--- Log opened Sun Jan 24 11:56:32 2010
11:56 -!- sandy|out [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has joined #foundation
11:56 -!- ServerMode/#foundation [+nt] by irc.acc.umu.se
11:56 -!- Irssi: #foundation: Total of 1 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 0 normal]
11:56 -!- Irssi: Join to #foundation was synced in 3 secs
14:27 -!- sandy|out [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has left #foundation []
--- Log closed Sun Jan 24 14:27:44 2010
--- Log opened Tue Jan 26 09:13:58 2010
09:13 -!- sandy [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has joined #foundation
09:13 -!- ServerMode/#foundation [+nt] by irc.acc.umu.se
09:13 -!- Irssi: #foundation: Total of 1 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 0 normal]
09:14 -!- Irssi: Join to #foundation was synced in 3 secs
09:14 -!- sandy [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has left #foundation []
--- Log closed Tue Jan 26 09:14:04 2010
--- Log opened Fri Jan 29 16:57:55 2010
16:57 -!- sandy [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has joined #foundation
16:57 -!- ServerMode/#foundation [+nt] by irc.acc.umu.se
16:57 -!- Irssi: #foundation: Total of 1 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 0 normal]
16:57 -!- Irssi: Join to #foundation was synced in 3 secs
16:58 -!- sandy [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has left #foundation []
--- Log closed Fri Jan 29 16:58:01 2010
--- Log opened Sat Jan 30 07:21:01 2010
07:21 -!- sandy|out [~sandy@ip68-104-95-17.lv.lv.cox.net] has joined #foundation
07:21 -!- ServerMode/#foundation [+nt] by irc.acc.umu.se
07:21 -!- Irssi: #foundation: Total of 1 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 0 normal]
07:21 -!- Irssi: Join to #foundation was synced in 4 secs
07:27 -!- gpoo [~gpoo@pc-50-169-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #foundation
07:32 -!- OgMaciel [~omaciel@66.192.95.199] has joined #foundation
07:35 -!- yippi [~bc99092@adsl-69-211-51-250.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net] has joined #foundation
07:37 -!- mode/#foundation [+oo OgMaciel gpoo] by sandy|out
07:37 <@OgMaciel> :)
07:38 < yippi> hiya.  the meeting is supposed to be in 25 mins, right?
07:38  * OgMaciel thought it was supposed to start 8 minutes ago :)
07:38 -!- mode/#foundation [+o yippi] by gpoo
07:38 <@OgMaciel> kids want to go out and play on snow
07:38 <@yippi> really?
07:38 -!- gpoo changed the topic of #foundation to: GNOME Foundation meeting.  16:00 UTC.
07:39 <@yippi> i thought it was supposed to start on the hour, not the half-hour
07:39  * OgMaciel checks calendar
07:39 <@yippi> isn't 16:00 UTC in 22 mins?
07:39 <@sandy|out> yes
07:39 <@OgMaciel> I probably screwed up when I entered it into my calendar
07:40 <@OgMaciel> no biggie
07:47  * OgMaciel will be back in a few... may miss the first 10 minutes
07:48 -!- vuntz [~vuntz@fennas.vuntz.net] has joined #foundation
07:49 -!- mode/#foundation [+o vuntz] by sandy|out
07:50 -!- Gwaihir [~Gwaihir@mail.foredil.it] has joined #foundation
07:53 -!- pcutler [~pcutler@c-75-72-118-230.hsd1.mn.comcast.net] has joined #foundation
08:00 <@vuntz> not a lot of people here :-)
08:01 < pcutler> I would have forgotten except for your email yesterday
08:01 -!- stormy [~chatzilla@c-24-9-32-102.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #foundation
08:01 <@vuntz> yeah, I think that many people forgot even with the reminder
08:01 <@vuntz> hey hey stormy 
08:01 < stormy> I was thinking (just now) it would help to have an agenda too.
08:01 < stormy> hey vuntz
08:02 <@yippi> i have a proposed agenda in gobby
08:03 < stormy> I meant to attract people to the meeting.
08:04 <@vuntz> nod. We can happily blame diegoe, though ;-)
08:04 <@yippi> so, its now a few minutes after 10, should we start?
08:04 <@yippi> there are only 3 board members, though.  We should probably try to get quorum if we can first
08:04 <@vuntz> yippi: nah, it's not a board meeting
08:04 <@vuntz> we don't need quorum
08:05 <@yippi> ok, though it would be nice in case any decisions needed to be made
08:05 <@vuntz> so, let's start
08:05 <@vuntz> OgMaciel, sandy|out, Gwaihir, pcutler: is there any specific topic/question you'd like to discuss?
