs and it would be nice to see those represented as well as they can be
[23:39] <jose> Lina, I'm going to send you all the conversation we just had via PM so you can review
[23:40] <jose> and we're going to give you a couple minutes to catch up in case you surface any concerns, risks, or questions
[23:40] <teward> agree with wxl on the wide needs dispersion and representation of different areas' needs.
[23:40] <linaporras> thank u jose
[23:40] <teward> And point #3 that was not seen by wxl in my regard of COVID was this:
[23:41] <teward> if LoCo teams need funding for events, etc. we can't reliably approve/etc. any of that because of the nature of the current Pandemic
[23:41] <jose> +1 to the globality, diversity, and inclusion part
[23:41] <teward> therefore #1 and #2 that wxl said is accurate.
[23:41] <jose> unless they're in a covid-free country :)
[23:42] <teward> but also that we need to keep this pandemic in mind with anything LoCo related because of local issues with the various issues this ongoing chaos year is bringing to regions and areas.
[23:42] <teward> jose: you mean Antarctica right?  :P
[23:42] <jose> New Zealand!
[23:42] <jose> or Australia!
[23:42] <linaporras> jajaja, some African countries reports low cases of COVID...
[23:42] <jose> The pandemic, however, is also forcing us to re-think our strategies
[23:42] <linaporras> Well... I have a question... form my ignorance... the membership board is having the meetings for new members approval... jus to verify... because I am not sure
[23:43] <wxl> yes linaporras
[23:43] <jose> Yes, they are.
[23:43] <jose> And I got the list of nominations
[23:43] <linaporras> thank u!
[23:43] <jose> I just need to make it pretty, officially present it to you, and we can go from there
[23:43] <wxl> the membership board overall is doing pretty good. there's still interest in helping with the board, people still want to be members, etc.
[23:44] <wxl> i will also say that the past few boards have done some heavy lifting to improve documentation and such, so that's a pretty healthy project
[23:44] <toddy> wxl: yes, I agree
[23:45] <teward> unrelated FYI I have a hard-stop at 19:00 my time (15 minutes) as i have another meeting for work I *must* be in (IT Security related heavy discussionss)
[23:45] <teward> so if I just die in 15 minutes that's why ^
[23:45] <Eickmeyer> ^ Same, hard-stop at 16:00 my time, work meeting.
[23:45] <wxl> ok let's move forward
[23:45] <jose> toddy, nhaines, linaporras, Eickmeyer, wxl: last call for concerns and queries about the committee project
[23:45] <toddy> my bed is waiting in 15 min
[23:45] <wxl> it sounds like we're in agreement here. so how do we form this committee?
[23:46] <linaporras> I want ot participate in that mission
[23:46] <linaporras> *to
[23:46] <jose> I would prefer if we act in observation
[23:46] <nhaines> I feel like we have a good plan to start getting things going again.
[23:46] <jose> So, next steps for the committee:
[23:46] <wxl> i would be open to letting lina suggest candidates
[23:47] <jose> oh, totally
[23:47] <jose> so, next steps:
[23:47] <linaporras> I disagree.... I think that we need to be active in this... and thats the reason I want to participate..
[23:47] <jose> 1.- Define the criteria to form the committee and the number of members it'll have based on our diversity expectations
[23:47] <linaporras> Diverse...
[23:47] <linaporras> 3 to 5 members
[23:47] <jose> 2.- Put out a call for nominations for the committee
[23:48] <jose> 3.- Vote, select, give a timeframe and scope of work
[23:48] <jose> and then they can get rolling
[23:48] <jose> I think we should discuss and draft the criteria in the ML and then come back here in two weeks to report results
[23:48] <jose> Lina, I don't say that you won't be able to participate, but rather that we shouldn't be direct members of the committee
[23:49] <jose> We would oversee the committee and the work that they do, but we have bigger and other varied responsibilities here
[23:49] <wxl> i agree
[23:49] <toddy> ok
[23:49] <jose> So, of course we can get involved with the work, but we should delegate this work
[23:49] <wxl> that said, if one or more of us wants to actively participate, i don't think that's a bad idea
[23:49] <wxl> echo
[23:49] <jose> right, but as outside members providing feedback to this independent entity
[23:50] <jose> and super valuable feedback considering our experience
[23:50] <linaporras> Could be... If I have luck, I will have reach some people from locos to listen them separetly and se the intentions to participate... I think that is an important point...   I will try to reach the ubuntu members and the information from locos... to see how we can achieve representativeness, and how can we start moving people
[23:50] <linaporras> *see
[23:50] <linaporras> is that ok for u all?
[23:51] <jose> of course, if you have any recommendations they're more than welcome to nominate themselves for the committee
[23:51] <jose> and if they're not yet an Ubuntu Member, they can apply for membership
[23:51] <linaporras> Yes!
[23:51] <linaporras> That's an excellent point!
