Thursday, 2015-07-23

*** spotz_zzz is now known as spotz13:51
*** exploreshaifali has joined #openstack-diversity16:26
*** kavit has joined #openstack-diversity16:47
*** MeganR has joined #openstack-diversity16:55
*** rolandchan has joined #openstack-diversity16:57
kavithello all16:59
egluteHello Kavit!16:59
MeganRHi16:59
kavithow's it going?l17:00
*** TamaraJ has joined #openstack-diversity17:00
eglute#startmeeting Diversity Working Group 317:00
openstackMeeting started Thu Jul 23 17:00:16 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is eglute. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.17:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.17:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'diversity_working_group_3'17:00
eglute#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/OpenStackDiversity.317:00
eglute#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Diversity#Agenda17:00
eglute#chair kavit17:00
openstackCurrent chairs: eglute kavit17:00
*** barrett has joined #openstack-diversity17:02
egluteif you are attending diversity meeting, please introduce yourself and include your time zone17:02
* eglute works at Rackspace, CST17:02
spotzAmy Marrich - US CST work at Rackspace17:02
kavitKavit from Aptira, Indian Standard Time (GMT +0530)17:03
barrettCarol Barrett here,  I work for Intel and am in Pacific time zone17:03
TamaraJTamara Johnston - EMC - US PST17:03
rolandchanRoland Chan, AEST, Aptira (GMT+10)17:03
eglute#chair barrett17:04
openstackCurrent chairs: barrett eglute kavit17:04
MeganRMegan Rossetti - Comcast - EST17:04
*** AlanClark has joined #openstack-diversity17:05
eglute#topic introductions17:05
eglutethanks everyone for attending!17:06
kavithello Alan17:06
AlanClarkkavit: Hi - took me a minute to join - was on the wrong channel17:07
eglute#topic finalize work group charter17:07
eglutewe need to finalize the charter before the board meeting17:07
kavitSo I think we are very close to finalising the charter. I think one part where threre might be an objection from a legal point of view is the wording here17:08
kavit"...Diversity Work Group may require Board of Directors approval...."17:08
kavitdoes may leave it a bit open ended?17:08
egluteit is open ended, but it open ended intentionall17:09
AlanClarkwhere is the most current version?17:09
rolandchanSurely its better than will or will not.17:09
kavitAlan on the wiki https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Diversity17:10
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity17:10
barrettI can imagine things we may want to do, like gatherings at the Summits, that won't need Board approval, just community leadership & participation17:10
kavitthat was the main point of contention at the last board meeting, so I was just making sure we dont run back into the same objectiond again17:11
egluterolandchan what do you mean?17:11
rolandchanWill and will not are both wrong.17:11
spotzThe agenda actually has it worded as 'is subject to' Is that clearer?17:11
kavitbarrett, yeah, but that sentence talks specifically about sponsored programs17:11
kavitspotz, link me? Am I looking at the wrong working draft?17:12
eglute#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/OpenStackDiversity.317:12
egluteplease make edits or comments in etherpad, will be easier17:13
spotzhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtM4AiszlEyZThRR3ZxX2c1Qjg/view?pli=1 Under Who? First slide17:13
*** ninag has joined #openstack-diversity17:13
kaviteglute, spotz I have added a comment to the etherpad17:14
rolandchanAs it stands programs undertaken by the WG may or may not require board approval. Without knowing the future, this is a true statement.17:15
*** ninag has left #openstack-diversity17:15
kavitfair point rolandchan17:15
barrettrolandchan +117:16
egluterolandchan kavit i think some programs will require approval and others wont. i do not think we should make the approval required. the WG has board members involved, and unless we need money or are doing something grand, we should have some freedom with the programs17:16
AlanClarkThe board is going to want to delegate a 'blank check' authority to create new programs.  As Kavit pointed out the way this is worded is going to cause discussion at the meeting.17:17
* AlanClark thinking of way to rephrase the sentance17:17
