Transcript of IRC Meeting
--> You are now talking on #zope-foundation
--- Topic for #zope-foundation is ZF Annual meeting, 2007-10-31 @ 14:00 GMT
Topic for #zope-foundation set by TresEquis at Tue Oct 30 09:54:58 2007
ChanServ gives channel operator status to TresEquis
<-- kenmanheimer_ has quit (Client Quit)
--> kenmanheimer (firstname.lastname@example.org) has joined #zope-foundation
<TresEquis> kenmanheimer: Howdy, LTNS
--> StefanieO (n=Stefanie@dslb-084-063-041-095.pools.arcor-ip.net) has joined #zope-foundation
<-- kenmanheimer has quit (Client Quit)
--- TresEquis has changed the topic to: ZF Annual Meeting 2007-10-31 @ 14:00 GMT. Please see http://foundation.zope.org/minutes/annual_meeting_2007
--> kenmanheimer_ (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
<-- kenmanheimer_ (firstname.lastname@example.org) has left #zope-foundation
--> dataflake (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
--- TresEquis gives voice to faassen
TresEquis gives voice to dataflake
TresEquis gives voice to rsp_zope
TresEquis gives voice to thisfred
TresEquis gives voice to baijum
<TresEquis> Prepping for moderation period
Hmm, don't see the chair yet
--> J1m (firstname.lastname@example.org) has joined #zope-foundation
* baijum just testing whether I can type here or not.
--- TresEquis gives voice to J1m
<TresEquis> we aren't moderated yet
I shouldn't have given you voice though: I meant to give it to board members
--- TresEquis removes voice from baijum
<dataflake> TresEquis: according to sathya, baijum represents zeomega?
<TresEquis> I don't think zeomega has a board seat
--> kenmanheimer (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
<dataflake> ok, wasn't sure
<TresEquis> I think they are Solution Providers, who did not elect a board member in the outgoing board
<faassen> yes, but they can represent zeomega here. :)
I mean, they're a member, right?
members can be represented.
<TresEquis> Ah, yes
--> aroldo (firstname.lastname@example.org) has joined #zope-foundation
--- TresEquis gives voice to aroldo
--> klmtest (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
<faassen> hi aroldo :)
<aroldo> faassen: hi Martijn
<thisfred> hi all
<TresEquis> Please review the meeting documents: http://foundation.zope.org/minutes/annual_meeting_2007
--> wchipmanJSA (n=Bill@220.127.116.11) has joined #zope-foundation
* TresEquis wonders if Ken is planning to "vote early, vote often"
* TresEquis also can't believe Ken actually has more than one Emacs running
--> betabug (firstname.lastname@example.org) has joined #zope-foundation
<TresEquis> or else that he is (*gasp*) running a non-Emacs IRC client!
<dataflake> I guess that means there's an IRC plugin for Emacs?
<faassen> of course there's an irc plugin for Emacs. :)
--> factor (n=Factor@18.104.22.168) has joined #zope-foundation
<TresEquis> that would be a silly question: there are emacs plugins for getting haircuts
--> benji (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
--- Channel #zope-foundation modes: +mtnc
Channel #zope-foundation created on Sat Oct 13 03:42:08 2007
TresEquis sets mode -m #zope-foundation
<TresEquis> Oops, I guess the moderation bit had been stuck on
<kenmanheimer> ah, can i speak now?
<TresEquis> from when we tested the other day
yup, until the formal part of the meeting starts
then you have to ask the Chair (aroldo) for the floor
* srichter wonders where all the people are
<kenmanheimer> phew. i was feeling a mite distressed - all these greetings coming at me to which i could not reply!
<TresEquis> sorry about that
<StefanieO> Hello from me as well :-)
<kenmanheimer> couldn't speak from either emacs or mirc - just to chime in on the emacs reference!-)
<TresEquis> For those who don't know: StefanieO has been functioning as secretary to the ZF board
<betabug> hello from another spectator :-)
--> ChrisW (n=ChrisW@22.214.171.124) has joined #zope-foundation
<ChrisW> hey all, how long until kick off?
<faassen> see the topic for the URL to our annual meeting notes, newcomers.
<ChrisW> well, it's 14:10 GMT ;-)
<TresEquis> For the record, before we kick off the meeting, I'd like to ask ZF members to announce themselves with full names, and affiliations if not Committer Members
<faassen> aha. But we dno't use that British GMT thing, we use UTC!
