20:01:17 <flaper87> #startmeeting tc
20:01:17 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Oct 12 20:01:17 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is flaper87. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:01:18 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:01:20 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tc'
20:01:28 <mordred> yay
20:01:37 <dhellmann> o/
20:01:41 <flaper87> I don't have a courtesy-ping list for this meeting so, I hope everyone is around
20:01:43 <flaper87> :D
20:01:49 <dhellmann> I know sdague was interested
20:01:50 <flaper87> sdague: jaypipes
20:01:58 <flaper87> I know those two
20:02:02 <dhellmann> and maybe lifeless?
20:02:06 <sdague> o/
20:02:08 <flaper87> ttx: in case you're awake
20:02:10 <dhellmann> flaper87: you could just ping everyone in case
20:02:26 <ttx> o/
20:02:32 <ttx> reviewing from bottom up as we speak
20:02:46 <flaper87> ttx: mind using the courtesy ping list from the tc?
20:02:48 <dhellmann> courtesy ping for jeblair, russellb, annegentle, markmcclain, dtroyer
20:02:53 <flaper87> just in case others are around
20:02:54 <flaper87> dhellmann: thanks
20:03:01 <flaper87> #topic Agenda
20:03:02 <dhellmann> I think that's everyone who hasn't already poked their head up or been mentioned
20:03:07 <flaper87> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-cross-project-session-planning
20:03:10 * jeblair pokes
20:03:12 <jaypipes> hey, I'm here. I'm on the etherpad commenting..
20:03:21 <flaper87> That's pretty much our agenda. Lets try to go through as many as we can
20:03:26 <Eva-i> Hello. I'm here too.
20:03:30 <flaper87> I've added them in order of submission
20:03:41 <flaper87> unless I messed that up
20:03:53 <flaper87> #topic Role assignments for service users
20:03:57 <sdague> ok, so for folks that haven't commented on the etherpad yet, I'd say that's where you should be doing things. Do we want to give folks sort of 20 minutes to get through the list
20:04:20 <sdague> flaper87: I don't think walking through 27 items on irc is going to really work, we should get people to comment in etherpad and cull first
20:04:25 <ttx> almost done
20:04:34 <jaypipes> sdague: I'd appreciate that, but I feel selfish for saying it..
20:04:36 <dtroyer> o/
20:04:58 <dhellmann> yeah, flaper87  how about if we try to identify anything we can cut as a first pass?
20:05:10 <dhellmann> or the other way, anything we think is critical
20:05:23 <flaper87> dhellmann: ok, I'm good with that. First time running this meeting s open to suggestions and corrections
20:05:27 <flaper87> sdague: ^
20:05:42 <flaper87> well, I'm always open to that but you get my point
20:06:02 <flaper87> #topic Fast-Track topics
20:06:15 <flaper87> Any topics in particular you'd like to fast-track?
20:07:03 <sdague> the deprecation one
20:07:14 <dhellmann> service catalog, too
20:07:19 <sdague> that came out of the TC meeting, so seems like a thing we should definitely land
20:07:27 <mordred> flaper87: 18 and 8 and the deprecation one
20:07:35 <jeblair> ==27
20:07:35 <mordred> 27
20:07:41 <mordred> gah
20:07:48 <mordred> 17 is what I meant
20:07:50 <flaper87> Service catalog got some good votes (1)
20:07:55 <mordred> 8, 17 and 27
20:08:02 <dhellmann> I'd also like the themes discssion, #19, but that seems to have tepid support
20:08:11 <ttx> are we sure everything that was on the etherpad got moved here ?
20:08:14 <dhellmann> and *something* about defcore, we had 2 I think we can combine
20:08:16 <annegentle> o/ sorry I'm late
20:08:23 <flaper87> I'd like to see #2 in as well
20:08:24 <sdague> ttx: everything in odsreg is here
20:08:37 <flaper87> ttx: is there something missing?
20:08:45 <mordred> jaypipes: (I agree wholeheartedly with you on 8 btw - I'm on it)
20:09:05 <ttx> sdague: I mean the original submission etherpad
20:09:13 <flaper87> So, we have #2 and #8 that are very similar
20:09:15 <sdague> ttx: I have no idea
20:09:23 <dhellmann> ttx: isn't this the same pad?
20:09:25 <sdague> I think I was out the week that all went down
20:09:30 <sdague> dhellmann: it is not
20:09:36 <mordred> flaper87: 2 and 18 you mean?
