| ted | ==== START MEETING ==== Welcome everyone! Oh, agenda. Let me not forget. * SFC Items (ted) * Student programs (Outreachy, GSoC, etc) (Tav) * Developer meeting update (Mc) * Vectors update (ryangorley) * Infrastructure update (doctormo) * Administrator job process status (doctormo) * Current Votes Status * Next Meeting: June 3, 2022 | 17:00 |
|---|---|---|
| Mc | o/ | 17:01 |
| karen | \u0001ACTION waves\u0001 | 17:01 |
| ted | Not too much interesting going on with our financials this month. Data for completeness. Financial overview raw numbers from SFC: https://gitlab.com/-/snippets/2314784 Allocations view: https://office.inkscape.org/nextcloud/index.php/s/yqgxF5ecknaYzNF | 17:01 |
| Tav | Hi! | 17:02 |
| ted | Mostly we paid for a domain name renewal. | 17:02 |
| doctormo | Hello | 17:02 |
| ted | That'll all likely to change, but that's for other items 😃 | 17:02 |
| doctormo | ted: did you see the graphs of your data? | 17:02 |
| ted | @doctormo, oh, no I saw that link. But it was on my phone so I didn' thave logins. Then I forgot about it. | 17:03 |
| doctormo | 17:04 | |
| doctormo | I've sent a screenshot hopefully it goes to IRC | 17:04 |
| ted | Yup, got it. | 17:04 |
| Mc | scislac[m]: ted: btw, any of you interested in mentoring for gsoc ? | 17:04 |
| ted | Mc: Sure I could probably do that. I have to be off line for a couple weeks in July but we can work that out. Guess we should move to: * Student programs (Outreachy, GSoC, etc) (Tav) What are the deadlines and links there? | 17:05 |
| scislac[m] | Mc: Unfortunately I am over-committed for the next couple months given that my health isn't cooperative. | 17:07 |
| Mc | not sure for outreachy, but gsoc is Soon™ | 17:07 |
| ted | I think we missed Outreachy for the summer. | 17:07 |
| Mc | we have 4 students that meet eligibility rules, and currently 3 mentors | 17:07 |
| pono | Yeah, Outreacy has closed for this round. | 17:07 |
| Mc | ideally we'd want backup mentors | 17:07 |
| pono | Mentors for the winter application for Outreachy should be submitted before July | 17:08 |
| ted | Haha, and my email notifications say you've already found me 😉 Anything we need to discuss here? Do we need to do a broader call for mentors? Are they all dev students? (my understanding is that GSoC is more open this year?) | 17:08 |
| Tav | We've got some good proposals but we really could use backup mentors. | 17:09 |
| Tav | I think they are all students. | 17:09 |
| Mc | (even though the gsoc program is no more targeted at only students) | 17:10 |
| Tav | The whole process got redone... a bit confusing at times. | 17:10 |
| ted | K, I was more thinking we could look for non-dev mentors. But if all of the proposed projects are highly development based, that wouldn't really work. | 17:11 |
| Tav | We must rank the proposals before requesting slots and then the slots are filled in order. | 17:11 |
| ted | Do we need to start making plans for meetings? We did like a kickoff and stuff last year? (I thought those were good) | 17:13 |
| Tav | Are we going to get a status of the hiring process? Shouldn't that be under SFC? | 17:13 |
| Mc | ted: we can wait for project announcements | 17:14 |
| ted | @Tav, I put it as its own agenda item. | 17:14 |
| Mc | also for gsoc projects have to be dev-focused | 17:14 |
| Tav | Ah, missed it. | 17:14 |
| pono | @Tav: I'm in the process of finishing anonymizing the rest of the CVs so those will go out today. | 17:14 |
| ted | Mc: Ah, okay. I thought they'd changed that. So many changes, I'm probably mixing it up. | 17:14 |
| doctormo | i'd keep the GSoC stuff to the developer meetings if possible. | 17:15 |
| Tav | It might be good to update our GSoC page to state that attending developer meetings is strongly recommended. | 17:15 |
| Mc | in developer meeting upsates, we might do a release soon-ish | 17:16 |
| ted | Okay, transitioning to: * Developer meeting update (Mc) | 17:16 |
| Mc | attendance is variable, but it's all good | 17:16 |
| doctormo | The RC is still planned for this wekeend Mc? | 17:16 |
| Mc | yup | 17:16 |
| ted | And when is the release? I don't remember the date. | 17:17 |
| doctormo | 13th or when the vectors team want. | 17:17 |
| doctormo | @ryangorley any advance on that? | 17:17 |
| ryangorley | We'll discuss that tomorrow, but that's the plan so far. Friday the 13th. What could go wrong? | 17:18 |
| doctormo | Awesome | 17:18 |
| pono | :D | 17:18 |
| ted | Haha, I feel like we're moving along the agenda naturally. But for the logs: * Vectors update (ryangorley) | 17:18 |
| c.rogers | Haha | 17:18 |
| ryangorley | The Release Video has pretty much wrapped up. | 17:19 |
| ted | Any other vectors stuff? I imagine that release is most of it. | 17:19 |
