10:06 < yippi> OgMaciel, are you running this meeting?
10:07 <@OgMaciel> yippi: was not planning to but I'll be around for sure
10:07 < yippi> who is moderating?
10:08  * OgMaciel was under the impression that stormy would be since she scheduled it
10:08  * OgMaciel puts on his moderator hat on
10:08  * OgMaciel double-checks agenda
10:09 <@OgMaciel> shall we get started then?
10:09 <@OgMaciel> agenda items are in http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/MeetingAgenda
10:09 < pockeylam> OgMaciel, sure
10:09 <@OgMaciel> ok
10:09 <@OgMaciel> First item is: GNOME Mobile/Maemo integration proposals Update
10:10 < yippi> is bastien here?  I'm not sure we can discuss that item without him.
10:10 <@OgMaciel> haven't seen him...
10:11 <@OgMaciel> yippi: what can you tell us about this item?
10:11 -!- hadess [~hadess@cpc6-glfd5-2-0-cust126.6-2.cable.virginmedia.com] has joined #foundation
10:11 <@OgMaciel> we found hadess
10:11 < hadess> hey
10:11 <@OgMaciel> :)
10:11 <@OgMaciel> First item is: GNOME Mobile/Maemo integration proposals Update
10:11 <@OgMaciel> hadess has the floor
10:11 < hadess> OgMaciel: you could change the /topic :)
10:11 < hadess> and it's still missing the time
10:12 -!- OgMaciel changed the topic of #foundation to: GNOME Foundation IRC Meeting: Nov. 3rd, 2010 | Agenda: http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/MeetingAgenda
10:12 <@OgMaciel> meh
10:12 -!- andreasn_ [~andreas@c83-248-192-174.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #foundation
10:12 < yippi> excuse the smoke & mirrors
10:12 -!- OgMaciel changed the topic of #foundation to: GNOME Foundation IRC Meeting: Nov. 3rd, 2010 @ 14:00 UTC | Agenda: http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/MeetingAgenda
10:12 < hadess> i e-mailed a number of consultancy, and it seems that we have quite a bit of interest in the project
10:12 < hadess> consultancies even
10:13 < hadess> i should be setting a bid proposal closing date shortly
10:13 < yippi> stormy said she will be about 10 more minutes late and apologies
10:13 -!- fernandes [~fernandes@189.70.213.239] has joined #foundation
10:14 < hadess> anyone with questions or comments about the GTK+/MeeGo project?
10:14 < yippi> how many bids have we gotten, or expect to receive?
10:15 < hadess> we haven't gotten any yet, but we expect at least 4 to come in
10:15 < yippi> that sounds very respectable.  very good job hadess!
10:15 < hadess> and that's just from the people i contacted
10:16 < yippi> look forward to reviewing them.   Would be good to continue to get the word out so people can submit proposals!
10:16 < hadess> as i obviously cannot e-mail every consultancy in the GNOME eco-system :)
10:16 <@OgMaciel> hadess: got a handy link for more information on this topic for those who may want to catch up later?
10:16 < hadess> OgMaciel: nothing apart from the original announcement
10:17 <@OgMaciel> aye
10:17 < hadess> which can be found at http://blogs.gnome.org/foundation/2010/10/13/gtkmeego-handset-integration-work-call-for-bids/
10:17 < yippi> thanks, links are handy
10:18 <@OgMaciel> does anyone have any comments or questions about this?
10:18 <@OgMaciel> ok
10:19 <@OgMaciel> so now andreasn_ will give us an update on the next topic: Desktop Summit Update
10:19 < yippi> andreasn_, there was a meeting yesterday, no?
10:19 < andreasn_> all right
10:19 -!- dneary [~dneary@ALyon-152-1-178-121.w109-212.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #foundation
10:19 < andreasn_> yes, unfortunately it collided with another meeting I had at the time
10:19 < andreasn_> so I was unable to attend
10:20 < yippi> dneary, good timing - we are talking about Desktop Summit planning update.
10:20 < yippi> i believe dneary attended the meeting yesterday
10:20 < andreasn_> but as I can see from the meeting notes:
10:20 < dneary> Hi yippi
10:21 < andreasn_> * Keynote speakers have been invited, all in the first round said no, so more will be asked
10:21 < dneary> Shoot... any questions in patricular?
