Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Gris Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>]

Hi Justin, 

Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet. The time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where they know they can have a hold of someone in our working group predictably. 

Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm. 

I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's needed, could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for you? I will add this to the Doodle. 

In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels. 

G

On 2019/09/29 21:54:28, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote: 
> HI,
> 
> Is there really a need for synchronous meetings? None of the time given work for me and they are all between 1am and 5am my time (Sydney).
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>]

Hi,

> Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things that
> are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.

All good by me. The advice Matt and others gave is useful.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 16:41, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> > and we
> > publish the minutes of those meetings regularly. Similarly in the Outreachy
> > meetings, we’ve been recording and publishing minutes. I consider both
> > meetings to be particularly useful for finalizing decisions that involve
> > two or more people (board for resolutions, smaller meetings for informal
> > equivalents).
> >
> > To make both compatible as possible with the Apache Way, the date and times
> > are scheduled ahead of time and are generally open to anyone who wants to
> > attend
>
> Good advice for PMCs, but not a hard requirement for other committees.
> In fact, we have ample examples where such is an anti-pattern,
> particularly when meeting with external companies.

That's why I said "two or more people". Let me clarify that as "two or
more Apache folk". From an operational perspective, if you have one
Apache person in charge, then there's no need for a meeting. This
doesn't necessarily mean that any officer's actions require this type
of formality.

> If you would like to discuss this further, I'd suggest operations@apache.org.

That could be useful for helping clarify when it's particularly useful
to use open synchronous meetings versus officer actions without the
need for added bureaucracy.

-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>]

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:46 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Synchronous meetings are done by the board of directors monthly,

As well as by infrastructure, conferences, fundraising, ...

> and we
> publish the minutes of those meetings regularly. Similarly in the Outreachy
> meetings, we’ve been recording and publishing minutes. I consider both
> meetings to be particularly useful for finalizing decisions that involve
> two or more people (board for resolutions, smaller meetings for informal
> equivalents).
>
> To make both compatible as possible with the Apache Way, the date and times
> are scheduled ahead of time and are generally open to anyone who wants to
> attend

Good advice for PMCs, but not a hard requirement for other committees.
In fact, we have ample examples where such is an anti-pattern,
particularly when meeting with external companies.

If you would like to discuss this further, I'd suggest operations@apache.org.

> or get clarity on something in real time. Publishing minutes after
> meetings as well as using mailing lists for the asynchronous aspects of the
> group seems to strike a careful balance. I’d expect other synchronous
> meetings at Apache (regardless of which committee(s) it involves) to be
> done similarly. I wouldn’t expect formal minutes like we publish for the
> board, but making public notes about what was discussed makes the meetings
> accessible to those who either can’t attend synchronously or those with
> accessibility issues.

- Sam Ruby

> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 14:26, Katia Rojas <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > "the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things"
> >
> > Synchronous meetings are an additional channel. I think that it worked well
> > with the Outreachy program and not all of the members attended the video
> > calls. At the end of the meeting we provided access to the meeting notes,
> > to make it transparent; and to make it possible for people to contribute on
> > the discussed topics async :)
> >
> > Katia
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 7:33 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I've encountered this question many times, in projects I contribute to
> > and
> > > mentor.
> > >
> > > My current (evolving) take on this is that the mailing list needs to be
> > an
> > > authoritative and descriptive record of the project. A lurker should know
> > > what is going on by subscribing. A newcomer should be able to catch up by
> > > reading archives. For any decision, someone should have their voice
> > heard -
> > > a chance to have a different opinion and change the course of the
> > project -
> > > via only the email list. You can achieve all of that and still have
> > > off-list working meetings.
> > >
> > > The key is in just what Gris said: "the meetings will be just to provide
> > a
> > > time to work on things". I would guess that almost every active Apache
> > > project has people working off-list in person having many meetings and
> > > calls. But the list is what drives the project.
> > >
> > > This is all talking about normal project PMCs. I'm not sure if this all
> > > applies to an operational arm of ASF.
> > >
> > > Kenn
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 9:31 AM Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It can, and that will be the preferred way. I'm not going against the
> > > > Apache Way, I'm providing additional channels to move the project
> > forward
> > > > making it as transparent and collaborative as possible.
> > > >
> > > > I will also hold these meetings as we have done with the Outreach work,
> > > > which has proven to be going well.
> > > >
> > > > Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things
> > that
> > > > are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 23:30, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >  > Hi Justin,
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet.
> > The
> > > > >  > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where
> > > they
> > > > >  > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
> > > > >  > predictably.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be
> > > > >  > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
> > > > >  > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's
> > > needed,
> > > > >  > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
> > > > >  > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
> > > > >  > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it
> > is
> > > > > hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time zone,
> > > > > shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
> > > > > time, and time-based responsibilities.
> > > > >
> > > > > Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
> > > > > circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for everyone
> > > is
> > > > > practically impossible.
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't keeping
> > > > > track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
> > > > > e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>]

