Re: Things to do/Roadmap

[Vincent Untz <vincent vuntz net>]

It's time to start discussing this again :-)

Le lundi 15 décembre 2003, a 14:17, Eric Baudais a ecrit :
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:10:07AM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> > 1) Process remaining applications
> > =================================
> > Ok, I have to admit: this will never end, we'll always have remaining
> > applications :-) Anyway, this is our main job, so we have to process
> > them. I didn't look at the new ones (except for jpr that I forgot to
> > marked as accepted...). It'd be great to process them before Christmas.

Hrm. We're late here. I'll try to process the applications this week-end
if nobody can do it before.

> > 2) New infrastructure
> > =====================
> > I'd like to change our very old infrastructure to something totally
> > automated. Eric, you worked a bit on this some months ago. Do you still
> > have what you wrote? This should really help us to process the
> > applications quickly. I can work on it if it is needed, but not before
> > January.
> > I'm sure we can do this before March. I absolutely want this before
> > next summer.
>
> I think it's doable by January if I can get PHP to place nicely with
> Apache.  I've had to reinstall Debian on my machine and haven't been
> able to get this working correctly since.  I'd appreciate a bit of
> help troubleshooting my development setup.  I'm using the Debian
> packages and am not sure if the packages are at fault or the Apache
> configuraiton.

Eric: did you make any progress? I hope you could fix your setup (if
not, tell me what's not working, I'll try to help you).

> > 3) Anonymous voting referendum
> > ==============================
> > The board asked us to organize a referendum, so just let's do it! This
> > should be a lot easier than elections. The first thing to do is to write
> > a timeline. I think I did work on one some times ago, but I can't find
> > it anymore... Here's a quick suggestion:
> >
> > Beginning of February: announce that the referendum begins two weeks
> > later
> > Mid-February: send ballots, beginnong of voting period.
> > Two weeks later: end of voting period.
> > Beginning of March: preliminary results are out.
> > One week later: official results.
> >
> > What do you think? Any volunteer to work a bit on this and propose a
> > good timeline?
>
> I think there should be two things we need before the election can
> start.  A timeline is one.  A description of how the anonymous voting
> mechanism will operate is the second.  I believe the foundation-list
> was still debating the merits of how to implement the anonymous voting
> before the elections.  It would be good to see the discussion revived.

You're right. But we need a volunteer to lead this thing. I'm not sure
I'll be able to give much of my time for this before mid-february.

> > 4) Discussing with the board
> > ============================
> > I'd like to see some discussion with the (future) board. The main
> > problems I'd like to see fixed are:
> >  * the duration of a membership (I think moving to one-year membership
> >    might be a good thing). Hrm... This might not be our role as
> >    membership committee to discuss this. Maybe I should try to launch a
> >    discussion on foundation-list...
> >  * I'd like to see all renewals happen at the same date. So memberships
> >    would all expire on September 1st, e.g. This might be easier for us
> >    to manage. What do you think of this?
>
> I think it is our role to bring to the board items which we see as
> hindering our ability to serve the Foundation's membership.  I believe
> both are valid points which need some more discussion.  Particularly
> I'd like to see the renewals happen on the same date.

Glynn: is it ok to start discussing those things with the board now or
should we wait a bit so the new board can settle a bit?

> > 5) Renewing the committee
> > =========================
> > Maybe it's time for some fresh blood. There are two things here we
> > should think about:
> >  * how many people should be in the committee? When we joined the
> >    committee, we were five (remember Mike) (note to Glynn: I'm not
> >    sure... were you still in the committee?). Now, we're four.
> >  * do we want to stay or to leave?
> > I know Ghee is on vacation, so here's what I suggest: we should all
> > start to think about it and we'll discuss this in January.
> > FIY, at least two people are interested in joining the committee. And
> > still FYI, I don't know if I want to stay or leave (or if I should), so
> > discussing this in January will allow me to determine what I want to do.
>
> This isn't our decision to make.  However I believe we should provide
> some guidance to the board.  I believe the committee should be no
> larger than six people and not smaller than three people.  I would
> like to stay a member of the committee.  There are some things I want
> to see done before I leave the committee.  Getting the membership
> database and interface working is something I'd like to see completed.
>
> I have been approached by one person who would like to be a part of
> this committee.  I know Vincent has been approached by a different
> person.  I believe it is time to grow the membership committee if no
> one wants to leave or allow people to leave without feeling guilty
> over leaving us one short.

This part is the most important for now.
Is there some of us who want to leave? Or does everyone wants to stay?

As for me, I think I'll stay a bit so there can be a smooth transition
with a new committee. But I'd like to leave before the next elections
:-)

Vincent

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas presses.