10:21 < dneary> andreasn_, We have one confirmed keynote, of 3 invitees
10:21 <@OgMaciel> dneary: just a general update
10:21 < dneary> Re-read :)
10:21 < yippi> dneary, let's see.  feel free to join in if you have additional info to provide
10:21 -!- jhs [~jhs@ppp-88-217-101-24.dynamic.mnet-online.de] has joined #foundation
10:21 < andreasn_> dneary, sorry, I'm blind
10:22 -!- kittykat [~kat@85.183.48.167] has joined #foundation
10:22 < andreasn_> reading on (correct me where needed dneary)
10:22 < dneary> The danger spot for me is IT infrastructure - we don't have a finalised list of requirements for registration, CMS, paper submission, review, scheduling & conference management for attendees
10:22 < dneary> Hi kittykat
10:22 < andreasn_> Program commitee will be announced shortly, 6 people from gnome, 6 from kde
10:23 < andreasn_> there will also be a local team meeting on November 8th in Berlin
10:23 < dneary> The other question mark is around sponsorship - since that's something where Stormy was on point
10:24 < kittykat> dneary: moin
10:25 < andreasn_> dneary, how much time do you feel we have before it's too late to find volunteers for the IT stuff?
10:26 -!- emily [~emily@221.223.86.104] has joined #foundation
10:26 <@OgMaciel> dneary: also, can the board help you find volunteers in any way? Blog posts?
10:26 < dneary> andreasn_, Last night I suggested that it might be useful for Christer to spend some time on this, if it's in scope for him
10:26 < dneary> We're already late on that... but not dramatically so
10:27 < andreasn_> that could work, will look into that
10:27 < yippi> dneary, andreasn, what do you guys think are the things we need to be focusing on for the Desktop Summit right now?
10:28 < dneary> OgMaciel, I'm not really the best person to talk to about that - perhaps Mirko Boehm can give you a better idea of tasks where volunteers would be useful
10:28 < dneary> OgMaciel, Or kittykat
10:28  * OgMaciel waves at kittykat 
10:28 -!- SFD_Fred is now known as fredm
10:28 < dneary> OgMaciel, I'm really just concentrating on the stuff I volunteered for, and generally making sure we have a good idea what's going on, and what's late
10:28  * OgMaciel nods
10:29 <@OgMaciel> kittykat: so if I may ask you the same question I asked dneary 
10:29 < gpoo> dneary: I am taking over contacting GUADEC sponsors, until we find a new ED
10:29 < dneary> gpoo, Make sure you co-ordinate with Claudia a lot.
10:30 -!- stormy-laptop [~chatzilla@m4a2636d0.tmodns.net] has joined #foundation
10:30 -!- fmuellner [~florian@55.Red-217-125-215.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #foundation
10:30  * kittykat just came back..
10:30 <@OgMaciel> I can talk to kittykat offline I guess
10:31 <@OgMaciel> does anyone have any question or comment about the desktop summit?
10:31 <@OgMaciel> ok
10:31 <@OgMaciel> next topic is: Evaluate the ways of collaboration with distros
10:32 <@OgMaciel> this is more of a question for the audience
10:32 <@OgMaciel> does anyone have any suggestions on how we could improve in this area?
10:33 < jhs> I take the mostly as "improve cooperation with Ubuntu", right? Because I don't see issues with Fedora/OpenSuSE.
10:33 < dneary> jhs, No real relationship either
10:33 < stormy-laptop> We have a distribution mailing list that I think is not used much.
10:33 < stormy-laptop> Did it used to be used?
10:33 < jhs> dneary: no, not a relationsship but it seems that collaboration works for them.
10:34 < jhs> stormy-laptop: I don't think so, I think we discussed about that list before
10:34 < jhs> however, it would be nice to have some place to discuss with distributions but that would also mean that distributions tell us what they need and plan and that has failed in the past.
10:34 < stormy-laptop> Do the distos collaborate among themselves at all? (i.e. about more than GNOME)
10:35 < jhs> stormy-laptop: kernel, LibreOffice, ...
