On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:58:36AM -0500, Ryan Harper wrote:

* Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com> [2011-10-12 09:14]:

...

This came up in today's project planning meeting. How do folks feel about moving the project planning and future board meetings to IRC?

The advantage of IRC meetings are that the full meeting minutes can be posted in a public archive. It's significantly easier for many folks to participate in IRC meetings.

I think the only downside would be if anyone involved is uncomfortable with using IRC. Using IRC for regular meetings certainly doesn't preclude having occasional phone calls if necessary.

+1

Do we have a irc bot for logging?

Putting up a 'meetbot' instance is on my list right after gerrit/jenkins. If we move meetings to IRC ... which I +1 btw ... we'll have the bot in channel before the first meeting. :D - Karsten -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org http://TheOpenSourceWay.org gpg: AD0E0C41

On 10/12/2011 10:04 AM, Chris Wright wrote:

* Anthony Liguori (aliguori@us.ibm.com) wrote:

...

This came up in today's project planning meeting. How do folks feel about moving the project planning and future board meetings to IRC?

The advantage of IRC meetings are that the full meeting minutes can be posted in a public archive. It's significantly easier for many folks to participate in IRC meetings.

I think the only downside would be if anyone involved is uncomfortable with using IRC. Using IRC for regular meetings certainly doesn't preclude having occasional phone calls if necessary.

The only other downsides I've heard voiced (having just gone through this debate elsewhere):

1) typing == slow for some folks 2) inevitible overlapping conversations

I think the key is to moderate the discussion and make sure there's a clear agenda. Regards, Anthony Liguori

3) more consuming than phone (harder to do 2 things at once) 4) can't do from airport/kitchen/car/...

thanks, -chris

On 2011-10-13 6:43, Karsten Wade wrote:

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 08:04:19AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:

...

The only other downsides I've heard voiced (having just gone through this debate elsewhere):

1) typing == slow for some folks 2) inevitible overlapping conversations 3) more consuming than phone (harder to do 2 things at once) 4) can't do from airport/kitchen/car/... Yep, totally understand where this list comes from, I've been there before.

The place I draw the line is, a tightly integrated team - such as a developer team at a company - has a higher importance on certain factors that make the above objections more relevant:

* It's your team meeting at your JOB, you make the meeting no matter what. So it's key to have it highly available (call from anywhere) v. text-based.

* The rest of your company may not be familiar with the pace of open source development - it doesn't respond to "NOW!" the way a job-role does, the urgency to be in meetings isn't the same, etc.

* And so forth.

Where it comes to open community meetings, we are plainly just more flexible to be as accommodating as possible. So this means we do IRC in plain text because:

* It's easier for non-native English speakers.

* In fact, some people can read English but not understand all the spoken accents.

* It's translatable.

* It's accessible - if you can't hear a phone conversation, you can read an IRC log. If you can't read a log, you can use a screenreader.

* It's searchable when the log is archived.

+1 and add one moe * It is easy to know who is talking in the meeting by IRC ID, especially for a meeting with many attendees.

Once a project is out in the open and WANTS participation, that's when the phone calls stop and IRC+email begins.

- Karsten

_______________________________________________ Board mailing list Board@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board