08:05 < pcutler> not that I can think of
08:06 -!- herco [~chatzilla@vfppp079167185161.dsl.hol.gr] has joined #foundation
08:06 <@gpoo> or topics that would like to be informed
08:06 < Gwaihir> not for me
08:06 -!- vuntz changed the topic of #foundation to: GNOME Foundation meeting | Feel free to name any topic you'd like to see discussed
08:07 <@vuntz> herco: hi! Is there any topic you'd like to see discussed?
08:07 -!- KaL [~KaL@89.141.75.116.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #foundation
08:07 -!- nacho [~nacho@62.159.220.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #foundation
08:07 < nacho> hey guys
08:07 <@vuntz> KaL, nacho: welcome!
08:07 < KaL> hi!
08:08 <@vuntz> so there's no topic people want to discuss? Does it mean the Foundation is perfect? :-)
08:09 <@yippi> paul, you have a longstanding action item as follows: " Will provide an overview of hiring a sysadmin and the benefits that has for the overall GNOME community."  it would be good to get status on that, and close that action if possible.  
08:09 <@yippi> I've pinged you a few times, but never got a real clear response
08:09 < stormy> vuntz, and we communicate perfectly. :)
08:09 < pcutler> yippi: I emailed you a response a week ago
08:09 < herco> hi vuntz ! yes, i would like to see something about GNOME 3 -  is this a relative topic ?
08:09 <@vuntz> herco: sure
08:10 < herco> (goodevening to all)
08:11 <@vuntz> herco: that's actually a huge topic. Do you want to discuss the "technical" part, marketing, or anything specific? Or just GNOME 3 in general?
08:11 <@yippi> pculter, i missed your email, could you let me know again?
08:12 < herco> i think the "marketing" side is more interesting at the time :-)
08:12 <@vuntz> so the marketing team was working on a plan there
08:12 <@vuntz> stormy, pcutler: do you want to talk a bit about this?
08:13 < stormy> We did some planning on the November hackfest.
08:13 -!- Ford_Prefect [~ford_pref@122.171.0.207] has joined #foundation
08:13 -!- seb [~seb@cvl92-3-82-247-217-100.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #foundation
08:13 -!- Susana [~Susana@bl6-8-77.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #foundation
08:13 < stormy> 1) Have really good materials (event box & presentations) for people that want to promote GNOME 3.0
08:13 < stormy> 2) A slogan/saying
08:14 < stormy> 3) Make sure the marketing materials we make can be easily used by our partners.
08:14 < stormy> We had talked about creating videos, and they would all have a spot for downstream partner logos.
08:14 < stormy> We plan to have 2 more marketing hackfests/meetings before September.
08:14 < pcutler> I would also add we we want #2 to be a campaign slogan - as part of this campaign we want to build a dedicated GNOME 3.0 website that will include short videos highlighting one specific feature 
08:14 < stormy> And I expect a lot of marketing activity at GUADEC.
08:15 -!- vuntz changed the topic of #foundation to:  GNOME Foundation meeting | Currently discussing: Marketing for GNOME 3 | If you want to see a specific topic discussed, please tell vuntz
08:15 < stormy> We also talked about doing release parties - worldwide hosted by people in the community.
08:15 < stormy> herco, any specific questions?
08:15 < pcutler> we're trying to add some more organizatoin to the marketing team, including monthly meetings to work on specific tasks so we can accomplish these goals.  We're always looking for more help!
08:16 -!- ploum [~ploum@86.183-200-80.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #foundation
08:16 <@vuntz> Ford_Prefect, seb, Susana, ploum: hi :-) Feel free to ping me if you want to add a topic to the agenda
08:17 < ploum> hi Vuntz
08:17 < Ford_Prefect> Hello vuntz, all - just here to watch for now. Will chime in if I have anything to say/ask. :)
08:17 -!- behdad [~behdad@grad335-018.resnet.yorku.ca] has joined #foundation
08:18 < herco> thank you stormy & pcutler. A dedicate GNOME3 site is a very good idea
08:18 < behdad> sorry for being late.  it's saturday :)
08:18 < stormy> We're discussing the GNOME3 site on the marketing list.
08:18 < stormy> Just needs someone to do it!
08:18 < herco> i see :-)
08:19 < stormy> We do have a wiki page with GNOME 3 "myths" that we'd like to start promoting.
08:20 <@vuntz> I guess the new plone-based website will also help when building the GNOME 3 site?
08:20 < stormy> People ask a lot of the same questions.
08:20 < stormy> vuntz, I think we should get something up really soon. Then we can do it better later in plone.
08:20 < pcutler> vuntz: yes, in a perfect world we'd like to build the sub-site in Plone, but we need that up first
08:21 <@sandy|out> what's the ETA on the plone site?
08:21 < Ford_Prefect> Do we have any artwork? Stuff to put on blogs/wallpapers and whatnot?