| Mc | when the licensing for the music ? -when | 17:19 |
| doctormo | @ryangorley Have yourself and Adam concluded a good outcome from that contract? | 17:19 |
| doctormo | Mc: Music is CC-BY-SA 4.0, no issues remaining. | 17:20 |
| c.rogers | @Mc actually, we're looking to cast your vote on reimbusment to Doc. Somehow he got the author to give us a CC-BY-SA license so we can upload it to our gitlab instance wiutht he rest of the video files. | 17:20 |
| ryangorley | I'm happy with where it is at. We need to have a debrief. I think there is a lot to learn from the process. | 17:20 |
| doctormo | Sounds good. Would you like to do it as a PLC item, for example at the next video meeting? Or a one off? | 17:21 |
| karen | +1 on learning, we can do much better on process going forward happy to participate in that and sync up with conservancy processes and the like :) | 17:21 |
| c.rogers | @karen, how do I invoice for the video? In the usual way or? | 17:22 |
| ted | @ryangorley, that's a great idea. Could you post a summary to the PLC list? I think it'd be useful for everyone. Probably help us get better at contracting in general. | 17:22 |
| karen | emailing accounts-payable@ is always the way | 17:22 |
| ryangorley | @doctormo I think that would be a good third-party venue. @karen it would be great to have you or an SFC representive there too. I don't have the time/date in front of me for that. | 17:23 |
| c.rogers | Sure. We wshould probably provide an invoice template, since SFC has certain requirements. | 17:23 |
| doctormo | @ryangorley Do you mean yes, or no on the video meeting (in 5 days) https://inkscape.org/cals/event/30/ ? | 17:23 |
| c.rogers | Does one exist already? | 17:23 |
| c.rogers | (invoice template) | 17:23 |
| pono | I don't think we have a general template, but let me check. | 17:24 |
| adam.earle | adam.earle | 17:24 |
| ryangorley | @doctormo Let's tentatively say yes for discussing there, and we'll keep some notes to share with the whole PLC and anyone else. I'll confirm tomorrow that those who are most interested in joining can make it. May have a problem getting @adam.earle there due to the time difference though. | 17:24 |
| c.rogers | Is the turn-around time on payment the same in this case as it is for the SFC video work I did? | 17:25 |
| karen | we are actually putting together a manual for member projects that is close to being finished! | 17:25 |
| c.rogers | That should also go in the template, and in the description of the work for future contractors. | 17:25 |
| doctormo | @ryangorley Understood, let's record the meeting and also make some text notes to send to the mailing lists. :thumbsup: | 17:25 |
| pono | @c.rogers I can't find a template, so making one for Inkscape might be a good idea. And payment should be the same schedule for this work as well. | 17:25 |
| c.rogers | Haha, let me know if you need some more work to help finish it then. ;) | 17:25 |
| ryangorley | Other than that, we'll just do the work to get this 1.2 release out the door. People are excited. Great work from all involved! | 17:25 |
| c.rogers | So up to 30 days? | 17:26 |
| karen | c.rogers: yeah it's up to 30 days | 17:26 |
| ted | Cool. Next up: * Infrastructure update (doctormo) | 17:26 |
| karen | I can try to do better if need be but I can't rush our volunteer directos | 17:26 |
| c.rogers | Is that the same for the Project Manager position? | 17:26 |
| doctormo | Website went down for 6 hours because the machine ran out of memory. Quickly brought back up with a restart. But I'm watching for issues. | 17:26 |
| c.rogers | - IE- They work for a month, then get paid a full month after that ongoing? | 17:27 |
| c.rogers | (up to) | 17:27 |
| doctormo | Outside note: GitLab are removing CI and other tools from projects that are not signed up to their special open source plans. | 17:27 |
| ted | @doctormo, I thought we were though, no? | 17:27 |
| doctormo | Does anyone object to me making the budget information public from the website? (currently only admins can see the new page) | 17:28 |
| ted | @doctormo, do we have pagerduty or something similar setup? Should we get something like that? | 17:28 |
| doctormo | ted: I believe we are, but we also operate a bunch of things and who knows. | 17:28 |
| pono | Is there a reason to publically display the budget information? Has that been requested from contributors or others? | 17:28 |
| doctormo | We could look into a downtime monitor yes. I'm keen to find a new sysadmin if anyone knows someone trustworthy. | 17:28 |
| pono | I'm worried that it could cause more work and discussions than the benefit it might bring. | 17:29 |
| Mc | downdetector works | 17:29 |