TamaraJSuggest making a slight modification to the last paragraph as we say "experiences" twice within the same sentence, maybe just remove "life experiences" since "experiences" can encompass life experiences as well as work and other experiences.17:17
egluteAlanClark do you mean they will NOT want to?17:17
rolandchanSaying "will" means the working group can do nothing without board approval. Can't see a productive outcome from that.17:18
AlanClarkeglute: thanks I did mean 'not'17:18
AlanClarkand not just the board, but could be contention with TC User committee as well (since the next sentence names them17:19
egluteOk, would all programs by WG then would need approval?17:19
AlanClarkbut I like the sentence because it conveys action17:19
kaviteglute, I would hope not, that way lies a bureaucratic quagmire17:20
eglutekavit agree17:21
barrett+117:21
kavit how about this "Some programs ... may require Board Approval"17:21
egluteok, then if we change to "Programs sponsored and/or created by the Diversity Work Group are subject to Board of Directors approval" would that work?17:21
rolandchanFunctionality equivalent to "will require bod approval"17:22
rolandchanFunctionally17:22
barretteglute: doesn't this put us in the quagmire?17:22
egluteit does!17:22
egluteAlanClark what do you suggest?17:22
barrettGiven that we're a WG and not a Board Committee, why do the actions we want to take need any more Board scrutiny that the actions by other Work Groups?17:23
rolandchanI suggest "may". It should be self governing. Entities that require a bod approval in order to do what the WG says will ask for it.17:23
kavit"Some programs sponsored and/or created by the Diversity Working Group are subject to the Board of Directors approval as deemed necessary by the OpenStack Foundation by laws"17:23
kavit"Some programs sponsored and/or created by the Diversity Working Group may be subject to the Board of Directors approval as deemed necessary by the OpenStack Foundation by laws"17:24
spotzbarrett I'm assuming for financing purposes unless there is a budget assigned?17:24
barrettKavit: I like that, it's very explicit which hopefully will make people more comfortable.17:24
AlanClark"The Diversity Work Group will sponsor, promote and propose new programs through collaboration with the BoD, TC and User committee with the goal to ...17:24
barrettspotz: if we want foundation $$ then we could go to the Board for that request...17:24
kavitbarrett, as spotz said, if $s and changes to foundation wide policies are recommended, we will need board approval17:25
barrettkavit: agree17:25
kavitAlanClark, that works for me, collaboration leaves enough ambiguity for future changes and will also placate some concerns that the BoD might have17:26
barrettAre we in agreement on this wording: "Some programs sponsored and/or created by the Diversity Working Group are subject to the Board of Directors approval as deemed necessary by the OpenStack Foundation by laws" ?17:26
rolandchanYep.17:27
eglute+117:27
kavitbarrett, I suggested it so you will hear no disapproval from me :)17:27
spotz+117:27
kavit+117:27
MeganR+117:27
TamaraJ+117:27
barrettI updated the etherpad to reflect this.17:28
eglutethank you barrett17:28
eglutethere is another comment on the charter17:29
eglutei am ok with removing "life"17:29
egluteopinions?17:29
barrettworks for me17:30
eglutethanks, edited17:30
kavitsure, i have no problems with that17:30
spotzYeah it's definitely implied already17:31
TamaraJahh what i meant by that comment is that we say experiences twice in the same sentence17:31
TamaraJso a bit redudant17:31
egluteright! I edited out.17:31
egluteplease review and see if more changes are needed17:31
spotzI think Taamaraj wasn't against the word life but experiences and 'life experiences' in the same sentance17:32
TamaraJcorrect17:32
kavitI am happy with it, should we email the BoD with this draft and see if they have any comments before the meeting? might help us tweak it further at the meeting17:33
AlanClarksend it me and I will include it with the board packet17:33
eglutethank you AlanClark, will do so17:33
eglute#topic review diversity category benchmark17:34
eglutei dont think this bot works17:34
eglutebarrett, can you speak about the benchmark?17:34
barrettsure17:34