08:21 < ploum> vuntz, I've some questions about the process used to make design and usability choices in GNOME 3. Is this appropriate in the current meeting or not ?
08:22 <@vuntz> Ford_Prefect: I've asked for a GNOME 3 specific logo (see http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArt/ArtRequests/GNOME3Logo)
08:22 <@vuntz> Ford_Prefect: but this needs some discussion I guess
08:23 <@vuntz> ploum: well, we can probably discuss this a bit, but I'm not sure we have the most appropriate people here, though
08:23 <@vuntz> ploum: (let's queue it after the current topic)
08:23 < ploum> vuntz, ok, forget it for now then
08:23  * vuntz looks for an answer to sandy|out's question
08:24 <@vuntz> sandy|out: as far as I know, the technical side is ready, and we have http://website-editors.gnome.org/
08:24 < Ford_Prefect> vuntz, ah, cool. Just curious so I can put something on my blog. No art skillz to contribute there.
08:24 <@vuntz> what's missing now is content
08:24 <@sandy|out> vuntz: weird, I thought we wrote all the content like three years ago :-P
08:24  * OgMaciel is catching up
08:24 <@sandy|out> anyway, kind of off-topic
08:25 <@vuntz> sandy|out: heh. I've not followed closely the looooong story of the new website, I just know this:
08:25 -!- jhs [~jhs@ppp-88-217-126-213.dynamic.mnet-online.de] has joined #foundation
08:25 <@vuntz> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-web-list/2009-December/msg00009.html
08:26 <@vuntz> jhs: hey hey
08:26 < jhs> vuntz: btw, is the CMS also available for other projects (projects.gnome.org)?
08:26 < jhs> vuntz: hi ;)
08:27 < pcutler> jhs: not in phase one if I remember correctly
08:27 <@vuntz> jhs: hrm, good question. I would hope it will be available
08:27 <@vuntz> yeah, I guess the n?1 priority was "get the new www.gnome.org out and then..."
08:28 < jhs> pcutler, vuntz: ok, would then be a medium-time goal. Currently projects.gnome.org lacks lot of features (no scripting, etc.)
08:28 <@vuntz> nod
08:28 < jhs> And many web designers feel that git is a pain-in-the-ass for website maintaince
08:28 <@vuntz> it would also make it easier to create consistent & good-looking pages for apps
08:29 < pcutler> agree - we wanted to do a second round of adding content to the site, and then create a GNOME Applications site that I think would tie-in
08:29 < jhs> pcutler: great!
08:30 < herco> pcutler: yeap
08:30 <@vuntz> anything else on GNOME 3 marketing or website?
08:31 <@vuntz> (fwiw, help is very much appreciated in those two areas :-))
08:31 < jhs> vuntz: OT: is there a log available for this session? Sorry, but I came home late...
08:31 <@sandy|out> i can make one available if nobody else is
08:32 <@vuntz> I could probably make some live log, if I remember how to save the log in irssi
08:33 <@sandy|out> http://armstrong-clan.net/dump/#foundation.log
08:33 <@vuntz> thanks!
08:33 <@sandy|out> I'll clean it up at the end and put it on l.g.o
08:33 <@sandy|out> heh, that link doesn't work
08:34 <@vuntz> ploum: do you still want to discuss a bit the design/usability choices for GNOME 3?
08:34 <@vuntz> ploum: or should we skip it as you suggested later?
08:35 -!- seb [~seb@cvl92-3-82-247-217-100.fbx.proxad.net] has left #foundation []
08:35 <@sandy|out> jhs: http://armstrong-clan.net/dump/foundation.log
08:35 <@OgMaciel> about GNOME 3, is there a list of what type of system is needed to run it? Sort of a "you must be this tall to ride" spec?
08:36 <@OgMaciel> new shell and bells and whistles will sirely require more potent systems
08:36 <@sandy|out> OgMaciel: that should go in the Myths page, I would think
08:36 <@OgMaciel> myths?
08:36 <@sandy|out> http://live.gnome.org/GNOME3Myths
08:37 <@sandy|out> we could add more info there
08:37 < jhs> OgMaciel: "potent system" is wrong. You just need a support graphic card.
08:37 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: we don't have this. But the main change in requirements would be for GNOME Shell, where working 3d graphic drivers is needed
08:37 <@OgMaciel> myth is not a good choice imho
08:38 <@OgMaciel> it is good to know that you have addresed this concern...
08:38 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: depends how you write it: I've seen people saying "you need the latest computer to run what will be GNOME 3". This is certainly a myth, if expressed this way
08:38 <@OgMaciel> not too sure it is obvious to get to it
08:38 < jhs> What came into my mind: I proposed a talk about Gnome3 on LinuxTag and I wonder if we have some standard slides or want to create any.