| doctormo | pono: Transparency (and there are graphs, which is cute), but I understand if the SFC wants more confidentiality. just let us know. | 17:29 |
| ted | @doctormo, okay. I'm not sure how to check which projects are included or not. But we should probably figure that out. | 17:29 |
| ted | @doctormo, good to know about the sysadmin stuff. Not sure how we should track that, but we shouldn't let it drop. Should probably be a focus after the release. | 17:30 |
| pono | It's up to the project, but I'd just caution because it's something that will be a hard decision to reverse (and sorry if this has been discussed before and I'm late to the conversation). | 17:31 |
| doctormo | No, this is a new discussion. | 17:31 |
| pono | I'm curious if other folks have thoughts on it. | 17:32 |
| ted | I feel like the data is out there, so I'm not worried from the transparency part, but it generally isn't easy to find if you're not coming to these meetings. | 17:32 |
| doctormo | We're still trying to figure out how to write down numbers our end so that the project has them to hand when we're thinking about things we'd like to do. And the new project administrator will be tasked to help with some of these numbers. So having this discussion is needed. But it can also be defered. | 17:32 |
| c.rogers | Makes us look more more friendly to have spending out in the open. | 17:32 |
| c.rogers | Your funds are appreciated, and are going towards these things | 17:33 |
| doctormo | Not like i'll be putting it on the front page, or linking from anywhere. It'll be a url, sharable. | 17:33 |
| ted | So I think that's fine, but advertising or promoting it would probably be a bad idea. I think you used all public sources for the graph, no? | 17:34 |
| karen | the overall balance is published in conservancy's audited financials FWIW (which is a separate thing, I know, I'm just mentioning it for completeness) | 17:34 |
| doctormo | ted: only public sources, yes. | 17:34 |
| pono | Sure :) And I think budget transparency is a good way for donors to feel more involved. So if it's just from public sources that sounds good. | 17:35 |
| c.rogers | When we do more fundraising activites for specific expenditures, it will be more useful to have the info up for folks to look at. | 17:35 |
| doctormo | great this sounds like a consensus. | 17:35 |
| ted | Sounds good. Next up: * Administrator job process status (doctormo) | 17:36 |
| c.rogers | It may also encourage people to contribute more if more would get X-budget item over the top. | 17:36 |
| ted | I think that pono already gave some update though. | 17:36 |
| scislac[m] | agreed | 17:36 |
| doctormo | pono/ | 17:36 |
| RdH | Doesn't it make us look bad to show our money that we are not spending? | 17:36 |
| pono | Yeah. I'm wrapping up the last anonymizations so will get the 2 batches out today before EOD. | 17:37 |
| c.rogers | @RdH well we are starting to, so... :) | 17:37 |
| c.rogers | It looks worse to sit on it in the dark. | 17:37 |
| karen | Also off topic, but here's a handwritten note from a paper check donation we are depositing today on Inkscape's behalf \ | 17:37 |
| c.rogers | Heartwarming. | 17:38 |
| doctormo | ok, this'll start hitting at the same time as the release, so I'll ask if the people doing the reviews need extra time. Since they are vectors members mostly. | 17:38 |
| ted | karen: awesome | 17:38 |
| c.rogers | <3 | 17:38 |
| Mc | :) | 17:38 |
| scislac[m] | @RdH I think it's understandable about what we're not spending since we're trying to get a project admin. If we keep getting funds and not spending AFTER we have that position filled, that won't look as good. | 17:38 |
| doctormo | :heart_decoration: | 17:38 |
| ted | pono: @doctormo, sorry for being slow. We've got candidates, and we've sent out questions, and now were reviewing responses? | 17:38 |
| karen | so maybe we should focus on getting that sorted then start publishing the financial flow? It certainly will be more meaningful then. | 17:39 |
| doctormo | ted: SFC god candidates, and are sending them to the jobs mailing list EOD today. | 17:39 |
| pono | ted: No, the CVs need review and then the questionaires will be send out by the hiring committee | 17:39 |
| scislac[m] | karen: makes sense to me | 17:39 |
| karen | (On our side we are happy with whatever transparency the projects goes with) | 17:39 |
| ted | Oh, okay. So we're determining which of the CVs to send questions to. | 17:40 |
| karen | (except that annually we publish the fund balance, including amount spent over the year) | 17:40 |
| pono | ted: yeah, and hopefully most of them. They are mostly pretty solid. | 17:40 |
| karen | pono: sorry if I missed it but is it easy to estimate a ball park on the number of applications? | 17:41 |