barrettA co-worker and I did some research to bring some data to this group as we look to frame up the diversity policies and statements.17:35
eglute#link https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtM4AiszlEyZThRR3ZxX2c1Qjg/view17:35
barrettAlong the way we found a report that had good data on the status of gender and geographic diversity for many of the OpenStack companies that we thought could be helpful17:36
barrettThe "Approach" slide came about as an attempt to put our charter in actionable terms17:37
barrettWe could use this on our Wiki page or we could toss it...17:37
egluteI think it is very informative17:37
barrettAfter that, we were looking to see how wide ranging are the elements or categories of diversities used by industry and world leading organizations17:38
eglutewhat were some things that you could highlight from the report?17:38
barretteglute: slides 10-14 include the data; but I think in general it supports the perception females as minority pariticipats17:39
barrettFrom a Ethnicity point of view (sorry, I said geography before and that was wrong) many leading high tech companies continue to be caucasian domint17:40
barrettdomianted17:40
eglutewhich brings us to the next topic: "Review Diversity Policy Statement Benchmark and agree on next steps"17:41
barrettAnd going 1 step further, we saw data that showed the # of women obtaining CS type degrees continues to be low too17:41
eglutebarrett sorry, didn't meant to cut you off.17:42
barrettMaybe the 1st question is are we OK to use the Diversity Categories that are most commonly use?17:42
eglutei think the statistics come as no surprise17:42
egluteI would be ok wiht that17:43
barrettWe could define phase 1 to include Gender, Race, Sexual Orientation17:43
barrettthen Phase 2: as Geo, Religion, Education17:43
barrettand Phase 3 as the rest - just to avoid trying to boil the ocean17:44
eglute+117:44
eglutei like phased approach17:44
kavitI think geography should also be in there17:44
rolandchanThe the reporting of ethnicity measurement is in itself geographically skewed. "Asian" means very little to people in Asia, who view themselves as all different. Not that I have a better suggestion.17:44
kavitRace alone says little17:45
rolandchan+1 on phasing17:45
spotzYeah geo as part of phase 3 should be moved up17:45
eglutegeo is phase 2 as suggested17:45
barrettWhat would you move from phase 1 to make room for Geo - think we need to keep a reasonable scope for each phase to be able to make progress17:46
egluteso i think race is really US centric17:46
rolandchanSort of. It is reported in a US centric way by us based companies.17:47
rolandchanRace is definitely a global issue.17:47
rolandchanBut its different in Australia, say, than the US17:47
egluteso, which is higher priority, Geo or Race?17:47
spotzeglute I'd almost say Geo in the case of OpenStack community17:48
kavitwhat is our goal here? I think Geo if we look at OpenStack17:48
rolandchanfor a truly global organisation, geo.17:49
TamaraJI agree Geo higher priority than race.17:49
kavitRace if we want to build a utopia on earth :)17:49
eglute+1 for utopia17:49
barrettGoing for the close...17:50
rolandchanRace is a problem, but requires different approaches in each geography.17:50
AlanClarkgeo17:50
barrettPhase 1: Gender, Sexual Orientation, Geo17:50
egluteGeo gets to move to phase 1 then?17:50
eglute+1 barrett17:50
rolandchanYep17:50
spotz+117:50
barrettPhase 2: Race, Religion, Education17:50
eglute+117:50
spotz+117:50
AlanClarkslide points out CS degree - anything that would relate to business or marketing?  Just thinking about our community makeup. For example Lauren and Anne are great leaders in the community but doubt they came through a CS degree.17:50
TamaraJphase 1 - +1, phase 2 - +117:51
barrettAlanClark: Agree17:51
egluteAlanClark good point, but I don't think we survey right now based on education17:51
spotzI know I'd be an outlier on education:)17:52
barrettAlanClark: We can look for addl data on Business education17:52
barrettPhase 3: Age, Disabilities, Politics17:52
kavitI dont get why politics is in there?17:52
spotzCan you even do politics?17:52
eglutewould sending an anonymous survey out to registered members and ask them to identify different aspects be useful?17:52