10:35 < dneary> Is it worth making it easier for up-stream/down-stream bug tracking?
10:35 < fredm> so in fact we should be the one subscribing to all major distro mailing list and trying to gather feedback, rather than ask them to come to our place?
10:36 < fredm> especially if distros want to differentiate themselves they might not be so comfortable to talk 'publicly'
10:36 < hadess> stormy-laptop: the distribution list does get used
10:37 <@OgMaciel> fredm: definitely not imho
10:37 < dneary> fredm, I'd like to see us create reelationships with the release teams of major distros
10:38 <@OgMaciel> what are the main pain points that distros face when trying to reach out to us and how can we improve this?
10:38 < stormy-laptop> I see a lot of "you need to do it our way" from both sides.
10:38 < fredm> so we would need 1 or 2 guys focusing on 'hanging out there' and making it known that he is a feedback collector for GNOME?
10:38 <@OgMaciel> are we, GNOME< doing a good job of providing the necessary information for distros to reach out to us?
10:39 < andreasn_> OgMaciel, one thing that a lot of people told me at UDS was that it was tricky to get patches in, so I'm going to look into that issue
10:39 < stormy-laptop> Or are we reaching out to them, OgMaciel? It has to go both ways.
10:39 < dneary> fredm, Do you know the name of the Fedora release manager(s) & bugmaster(s)?
10:39 < fredm> dneary: no i don't
10:39 < andreasn_> me and vuntz met the new Ubuntu release manager in person last week, so we can take care of contacting him
10:40 <@OgMaciel> stormy-laptop: imho we don't have someone with the bandwidth to serve as the chaperone per se, but my concern is about at least making it dead simple for someone to get the info they need from us
10:40 < fredm> dneary: but that's something that can be dug, and relationships can be built
10:40 < andreasn_> and maybe it would be good to have a list of the Release managers and bug masters of the big distros
10:40 < stormy-laptop> OgMaciel, you have to have time for relationships like that if you want to work together. And we have people in the community that span both organizations.
10:40 < fredm> andreasn_: +1
10:40 < stormy-laptop> (both organizations = GNOME + any distro)
10:40 < dneary> fredm, My point exactly :)
10:41 < dneary> Plus, technological solutions to link bugzillas & push bugs & comments up & downstream would be useful
10:42 <@OgMaciel> stormy-laptop: so, once again, do people think we're providing enough information to them out there or do we need to make a better job (this is us reaching out to them)
10:42 < stormy-laptop> dneary, I think if we had a list of those technologies, it would be possible to get distros to work with us on implementing them
10:42 <@OgMaciel> I like the idea of establishing a relationship with release managers for sure
10:42 < stormy-laptop> OgMaciel, the fact that we don't know what info they need, means we aren't working as well as we could with them
10:43 < dneary> stormy-laptop, I believe that there are bugs open on bugzilla.org for this kind of functionality
10:43 <@OgMaciel> stormy-laptop: point taken
10:43 < stormy-laptop> dneary, we should put them together and present them at an adboard meeting. See if there are resources - people or funding.
10:43 < aday> OgMaciel: i think it depends who 'them' is. are we just concerned about managers, or about those who contribute to distros too?
10:44 < jhs> as the release-team was mentioned - I could be positive to have someone from Ubuntu/Debian-fame in the release-team. Doesn't have to be from Canonical
10:44 <@OgMaciel> aday: I'd say both
10:44 < aday> OgMaciel: in that case, i think we can do a much better job of explaining what gnome is, how it works, and what our vision is
10:44 < jhs> the debian system is a bit underrepresented in GNOME IMHO, the often have quite some downstream patching that might be useful for us.
10:45 <@OgMaciel> aday: great comment!
10:46 < yippi> jhs, although there are some unique concerns with Canonical, I think all distros could improve their cooperation - including Fedora and OpenSuSE.
10:47 < jhs> yippi: true, but those two are represented in most of the teams (release-team, board, etc.)
10:47 <@OgMaciel> so, GNOME should reach out to distributions and convey in a better and clear way what GNOME is, how it works, our vision, etc as a good first step?