20:09:44 <flaper87> mordred: yes, sorry
20:09:49 <sdague> dhellmann: this is effectively an export of odsreg
20:09:51 * ttx checks logs
20:09:57 <dhellmann> oh, this is the only etherpad I have a link to
20:10:02 <sdague> which was a pretty manual process, so lets never do this again :)
20:10:04 <flaper87> this is the same etherpad
20:10:12 <sdague> flaper87: oh, ok
20:10:13 <flaper87> ok, focus
20:10:17 <flaper87> so far I have
20:10:19 <jeblair> yes, i'd like to combine 2 and 18 and fast-track that
20:10:30 <mordred> jeblair: ++
20:10:32 <flaper87> 2, 8, 18, 27
20:10:36 <ttx> we might want to pick sessions for double-slots too
20:10:37 <flaper87> we can combine 2 and 18
20:10:51 <flaper87> so, I'd go with the first one that was submitted and work on that
20:10:59 <sdague> if we combine 2 and 18 who has the baton on moderator for it?
20:10:59 <flaper87> mordred: jeblair dhellmann preferences?
20:11:17 <dhellmann> flaper87: I'm making notes about this near line 18
20:11:25 <flaper87> dhellmann: thanks
20:11:34 <dhellmann> flaper87: I can moderate that, with mark's input
20:11:44 <jeblair> flaper87: i think dhellmann should mod, and should coordinate with mvoelker to see his things are included
20:11:50 <jeblair> or, what dhellmann just said :)
20:11:54 <flaper87> jeblair: :D
20:11:57 <flaper87> ok, sold!
20:12:03 <dhellmann> yeah, I'd want mark's content as the first 5 minutes to frame the discussion, I think
20:12:33 <flaper87> I'd like to see #23 as well
20:12:46 <flaper87> I think we should fast-track that one
20:12:51 <flaper87> That'd be documentation
20:13:00 <sdague> I added a Nack list, as there are a couple that seem pretty clear we drop
20:13:14 <sdague> 16 - rocky withdrew it
20:13:39 <sdague> 7 -  chungg said he couldn't run it any more
20:13:40 * markmcclain lurks
20:13:41 <dhellmann> flaper87: 23 seems pretty good but only has +1 votes so far
20:14:30 <jeblair> yeah, i'd like to have it but it doesn't seem like fast-track material to me
20:14:38 <flaper87> :D
20:15:02 <sdague> ttx: are you proposing rolling 22 into 23?
20:15:03 <flaper87> oh and 19
20:15:32 <flaper87> I think that one could also be fast-tracked
20:15:54 <ttx> sdague: I think I can touch on the important points in #22 in #23 instead. I kind of agree that a full session about pain points is likely to be counterproductive
20:15:55 <dhellmann> we 2 several on roles and policy, can we take that group and sort through those? #1 & #12
20:16:03 <sdague> how close are people feeling towards scoring all the ones they care about? is another 5 minutes good enough for that?
20:16:14 <ttx> I'm done with scoring
20:16:34 <flaper87> dhellmann: ++ Can you (or someone else) help with pinging these folks?
20:16:51 <flaper87> Any objections on #19 ?
20:16:58 <dhellmann> flaper87: pinging?
20:17:01 <ttx> nope
20:17:07 <sdague> dhellmann: honestly, I don't know. It's one of those places there was a lot of going around this last cycle, and honestly if they need 2 sessions it might be better than other things on there
20:17:23 <mordred> dhellmann: I thnk 1 and 12 are a bit different
20:17:31 <flaper87> dhellmann: I thought you meant you wanted to ask them to work together. nevermind
20:17:33 <dhellmann> sdague: sure, I wasn't necessarily saying combine just that we look at them as a theme
20:17:45 <flaper87> dhellmann: misunderstood you, keep going :)
20:17:46 <mordred> yah. as a theme for sure - I thnk they're complimentary brian topics
20:17:54 <sdague> dhellmann: yeh, I'd say put them back to back
20:18:23 <sdague> 6 is another candidate nack, it's super vague, and people scored it badly
20:18:23 <dhellmann> sdague: did you happen to talk to ayoung about the scope change on 12?
20:18:37 <dhellmann> sdague: ++
20:18:37 <sdague> dhellmann: I did not directly talk to him about it
20:19:06 <flaper87> sdague: ++ nack'd it
20:19:12 <sdague> ok, who needs more time for scoring?