Oh, almost forgot to mention posting an agenda ahead of time, though we
haven’t been very proactive about that yet for our Outreachy meetings,
though that has been included in the meeting invite usually.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 15:46, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Synchronous meetings are done by the board of directors monthly, and we
> publish the minutes of those meetings regularly. Similarly in the Outreachy
> meetings, we’ve been recording and publishing minutes. I consider both
> meetings to be particularly useful for finalizing decisions that involve
> two or more people (board for resolutions, smaller meetings for informal
> equivalents).
>
> To make both compatible as possible with the Apache Way, the date and
> times are scheduled ahead of time and are generally open to anyone who
> wants to attend or get clarity on something in real time. Publishing
> minutes after meetings as well as using mailing lists for the asynchronous
> aspects of the group seems to strike a careful balance. I’d expect other
> synchronous meetings at Apache (regardless of which committee(s) it
> involves) to be done similarly. I wouldn’t expect formal minutes like we
> publish for the board, but making public notes about what was discussed
> makes the meetings accessible to those who either can’t attend
> synchronously or those with accessibility issues.
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 14:26, Katia Rojas <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>> "the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things"
>>
>> Synchronous meetings are an additional channel. I think that it worked
>> well
>> with the Outreachy program and not all of the members attended the video
>> calls. At the end of the meeting we provided access to the meeting notes,
>> to make it transparent; and to make it possible for people to contribute
>> on
>> the discussed topics async :)
>>
>> Katia
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 7:33 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I've encountered this question many times, in projects I contribute to
>> and
>> > mentor.
>> >
>> > My current (evolving) take on this is that the mailing list needs to be
>> an
>> > authoritative and descriptive record of the project. A lurker should
>> know
>> > what is going on by subscribing. A newcomer should be able to catch up
>> by
>> > reading archives. For any decision, someone should have their voice
>> heard -
>> > a chance to have a different opinion and change the course of the
>> project -
>> > via only the email list. You can achieve all of that and still have
>> > off-list working meetings.
>> >
>> > The key is in just what Gris said: "the meetings will be just to
>> provide a
>> > time to work on things". I would guess that almost every active Apache
>> > project has people working off-list in person having many meetings and
>> > calls. But the list is what drives the project.
>> >
>> > This is all talking about normal project PMCs. I'm not sure if this all
>> > applies to an operational arm of ASF.
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 9:31 AM Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > It can, and that will be the preferred way. I'm not going against the
>> > > Apache Way, I'm providing additional channels to move the project
>> forward
>> > > making it as transparent and collaborative as possible.
>> > >
>> > > I will also hold these meetings as we have done with the Outreach
>> work,
>> > > which has proven to be going well.
>> > >
>> > > Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things
>> that
>> > > are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 23:30, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >  > Hi Justin,
>> > > >  >
>> > > >  > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet.
>> The
>> > > >  > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where
>> > they
>> > > >  > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
>> > > >  > predictably.
>> > > >  >
>> > > >  > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to
>> be
>> > > >  > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
>> > > >  > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
>> > > >  >
>> > > >  > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's
>> > needed,
>> > > >  > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
>> > > >  > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
>> > > >  >
>> > > >  > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
>> > > >  > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these
>> channels.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it
>> is
>> > > > hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time
>> zone,
>> > > > shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
>> > > > time, and time-based responsibilities.
>> > > >
>> > > > Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
>> > > > circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for
>> everyone
>> > is
>> > > > practically impossible.
>> > > >
>> > > > Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't
>> keeping
>> > > > track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
>> > > > e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>]

Synchronous meetings are done by the board of directors monthly, and we
publish the minutes of those meetings regularly. Similarly in the Outreachy
meetings, we’ve been recording and publishing minutes. I consider both
meetings to be particularly useful for finalizing decisions that involve
two or more people (board for resolutions, smaller meetings for informal
equivalents).