10:47 < yippi> for example, many distros are releasing GNOME 2.28, 2.30, etc. in their upcoming Long-Term-Support (LTS) releases.  There are likely a lot of opportunities for these distros to work together to ensure that these "stable" versions of GNOME are well maintained, that patches are shared, etc.
10:48 <@OgMaciel> good point yippi 
10:48 < hadess> yippi: for fedora, pretty much all the patches actually go upstream
10:48 < yippi> and I think little is being done in these areas, regardless of which distros have people on various GNOME groups (board, release team)
10:48 < hadess> yippi: so we make new releases
10:49 < yippi> hadess, yes, but are there plans to continue providing 2.28 or 2.30 releases for GNOME modules to keep everyone sharing?
10:49 < yippi> there probably are, but this is likely just up to individual module maintainers without a great deal of GNOME-wide coordination
10:49 < yippi> but, this is likely an opportunity for distros to work more together
10:50 < hadess> yippi: it's up to the upstream maintainers to do that
10:50 < yippi> just to give an example, since some people seem to think there is little to do
10:50 < hadess> yippi: it's up to the distributions to get involved in upstream
10:50 <@OgMaciel> so better integration with distros, specially via communication with release personel would be a good thing to happen to
10:50 < stormy-laptop> hadess, and up to us to make sure they feel invited, welcome and know how to submit patches
10:50 < yippi> well, i'm not sure that saying "it is up to upstream maintainers" is really the sort of cross-distro collaboration we are trying to encourage with this discussion topic.
10:50 < hadess> stormy-laptop: right
10:50 < yippi> exactly, how do we invite distros to get involved, and to make sure we are working together
10:51 < stormy-laptop> Just think of mobile manufacturers instead of traditional desktop distros.
10:51 < jhs> stormy-laptop: +1, we failed here a bit in the past
10:51 < hadess> stormy-laptop: right, that's a whole different kettle of fish
10:51 < yippi> and we need to make sure that module maintainers are on board and don't just ignore these stable releases
10:51 < yippi> or that we find new maintainers to maintain these older versions if there is a real need.
10:51 < aday> i think we need a high quality gnome news source - something positive, motivational, informative
10:51 < yippi> or additional maintainers rather
10:52 <@OgMaciel> aday: how so?
10:52 < stormy-laptop> Should we put together a committee or an owner to discuss some of these ideas and a plan?
10:52 <@OgMaciel> I +1 on this ^^
10:52 < jhs> aday: well, that's planet.gnome.org and news.gnome.org and desktop-devel-list - if you read it you should be quite up-to-date
10:53  * stormy-laptop thinks it would be awesome if someone read all those and put together a weekly newsletter. But that's a lot of work!
10:53 < aday> OgMaciel: what about central gnome blog? could explain what's happening in gnome, where we're going, spread the gnome love, etc
10:53 < hadess> stormy-laptop: i can help anyone that will take this on if they need examples on how to do this well :)
10:53 < jhs> stormy-laptop: I think the owner would need to contact the distros/manufacturers and try to that everybody sents someone to join some kind of board.
10:53 < jhs> aday: you volunteer?
10:54 < stormy-laptop> Boards are usual elected or merit based so they just can't send someone.
10:54 <@OgMaciel> aday: so a more formal, authoritative(sp) news feed
10:54 < aday> jhs: arghh! i *really* shouldn't!
10:54 < yippi> i don't know.  in terms of getting distros to work together on stable releases, the GNOME community has never been particularly effective at getting distros to cooperate well in this area.  It's always been rather a hot potatoe to pass around.  So, it's likely a big job to get people to focus attention in this sort of cooperative way.
10:54 < aday> OgMaciel: not sure about formal, but certainly something that can speak for gnome
10:55 < jhs> stormy-laptop: call it something else than board - something that probably has a monthly meeting with people from several distros where they can share and complain.
10:55 < stormy-laptop> jhs, there has to be more of a draw.
10:55 < stormy-laptop> What's in it for them?
10:55 < stormy-laptop> Who will listen there?
10:55 < stormy-laptop> The release team?
