Minutes of Georgetown Release Meeting, 2008-09-29

TOC and Agenda

Logistics, Participants, IRC log

• Date: Monday, 2008-09-29 19:00 GMT (Convert the start for your time zone)
• IRC Channel: #twiki_release

• Participants: (smilies for those who are present)
  • PeterThoeny (PeterThoeny)
  • KennethLavrsen (Lavr)
  • MarkusUeberall (uebera||)
  • MichaelDaum (MichaelDaum)
  • OliverKrueger (OliverKrüger)
  • CarloSchulz
  • EugenMayer
  • AndreUlrich (AndreU)
  • MartinSeibert (MartinSeibert)
  • MartinCleaver (MartinCleaver)
  • CrawfordCurrie (CDot)
  • LynnwoodBrown (Lynnwood)
  • RafaelAlvarez (Soronthar)
  • StephaneLenclud
  • MichaelRubin (iradel)
  • AdamHyde (eset)
  • Rawash (gwash)
  • OlivierRaginel (Babar)
  • GilmarSantosJr
  • KoenMartens (gmc)
• Facilitated by KennethLavrsen
• Notes taken by KennethLavrsen

• Log of IRC meeting: GeorgetownMinutes2008x09x29.txt

• Previous release meeting: GeorgetownReleaseMeeting2008x09x15
• Next release meeting: GeorgetownReleaseMeeting2008x10x13 (subject to change)

1. TWiki Association

Kick off a debate. An Association of the TWiki Community who will elect the governing body once a year.

How should you become a member?

See also TWikiAssociationMembershipDebate for off line debate.

Trying to capture the essense of the debate is difficult. It was not the idea to have a decision. The discussion continues on Codev. But the big lines are

• The mailing list is prone to spam. Better with a ..WouldLikeToBeAMember topic.
• Different views how high the bar should be for membership. The model where two members has to recommend you on the would-like-to topic was being regarded a good model by many tonight
• A model where there is a guide line for what a new member should be required to show of activity was discussed. If this guideline is for the members to use but at the end of day have an objective criteria of two recommendations then we can still have an objective criteria for membership.

Again. No decision. The debate is open on TWikiAssociationMembershipDebate for anyone to add their inspirations. All inputs so far have been great. Thank you so much.

See also TWikiGovernanceStructure, InterimGovernanceTeamAgenda, InterimGovernanceTeamMeeting20080909 and InterimGovernanceTeamMeeting20080919

2. Review Urgent Bugs

• Desired outcome: Identify owners for urgent bugs; eyeball release date of 4.2.4
• See TWikibug:ReleaseBlocker

• Bugs:Item5958 - Kenneth proposes "No Action"
  • OK to no action says Michael
• Bugs:Item5960 - Kenneth proposes lowering to Normal
  • Koen is unsure if this can potentially be a security issue. Gilmar may look but not in near future
• Bugs:Item5994 - Kenneth asks - anyone willing to work on this the next days or do we defer till after 4.2.4?
  • Olivier will look
• Bugs:Item5957 - Urgent bug where reporter has provided a patch. Need a core developer to review and accept or reject patch.
  • You read this! You got the message
• Bugs:Item5865 - Kenneth proposes lowering to Normal
  • Will do
• Bugs:Item5914 - Gilmar is looking for developer feedback. Meeting encouraged to give it a try. Rafael will try on a live server if he gets a patch

3. Feature requests for Georgetown Release

• Desired outcome: Discuss and decide on pending feature request that need attention
• See TWikiFeatureProposals

I have reviewed the hanging proposals and I do not see any that are ready for further discussion.

A few proposals have been accepted by consensus or 14 day rule the past week. Which is good. The process still works.

Back to: GeorgetownRelease

4 Added item: Discuss Bylaws for association

It was noted that there are two teams Kenneth/Lynnwood from the Interim team and AndreU/SvenR that have planned a task team.

It was agreed that we join forces since we all seem to be writing more or less the same document. It seems we will have an easy task to come to agreememt. Especially if we take the open issue to open debate like we have done with the membership question.

Comments / Feedback