[22:55:21] [connected at Thu Aug 18 22:55:21 2016] [22:55:32] [I have joined #xf-bod] [22:56:00] <bryce> robclark, thanks [22:56:17] <bryce> robclark, yeah it'd just be bod + admins [22:56:17] <agd5f> hello [22:56:18] <whot> good morning [22:56:49] <danvet> you're too early ;-) [22:57:01] <robclark> bryce, yeah, if bod+admins I guess that is ok.. I'm not sure we could do better than that other than just encrypting the files [22:57:36] <whot> danvet: perfect timing if you ask me, with 1 minute to go :) [22:57:50] <danvet> hm, my time must be off [22:59:09] <danvet> indeed, ntp server is awol [22:59:15] <danvet> anyway, here we go [22:59:17] <egbert> hi guys! [22:59:20] <danvet> Agenda: travel requests (Samuel & Sebastian), SPI transfer, financial records, [22:59:20] <danvet> x.org [23:01:17] <danvet> mupuf, keithp around? [23:01:40] <keithp> yup [23:02:18] <danvet> I guess we can start then [23:02:29] <danvet> first travel requests I'd say [23:02:36] <danvet> hm, gsoc for agenda, in case mupuf shows up [23:03:00] <danvet> first one is from Samuel, to present about the latest&greatest on nouveau [23:03:30] <danvet> for roughly 350 EUR for just the flight (he can stay with mupuf) [23:04:00] <robclark> that sounds affordable.. +1 [23:04:03] <keithp> seems reasonable to me; +1 [23:04:05] <whot> +1 [23:04:06] <bryce> +1 [23:04:07] <agd5f> seems fine +1 [23:04:17] <danvet> +1 [23:04:20] <danvet> and carries [23:04:47] <keithp> danvet: we have too few bits and overflow on votes? [23:05:06] * keithp really did mis-parse that as an arithmetic carry... [23:05:07] <danvet> more than 5 is good enough ;-) [23:05:17] <mupuf> hey, sorry [23:05:23] <danvet> ah mupuf's here too [23:05:35] <keithp> mupuf: are you up for Samuel as room mate? [23:05:39] <mupuf> +1 [23:05:40] <danvet> so next travel request: sebastian from golem.de, for reporting [23:05:51] * mupuf will host the entire nouveau team :p [23:06:16] <danvet> he also offered to do a presentation about marketing for open source projects [23:06:26] <danvet> I have no idea about golem.de, but it's german only [23:06:27] <whot> that one may be interesting for us [23:06:37] <danvet> and the presentation didn't look that interesting to me [23:06:39] <mupuf> yep, I read the presentation [23:06:41] <mupuf> it is good! [23:06:48] <danvet> there we go ;-) [23:06:49] <keithp> egbert: any thoughts on golem.de? [23:06:57] <mupuf> and golem.de .. I have seen it many times [23:07:07] <whot> i used to read it back in the day, iirc it's up there with heise [23:07:14] <egbert> i've hard of it, other than that, I don't know much about it. [23:07:28] <whot> haven't read it for a long time though [23:07:29] <danvet> sebastian is asking 300EUR for flight and around 500 for hotel, but sounded like he's happy with a partial funding too [23:08:06] <bryce> how relevant is the presentation topic to the folks that will be at the event? [23:08:14] * mupuf would say, golem touches a way broader public than lwn does [23:08:33] <bryce> and does the publication regularly cover X.org matters? [23:08:35] <mupuf> bryce: very. It is about documenting changes better and the kind of things to put in [23:08:39] <whot> well, execpt for the german-only bbit :) [23:09:06] <mupuf> whot: sure, sure. But I doubt Ars or gizmag would come ;) [23:09:55] <whot> hehe [23:09:59] <mupuf> bryce: checking now [23:10:05] <bryce> mupuf, hmm well documenting changes better does sound worthwhile but the proposal he posted to the list sounded more like optimizing press releases rather than changelog entries [23:10:29] <whot> and quite frankly, that's what we could really do with... [23:10:38] <danvet> optimizing changelogs for better press releases [23:11:27] <mupuf> http://forum.golem.de/kommentare/opensource/107,index.html [23:11:45] <keithp> Do we have a program committee seleccting talks for the conference? If so, that's where the talk selection should come from [23:11:51] * mupuf has been pushing some nouveau devs to better