10:56 <@OgMaciel> makes sense to me
10:56 < jhs> stormy-laptop: release-team with CC to desktop-devel-list
10:56 < stormy-laptop> What guarantees of action will there be?
10:56 < hadess> stormy-laptop: when you get your patches upstream, it makes it easier to maintain
10:56 <@OgMaciel> what hadess says
10:56 < stormy-laptop> But we have to promise them that this meeting is useful.
10:56 < hadess> if they are acceptable upstream, obviously
10:56 < stormy-laptop> jhs, the release team will attend the monthly meeting with the distros?
10:56 < hadess> and you get them reviewed
10:56 < jhs> stormy-laptop: no guarantees, we cannot do that. But they have the chance to talk to us so we know in which areas they see problems.
10:57 <@OgMaciel> makes sense to me
10:57 < stormy-laptop> To get them there, we have to guarantee them we will be there to listen.
10:57 < jhs> stormy-laptop: *someone* from the release-team should probably attend and write meetings. The release-team has enough work already and I don't think the whole team is necessary.
10:57 < gpoo> is not the advisory board a place to listen to them?
10:57 < jhs> s/meetings/meeting minutes
10:57 < stormy-laptop> jhs, then the distros are likely too busy too.
10:57 < jhs> stormy-laptop: what would you propose then?
10:58 <@OgMaciel> :)
10:58 < yippi> it might be worthwhile to dedicate an adboard meeting to discuss this to find out if there is a real desire to dedicate more effort ot maintain stable branches
10:58 < jhs> gpoo: it probably is but it doesn't work, right?
10:58 < fredm> how many distros are we talking about?
10:58 < stormy-laptop> jhs, I don't know but it can't be a "come talk to us". We have to show we are making a big effort too.
10:58 < fredm> 5 or 350?
10:58 < fredm> ;-)
10:59 < stormy-laptop> 5
10:59 < stormy-laptop> which is a good point
10:59 < stormy-laptop> a one-to-one effort for a while might help too
10:59 < fredm> i can initiate the contact, do the research and say we're trying to reach out (for 5 distros)
10:59 <@OgMaciel> I don't want to spoil the fun but we should move on to the next topic
10:59 < jhs> stormy-laptop: it was more about: "We invite you - here is a place to share your thoughts"
11:00 < fredm> then once we get initial feedback we can see how to organize those monthly meetings
11:00 < stormy-laptop> jhs, we invite you to do all the work and figure out how to work with us
11:00 <@OgMaciel> fredm: I'd be very interested in chatting with you about that later
11:00 < fredm> OgMaciel: ok
11:00 < jhs> fredm: sounds good!
11:00 <@OgMaciel> sweet
11:00 < stormy-laptop> jhs, just playing devil's advocate, sorry
11:00 <@OgMaciel> shall we proceed?
11:00 <@OgMaciel> ok
11:00 <@OgMaciel> the next topic is: GNOME Shell & Unity
11:00 < jhs> stormy-laptop: :) It things like "we have to patch gdm because of xyz - can't that be upstream", etc.
11:00 < jhs> stormy-laptop: anyway, next
11:00 < yippi> i love it when people invite me to do all the work.  :)
11:00 <@OgMaciel> stormy-laptop: all yours
11:01 < stormy-laptop> yippi, you are quite good at volunteering to do lots of work. :)
11:01 < stormy-laptop> All mine?
11:01 < stormy-laptop> GNOME Shell & Unity
11:01 < stormy-laptop> I assume someone added it because they wanted to discuss it, which I think is a good idea.
11:02 < stormy-laptop> Canonical has announced that they will ship Unity instead of GNOME's shell.
11:02 < stormy-laptop> They have told me they still consider themselves a GNOME distro and plan to continue to support GNOME and the GNOME Foundation and GNOME events as usual.
11:02 < stormy-laptop> If you have questions about Unity, they should go to Canonical.
11:02 < stormy-laptop> But we can discuss what it means for GNOME.
11:02 < jhs> stormy-laptop: do we have some official Foundation reply to that announcement?