08:38 < pcutler> we just started the page a week or two ago, and as we build a GNOME 3.0 site later I'm sure we'll have a more formal FAQ
08:38 < stormy> OgMaciel, we need to use the myths to propel are marketing efforts.
08:39 < stormy> We can write about them, include them on the GNOME 3.0 site, in a FAQ, in dents/tweets.
08:39 <@vuntz> having a more formal FAQ later certainly makes sense, indeed
08:39 < pcutler> jhs: yes, we do - we started this project at the hackfest to do exactly that, we just need to get it cleaned up and finish it (we do have a slide template available too)
08:39 <@OgMaciel> stormy: I can see how this page would help internally but making it easier to get and stand out would be nice
08:40 < jhs> pcutler: great! The would make my life easier and ensure that people are informed.
08:40 < stormy> OgMaciel, absolutely. The page is not focused at external folks.
08:40 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: that's definitely right. That would be part of the GNOME 3 website effort
08:40 <@OgMaciel> nod
08:40 <@yippi> yes, I think the myths page would be better as a more standard FAQ.  Myths seems an odd word choice to me
08:41 <@sandy|out> yippi: it's an Anti-FUD device
08:41 <@sandy|out> there has been a lot of GNOME3 FUD
08:41 < pcutler> that's an understatement  :)
08:41 <@OgMaciel> a "formal" blog post followed up by presentations, etc may help dismiss this fud
08:41 <@sandy|out> but yeah, an official user-facing FAQ is also necessary,as you say
08:42 <@OgMaciel> that was my only question related to GNOME 3
08:44 <@vuntz> any other comment/question about GNOME 3?
08:44 -!- Dodji [~dseketel@nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com] has joined #foundation
08:44 <@vuntz> Dodji: hello (tu es en retard ;-))
08:45 <@OgMaciel> the agenda page is empty so, is there another list of topics that will brought to the table?
08:45 < jhs> vuntz: do we have information from the distributers? How is likely to adapt GNOME 3 immediately?
08:45 < jhs> s/How/Who
08:45 < Dodji> vuntz: hey.yeah, I am late, sorry. I missed the notice.
08:45 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: for this meeting, we wanted to let members propose agenda items so we could discuss what's of interest to you
08:46 <@yippi> should we talk about co-locating in 2011?
08:46 < jhs> sandy|out: thanks for the log, btw.
08:46 <@vuntz> jhs: so I guess the main question here is "who will use gnome shell by default?"
08:46 < jhs> vuntz: yes
08:47 <@vuntz> jhs: we (release team, not board) discussed this a bit with various people
08:48 <@vuntz> jhs: it's still a bit unclear, but the feeling I got is that ubuntu will probably stay with the standard shell (panel + metacity/compiz) in the short term; not sure about fedora/mandriva (although I think fedora might choose to switch)
08:48 <@yippi> I know at Sun, that there will be issues with migrating to GNOME 3.0 if it isn't accessible.
08:48 <@vuntz> for opensuse, we'll try to switch to gnome-shell by default and see how it goes
08:49 <@vuntz> jhs: so right now, it's a bit unclear. Most distros probably are waiting to see how it goes
08:49 <@yippi> though, if it is possible to deliver an accessible GNOME 3 with the GNOME 2.x panel/metacity and deliver GNOME 3 at the same time, then Sun would likely deliver both and make the a11y one the default
08:49 <@vuntz> although it's worth mentioning that they'll probably all ship GNOME 3 with the old shell in the worst case
08:49 < jhs> vuntz: ok, I think fedora will switch (hey, the employ all those people). But yeah, that's a bit hypothetically atm as we don't know how ready it is.
08:50 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: are there drawbacks for the user when the time comes around to switch? meaning, is there a "migration" step that needs to be taken in order to switch from the user's pov?
08:50 < jhs> vuntz: yes, I was meaning gnome3 = gnome-shell. That's not the whole truth of course...
08:50 <@yippi> what do you mean by "old shell"  do you mean the old panel and metacity, or something else?
08:50 <@vuntz> yippi: old shell = gnome-panel + metacity/any-other-wm
08:51 <@yippi> i get the impression that gnome 3 will not be accessible initially, and that a11y may be added in 3.2 or a later release.  Is this the plan, or will GNOME 3.0 slip for a11y?
08:51 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: I don't think there's any need for migration steps
08:51 -!- shaunm [~shaunm@c-98-212-133-244.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #foundation
08:52 <@yippi> that sort of mimics what happened with GNOME 2.  GNOME 2 wasn't really usably accessible until somewhere around GNOME 2.10-2.16
08:52 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: (or at least, I don't see anything right now)
08:52 <@vuntz> hey shaunm 
08:52 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: well, say you rely on something that runs on the panel... all of a sudden this item may be gone...
08:52 <@yippi> i suspect GNOME 3 won't take so long since there were many more issues with GNOME 2.x with a11y being new.