[23:51] <toddy> fine
[23:51] <jose> or you can also nominate them yourself
[23:52] <jose> anyone wants to put this to a vote, or are we all good to go with what's been listed so far?
[23:52] <wxl> so jose you going to send something to the ML about criteria and such?
[23:52] <jose> unless toddy wants to inherit it
[23:52] <wxl> i'm not hearing much in the way of dissention so it sounds like we should move forward
[23:52] <jose> but I'd be happy to own it
[23:52] <toddy> I think, we don't need a vote
[23:52] <jose> Eickmeyer, teward, nhaines?
[23:52] <Eickmeyer> No objection.
[23:52] <teward> no objections here
[23:52] <jose> I'll give them 30 secs before I move to the other topic
[23:53] <teward> *salts jose for delay*
[23:53] <wxl> ok any takers for defining the criteria? else it goes to jose
[23:53] <nhaines> I think we're good so far.
[23:53] <teward> not it :P
[23:53] <wxl> not it
[23:53] <Eickmeyer> not it
[23:53] <jose> >.>
[23:53] <jose> okay, in the interest of time I'll take it and then we can discuss if it needs to shift around
[23:53] <wxl> (this is not representative of my interest in the subject, just trying to be wise with my time)
[23:53]  * Eickmeyer started a new job and has a bit of a full plate now
[23:53] <jose> congrats!
[23:54] <jose> does anyone have aob they'd like to bring to the meeting?
[23:54] <wxl> yes congrats indeed
[23:54] <jose> otherwise I'll go with mine
[23:54] <wxl> i think those were the two big hot things
[23:54] <Eickmeyer> In the interest of time, Go jose.
[23:54] <jose> #topic Membership Board Elections
[23:54] <teward> RE: TB we all knew going into today we might have toget that extended so :P
[23:54] <jose> things are moving forward with the MB elections
[23:54] <jose> they've sent over a list of 7-8 nominations
[23:55] <wxl> we have all the nominees yes?
[23:55] <jose> yes
[23:55] <jose> I just need to put it in a nice list for you to just see and we can take a peek
[23:55] <wxl> yes that would be preferable
[23:55] <jose> I *think* we'll have a quorum
[23:55] <jose> does anyone have any questions about that?
[23:55] <jose> I'd say it's all smooth sailing for now
[23:55] <wxl> yes i think that will go rather quick and easy
[23:56] <wxl> i will say something about elections: i found more than a few bugs in our script to generate emails, if anyone is bored and wants something to do :)
[23:56] <jose> I don't think this one needs a general vote
[23:56] <teward> once I see the list of nominations I'll provide my 2 cents if we need to reject a nominee - I haven't seen the list yet due to chaotic workplace
[23:56] <jose> just outs
[23:56] <jose> no prob
[23:56] <jose> I'll make sure that we get all of your perspectives
[23:57] <jose> #topic Any other business?
[23:57] <jose> anything else anyone wants to bring to the table?
[23:57] <teward> yeah where's my coffee you promised me :P
[23:57] <teward> (jk)
[23:57] <jose> I'll send you a starbucks gift card shortly
[23:57] <nhaines> I'll have a tea, please!
[23:57] <wxl> anyone else from the general public?
[23:57] <wxl> tea for me, too, please.
[23:57] <wxl> and not from starbucks XD
[23:57] <teward> just send me $20 via Venmo, i'll call it even xD  (yes myself and jose and everyone joke around a lot, it's just us being kind)
[23:57] <linaporras> jajaja
[23:57] <teward> (and friendly)
[23:57] <teward> oh right
[23:58] <teward> one note on the TB thing
[23:58]  * wxl never jokes and is always incredibly serious, including right now
[23:58] <teward> I already sent the email to the TB and cc'd the CC about the extension and updated the bug
[23:58] <teward> just for awareness :)
[23:58] <jose> thanks a lot for your proactiveness :)
[23:58] <jose> Eickmeyer, toddy, any other business you'd like to discuss?
[23:58] <toddy> jose: no
[23:58] <wxl> oh
[23:58] <Eickmeyer> I've got nothing.
[23:58] <jose> wxl, got something?
[23:58] <wxl> did we make any progress getting access to discourse?
[23:59] <jose> thanks for reminding me
[23:59] <jose> no
[23:59] <jose> I was going to ping IS today and then got swamped by meetings
[23:59] <wxl> and what was it you were contacting rt about yesterday toddy?
[23:59] <jose> I'll set a reminder to do it at 9am my time tomorrow
[23:59] <toddy> the pad, wxl
[23:59] <teward> jose: I think IS got swamped with issues with security.u.c today
[23:59] <wxl> oh right
[23:59] <toddy> the pad was broken
[23:59] <nhaines> I think I might have elevated rights on Discourse.
[23:59] <teward> so today would've been a bad poke day anyways
[23:59] <toddy> so they have restore the etherpad
[23:59] <jose> just pinged them regardless