11:03 < stormy-laptop> jhs, no
11:03 < stormy-laptop> I think the board would like a better understanding of how the community feels
11:03 < stormy-laptop> or thinks
11:04 < jhs> stormy-laptop: should we? Something like that we can understand that and hope that they will continue supporting GNOME but that we dislike the copyright assignment according to our policies?
11:04 < stormy-laptop> We do have things to say ...
11:04 < stormy-laptop> but no strong stances one way or the other so far.
11:04 < shaunm> I suspect there are differences in how people within the community feel
11:05 < stormy-laptop> Our talking points were:
11:05 < stormy-laptop> 1) Ubuntu is still using GNOME technologies.
11:05 < stormy-laptop> 2) We support people using GNOME technologies in different ways, MeeGo, Unity, etc.
11:05 < stormy-laptop> 3) We still support GNOME Shell and it will be part of GNOME 3.
11:06 < stormy-laptop> jhs, we could say that. 
11:06 < jhs> I would personally add the copyright-assignment as we resolved that for clutter and it feels like an important agenda for us.
11:07 < gpoo> jhs: nothing has changed in our position regarding to copyright assignment.  We have set a policy and still is valid.
11:08 < jhs> gpoo: yes, but I probably would mention that with regard to Unity.
11:08 < stormy-laptop> Thoughts? Opinions? Should we say something officially? Something about copyright?
11:09 < shaunm> I think we should. It's keeping in line with existing GNOME policies.
11:09 < jhs> I agree with shaunm but it should be something to calm down everybody while making our position clear.
11:09 < stormy-laptop> So we could write a brief statement for the Foundation blog that includes the 3 points above and the fact that we are disappointed that Unity doesn't follow our copyright policies?
11:09 < jhs> +1
11:10 < stormy-laptop> And we could mention the work andreasn_ is doing on improving upstream patch flow.
11:10 < shaunm> um, yes. please let's not be inflammatory. (not that I think anybody on the board would write an inflammatory official statement)
11:10 < stormy-laptop> Is someone willing to take this? 
11:10 < aday> stormy-laptop: that sounds like we're saying that we've been the problem...
11:10 -!- kittykat [~kat@85.183.48.167] has left #foundation []
11:10 < stormy-laptop> aday, how so?
11:11 < stormy-laptop> We have 4 agenda items left and 19 minutes:
11:11 < stormy-laptop> 3 left:
11:11 < stormy-laptop> Branding considerations: stop people from seeing downstream decisions as "GNOME" 
11:11 < stormy-laptop> GNOME 3.0 Worldwide Launch Party and GNOME.Asia pre-event survey 
11:11 < stormy-laptop> My leaving my position as ED.
11:12 < fredm> 2nd item was discussed last week I believe
11:12 < stormy-laptop> cool
11:12 < fredm> but if anyone has any question... please feel free
11:12 < fredm> and thanks for the support and people who filled the survey and blogged about the launch party :)
11:12 < jhs> is branding an issue? I don't think our brand is particularly strong. You hardly see a GNOME foot in a distro.
11:13 < aday> stormy-laptop: i guess it's just a matter of phrasing
11:13 < shaunm> I think (3) is important to discuss, i.e. what the heck are we going to do now?
11:13 <@OgMaciel> :)
11:13 < yippi> thanks for all the great work over the past 2.5 years, Stormy
11:13 < gpoo> shaunm: work harder
11:14 < stormy-laptop> aday, I'm still interested in your perspective on the statement
11:14 < stormy-laptop> aday, I think we can word it in a way that we are willing to make extra efforts to work together.
11:14 < stormy-laptop> Not that we were doing something wrong.
11:14 < stormy-laptop> We need an owner for that too ...
11:14 < stormy-laptop> Brandign considerations.
11:14 < stormy-laptop> We are going to hire another ED.
11:14 < jhs> shaunm: well, we create the GNOME Desktop we planned for all distros. Unity doesn't really seem to work on anything else than Ubuntu as I read from the recent blog posts.
11:14 < stormy-laptop> And continue to do awesome work!
11:15 < shaunm> regarding hiring a new ED, we managed to kind of scrape by for years without one. how long are we willing to hold out to find the right person?
