13:33:49 #startmeeting uc 13:33:50 Meeting started Thu Jan 9 13:33:49 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is spotz. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:33:51 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 13:33:54 The meeting name has been set to 'uc' 13:34:00 #topic ROll Call 13:34:08 o/ 13:34:09 o/ 13:34:37 Morning:) 13:35:20 Good morning ! 13:35:26 Agenda 13:35:34 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/uc 13:35:34 hi all! afternoon here :) 13:36:32 One trip when I go to the office I'll have to try to visit belmoreira 13:36:46 #topic Annual Report 13:37:19 spotz you are very welcome! 13:37:34 Annual report is due tomorrow. John did aa great start and I made a few changes, anyone else have anything for tthat? 13:37:54 I just edit the initial paragraph 13:38:18 And if I see myy typos I'll fix if not apollogies in advance for extra letteers:) 13:38:19 I was elected in February and not re-elected 13:38:33 Ok thanks belmoreira 13:38:53 looks good 13:38:54 looks good to me 13:39:47 Ok I'll leave the draaft up untill toomorrow afternoon and then send it in in case jayahn has any changes or additins 13:41:08 #topic Elections 13:43:41 So we're leaning towards reducing the number and we'll need to make a decision soon so we can discuss with the OSF. But we didn't ask the easy question of who is planning on re-running. While I don't wantt to fill the UC with people just re-running and no one new if everyone is planning on it it would give us more time to decide. Trouble is I still think Spring is the time to make. the downsize if we everr decide to 13:44:29 And witth half the group not here we can't make a decisiioin either way tthis week even though we do have a quorum, I would really like to see a consensus on this 13:44:41 agreed 13:44:45 +1 13:47:20 And while meeting attendence is important, if folks are acttively working on things at other ttimes I don't think it's necessarily a sign that yes we shold downsize right now as we're 3 and not 5 today 13:48:06 So let's table this again for next week unlleess eitherr of you have a comment before we move on? 13:48:18 I'm good, that makes sense 13:48:39 let's wait until we have everyone in the meeting 13:49:07 We definitely need to wait for eveeryone, this is a big decision. Ok moving on 13:49:23 #topic Anbassador Program 13:49:31 melsakhawy: You want to lead this? 13:50:20 sure, so I communicated with allison and ashlee on the revamp for the ambassador program 13:50:35 the core change is including outreach as part of the responsibilities 13:50:52 currently , the scope of ambassadors is only user group support and oversight 13:51:22 I started a draft for collecting the proposed changes , both are welcoming to the changes 13:52:08 something that was mentioned was how to followup and ensure responsiveness/active engagement of ambassadors 13:52:45 My thought on this is to make the UC primarily responsible for the Ambassador program 13:53:28 and clarify, in writing, what the role of Ambassadors , this way we can follow up and assist with the outreach 13:54:11 Yeah we've always been associated and used them as a feedback loop but never really overseen them 13:54:49 I'd love to have the proposal finished before the upcoming elections 13:55:43 I' plan on putting time into it this week/end and will email everyone to get their feedback on the items 13:56:00 thanks melsakhawy 13:56:04 We have 35 minutes, if we leave 5 for oopen discussion why don't we do some outlining? 13:56:23 sure 13:57:40 it';s a bit hard to discuss in two windows :) 13:59:12 I think at lelast for me I'd rather throw out ideas here it just took me 2 minutes to figuree out the spacing you were using:) 13:59:52 lol 14:00:34 yeah , I thinik there's an agreement on that we need to formalize the process of appointment and termination of ambassadors 14:00:40 Did the OSF give any hint to funding the ambassadors as you just put that on the sheet? 14:01:16 not really , but I think we need to put it out . Basically if an Ambassador needs to reach out to the community, they may have to travel 14:01:32 or organize events and such 14:01:49 we can see how much they can be allocated for such activities 14:03:55 Yeah I have a feeling that might end up being an issue in the end, it definitely doesn't hurt to propose it and I think we could minimize costs in that reguard by having regional people 14:04:17 yeah that's fair 14:05:08 There could be more high profile events which could reequire more of a higher level ambassador but if that person isn't nearby that's more travel 14:05:35 And maybe in those cases some funding from the local group? 14:06:28 yeah could be , we should probably include something about ambassador coverage, right now it's mostly regional 14:06:57 I think having more than one ambassador per region can help 14:07:06 alleviate the need for travel if ther are need by 14:07:09 *near 14:07:16 Ok leet's start with how many ambassadors do we have now and where. Then how many we think this change would require. 14:08:49 I think knowing the numbers might help us to definite terms, how to be selected, how to determine activity, eetc 14:09:19 yeah true , the current links on the website point to the meetup groups 14:09:57 So Useer grous vs amabassadors? I know there used to be a page with headhsots 14:11:09 yeah can't find that 14:11:28 last meetings on irc were in 2015 from eavesdrop 14:11:35 Me neither:( 14:11:44 I will check with aprice and ashlee 14:11:49 They have a slack but not a whole llot of chatteron it 14:12:08 probably a good reason we need to revamp the program that we can't find much info about it 14:12:48 33 people show up in the meetup channel but I know not everyone like me is an ambassador 14:15:37 So I think if we can make up numbers and locations that might help us some. Last time I saw that page I want to say there were 12 Ambassadors, 2 I know aree no longer in OpenStack 14:16:34 true 14:16:49 I'll check with them on the numbers 14:18:04 One thing we can think about is time limits, yearly or every 2 years? They wouldn't be re-elected as we aree but they could need to reapply 14:19:49 true , I think two years are minimum. As it's individual-based program, we probably want them to have enough time to build their plan for outreach and execute on it 14:21:11 I'm divided on timeframes, if it's someone doing it as a passion longer can be good, if it's woork rellated they could be around long term or for shorter if job changes 14:23:31 Whiich iis why I definittely think reappllying to show intterest, if we go shorter it can just be a rubberstamp of yep you'r egood even if they haven't made big waves but wee know they're out there trrying 14:25:14 yeah , i wouldn;t be opposed to the reapplying part as long as the UC doesn't expect big waves to reapprove someone who's doing good effort 14:25:21 And we're at 6 minutes. Is there any open discussion? 14:26:03 yes 14:26:09 I personally woullldn't expect big waves escpeciallly if someone waas in a harder area and you knew they were doing their best 14:26:17 Ok changing topics:) 14:26:23 #topic Open Discussion 14:26:27 You're on belmoreira 14:26:29 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/LiYBz2Ak7M 14:26:49 This is the etherpad from the Shanghai Summit 14:26:58 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/LiYBz2Ak7M 14:27:17 maybe we should go through it during the next meeting 14:27:31 Oh we should get ops meetup group in touch with Japan:) 14:28:14 Definitely, I can make a section but always feell free to add ageenda stuff:) 14:30:24 Ok I added it under old business as we have technically already talked about summit. But I put it first, then ambassador program and then elections. Might need to reorder thoose though 14:31:45 sounds good 14:31:54 Anything ellse? We're a minute over 14:32:55 bye bye 14:33:21 Have a goood day/night:) 14:33:25 #endmeeting