document their pull requests to make them phoronix-proof [23:12:08] <keithp> And, if his talk is selected, then we would be able to make a decision on whether to sponsor him with that input [23:12:12] <mupuf> keithp: I guess we should decide now, since this is sort of urgent [23:12:20] <danvet> scrolling through sebastians articles, much less technical than lwn, but seems fairly decent coverage of news from all around [23:12:27] <danvet> with a pile of graphics stuff in there [23:12:50] <danvet> but with german-only it has a rather narrow focus [23:12:57] <danvet> compared to where our community is all from [23:12:58] <keithp> Who decides what talks are going to be given? It doesn't seem like the board should be in charge of that [23:13:18] <danvet> keithp, mupuf is chair and I promised to help him out [23:13:20] <mupuf> keithp: right, it usually is a subset of the board [23:13:38] <keithp> mupuf: ok, so you two get to pick whether his talk is going to be accepted. [23:13:40] <egbert> keithp: i think usually the organizer is involved. [23:13:46] <danvet> but yeah deciding about the talk and travel sponsoring together is kinda not great [23:13:50] <keithp> *then* the full board can decide on whether to sponsor his travel [23:13:56] <egbert> but this is the first time that we need to pick, isn't it? [23:14:11] <keithp> egbert: no, we've had a couple of talks in the past that we've said 'no thanks' to [23:14:27] <robclark> well, I guess we can decouple talk and sponsorship, since it sounded like he would like to cover the event anyways.. [23:14:35] <keithp> and they were similarly general and not desktop specific [23:14:35] <danvet> keithp, did they come with travel requests? [23:14:36] <robclark> (I mean, lwn isn't giving a presentation) [23:14:43] <mupuf> yep, having been in the election commitee for what, 3 XDCs, it is the normal way to go [23:15:02] <keithp> danvet: I'd like to separate the questions and have the two of your making up the PC decide whether you want that talk heard by the group first [23:15:09] <mupuf> we accepted lwn's travel request before the election comitee accepted his talk (since it did not happen) [23:15:19] <mupuf> so, why would this be different for sebastian? [23:15:25] <danvet> well lwn is imo special [23:15:40] <keithp> mupuf: lwn is effectively the 'publication of record' for X.org :-) [23:15:42] <mupuf> sure, proven coverage :) [23:15:51] <danvet> since their coverage is indeed great, and it's imo really useful for everyone who couldn't attend as a technical summary [23:16:01] <danvet> keithp, yup, exactly [23:16:08] <mupuf> but how about other devs who submitted weeks before the deadline? [23:16:31] <egbert> i believe we need to treat everyone who did equally. [23:16:31] <danvet> I think golem.de is too much fluff pieces for the masses and too narrow with just german-speakers to justify travel sponsoring just for the coverage [23:16:36] <keithp> ignoring his presentation and focusing solely on the offer of press coverage, what kind of coverage is on offer, I guess? [23:17:12] <danvet> keithp, I'd say similar to phoronix, but less crap [23:17:19] <danvet> he seems to do about 1 article per day [23:17:19] <mupuf> yeah, maybe we can split and offer travel sponsorship based on this [23:17:20] <egbert> in the past Michael did the 'coverage for the masses' - when he attended xdc he never asked for funding. [23:17:29] <bryce> yeah my vote on lwn was informed by the established precident, and it being specialized to LWN [23:17:36] <jcristau> danvet: lwn coverage is good as a record of the talks even for people who did attend, i would say [23:17:37] <egbert> phoronix i mean [23:17:52] <danvet> jcristau, yeah, viz jetlag and beer ;-) [23:18:17] <bryce> I suppose a policy regarding travel funding for the general press in attending XDC would be more relevant here; separate from the question of the talk acceptance [23:18:25] <danvet> keithp, I'd say looking at the articles it's about what