To make both compatible as possible with the Apache Way, the date and times
are scheduled ahead of time and are generally open to anyone who wants to
attend or get clarity on something in real time. Publishing minutes after
meetings as well as using mailing lists for the asynchronous aspects of the
group seems to strike a careful balance. I’d expect other synchronous
meetings at Apache (regardless of which committee(s) it involves) to be
done similarly. I wouldn’t expect formal minutes like we publish for the
board, but making public notes about what was discussed makes the meetings
accessible to those who either can’t attend synchronously or those with
accessibility issues.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 14:26, Katia Rojas <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
> "the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things"
>
> Synchronous meetings are an additional channel. I think that it worked well
> with the Outreachy program and not all of the members attended the video
> calls. At the end of the meeting we provided access to the meeting notes,
> to make it transparent; and to make it possible for people to contribute on
> the discussed topics async :)
>
> Katia
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 7:33 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I've encountered this question many times, in projects I contribute to
> and
> > mentor.
> >
> > My current (evolving) take on this is that the mailing list needs to be
> an
> > authoritative and descriptive record of the project. A lurker should know
> > what is going on by subscribing. A newcomer should be able to catch up by
> > reading archives. For any decision, someone should have their voice
> heard -
> > a chance to have a different opinion and change the course of the
> project -
> > via only the email list. You can achieve all of that and still have
> > off-list working meetings.
> >
> > The key is in just what Gris said: "the meetings will be just to provide
> a
> > time to work on things". I would guess that almost every active Apache
> > project has people working off-list in person having many meetings and
> > calls. But the list is what drives the project.
> >
> > This is all talking about normal project PMCs. I'm not sure if this all
> > applies to an operational arm of ASF.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 9:31 AM Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > It can, and that will be the preferred way. I'm not going against the
> > > Apache Way, I'm providing additional channels to move the project
> forward
> > > making it as transparent and collaborative as possible.
> > >
> > > I will also hold these meetings as we have done with the Outreach work,
> > > which has proven to be going well.
> > >
> > > Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things
> that
> > > are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 23:30, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  > Hi Justin,
> > > >  >
> > > >  > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet.
> The
> > > >  > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where
> > they
> > > >  > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
> > > >  > predictably.
> > > >  >
> > > >  > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be
> > > >  > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
> > > >  > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
> > > >  >
> > > >  > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's
> > needed,
> > > >  > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
> > > >  > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
> > > >  >
> > > >  > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
> > > >  > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it
> is
> > > > hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time zone,
> > > > shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
> > > > time, and time-based responsibilities.
> > > >
> > > > Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
> > > > circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for everyone
> > is
> > > > practically impossible.
> > > >
> > > > Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't keeping
> > > > track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
> > > > e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Katia Rojas <ka...@gmail.com>]

+1
"the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things"

Synchronous meetings are an additional channel. I think that it worked well
with the Outreachy program and not all of the members attended the video
calls. At the end of the meeting we provided access to the meeting notes,
to make it transparent; and to make it possible for people to contribute on
the discussed topics async :)

Katia


On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 7:33 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:

> I've encountered this question many times, in projects I contribute to and
> mentor.
>
> My current (evolving) take on this is that the mailing list needs to be an
> authoritative and descriptive record of the project. A lurker should know
> what is going on by subscribing. A newcomer should be able to catch up by
> reading archives. For any decision, someone should have their voice heard -
> a chance to have a different opinion and change the course of the project -
> via only the email list. You can achieve all of that and still have
> off-list working meetings.
>
> The key is in just what Gris said: "the meetings will be just to provide a
> time to work on things". I would guess that almost every active Apache
> project has people working off-list in person having many meetings and
> calls. But the list is what drives the project.
>
> This is all talking about normal project PMCs. I'm not sure if this all
> applies to an operational arm of ASF.
>
> Kenn
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 9:31 AM Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > It can, and that will be the preferred way. I'm not going against the
> > Apache Way, I'm providing additional channels to move the project forward
> > making it as transparent and collaborative as possible.
> >
> > I will also hold these meetings as we have done with the Outreach work,
> > which has proven to be going well.
> >
> > Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things that
> > are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 23:30, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:
> > >
> > >  > Hi Justin,
> > >  >
> > >  > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet. The
> > >  > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where
> they
> > >  > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
> > >  > predictably.
> > >  >
> > >  > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be
> > >  > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
> > >  > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
> > >  >
> > >  > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's
> needed,
> > >  > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
> > >  > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
> > >  >
> > >  > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
> > >  > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels.
> > >
> > >
> > > There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it is
> > > hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time zone,
> > > shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
> > > time, and time-based responsibilities.
> > >
> > > Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
> > > circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for everyone
> is
> > > practically impossible.
> > >
> > > Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't keeping
> > > track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
> > > e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?
> > >
> >
>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>]