20:19:18 <ttx> We can abandon #22 and I can touch on the very few points that matter there on #23 instead
20:19:21 <sdague> otherwise I'm going to start doing maths
20:19:25 <jeblair> i'm good.
20:19:32 <dhellmann> ttx: added to the nacks list
20:19:35 <sdague> jaypipes: ?
20:19:41 <sdague> annegentle: ?
20:19:53 <ttx> I could reword it a bit. I want to touch on helping people keep up with the dev news
20:20:13 <ttx> but that can live in #23
20:20:19 <annegentle> sdague: still scoring, ya
20:20:27 <jaypipes> sdague: yeah, 2 more minutes please.
20:20:34 <jaypipes> (i'm on 22)
20:21:11 <sdague> ok I'll start at the top with stuff you've voted on
20:21:25 <sdague> also, whoever is yellow, you need to add your name to your scores
20:21:34 <sdague> a yellow +1 showed up on #3
20:21:38 <jeblair> sdague, flaper87: i started a list of things we should put in the ops session hole at the top
20:21:45 <dhellmann> ttx: while we wait, a procedural note: if we're going to use odsreg next time, we need to hook it up to send comments as email so we can get feedback from proposers
20:22:13 <jeblair> dhellmann, ttx: if we do, i can make that happen.  piece of cake.
20:22:21 <flaper87> jeblair: awesome, thanks!
20:22:32 <flaper87> I think #10 is also good for fast-track
20:22:32 <sdague> it also needs real data export
20:22:47 <sdague> because manually doing the sqlite dumps to get it back into the etherpad was pretty gorpy
20:22:52 <dhellmann> jeblair: great, I think that would be an improvement
20:23:15 <annegentle> almost there, sorry for the delay I'm off today with kids
20:23:18 <ttx> I proposed a more catch-all title for #23 now that we abandoned #22
20:23:46 <flaper87> ttx: thanks
20:24:33 <annegentle> ding!
20:24:35 <annegentle> done :)
20:24:58 <flaper87> we have 21 slots, btw. So far we've 5 sessions
20:24:59 <ttx> so with the 5 nacks we already have less than we have slots.
20:25:09 <flaper87> ttx: :)
20:25:16 <flaper87> and 27 submissions total
20:25:17 <ttx> is there anything that would benefit from a double session ?
20:25:19 <annegentle> flaper87: nice work
20:25:20 <annegentle> :)
20:25:31 <flaper87> we've nacked 5 and we've merged a couple of them
20:25:32 <flaper87> annegentle: thanks :D
20:25:33 <sdague> dhellmann: rescope to ....
20:25:35 <jaypipes> ttx: the DLM one.
20:25:48 <mordred> jaypipes: ++
20:25:51 <ttx> ++
20:26:01 <flaper87> jaypipes: ++
20:26:07 <ttx> ok noted
20:26:09 <flaper87> that'll require some serious talking and bike-shedding
20:26:15 <jaypipes> heh
20:26:30 <ttx> anything else ?
20:26:35 <flaper87> I wonder if DefCore
20:26:38 <flaper87> but I'm not sure
20:26:40 <flaper87> dhellmann: ?
20:26:55 <ttx> service catalog TNG maybe
20:26:55 <dhellmann> sdague: catching up, sorry
20:27:09 <annegentle> DefCore prolly
20:27:12 <sdague> dhellmann: yeh, you were typing in the etherpad
20:27:21 <sdague> on the dynamic policy one
20:27:21 <dhellmann> flaper87: I'm missing context
20:27:23 * annegentle catches up on dlm
20:27:28 <sdague> and it sort of ends mid sentence
20:27:30 <flaper87> dhellmann: double slotes for the DefCore session
20:27:32 <flaper87> slots*
20:27:35 <dhellmann> sdague: yeah, I was trying to listen to ayound at the same time, I finished it
20:27:53 <dhellmann> flaper87: I don't think we need 2 sessions
20:27:59 <flaper87> dhellmann: ok
20:28:11 <mordred> ttx: service catalog tng would be good to hammer on
20:28:18 <mordred> if we have time, I'm guessing
20:28:27 <dhellmann> flaper87: the point there is to start the engagement and establish lines of communication, and we should timebox that
20:28:48 <flaper87> dhellmann: sounds good!
20:30:25 <jaypipes> ttx: the only other one I think *might* need 2 slots is the future of multinode testing one.