08:52 <@sandy|out> OgMaciel: yeah, but there's nothing to migrate
08:52 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: do you have an example?
08:52 <@sandy|out> metacity and mutter share configuration
08:52 < jhs> OK, that leads to another question: Will we have something like "Tour through GNOME 3.0" to help usual users to find their way. Like what windows does but less annoying?
08:52 <@yippi> but, perhaps GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 might be a more reasonable time to expect really usable a11y with GNOME 3...unless the plan is to slip GNOME 3 until a11y is ready
08:53 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: keyboard layout changer
08:53 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: dropbox
08:53 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: hamster
08:53 <@vuntz> yippi: this is not the plan
08:53 <@sandy|out> OgMaciel: there isn't any applet support in gnome-shell
08:53 < shaunm> hi vuntz
08:53 <@vuntz> yippi: and the accessibility is working very hard to make sure it will just work fine
08:53 -!- muelli [~muelli@83-71-42-122-dynamic.b-ras1.srl.dublin.eircom.net] has joined #foundation
08:53 < pcutler> jhs: from a doc team point of view - no, probably not videos, though we want to re-write the user guide in Mallard and do topic based help 
08:53 <@OgMaciel> sandy|out: exactly my concern
08:54 <@OgMaciel> sandy|out: so the user has things just so and during the update/upgrade these things will be "gone"
08:54 <@OgMaciel> thus my question for a migration
08:54 < nacho> pcutler, do you have any roadmap for the mallard switching?
08:54 <@yippi> i know they are working hard, and it might be possible for them to get all a11y work done in the timeframe.  But between WebKit, clutter, and the CORBA->D-Bus migration, it seems very optimistic to expect it to work just fine 
08:54 < jhs> pcutler: I didn't mean videos. Rather something that pops up on first start and say "Hey we changed something, you want to know more?"
08:54 <@sandy|out> well I don't think that's a migration issue
08:54 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: no idea about dropbox; the keyboard layout stuff is moving to notification area in 2.30 already, so it will just work; hamster is creating a stand-alone app for the same reason I guess
08:54 <@OgMaciel> where migration could mean a tour
08:54 <@sandy|out> ah
08:54 -!- sasi [~sasi@112.110.25.187] has joined #foundation
08:55 < pcutler> nacho: for the user guide?  gnome 2.32 / 3.0.  Mallard was implemented in GNOME 2.28 with empathy being the first app to use it
08:55 < shaunm> nacho: the roadmap is to do what we can, one document at a time
08:55 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: we could probably make the app autostart if there were applets in the 2.x config of the user. That's an idea that can be investigated, indeed
08:55 < nacho> ok
08:55 -!- Bertrand [~lorentz@87.240.206.6] has joined #foundation
08:55 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: sounds good... just want to make sure that users don't get allienated
08:55 < nacho> I tried to to make something on the mallard switching for gedit but it was really painful
08:56 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: yes. That's important, so if you can think of cases like this, maybe document them in some way so we make sure they'll get handled
08:56 < shaunm> really?
08:56 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: aye
08:56 -!- KaL [~KaL@89.141.75.116.dyn.user.ono.com] has quit [Bye]
08:56 < shaunm> nacho: could you stop by #docs today to talk about it?
08:56 < nacho> shaunm, sure
08:56 <@yippi> but i do think a11y needs to be managed, especially if the plan ends up being that a11y will be broken and fixed in a later 3.2/3.4, etc. release.  From a marketing perspective, it could alienate people and make people question GNOME's values if we don't set expectations right.
08:56 -!- sasi [~sasi@112.110.25.187] has left #foundation []
08:57 <@yippi> I don't think it is a problem if a11y users need to wait for a follow-up release for full a11y-support if we make it clear that is what we are doing.
08:57 <@yippi> though i understand right now we don't really know what the plan is
08:57 <@yippi> or whether all the work will get done in time
08:58 <@vuntz> yippi: yeah. The plan is known, but it's unclear whether everything will be ready in time
08:58 <@vuntz> yippi: (although that's really more about gnome-shell than about the rest of the a11y stack, I think)
08:58 <@vuntz> yippi: the main issue is really clutter a11y, afaik
08:58 <@yippi> yes, but the ORBIT->D-Bus conversion is another real sensitive area which might be more work than people think atm
08:59 -!- reinouts [~reinout@s559355fe.adsl.wanadoo.nl] has joined #foundation
08:59 <@vuntz> hrm, my understanding is that it'd be okay -- it's nearly already fine, isn't it?
08:59 <@sandy|out> yippi: the at-spi-dbus work is going great
08:59 <@yippi> if, for example, if makes for real performance issues, that could also make GNOME 3.0 not very usable from an a11y perspective.  But we need to wait and see.