11:15 < aday> stormy-laptop: that sounds good to me :)
11:15 < stormy-laptop> For the brand, and for the mission, I think we need to realize that GNOME is more than a desktop. It is used in phones, devices, etc.
11:15 < stormy-laptop> shaunm, I think finding the right one is a matter of having everyone think of who would be great in that role.
11:16 -!- zana [~zana@static-71-174-236-21.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #foundation
11:16 < stormy-laptop> And then going and recruiting them.
11:16 < shaunm> right. somebody go recruit Stormy Peters. she'd be awesome
11:16 < stormy-laptop> :) Thanks.
11:16 < aday> shaunm: perfect!
11:16 < jhs> stormy-laptop: so I guess there is nobody you have in mind or the board has in mind to follow you?
11:17 < stormy-laptop> jhs, a number of names have been mentioned.
11:17 < yippi> how about RMS?  :)
11:17 < pockeylam> yippi, you are funny
11:17 < fredm> haha
11:18 < jhs> stormy-laptop: ok, thanks for all the work you did by the way. I hope we will find someone else soon as it would in general be a bad impression for any commercial companies wanting to use GNOME technologie in some way if they have nobody to talk to directly.
11:18 < fredm> yippi: he is too busy with the FSF
11:18 < gpoo> jhs: they still can talk directly with us
11:19 < shaunm> I'm content for now just knowing the board has tossed names around.
11:19 < stormy-laptop> sorry, I should clarify
11:19 < stormy-laptop> In conversations I've had with different board members and other people that care about GNOME, names have been tossed around.
11:19 < jhs> gpoo: sure - but I guess you know what I mean.
11:19 < stormy-laptop> So the conversation hasn't happened with the whole board.
11:19 < jhs> but the board is taking care of searching a new ED, right?
11:20 < stormy-laptop> Seriously, everyone should think about candidates.
11:20 < stormy-laptop> jhs, yes
11:20 < shaunm> and we can safely assume this is on their agenda for a soonish board meeting?
11:20 < stormy-laptop> shaunm, and being discussed on the board list
11:20 < shaunm> great
11:21 < stormy-laptop> I'm not being clear today.
11:21 < gpoo> shaunm: fwiw, everybody can always add topics to be discussed on the board meeting
11:21 < stormy-laptop> The conversation of a new ED is being discussed by the whole board!
11:21 < shaunm> if community members have suggestions for candidates, should they email the board?
11:22 < stormy-laptop> shaunm, that would be great.
11:22 < shaunm> (not that I do. just a general question)
11:22 < stormy-laptop> Or if you'd prefer you can approach a board member to discuss it first.
11:22 <@OgMaciel> I guess this would be a good time as any to officially end this meeting
11:22 < jhs> stormy-laptop: could you mail that info to foundation-list?
11:23 <@OgMaciel> thanks everyone for attending and the great questions and comments!
11:23 < stormy-laptop> Yes, we are working on an official job description and will announce that it's officially open very soon.
11:25 < bkuhn> stormy-laptop: I got a phone call and fell behind on meeting traffic, but I want to echo the thanks others gave for your work as Executive Director.  You've left a tough spot to fill now that you've done such fine work in the job.  I'll keep candidates in mind and look forward to the job description post.
11:25 < stormy-laptop> thanks, bkuhn
11:26 -!- jhs [~jhs@ppp-88-217-101-24.dynamic.mnet-online.de] has quit [Remote closed the connection]
11:32 < aday> OgMaciel: i'm up for a discussion on communications strategies if you are
11:34 <@OgMaciel> aday: absolutely... maybe we can catch up in a couple of hours? got a tight deadline here
11:34 < aday> OgMaciel: sure - i'm busy right now myself
11:35 <@OgMaciel> aday: what's the best way to continue? ping you right here?
11:35 < stormy-laptop> Thanks everyone for everyone's hard work! 
11:36 < andreasn_> I'm glad that there was so much to discuss last week we ended up with two meetings
11:36 < aday> OgMaciel: yes, i'll hang around
11:36 < andreasn_> so when is the next meeting?
11:36 -!- stormy-laptop [~chatzilla@m4a2636d0.tmodns.net] has quit [Remote closed the connection]