[FOSS4G2016] FOSS4G2016 hacking weekend 20-22 nov

Fri Oct 23 06:06:17 PDT 2015

I cannot come over for the weekend as well, neither an I available on mondays for a hack..sorry. 

Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans

> Op 23 okt. 2015 om 14:45 heeft till.adams at fossgis.de het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hi Gert-jan,
> 
> I also thought about that, but I know, that spaces are sparse there.
> 
> Also I can't make it to this weekend, eventually I can join for the day on saturday. More details on monday!
> 
> Till.
> 
> 
> 
> Am 2015-10-21 20:52, schrieb Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting OSGeo.nl:
>> When I propesed this morning to to have a hacking weekend,
>> I wasn't aware of the already scheduled FOSSGIS hacking weekend of
>> 20-21-22 November in the Linux Hotel in Essen. [1]
>> 
>> So on next Monday's IRC we don't have to decide whether or not to
>> organize a Hacking Even, but just if we (the LOC) will be there for a
>> FOSS4G-orga-sprint.
>> (amazing: a bus ride from Amsterdam to Essen is only 15 euros single fare!)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> regards,
>> 
>> GJ
>> 
>> 
>> [1] http://www.fossgis.de/wiki/FOSSGIS_Hacking_Event_2015_Nummer_4
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: FOSS4G2016 [mailto:foss4g2016-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] Namens
>> Gert-Jan van der Weijden
>> Verzonden: woensdag 21 oktober 2015 09:12
>> Aan: foss4g2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>> Onderwerp: Re: [FOSS4G2016] weekly IRC meeting
>> 
>> Hi LOC,
>> 
>> I'll be there on monday at 5 pm CET (otherwise I would be in the
>> regular traffic jam anyway).
>> No matter what channel we choose (IRC, Slack, Hangout), most
>> important is to have an agenda, a chair and a scribe.
>> 
>> First proposal for an agenda-item for this Monday: arrange a
>> FOSS4G2016 organisation hacking weekend in November, in ordr to make
>> some serious steps forward.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> GJ
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> till.adams at fossgis.de schreef:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Darrrell, Marc, Volker, thanks for your comments on that.
>>> @Marc, I do not feel in a pitiable situation ;-) - other teams had and
>>> always will have the same problem ;-)
>>> 
>>> Although I like to pick up proposals and also like to cash in from
>>> experiences past teams made, I'd like us to keep the suggested weekly
>>> IRC meeting. From my own company experience I know that meetings, that
>>> are not once a week or once a month don't work. You never know, is it
>>> this week, is it next week or was it last week...?
>>> 
>>> Also, if we recognize, that IRC is not appropriate we can change every
>>> time ;-)
>>> 
>>> So, first IRC meeting for LOC will be 26.10.2015 at 5 p.m. CET:
>>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=FOSS4G+Weekly
>>> +IRC+Meeting&iso=20151026T17&p1=312&ah=1
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Till
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 2015-10-21 00:12, schrieb Volker Mische:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I don't agree with Darell and Marc. Meeting over IRC can also be very
>>>> efficient and I've seen those meetings. The problem with running them
>>>> over voice is that people there also need to be efficient, if there
>>>> are not, text can be faster. I see several advantages:
>>>> 
>>>> - Many people can "speak" at once
>>>> - You don't need to interrcommiserateupt someone
>>>> - It's easier to speak up and disagree (e.g. if you are more of a
>>>> silent person)
>>>> - You have everything in written
>>>> - Watchers can just join an lurk
>>>> - You might want to attend, mostly for listening or just for one
>>>> small item, you can do something next to it
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Volker
>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/20/2015 11:51 PM, Marc Zakelijk wrote:
>>>>> I agree with Darrel; voice beats text in efficiency.
>>>>> commiserate
>>>>> I see where Jeff comes from.
>>>>> But for needed history and monitoring a central doc will suffice
>>>>> when at least capturing;
>>>>> - planning per sub-committee and master planning
>>>>> - each agenda item has; A(ctivity statement ), B((enefit clearly
>>>>> defined,  otherwise activity ditched), C(oncern or risk assessment
>>>>> of intended action success) and D(o r action stated to overcome
>>>>> concern)
>>>>> - each activity has people who are R(responsible, who has to Do
>>>>> something), A(countable, who monitors progress), (to be) C(onsulted,
>>>>> for possible advice), (to be) I(nformed, but stays out of the way as
>>>>> much as possible ;-)
>>>>> - there is only 1 Responsible person per task, 1 Accountable, a few
>>>>> to be Consulted, and more to be Informed
>>>>> - is a task or activity too large for one person it gets divided
>>>>> into smaller tasks with maybe more people involved
>>>>> 
>>>>> I commiserate with Till.
>>>>> Before everyone suffers from inertia;
>>>>> - Without a Program (you can read Product) there is no idea of who
>>>>> feels/is invited as audience/Buyers of tickets (academia,
>>>>> developers, non-tech end-users, public sector orgs, NGO's,
>>>>> commercial orgs, etc)
>>>>> - Without an intended audience-segmentation there is no effective