I've encountered this question many times, in projects I contribute to and
mentor.

My current (evolving) take on this is that the mailing list needs to be an
authoritative and descriptive record of the project. A lurker should know
what is going on by subscribing. A newcomer should be able to catch up by
reading archives. For any decision, someone should have their voice heard -
a chance to have a different opinion and change the course of the project -
via only the email list. You can achieve all of that and still have
off-list working meetings.

The key is in just what Gris said: "the meetings will be just to provide a
time to work on things". I would guess that almost every active Apache
project has people working off-list in person having many meetings and
calls. But the list is what drives the project.

This is all talking about normal project PMCs. I'm not sure if this all
applies to an operational arm of ASF.

Kenn

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 9:31 AM Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org> wrote:

> It can, and that will be the preferred way. I'm not going against the
> Apache Way, I'm providing additional channels to move the project forward
> making it as transparent and collaborative as possible.
>
> I will also hold these meetings as we have done with the Outreach work,
> which has proven to be going well.
>
> Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things that
> are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 23:30, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:
> >
> >  > Hi Justin,
> >  >
> >  > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet. The
> >  > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where they
> >  > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
> >  > predictably.
> >  >
> >  > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be
> >  > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
> >  > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
> >  >
> >  > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's needed,
> >  > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
> >  > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
> >  >
> >  > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
> >  > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels.
> >
> >
> > There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it is
> > hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time zone,
> > shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
> > time, and time-based responsibilities.
> >
> > Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
> > circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for everyone is
> > practically impossible.
> >
> > Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't keeping
> > track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
> > e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?
> >
>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>]

It can, and that will be the preferred way. I'm not going against the
Apache Way, I'm providing additional channels to move the project forward
making it as transparent and collaborative as possible.

I will also hold these meetings as we have done with the Outreach work,
which has proven to be going well.

Again, the meetings will be just to provide a time to work on things that
are needed and email can't facilitate. No need for everyone to attend.



On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 23:30, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:

>
> On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:
>
>  > Hi Justin,
>  >
>  > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet. The
>  > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where they
>  > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
>  > predictably.
>  >
>  > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be
>  > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
>  > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
>  >
>  > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's needed,
>  > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
>  > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
>  >
>  > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
>  > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels.
>
>
> There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it is
> hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time zone,
> shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
> time, and time-based responsibilities.
>
> Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
> circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for everyone is
> practically impossible.
>
> Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't keeping
> track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
> e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?
>

Re: [Research] Selecting time for weekly meeting w/ Bitergia

[Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>]

On 10/2/2019 9:08 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote:

 > Hi Justin,
 >
 > Meetings are not mandatory and there is not a need for them yet. The
 > time selection is so the Bitergia team has a block of time where they
 > know they can have a hold of someone in our working group
 > predictably.
 >
 > Since we are under a contract with Bitergia, milestones need to be
 > achieved/met in a timely manner and meetings can provide a way to
 > unblock things and progress in a constant rhythm.
 >
 > I do want to give a time where you could make it in case it's needed,
 > could you propose 2 days of the week and times that will work for
 > you? I will add this to the Doodle.
 >
 > In the meantime, let's continue work through mail, Jira and
 > Confluence. I already briefed the Bitergia team in these channels.


There is one way in which ASF has been so successful at D&I that it is
hardly noticed. People can fully participate regardless of time zone,
shift, whether one does ASF activities on the job or during leisure
time, and time-based responsibilities.

Given people scattered around the world, and with different life
circumstances, finding a meeting time that is convenient for everyone is
practically impossible.

Instead, ASF tries to avoid doing things synchronously. Can't keeping
track of milestones, progress, and barriers to progress be done by
e-mail, rather than a synchronous meeting?