<TresEquis> nice distinction ;)
<ChrisW> and UTC is currently in synch with GMT unless I'm mistaked ;-)
<srichter> Stephan Richter, Committer Member
<TresEquis> Tres Seaver, Committer Member
<ChrisW> Chris Withers, Committer Member
<dataflake> Jens Vagelpohl, Associate Member
<benji> Benji York, Committer Member
* TresEquis notes that Jens is also a Committer Member
<faassen> Martijn Faassen, Committer Member
<thisfred> Eric Casteleijn, Solution Provider Member (Infrae)
<J1m> Jim Fulton, Zope Corporation, Committer member and ZC strategic developer representative.
<kenmanheimer> ken manheimer, unsure-what-kind-of-member-but-i'm-on-the-foundation-mailing-list
<dataflake> Jens Vagelpohl, Associate Member and Committer Member ;)
<baijum> Baiju Muthukadan, Representing ZeOmega (Solution Provider)
<TresEquis> Ken is a Committer Member
<aroldo> Aroldo Souza-Leite, Solution Provider Member (GfU Cyrus Cologne)
<rsp_zope> Rob Page, Zope Corp, ex-officio Zope Corp rep
--> mcdonc (firstname.lastname@example.org) has joined #zope-foundation
>mcdonc< announce your name and membership status
<faassen> everybody done?
<mcdonc> hello chris mcdonough, nonmember
<TresEquis> Chris is a Committer Member
<kenmanheimer> good try, though.-)
we have your names!
<faassen> TresEquis: now for the board itself, right?
TresEquis: just to make clear who's on the outgoing board.
<TresEquis> I guess we could do that
Tres Seaver, Committer Board Rep
Martijn Faassen, Committer Board Rep
<aroldo> Aroldo Souza-Leite, formerly Associate Member, Chairman
<rsp_zope> Rob Page, BoD Secretary and Treasurer
<J1m> Jim Fulton, snark, not paying attention cause nothing is happening.
<TresEquis> hmm, thisfred, dataflake
<dataflake> we're not on the outgoing board\
<thisfred> not outgoing, am I? :)
<TresEquis> OK, right
I'm about to switch on moderation; please '/msg aroldo' to ask to be recognized during the formal portion of the meeting
--- TresEquis sets mode +m #zope-foundation
<TresEquis> We are following the agenda at: http://foundation.zope.org/minutes/annual_meeting_2007/agenda
<aroldo> I call the meeting to order
* J1m claps
<-- wchipmanJSA (n=Bill@126.96.36.199) has left #zope-foundation
--- TresEquis gives voice to J1m
<TresEquis> Next item on the agenda is "Presentation of the Annual Report"
<aroldo> I am presenting the Annual Report now
The main thing is to make sure all members present have access to a copy of the annual report
<faassen> it's published, right?
--> timte (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
<faassen> shall I summarize some highlights from the annual report?
<faassen> thanks. :)
--> amaron (firstname.lastname@example.org) has joined #zope-foundation
<faassen> we represented the Zope Foundation at various conferences and events, giving talks. Such as at EuroPython, last year and this year, PyCon this year, and the DZUG Congress in Germany, also this year.
in addition we've also, with the help of Infrae, started maintaining a foundation.zope.org site.
so we have a web presence. we believe this is important also in marketing.
so that people can be pointed out to a structure for stability and continuity of the open source project
we've made the first steps towards improving zope's web presence. there's a lot to do still, but thanks to Amaze we have a better server for wiki.zope.org
and we're also hosting apidoc.zope.org on this server, and foundation.zope.org
it seems our efforts to try to improve zope.org are finally making some progress, thanks in particular to Martin Aspeli's volunteer effort, and Jodok Batlogg (who unfortunately couldn't be present today but is pushing this effort from the ZF board)
finally, the ZF helped us getting grants for 4 students to work on Zope during last summer as part of the Google Summer of Code.
So now to the lowlights? :)
or at least the issues that still need resolution (besides zope.org, where I'm getting pretty hopeful :)
in general, many of the efforts were hindered by rather cumbersome bylaws. they were overengineered for a foundation of our size, unfortunately.
so, still in progress is the actual transfer of the copyrights to the source code from Zope Corporation to ZF.