08:59 <@yippi> yes, it's going well.  But it is hard to predict performance issues until users really start hammering it
09:00 <@yippi> that was the main reason why GNOME 2.x wasn't really usably accessible until the GNOME 2.10-2.16 timeframe
09:00 <@yippi> even though it "worked" before, it wasn't really usable.
09:00 <@sandy|out> that's why it's supposed to be ready for testing in the next stable GNOME
09:00 -!- Ankh [~liam@208.69.244.135] has joined #foundation
09:00 <@sandy|out> we have plenty of time to evaluate what's going on before GNOME3
09:01 <@yippi> yes, but one cycle is ambitious to think all issues will be addressed.  I hope that is enough time, as you suggest.  But we should be prepared for finding out that it may take more time.
09:01 <@sandy|out> sure
09:01 -!- zana [~zana@static-71-174-236-21.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #foundation
09:02 <@vuntz> okay, moving away from the GNOME 3 topic?
09:02 <@vuntz> yippi: you wanted to discuss a bit guadec/akademy colocation in 2011?
09:03 <@yippi> i think it would be a good topic.
09:03 <@yippi> do you have results from your survey?
09:04  * sandy|out has to go away for a few hours, will post complete log later
09:04 <@vuntz> yippi: I'm looking at the raw results right now
09:04 < jhs> I personally think that co-location failed in 2009. I didn't talk to any KDE guys except on one of the beach parties. But I think with a shared schedule we could do much better!
09:04 <@vuntz> not quite sure if I can create stats out of it with the web interface
09:04 -!- pcutler is now known as pcutler|away
09:05 -!- giusef [~giusef@host10-250-dynamic.37-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has joined #foundation
09:05 <@OgMaciel> jhs: agreed but it was a good step forward imho
09:05 < Ankh> jhs, it wsa not somewhere I could rtavel to, but, were there many shared sessions? e.g. for desktop interop stuff?
09:06 -!- jrb [~jrb@static-71-174-236-21.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #foundation
09:06 < jhs> OgMaciel: sure. I even think the best would be to have one dedicated "cross-desktop"-day. Because otherwise you always have to decide which of the project specific talks you attend and as a GNOME contributer that almost always the GNOME side.
09:06 <@yippi> personally, i think the most important thing is to invest more time setting up the schedule so that the GNOME and KDE communities have more time to focus on their separate projects, and that the time we spend on "collaboration" projects is truly focused on areas that collaboration is useful and likely to be productive.
09:06 < jhs> Ankh: not really, that was one of the problems.
09:07 <@OgMaciel> jhs: agree 100%
09:07 <@yippi> I think a big problem with the last GCDS summit is that this sort of planning wasn't done carefully
09:07 -!- vuntz changed the topic of #foundation to: GNOME Foundation Meeting | Log at http://armstrong-clan.net/dump/foundation.log | Currently discussing: GUADEC & Akademy co-location | If you want to see a specific topic discussed, please tell vuntz 
09:07 <@gpoo> Ankh, jhs: it was supposed to be a co-hosted conference.  Two conferences at the same place and at the same time.
09:07 <@vuntz> jrb: hey. I see you're coming just in time for your favorite topic ;-)
09:07 <@gpoo> neither it did not work in that way, but for other reasons
09:08 <@vuntz> jhs: actually, there's was at least a cross-desktop morning
09:08 < jrb> vuntz: which is my favorite topic?
09:08 <@vuntz> jhs: (but I see the point about not enough cross-desktop)
09:08 < jrb> oh, co-location; gah
09:08 <@vuntz> :-)
09:08 < jhs> yippi: yes. But we have this time for 2011. I didn't think the location was a great choice anyway but that's another question
09:08 <@vuntz> jrb: I feel sorry for you
09:09 < jrb> why?
09:09 <@vuntz> jrb: you have to deal with this topic one more time here ;-)
09:10 <@vuntz> jrb: just kidding
09:10 <@vuntz> so looking at the raw results of the survey...
09:10 < jrb> vuntz: were there results from the survey?
09:10 <@vuntz> we didn't have that many people answering (103)
09:10 < muelli> I am in favour of having a conference together. But as jhs said, it'd be nice if it was organized better, i.e. allow more collaboration by having breaks together.
09:10 < Ankh> in some ways i'd be happier to see guadec colocated with some applicatoin/domain-specific conference like libregraphicsmeeting.org
09:10 <@yippi> jrb: I think vuntz is compiling the results as we speak
09:11 -!- tristan [~Tristan@74.210.0.150] has joined #foundation
09:11 <@vuntz> 65.05% said "do it", 27.18% said "don't do it"
09:11 <@yippi> yes, i think the organizers should make sure that we have enough time separately, and also encourage people to actually co-mingle better.
09:11 <@yippi> we need a bit of both
09:11 < Ankh> focused sessions sessions with developers on other platforms can be incredibly useful, but focused sessions with user communities can too.
