Follow-up items from face-to-face meeting at RIPE 79
Friends, I talked to Hans Petter Holen last night, and neither of us were sure who is allowed to update the charter or approve (or not) proposed changes. 😉 Given that, I think we're okay to update the items to deliver and the associated dates, as per my previous mail with a proposed updated charter. Hans Petter was not super enthusiastic about adding people to the task force. I am sure that he can be convinced, but clearly I fucked up by inviting Théophile along to our meeting. I'm basically happy for Théophile to join or not, whatever we think makes the most sense. I talked to Denis Walker this morning, and let him know that at least I will be at the Database Working Group session tomorrow to explain what this task force is. He looks forward to lots of detailed discussion about the requirements document, and especially his own involvement in that. Cheers, -- Shane
Hi Shane, The updated charter in your previous email looks good, thanks! Personally I believe we already have enough people with the required knowledge and representation base on the TF in the originally assigned 6. Nothing against Théophile at all, more that I don't really see the need for additional people at this early stage.
He looks forward to lots of detailed discussion about the requirements document, and especially his own involvement in that.
Community feedback is always welcome of course but tomorrow's update at the DB WG is only to communicate who the TF is, our purpose and charter etc. rather than hold a detailed discussion about the requirements? Regards, James
On October 16, 2019 at 11:48 AM Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Friends,
I talked to Hans Petter Holen last night, and neither of us were sure who is allowed to update the charter or approve (or not) proposed changes. 😉 Given that, I think we're okay to update the items to deliver and the associated dates, as per my previous mail with a proposed updated charter.
Hans Petter was not super enthusiastic about adding people to the task force. I am sure that he can be convinced, but clearly I fucked up by inviting Théophile along to our meeting. I'm basically happy for Théophile to join or not, whatever we think makes the most sense.
I talked to Denis Walker this morning, and let him know that at least I will be at the Database Working Group session tomorrow to explain what this task force is. He looks forward to lots of detailed discussion about the requirements document, and especially his own involvement in that.
Cheers,
-- Shane
On 16 Oct 2019, at 15:49, james@kennedyipam.com james@kennedyipam.com <james@kennedyipam.com> wrote:
Hi Shane,
The updated charter in your previous email looks good, thanks!
Personally I believe we already have enough people with the required knowledge and representation base on the TF in the originally assigned 6. Nothing against Théophile at all, more that I don't really see the need for additional people at this early stage.
We may want to consider having an odd number on the task force - https://www.fastcompany.com/1193130/could-your-team-be-more-effective-odd-ma... <https://www.fastcompany.com/1193130/could-your-team-be-more-effective-odd-man-out>
He looks forward to lots of detailed discussion about the requirements document, and especially his own involvement in that.
Community feedback is always welcome of course but tomorrow's update at the DB WG is only to communicate who the TF is, our purpose and charter etc. rather than hold a detailed discussion about the requirements?
Detailed discussions for the future, tomorrow an intro and Thursday a little more detail with slides, I believe is what we agreed. Cheers, Bijal
Regards, James
On October 16, 2019 at 11:48 AM Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Friends,
I talked to Hans Petter Holen last night, and neither of us were sure who is allowed to update the charter or approve (or not) proposed changes. 😉 Given that, I think we're okay to update the items to deliver and the associated dates, as per my previous mail with a proposed updated charter.
Hans Petter was not super enthusiastic about adding people to the task force. I am sure that he can be convinced, but clearly I fucked up by inviting Théophile along to our meeting. I'm basically happy for Théophile to join or not, whatever we think makes the most sense.
I talked to Denis Walker this morning, and let him know that at least I will be at the Database Working Group session tomorrow to explain what this task force is. He looks forward to lots of detailed discussion about the requirements document, and especially his own involvement in that.
Cheers,
-- Shane
Shane, On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:48:24AM +0200, Shane Kerr wrote:
force. I am sure that he can be convinced, but clearly I fucked up by inviting Théophile along to our meeting. I'm basically happy for Théophile to join or not, whatever we think makes the most sense.
first, this is a publicly archived mailing list, so I'll limit the details for prevention of embarrassment. Then, indeed I am glad to see that you reassessed your move. This was intentionally not set up as an "open TF" and we had an open process that resulted in the set we have/are. Making an exception unilaterally would not only be unfair to others who might not have made it, it would also not help us in saying "no" to further interested parties, eventually turning this into the "open TF" the Chair did not have in mind. In addition, I think it would also send the wrong message in the direction of mentees regarding our confidence in our own procedures. In general, we avoid filling roles on an ad-hoc basis. Please note that my reasoning explicitly and deliberately did not involve looking at the individual. -Peter
participants (4)
-
Bijal Sanghani -
james＠kennedyipam.com james＠kennedyipam.com -
Peter Koch -
Shane Kerr