20:30:37 <flaper87> mordred: ++
20:30:52 <flaper87> I think the Service Catalog will also require some time
20:30:57 <sdague> jaypipes: I'm not sure there is 2 sessions worth in there
20:31:02 <sdague> for multinode testing
20:31:07 <sdague> at least for the next cycle
20:31:13 <jaypipes> sdague: no? ok, I trust your judgment on that.
20:31:15 <ttx> mordred: well, at one point it will be, should we have this session or a double-slot on that one
20:31:33 <ttx> ok, so 2 double-slot candidates
20:31:41 <flaper87> also, I'm adding the service catalog one to the Approvals, it has 16 voes
20:32:32 <ttx> ok, how about we reorder them by score
20:32:36 <sdague> ok, do we want to try slotting some of the top ranked ones at this point ?
20:32:51 <flaper87> ok, so far we have 8 slots occupied (counting double sessions)
20:33:07 <ttx> sdague: ok, let's do that
20:33:10 <flaper87> sdague: I was doing that already
20:33:14 * jaypipes thinks the performance working group kickoff session is important to have in the cross-project track.
20:33:16 <flaper87> I mean, getting the obvious ones ups
20:33:20 <sdague> flaper87: no, I mean on the schedule
20:33:26 <flaper87> sdague: oh, ok
20:33:28 <flaper87> sorry
20:33:29 <mordred> flaper87: I think 8 should go early, and 21 should go before 5
20:33:30 <flaper87> sounds good
20:33:56 <flaper87> mordred: yup yup!
20:34:26 <flaper87> FY
20:34:29 <flaper87> #link http://mitakadesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross+project+workshops#.VhwYzc-1RZI
20:34:34 <sdague> so, now we get into the fun
20:34:36 <ttx> how about we NACK all the negative scores
20:34:48 <sdague> flaper87: there is a chunk at the bottom of the etherpad with bullet list for slots
20:35:21 <sdague> so I'm going to put 27 in one of the 2pm slots
20:35:31 <jeblair> flaper87, sdague: i found 5 things that i thought would be good for the 2pm slots; listed at top of etherpad
20:35:46 <jeblair> flaper87, sdague: i think 3 of them are stronger than the other 2
20:35:58 <mordred> oh. booo. I want to be in 27 and 21 and both want to be at 2pm
20:36:17 <ttx> I propose we NACK 15 13 and 9 as having negative scores
20:36:26 <sdague> ttx +1
20:36:29 <jeblair> mordred: only 3 of them can be, so we have choices there
20:36:36 * mordred agrees with jebliar about 21 not being in 2pm - makes his personal schedule better
20:36:56 <sdague> yeh, I wouldn't put 21 at 2
20:37:04 <flaper87> ++ for 21 at 2
20:37:05 <sdague> because the ops we get that talk aren't those ops
20:37:21 <sdague> so I don't think it's useful crossover
20:37:33 <flaper87> I think we could have #8 after #27
20:37:37 <ttx> so basically we NACKed enough to have our two double slots now
20:37:43 <ttx> and approve everything else
20:37:43 <sdague> 5 at 2pm sounds good
20:37:44 <flaper87> it's likely that many folks attending that one would want to stick around
20:37:55 <flaper87> and we need 2 slots
20:38:19 * ttx adds room capacity to the equation
20:38:30 <jeblair> sdague: 3 vs 20 for a 2pm?
20:38:30 <sdague> ttx: are they all the same size?
20:38:37 <ttx> you wish
20:38:40 <flaper87> lol
20:38:44 <dhellmann> what's special about 2:00? is that the ops track hole?
20:38:48 <jeblair> dhellmann: yse
20:38:54 <sdague> jeblair: I think 3
20:38:59 <sdague> 20 is more dev focussed
20:39:15 <jeblair> sdague: cool, we agree on 27/3/5 :)
20:39:17 <sdague> though it means I can't go to 3
20:39:24 <sdague> but, oh well
20:39:27 <sdague> yeh
20:39:27 <ttx> sdague: added capacity to the bottom of etherpad
20:39:31 <jeblair> sdague: :(
20:39:44 <flaper87> I think 5 should be at 2
20:39:54 <flaper87> ttx: thanks, that helps
20:40:00 <sdague> flaper87: yep, but not 21
20:40:40 <flaper87> sdague: agreed!
20:40:57 <sdague> so selfishly I'd like 17 in the pre lunch block in one of those rooms
20:41:03 <ttx> so. I striked out all the ones on the NACK list. Anything you think we should NOT have ?