09:11 < muelli> sure. My point was to *allow* collaboration. Not necessarily force it ;-)
09:12 <@vuntz> for foundation members you replied: 47.57% for do it, 21.36% for don't do it
09:12 <@vuntz> s/you/who/
09:13 <@yippi> right, forcing is bad...but there could be more opportunities to encourage doing activities together.  Rather than going to a bar where people tend to group with the people they know, perhaps activities where people are encouraged to break up into groups and meet new people might help
09:13 <@vuntz> hrm, I'm obviously not using this web interface correctly since numbers don't add up
09:13 <@yippi> maybe some didn't respond to certain questions?
09:13 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: maybe just stick to ball park figures for now
09:15 < muelli> one could also set up a "Call for Issues" (or so) so that the KDE and GNOME folks can place their issues somewhere (say in a Wiki) that they think deserve discussion. People then should be able to follow further plannings on their topic then, i.e. if someone books a room to discuss that, interested parties should be notified.
09:15 <@vuntz> yippi: nah, I think that's just that I'm not sure how to generate percentages for just a subpart of people who replied (eg, only foundation members) -- should be easy to do outside the web interface, though
09:16 <@yippi> it sounds like people are mostly positive about doing it, though it also seems that we learned a lot of lessons the last time about the need to focus more energy to organize it more effectively.
09:16 <@yippi> that seems to be the general feeling of everything I've heard people say at this and other meetings
09:16 -!- giusef [~giusef@host10-250-dynamic.37-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has quit [exit (-1);]
09:16 < Ankh> could also try specific sessions on some xdg desktop specs, maybe with call-in facilities and audio streaming
09:17 < stormy> vuntz, after you click on the "get statistics" pie chart icon, you can select answers in the field that you want to filter on.
09:17 <@yippi> Ankh, if we are lucky enough to ever plan a conference somewhere where we have good internet
09:17 < Ankh> there was good internet at some of the guadecs I've ben to, but not been recently
09:18 < Ankh> (can't go to conferences unless they pay my travel & hotel, ouch)
09:18 <@gpoo> Ankh: you can apply for sponsorship
09:18 < Ankh> true
09:18 < muelli> What are the reasons to not colocate?
09:19 <@gpoo> muelli: in the survey or in general?
09:19 <@yippi> i'd think the biggest reason to not colocate in the near future is that GNOME 3.0 is a big transition for the GNOME community, and we perhaps have too much on our plate to focus on collaboration issues
09:19 <@vuntz> stormy: yeah, but I want to get stats only for people who replied yes to one question. (ie, I get 47.57% (do it) + 21.36% (don't do it) for foundation members, which obviously doesn't make 100%)
09:19 < jrb> it also dilutes the community; and provided kde with a big financial boost
09:20 < stormy> jrb, actually it provided us with a big financial boost.
09:20 < Ankh> yippi - surely it's also the best time t ofocus on increased interop?
09:21 < jrb> stormy: that's true too.
09:21 < Dodji> I also feel like co-locating makes talks planning harder. It's very hard to to schedule talks in a way that leaves hole for people to chat in corridors. If yo co-locate, it's even harder to do that.
09:21 < Dodji> s/yo/you/
09:22 <@vuntz> 18.45% will only attend or be more likely to attend in case of co-location, while 10.68% will be less likely to attend or will not attend in this case
09:22 <@OgMaciel> I am a strong supporter of increasing interop with other communities, not only KDE... the most important thing, however, is figure out which areas will most likely make sense to include in these sessions
09:22 < Dodji> so in the end, yes, co-location happens but in practise, little is shared.
09:23 <@vuntz> anyway, I'll try to create stats that make sense later. Now is not the best time ;-)
09:23 < stormy> I think we need to cooperate. 
09:23 <@OgMaciel> Dodji: exactly! so instead of packing tracks with people talking about similar topics but on different buildings, I'd like to see them running this together
09:23 < stormy> The free desktop has a long ways to go market share wise and we shouldn't spend our energy competing with those that share our goals.
09:23 <@OgMaciel> nod
09:24 < Dodji> well. Something similar is happening with Fosdem actually, I think
09:24 < Dodji> They are willing more and more to be "inclusive", which is great.
09:24 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: btw, my concern about applets and GNOME 3... I'm sending an email to the foundation with my notes
09:24 < Dodji> but as time goes, the conference becomes less and less "focused"
09:25 <@OgMaciel> probably reply to the email about this meeting
09:25 < Dodji> will lots of talks about webby stuff, for instance
09:25 < Dodji> which is great, in a way. but not much if you are interested in "core stuff"
09:25 < Dodji> and for me, core stuff would be GNOME.
09:25 < muelli> Dodji: what stops you from doing core stuff?