arstechnica does for their short news coverage [23:18:26] * mupuf sees sebastian as a potential person who could get more involved in the community and not only make articles, but also help with the communication of the foundation [23:18:37] <danvet> roughly one page with a summary and a little bit of context [23:18:37] <mupuf> so, I would be ready to give him a chance [23:18:54] <mupuf> bryce: sounds fair [23:18:57] <danvet> bryce, hm yeah ... [23:19:04] <robclark> well, sounded like partial funding, for ex. cover the flights, might be an option.. [23:19:42] <mupuf> we could say that we cover half of it, and if the talk gets accepted, the other half? [23:20:00] <danvet> tbh personally I don't see much value in reporting for the masses [23:20:09] <bryce> same [23:20:13] <mupuf> getting people interested? [23:20:25] <danvet> much of the talks are very technical, we don't do any announcements or anything like that at xdc [23:20:33] <mupuf> that's what I am trying to do on G+, and probably what alanc is doing on twitter [23:20:49] <mupuf> danvet: that is not true, we do make plenty of announcements at XDC [23:21:00] <danvet> same here with twitter, but doing that throughout the year is imo better ... [23:21:02] <mupuf> last XDC, AMD said they would release their stack [23:21:20] <mupuf> and nvidia defined more their collaboration [23:21:21] <danvet> don't they do that like every year ;-) [23:21:21] <robclark> (and this year, maybe they actually will? :-P) [23:21:27] <mupuf> stuff that usually hits slashdot [23:21:32] <mupuf> robclark: hehe [23:21:40] <danvet> mupuf, not if it's written in german [23:21:44] <mupuf> fair point [23:22:14] <bryce> if they're giving a talk, that's one thing, but if it's just press access, well there are lots of news blogs out there and my worry would be we're setting a precident and opening a door for a lot of random funding requests [23:22:19] <egbert> like i said/ phoronix did this in the past and didn't ask for sponsorship [23:22:32] <mupuf> bryce: right [23:22:39] <mupuf> egbert: agreed too [23:22:40] <danvet> bryce, egbert agreed to both [23:23:10] <mupuf> well, let's focus on the talk then, we will check it out tomorrow thouroughtly and see [23:23:21] <danvet> proposal: we'll reject the travel request for press coverage, since german is too narrow and we haven't ever sponsored for popular/mass coverage [23:23:30] <bryce> for strictly promotional/awareness purposes, $1000 EUR could be used in a lot of other ways more effectively IMHO [23:23:34] <mupuf> danvet: +1 [23:23:35] <egbert> it's nice to reach out to the masses - but do we have all that much money left that we do want to afford this? [23:23:50] <egbert> bryce: right [23:23:51] <danvet> and reconsider once mupuf&me have figured out whether to accept his talk or not [23:23:59] <keithp> danvet: agreed [23:23:59] <bryce> danvet, sounds good [23:24:02] <egbert> +1 [23:24:04] <robclark> +1 [23:24:15] <whot> +1 [23:24:23] <danvet> I think the lwn exception as essentially our XDC proceeds is perfectly fine and makes sense [23:24:32] <danvet> +1 too [23:24:33] <bryce> +1 [23:24:35] <danvet> so that's done [23:24:48] <danvet> bryce, should we maybe clarify our travel sponsoring policy? [23:25:08] <bryce> danvet, I think that would be good to do, yes [23:25:12] <agd5f> +1 [23:25:14] <danvet> that we essentially require an accepted talk, but there's an established exception for lwn or similar to essentially publish our proceeds? [23:25:24] <danvet> bryce, can I sign you up to fix our wiki? [23:25:26] <keithp> danvet: proceedings :-) [23:25:29] <bryce> hah [23:25:32] <bryce> ok sure [23:25:34] * danvet not even sure where we have that [23:25:47] <danvet> keithp, already had a beer, it's getting hard to english correctly ;-) [23:25:50] <mupuf> danvet: we can keep it to: technical and well-established English-speaking media [23:25:54] <bryce> I seem to recall when the LWN question came up we tinkered the policy but I'll doublecheck [23:26:24] <mupuf> providing good coverage of the graphics stack all year round [23:26:27] <keithp> mupuf: focus on the technical; I wouldn't mind coverage in other languages if they were as good as lwn [23:26:38] <mupuf> keithp: ack, sounds good [23:26:44] <keithp> google translate offers a fun time if nothing else [23:27:38] <egbert> keithp: the target audience for tech articles can usually deal with english ones [23:28:21] <bryce> ah yes, on https://www.x.org/wiki/Events/ it says "Sponsorship also available for reporter(s) from a Board-selected publisher" [23:28:23] <danvet> yeah, everyone just learn english [23:28:40] <danvet> bryce, yeah I think we should clarify that per our discussion here [23:28:53] <danvet> ok, next up: spi transfers [23:28:54] <keithp> danvet: and list lwn.net explicitly? [23:28:57] <bryce> ok. also maybe I could cross-reference it from https://www.x.org/wiki/XorgWorkshops/ which seems like another place someone might look [23:29:11] <danvet> keithp, minutes say "lwn-like in-depth coverage of the technical talks" [23:29:17] <danvet> I'll let bryce word-smith the wiki [23:29:34] <bryce> I think we had decided not to explicitly say LWN but I'm fine either way [23:29:51] <danvet> I'd say not restrict to lwn-only [23:29:57] <whot> just say it, lets not dance around the topic [23:29:57] <danvet> but atm they're about the only ones really [23:30:09] <danvet> since about 20 years ;-) [23:30:14] <bryce> I'll draft something up [23:30:16] <robclark> bryce, not entirely sure how to word it, but maybe something like "in depth coverage (e.g. lwn)"?? [23:30:17] <danvet> thx [23:30:25] <bryce> re-spi transfers [23:30:47] <bryce> I know this task is in stuart's court presently [23:30:54] <danvet> http://paste.debian.net/790343/ <- the magic text bryce&I worked on [23:31:09] <danvet> I'll send that to bryce on dead trees tomorrow if no one has anything to add/correct there [23:31:13] <bryce> I'm not certain where we're at exactly at the moment, I vaguely recall he was waiting on something [23:31:16] <danvet> hopefully it's goog enough [23:31:30] <danvet> bryce, that piece of paper I was supposed to create ;-) [23:31:45] <bryce> ok [23:31:47] <mupuf> so, we gave up trying to give the foundration away to SFLC? [23:31:53] <danvet> bryce, btw can we now accept donations [23:31:59] <bryce> yes [23:32:32] <bryce> I should probably add links in the wiki for this, but it's all set up now for accepting CC's and such [23:32:42] <danvet> https://www.x.org/wiki/XorgFoundation/ <- here please [23:32:57] <danvet> also I have a few mails from the past 2 years where people asked how they could sponsor [23:33:11] <danvet> and I told them it's too much trouble with tax filings until we've merged with spi [23:33:13] <bryce> https://co.clickandpledge.com/advanced/default.aspx?wid=34115 [23:33:17] <danvet> I need to ping them as soon as that's updated [23:34:06] <keithp> danvet: a fine plan. With a bit of publicity, we should be able to gather enough sponsorship to keep running xdc indefinitely, and perhaps a few evoc spots too [23:34:06] <danvet> bryce, can you pls edit that too? [23:34:12] <bryce> yep will do so today [23:34:22] <danvet> keithp, yeah I'll run some blog noise too for sure [23:34:26] <danvet> bryce, thx [23:34:40] <bryce> we also have a donation page that just shows X.org, trying to dig up that link; that's the one we should actually use [23:35:22] <danvet> yeah, that would be best [23:35:28] <danvet> and maybe a link to the other methods [23:35:41] <bryce> danvet, let's also loop stuart in on the X.org dissolution doc, and coordinate the fund transfers. [23:35:44] <danvet> I think there's even one for at least Germans, through a proxy non-profit [23:35:49] <danvet> to make it tax-deductible [23:35:57] <bryce> if he has any other issues blocking him we should track them [23:36:02] <danvet> hm, stuart not around [23:36:12] <danvet> bryce, can you take care of that too? [23:36:27] <bryce> ah, oh okay [23:36:29] <danvet> I'll