20:41:17 <ttx> anything else *
20:41:24 <sdague> it probably doesn't need the A room if we think there will be a bigger topic
20:41:55 <ttx> next on the NACK kill list would be #4 with 0 votes
20:42:23 * ttx votes and kills it too
20:42:30 <jeblair> ttx: nicely done
20:42:40 <flaper87> I think we should have #8 in Track A after #27
20:42:43 <sdague> ok, so flaper87 suggested 8 to follow 27 in the same room
20:42:44 <ttx> jeblair: you can vote nd save it !
20:42:45 <sdague> flaper87: do it
20:43:08 <jeblair> ttx: nope, that didn't happen
20:43:29 <flaper87> I'm fine with 17 in the pre-lunch slot
20:43:41 <flaper87> probably on Track B, though
20:43:49 <sdague> flaper87: ok, lets do it
20:44:04 <sdague> I'll let you type
20:44:46 <flaper87> Ok, what about the defcore one?
20:44:49 <ttx> sdague: should we just approve eveythign else ? We have enough NACKed to have one extra slot at this stage
20:44:52 <flaper87> I thin that deserves track A
20:44:58 <flaper87> dhellmann: any preference on the slot ?
20:45:02 <sdague> ttx: yeh, I think so
20:45:16 <flaper87> ttx: ++ for approving everything else
20:45:21 <flaper87> we have enough slots
20:45:38 <dhellmann> flaper87: for #2?
20:45:55 <flaper87> dhellmann: yes
20:46:05 <dhellmann> I think A or B, early in the day since I expect it will have an impact on other discussions
20:46:08 <ttx> sdague: then we can discuss what we do of the extra slot
20:46:25 <dhellmann> flaper87: actually, I guess all of these are before project discussions so the time doesn't matter so much
20:46:45 <jeblair> ttx: sleep
20:46:55 <sdague> so 1 and 12 should go back to back, so do them in the 2:50 B block?
20:46:59 <flaper87> dhellmann: ok, I'd do B pre-lunch for now
20:47:07 <flaper87> unless someone disagrees
20:47:16 <flaper87> erm, I meant A
20:47:30 <flaper87> B pre-lunch is taken already
20:48:01 <flaper87> sdague: ++
20:48:11 <ttx> Of mine I think 23 and 24 can live in the small room (C). I'd say 11 and 21 needs at least the B room
20:48:12 <sdague> ok, those are on
20:48:33 <dhellmann> flaper87: I stuck themes earlier, but that can move to another room if we need the space for something else
20:48:36 <sdague> ttx do you have proposed timeblocks
20:48:44 <flaper87> dhellmann: aewsome
20:48:49 <flaper87> and +1 for having 19 early in the day
20:48:54 <sdague> ttx given that you are an exclusive lock
20:49:21 <ttx> argh, that will be a difficult one. Let me try
20:50:22 <jeblair> sdague: do you think "service catalogs" might should be a "theme for the mitaka cycle?"
20:50:24 <sdague> python 3 in C first thing?
20:50:28 <mordred> sdague: do we have the right people available for 3 in the 2pm slot? I worry that it's going to be a topic that wants to make progress and will not have humans in the room
20:50:33 <sdague> jeblair: it might be
20:50:40 <mordred> (it just hit me)
20:50:44 <flaper87> I added #10 to track C at 2:50
20:50:49 <sdague> mordred: how about we stick more stuff on and then horse trade?
20:50:51 <jeblair> sdague: (if so, hopefully someone can advocate for it since they collide)
20:50:53 <mordred> sdague: kk
20:51:00 <sdague> jeblair: yeh, I think that can happen by proxy
20:51:01 <flaper87> and it goes back to back w/ the openstack way
20:51:13 <jeblair> sdague: cool
20:51:39 <dhellmann> flaper87: I think I've copied all of the unscheduled titles down near the bottom of the page
20:51:54 <flaper87> dhellmann: super helpful, thanks!
20:51:58 <ttx> sdague: I placed them
20:52:26 <sdague> ok, I put python 3 on the early block in C
20:52:29 <ttx> anyone else being moderators on multiple sessions ?
20:52:32 <ttx> sdague: ++
20:52:41 <flaper87> sdague: ++
20:52:51 <dhellmann> ttx: I think I have 2, defcore and themes
20:53:17 <ttx> sdague: 11 could move on room A
20:53:25 <ttx> if we don't have a better candidate for that
20:53:27 <flaper87> I've put 26 track C last in the day
20:53:28 <sdague> so, we have keystone federation, multinode testing, and upgrades?