barrettkavit: We can eliminate it. It came up from the benchmark work17:53
kavitbarrett, cool17:53
eglutei think we ask some things when registering for the foundation, but i doubt it asks about education17:53
barretteglute: I think we may want to survey to gather info too, so might want to plan on 1 survey in a month or so...?17:54
eglute+1 that would be good17:54
rolandchanIIRC gender breakdowns of education vary wildly across functional groups.17:54
AlanClarkcan't do politics17:54
eglutei am ok without politics as well17:54
barrettFor the Phase 1 categories, we'll need to establish a baseline for where we are and then a target for where we want to get to for each one17:54
eglute+1 for baseline17:55
barrettOK - will delete Politics from Phase 3...Maybe we also want to say that we'll survey the community to further inform our focus areas...?17:55
* eglute sends out 5 minute warning17:55
eglutebarrett i like that17:55
TamaraJCarol - good suggestion17:55
barrettSounds like we've got a couple of deliverables: Establish Baseline for Phase 1 categories, Establish desired end-goal for those categories and define Community Survey17:56
egluteyes, how shall we divide these action items17:57
barrettAre there other things we want to take on now? Like Ambassador program?17:57
egluteNiki was supposed to report on the ambassador program, but she is not here17:57
amandapIsn't nicki doing that?17:58
egluteright17:58
egluteshe is not here17:58
eglutei will follow up with her17:58
barrett1 other to think about is whether we really need a diversity section added to our Codes of Conduct or not17:58
egluteanyone has link to code of conduct?17:59
TamaraJhttps://www.openstack.org/legal/community-code-of-conduct/17:59
barrettThey are in the PDF file18:00
egluteok, so we should leave that as action item for next meeting.18:00
barrettThe Summit code refers to diversity and I think does a pretty good job18:00
eglute#action everyone review Code of Conduct18:00
eglute#action eglute work with barrett on baseline18:01
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC18:01
eglutewe are out of time, and I have another meeting. any last comments?18:01
eglutethank you everyone for comming!18:01
kavitthanks!18:01
barrettThanks18:01
spotzthanks eglute!18:01
*** TamaraJ has quit IRC18:01
MeganRthank you!18:01
eglute#endmeeting18:02
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jul 23 18:02:00 2015 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)18:02
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/diversity_working_group_3/2015/diversity_working_group_3.2015-07-23-17.00.html18:02
rolandchanThanks. Bye.18:02
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/diversity_working_group_3/2015/diversity_working_group_3.2015-07-23-17.00.txt18:02
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/diversity_working_group_3/2015/diversity_working_group_3.2015-07-23-17.00.log.html18:02
*** GB21 has joined #openstack-diversity18:05
*** kavit has quit IRC18:08
*** barrett has left #openstack-diversity18:08
*** MeganR has left #openstack-diversity18:09
*** AlanClark has left #openstack-diversity18:09
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity18:17
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC18:21
*** exploreshaifali has quit IRC18:35
*** GB21 has quit IRC18:52
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity19:18
*** cpallares_ has joined #openstack-diversity19:48
*** cpallares_ has quit IRC19:48
*** cpallares has joined #openstack-diversity19:48
*** rolandchan has quit IRC20:08
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC20:41
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity20:44
*** electroc_ has joined #openstack-diversity21:02
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC21:05
*** electroc_ has quit IRC21:14
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity21:30
*** electroc_ has joined #openstack-diversity21:31
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC21:34
*** electroc_ has quit IRC21:48
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity21:49
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC21:58
*** electrocucaracha has joined #openstack-diversity22:01
*** electrocucaracha has quit IRC22:02
*** spotz is now known as spotz_zzz22:43

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!