just send you the current version, we can do this again if it's not good enough ;-) [23:36:33] <danvet> but like to get this going ... [23:36:36] <bryce> agreed [23:36:40] <danvet> excellent [23:36:42] <alanc> stuart has been out for family emergency [23:36:44] <danvet> I guess that's it [23:36:46] <danvet> alanc, :( [23:37:10] <danvet> bryce, anything else wrt transfers, or should we move ahead to the financial records topic? [23:37:10] <keithp> alanc: sorry to hear that [23:37:30] * keithp is heading out now; have fun kids [23:37:42] <bryce> danvet, nothing else. Maybe given the family situation we hold off until Monday to email requests to him? [23:38:01] <danvet> bryce, sure [23:38:10] <danvet> the dead tree snail mail will take a week anyway [23:38:18] <danvet> so next up is financial records [23:38:21] <bryce> I emailed to the list my proposed additions to the archives. Looking for any concerns regarding privacy of any of the data [23:38:27] <danvet> have folks read bryce's mail already? [23:38:42] <robclark> the rfc, yeah [23:39:22] <whot> i havent yet, sorry [23:39:37] <bryce> presently I know of no issues and everything looks safe, so I'm comfortable putting it in, but just for sanity checking want to doublecheck with others [23:39:56] <agd5f> bryce, I agree [23:40:16] <danvet> whot, should we postpone? [23:40:18] <danvet> mupuf, ? [23:40:24] <robclark> I think defn should be restricted to BoD (and not members, as I mentioned earlier), but that seems to be the case? [23:40:34] <danvet> yes, should be [23:40:34] <bryce> basically, there are some bank account numbers (both ours and mentees/xdc attendees), physical addresses, and SWIFT/IBAN/etc. numbers [23:40:38] <egbert> i haven't had a chance to look at it, either. [23:40:49] <whot> i wish there was something to encrypt git repos [23:40:50] <danvet> egbert, sorry, forgot you :( [23:41:04] <bryce> the repo is private to X.org board/foundation, and managed by freedesktop admins. No one else should have access. [23:41:15] <robclark> we could always create new git repo where we checkin encrypted files.. [23:41:16] <mupuf> bryce: yeah, sounds about right [23:41:27] <robclark> a bit more cumbersome.. but it is an option [23:41:40] <danvet> whot, https://www.agwa.name/projects/git-crypt/ [23:41:49] <bryce> whot, I've used pgp with git for password sharing. It's a bit of a pain in the ass but seems maximally secure [23:42:12] <robclark> git-crypt looks interesting [23:42:24] <whot> let's postpone and figure out if there's something we can use first [23:43:34] <robclark> fair 'nuf [23:44:09] <danvet> sounds good [23:44:13] <bryce> ok, one other related bit that I think would be safe to push now: [23:44:28] <bryce> I pulled out IRS docs and am going to push those to the IRS directory [23:44:45] <bryce> those don't contain any data that isn't already in the archives (tax ids, etc.) [23:44:50] <danvet> yeah I think no one has any concerns on that at all [23:45:02] <bryce> ok, the rest I'll hold off on [23:45:10] <agd5f> I think most of that stuff is public anyway (via the IRS) [23:45:11] <danvet> mupuf, gsoc: all good? [23:45:20] <mupuf> well, the end is supposed to be very soon [23:45:43] <mupuf> oh, and I did not request from google to go to the conference though L [23:45:46] <mupuf> :s [23:46:05] <danvet> ok, no news = good news [23:46:11] <danvet> egbert, x.org? [23:46:40] <egbert> danvet: no news unfortunately :( [23:47:30] <whot> sorry guys, I have to run, talk to you next time [23:47:53] <danvet> whot, well we're pretty much done anyway [23:48:17] <egbert> ok, have a good night then! [23:48:20] <danvet> egbert, you'll keep chasing that one? [23:48:26] <danvet> x.org domain I mean [23:48:33] <egbert> danvet: definitely. [23:51:26] <danvet> awesome [23:51:31] <danvet> ok, I guess that's it then [23:51:38] <danvet> thx everyone for participating [23:51:43] * danvet ^Z now [23:51:49] <robclark> k, gn
[23:52:00] [disconnected at Thu Aug 18 23:52:00 2016]