>>>>> promotion possible, nor can sponsors be sure their particular
>>>>> audience is present.
>>>>> - Without targeted promotion the overall attendance suffers and
>>>>> cross-pollination between sub-groups suffers too.
>>>>> - Without sponsors it will be a rather Spartan affair or very expensive.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My two cents.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Vriendelijke groet,
>>>>> Marc Vloemans
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Op 20 okt. 2015 om 22:53 heeft Darrell Fuhriman
>>>>>> <darrell at garnix.org> het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For 2014 we started with bi-weekly meetings and only moved to
>>>>>> weekly meetings in August. I thought it was sooner than that, but
>>>>>> apparently not.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I totally disagree about the IRC/Slack thing, IMNSHO. It’s a far,
>>>>>> far slower way to communicate than voice. A well run meeting is
>>>>>> going to be many times faster.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The main thing is:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Designate a note taker to:
>>>>>> • Track New TODOs
>>>>>> * Track decisions made
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The note taker is always different from the person running the meeting.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> At each meeting, we created a google document for the next meeting,
>>>>>> and people could add to the agenda at any time up until the time of
>>>>>> the meeting. Notes were then taken in that same document.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Always follow up on old TODOs, both to nag and to check for relevancy.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you want an effective meeting, learn how to run an effective
>>>>>> meeting. They don’t happen by accident.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Darrell
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2015, at 06:31, Jeff McKenna
>>>>>>> <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yes at some point soon you should move to a weekly meeting.  I
>>>>>>> have seen some past committee teams use IRC successfully (there is
>>>>>>> the #foss4g channel on freenode that is mostly empty, awaiting
>>>>>>> your use), and also phone conference calls using audio (it could
>>>>>>> be a weekly hangout with audio).  But personally I find that IRC
>>>>>>> meetings are much more "get down to business" than the audio calls
>>>>>>> ("hi how was your weekend?"), so I have a preference for the IRC
>>>>>>> text chat (or Slack, but that seems to offend some Open Source
>>>>>>> "oldtimers" so IRC it is, ha).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -jeff
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2015-10-19 5:41 AM, till.adams at fossgis.de wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi LOC!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This is a really honest eamil but unfortunately it looks like,
>>>>>>>> that it is necessary.
>>>>>>>> I know, that everybody involved in LOC also has a normal job and
>>>>>>>> I also understand that not everybody of you can act like I am doing.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> But...we are now in a situation where I really must **rely** on
>>>>>>>> everybody's contributions!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I think that at least it should be possible to everyone, who gets
>>>>>>>> asked about s.th. which is in your personal area of
>>>>>>>> responsibility to reply to a question in a short email.
>>>>>>>> And if the reply is: "Sorry, I am short in time for now, but I
>>>>>>>> will work on this on [...]" - that's also fair and nobody will be
>>>>>>>> angry about that.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> !!!The worst thing you can do (to all other people involved in
>>>>>>>> LOC) is to do/write/say nothing!!!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please note, that we are far away from having too much time for
>>>>>>>> organization and I really would like to get us all in motion for
>>>>>>>> the upcoming tasks!
>>>>>>>> The most urgent things are:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -> add more info on the homepage (@Anja, Carmen asked last week
>>>>>>>> -> about
>>>>>>>> having a meeting this week?)
>>>>>>>> -> fix sponsorship and exhibition packages (@Arnulf and @Hinrich:
>>>>>>>> -> still
>>>>>>>> no reply from you)
>>>>>>>> -> fix our contract with WCCB (wrote a question on this a few
>>>>>>>> minutes ago)
>>>>>>>> -> fix of our timetable and with that all the upcoming tasks
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So please, please let us get these things in motion!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Maybe having a hangout or IRC chat once a week would make
>>>>>>>> communication easier? Our monthly meetings are good but mainly
>>>>>>>> restricted to people located in Bonn What do you think? Any other
>>>>>>>> ideas on that?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So far, Till
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>> 
>> 
>> Gert-Jan van der Weijden
>> Voorzitter Stichting OSGeo.nl
>> _______________________________________________
>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016