09:26 <@yippi> ankh, I guess it depends on your perspective on whether the GNOME 3.0 transition calls for more or less collaboration in the near ter 
09:26 < Dodji> muelli: me in particular ? nothing
09:26 < Ankh> yippi: I think any architectural change calls for more attention to interperability
09:26 <@OgMaciel> I'd like to see ally sessions with people from different communities who deal with this topic in their own projects... share their pains and knowledge
09:26 < muelli> Dodji: so being more inclusive does not touch people doing "core stuff"?
09:27 <@vuntz> Dodji: that's something people have noticed too. I think for next GUADEC already, the organizers will possibly try to get a bit more focus again
09:27 <@OgMaciel> same goes for l10n
09:27 < zana> maybe it would make sense to do colocated hackfests instead?
09:27 < Ankh> you have to be careful that you're not introducing changes that seem easy now but will be really difficult to deal with a year or two from now.
09:27 < muelli> Dodji: or the other way round: Why is it not great for people that want to do core stuff if the conference is more inclusive?
09:27 <@OgMaciel> zana: +1
09:27 <@vuntz> zana: that's a good idea. I actually talked with a KDE eV board member about this
09:28 <@vuntz> zana: I think everybody likes the idea, but then nobody has come with a topic for a cross-desktop hackfest yet ;-)
09:28  * stormy needs to go. Will catch up on logs later.
09:28 < Dodji> muelli: Think about in practise. You'd have twice more talks about many more topics when you co-locate
09:28 <@OgMaciel> what I just said about ally and l10n sessions held by members from different communities is exacrly that: colocated hackfests
09:28 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: I just did
09:28 < Dodji> muelli: in the end, most people miss more stuff.
09:28 < Dodji> muelli: most of the core people I mean :-)
09:28 < Dodji> muelli: I'd be for doing *less* talks :-)
09:29 <@gpoo> vuntz: it makes a lot sense, especially to increase cooperation before having a big co-located conference
09:29 < Dodji> and have more time for people to have corridor chats
09:29 < Dodji> and have more "core stuff" covered.
09:29 < Dodji> but that's a hard sell, I know :-)
09:29 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: want to propose a hackfest about this?
09:29 <@OgMaciel> gpoo: the big colocated conference could then have people presenting together the result of their work
09:29 < muelli> Dodji: hm. yes and no. Nobody stops people from doing the very same thing they did all the last years, or am I missing something? So by just adding talks we enable people that want to see more talks but do not interfere with the people that don't.?
09:29 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: (see http://live.gnome.org/Hackfests/New for the first steps)
09:30 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: yes, but I would like to see the board kick start it
09:30 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: hackfests are not kickstarted by the board, but by the people who want to see them happen
09:30 < Ankh> zana, the reason I suggest colocating xdg specfest :) is that partly I don't know how much shared code there really is
09:30 < Dodji> muelli: it's not about *stopping* people, I think. It's less of a "hard" fact than that I guess.
09:30 < Ankh> but there are a lot of shared specs
09:30 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: right, but the board is in a better position to get the right people together
09:31 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: much like Canonical does
09:31 < Dodji> muelli: I think you get the idea. I just wanted to bring that POV to the table.
09:31 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: okay, let me give you a more concrete answer: the board cannot know what the goals of the hackfest should be
09:31 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: the board can help contact people who could help or who should go there. But in the end, the hackfest has to be lead by someone who knows the topic
09:31 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: this is why we're meeting and I'm here to provide you then with what the board should know
09:32 <@OgMaciel> fair enough
09:32 < Dodji> stormy: I am not against collaboration, who could be against that.
09:32 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: (and I'd love to see a l10n hackfest)
09:33 <@OgMaciel> vuntz: I can promise you that I will send in a proposal to the board :)
09:33 <@vuntz> OgMaciel: awesome!
09:33 < Dodji> stormy: but maybe guadec is not necessarily the best venue for that, I don't know.
09:34 < Dodji> anyway, I think this is a minority point of view :-)
09:34 < Dodji> the majority of people are not interested about core things :-)
09:35 < Dodji> still I think it can be worth to keep this POV in mind.
09:35 < Dodji> +it
09:35 <@vuntz> Ankh: btw, would you like to work on proposing a xdg spec hackfest?
09:35 <@gpoo> Dodji: I agree with you.  And I do think that hackfest is a better place to share and be productive at the same time
09:35 < Dodji> gpoo: yeah, maybe.
09:35 < Ankh> vuntz, I'm 100% maxed out right now, but I'm willing to send some notes to gnome-foundation list and see if someone else has more time than I do
09:36 <@vuntz> Ankh: that'd be great. I'd be interested in seeing this happen :-)
09:36 < Ankh> ok, thanks for the support!
09:36 <@vuntz> since we slightly move from co-location to hackfests