20:53:33 <flaper87> not sure about the capacity for that one
20:53:42 <ttx> multinode testing can be in room C
20:53:47 <flaper87> but I assumed track C would be enoug and I'd rather have keystone federation on B
20:54:12 <sdague> ttx if 11 moved to room A, I'd put the live upgrades bit in B in that slot
20:54:26 <ttx> sdague: done
20:55:00 <flaper87> B is fully booked so I've put 25 in C
20:55:06 <ttx> sdague: oh, btw.
20:55:17 <sdague> so that's it right? as there was a free slot?
20:55:25 <sdague> now stare and horse trade?
20:55:45 <ttx> sdague: after 3:40pm the ops only have woring sessions, not fishbowls, so we should put ops-related things there if they don't fit teh 2pm slot
20:55:45 <flaper87> I wonder if we should move Keystone to track A
20:55:49 <mordred> ttx: I want to rearrange all of your sessions :)
20:55:58 <flaper87> that could/should have more attendance
20:56:04 <ttx> mordred: wait I just added a constrinat
20:56:07 <ttx> constraint
20:56:35 <sdague> mordred: so, originally you wanted to move 3
20:56:38 <flaper87> any thoughts on moving Keystone's session? Or do we prefer to keep that slot free just in case?
20:56:52 <flaper87> (6 mins left)
20:56:57 <mordred> sdague: I did and do
20:57:00 <sdague> flaper87: yeh, put keystone in the last A block
20:57:12 <sdague> that's going to probably need bigger than C
20:57:20 <mordred> sdague: I kinda feel like you should be in 3
20:57:58 <sdague> flaper87: no, don't move the test one
20:58:02 <mordred> ttx: and I'd like to swap 21 and 24 - because 21 feels like a scoping setup for later conversations
20:58:07 <flaper87> sdague: oh, sorry
20:58:09 <mordred> but I'm just talking out loud
20:58:28 <flaper87> sdague: I thought about giving that track an early end of the day but I guess you're booked on both
20:58:55 <flaper87> mordred: +1 for swapping those
20:59:00 <ttx> mordred: it's tricky they are not in the same room
20:59:26 <sdague> mordred: so if we put 3 in the 4:40 block, I could probably be in it
20:59:39 <sdague> so bump it to 4:40 in C
20:59:46 <mordred> then I vote we do that
21:00:02 <dhellmann> hmm, I won't be able to attend but maybe dims can
21:00:02 <sdague> I guess that means that 21 could be in the 2 block
21:00:10 <flaper87> mmh, but I think 3 should use some ops love
21:00:23 <sdague> flaper87: the ops get quieter later in the day
21:00:29 <jeblair> we could also strategically leave the 2pm hole empty in order to funnel more people to 27 or 5
21:00:30 <sdague> so I don't know
21:00:39 <mordred> jeblair: ++
21:00:45 <sdague> yeh, honestly, leaving the 2 slot empty seems reasonable
21:01:03 <mordred> although I really want to be in 27 and 5
21:01:06 <mordred> but *shrug*
21:01:14 <mordred> I think they're both in the right place
21:01:20 <mordred> I'll just bounce between
21:01:23 <flaper87> sdague: yeah but dunno, I don't like to make those assumptions
21:01:24 <ttx> OK I'll need to drop
21:01:30 <flaper87> we're done folks!
21:01:35 <jeblair> ttx: goodnight!
21:01:42 <ttx> I added my constraints, in case you want to move things around
21:01:43 <flaper87> Thank you all and sorry for all the mess
21:01:44 <sdague> ok, so... we should inform all the proposers of their slots
21:01:55 <flaper87> I think we did great :P
21:01:58 <sdague> because they might have conflicts
21:02:03 <mordred> flaper87, sdague: ++
21:02:13 <sdague> so we can do last minute shuffle before stamping it good at tc meeting tomorrow
21:02:26 <sdague> flaper87: can you handle that, as it's almost daytime for you now :)
21:02:28 <flaper87> sdague: yeah, mind doing that? An early email would be great and I won't be able to send one until later today
21:02:30 <flaper87> lol
21:02:33 <flaper87> ok
21:02:35 <ttx> nice work, I think it's good content
21:02:36 <flaper87> I'll do it
21:02:39 <flaper87> :D
21:02:41 <sdague> flaper87: I'm done for the day :)
21:02:42 <flaper87> Thank you all
21:02:46 <sdague> thanks folks
21:02:48 <flaper87> #endmeeting