| ted | pono: Cool, but also to be clear, you're sending out the questions, right? Otherwise we'd be deanonymizing for the committee. | 17:41 |
| pono | ~20 ted: That's what I had planned. | 17:41 |
| doctormo | Jobs committee should be sending out the questions. | 17:41 |
| doctormo | Oh I see, the specific process. Gotch | 17:41 |
| doctormo | committee -> pono -> to candidates | 17:42 |
| ted | Great. Does the committee already have questions or are they doing that next? | 17:42 |
| doctormo | They've been waiting so far, so I don't think they have questions yet. But I can't speak for them, they may have some already. | 17:43 |
| pono | Each pass necessarily deanonymizes candidates, so I figured I could send out the questionaires and then pass them along. | 17:43 |
| ted | I think that it is important that they evaluate the answers without knowing who they came from. So after they're ranked for the next phase, yes. | 17:44 |
| pono | Right :) | 17:44 |
| doctormo | pono: Let me know by EOD today if the process is stalled, I need to get the committee re-engaged. | 17:45 |
| ted | Cool. I'm excited about all this. I was really worried we wouldn't get that many applicants. | 17:45 |
| pono | And coming up with an etherpad or other collaborative doc to brainstorm questions is a good idea. I can also help with that after I finish. @doctormo Will do. | 17:45 |
| doctormo | great! thanks pono | 17:45 |
| karen | it's a good idea to ask the candidate to write a sample email that is indicative of the kind of emails they'll be writing in the role | 17:46 |
| ted | Okay, only a couple things lieft in the agenda. * Current Votes Status | 17:46 |
| karen | and also to give the candidates a time limit on how long they should be spending on the questions :) | 17:46 |
| ted | Outstanding votes: * Mentor reimbursement * Security Key Program * Release Video Audio Track I think most folks have seen those, but for completeness that's my list. Vote if you haven't. And then: * Next Meeting: June 3, 2022 Anything else for the meeting? | 17:46 |
| doctormo | Surely these votes should have timed out? | 17:47 |
| ted | @doctormo, we don't have anything to force closure. @doctormo, practically speaking, I'd agree. But trying to be complete. | 17:47 |
| doctormo | ted: Hmm, I thought the FSA says votes are for one week unless otherwise specified. | 17:48 |
| scislac[m] | Just a heads up, I will be unable to make next meeting (it's the day before my sister-in-laws wedding so I'm sure I'll be roped into stuff). | 17:48 |
| ted | @doctormo, I believe it is \ | 17:48 |
| doctormo | karen: Is that correct? Are votes at least a week, and if not given an end date are perpetual? | 17:49 |
| karen | lemme check i mean you can all just vote here to abandon those votes | 17:49 |
| doctormo | karen: Can't vote in chat rooms, mailing list only rule. :-D | 17:50 |
| doctormo | Actually do we have an update on the new FSA? | 17:51 |
| karen | right! I have to get to that the current FSA does allow business to be conducted over IRC the relevant provision is: \ | 17:53 |
| doctormo | Oh cool. | 17:54 |
| karen | means. Members may call for votes on any issue of Committee business. Members must cast their vote within the Voting Period. The Voting Period shall be the longer of (a) seven (7) days after the question has been called or (b) the period of time within which action is required under the vote, such period of time to be no longer than one year. If no period of time is specified pursuant to (b), then the Voting Period shall be seven (7) days.\ | 17:54 |
| ted | Also, they'd get automatically closed in one year? | 17:56 |
| karen | otoh, I think technically you can read it as 7 days, since no time period is specified in the vote | 17:56 |
| doctormo | karen; Thank you! so what happens if a vote lasts more than 7 days and some members didn't vote? | 17:56 |
| karen | yes, at the absolute max \ | 17:56 |
| ted | I guess I read it as the \ | 17:56 |
| karen | yes that's also true ted but it can just be 7days | 17:57 |
| doctormo | but it's the (b) clause that pins it to 7 days if not specified. | 17:57 |
| ted | Not gonna stay on IRC for seven days. Sorry folks 😉 | 17:57 |
| karen | haha | 17:57 |
| doctormo | OK so I think this means folks who've not voted need to really get their votes in. We don't want members falling off the PLC because we don't grok the time periods properly. Or specifying more time if we think it needs it. | 17:58 |
| doctormo | Thanks for the quick reading :-) | 17:59 |
| ted | Cool, yes, thanks for the clarifications karen ! | 17:59 |
| karen | :) | 17:59 |
| ted | I'll go ahead and call ==== END MEETING ==== | 18:00 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!