<TresEquis> Right, bylaws would wedge us if we completed copyright transfer
<faassen> as the infrastructure for the community managing this, exactly, what Tres said.
the bylaws have such convoluted infrastructure we weren't really able to start operating properly as, for instance, they don't provide for a procedure to get new committers!
so, we've spent a lot of time agonizing about the bylaws. Adopting these we now agreed was a mistake, though at least they got us going.
one of the first topics for the new board is to adopt a new set of bylaws much more lightweight so we can complete the transfer.
okay, any board member wants to contribute to this?
<J1m> I will
as long as we do the simplest thing that can possibly work.
My plan is to plagarize the PSF. I have permission to do so. :)
<faassen> I mean, contribute to the summary. :)
but sure, yes, we intend to look at the PSF (Python Software Foundation) bylaws.
since they seem to be working. :)
<J1m> I suggest we open the floor up for discussion.
The documents are on line.
<TresEquis> Rob, any comments on financials?
<J1m> I don't think we need to summarize them further unless there are questions.
<TresEquis> We need to finish formalities first, I think
<faassen> right, the financial report presentation is next in the agenda.
<aroldo> Let's go to the finacial report presentation
<rsp_zope> That's me? :)
<aroldo> rsp_zope: yes
<rsp_zope> Balance sheet: http://foundation.zope.org/minutes/annual_meeting_2007/zf_bal_sheet_20071029.pdf
Pretty strong since we've had no expenses :)
We are filling out myriad US Internal Revenue Service forms to qualify as a non-profit.
Should be done in 2008.
<TresEquis> no liabilities for lawyers yet?
<rsp_zope> Initial formation was done with the SFLC pro bono
Any re-formation _might_ incur fees. We dont know yet.
We have informally committed to a max-$3k (USD) expense for non-profit status
with an accounting firm of record in Fredericksburg
--> slinkP (n=slinkP@pdpc/supporter/student/slinkP) has joined #zope-foundation
<faassen> SFLC: Software Freedom Law Center
<rsp_zope> We don't have anything official but we expect a small bit of revenue from GOOG for GSoC acticities
<faassen> GSoC: Google Summer of Code. :)
--> ChrisW___ (n=ChrisW@188.8.131.52) has joined #zope-foundation
<TresEquis> Any other notes?
<faassen> one piece of expenses was our secretary. :)
<rsp_zope> The migration to a PSF-inspired governance structure will change the revenue opportunities for the ZF. The new BoD and membership will need to keep this in mind.
<aroldo> rsp_zope: Thanks
<faassen> unfortunately she's now also our 'outgoing' secretary, I believe this is the last meeting she is able to attend with us.
* rsp_zope nods
TresEquis applauds her efforts to herd the cats on the Board
<faassen> it worked very well. I'm very glad Aroldo got her. :)
<aroldo> Thanks Stefanie
<TresEquis> mode v StefanieO
--- TresEquis gives voice to StefanieO
<faassen> a point on the agenda: we have the election of the bylaws committee *before* we seat the new board.
should we reverse this?
* TresEquis so moves
<faassen> otherwise new board members can escape, right?
<StefanieO> My pleasure. I enjoyed working for you and I hope that the foundation will, eventually, reach its goals!
<faassen> StefanieO: and then we set NEW goals. :)
<aroldo> The topic Presentation of the annual report is closed. Further discussions in the informal part after adjournment.
anybody seconds Martijn's motion?
* TresEquis does
rsp_zope: what to you think?
<TresEquis> Mr. Chairman, please wave the magic wand ;)
<aroldo> Yes, abracadabra
We are moving to the topic "seating of the new board"
<TresEquis> New board members, please identify yourselves and the class you represent
<thisfred> Eric Casteleijn, Solution Provider Member (Infrae)
<dataflake> Jens Vagelpohl, Associate Member class
<aroldo> thisfred: welcome to the new Board, Eric
<thisfred> thank you
<aroldo> TresEquis: welcome to the new Board, Tres
<aroldo> dataflake: welcome to the new Board, Jens
--> ChrisW__ (n=ChrisW@184.108.40.206) has joined #zope-foundation
<-- ChrisW has quit (Nick collision from services.)
<TresEquis> At the conclusion of the meeting, aroldo will be leaving the board
<faassen> shouldn't we explain the composition?
<TresEquis> Go ahead
<faassen> Tres & I were re-elected as committer member directors.
Jens Vagelpohl was elected associate member director by the associate members.
and Eric Casteleijn/Infrae was elected director representing the solution provider class.
<-- ChrisW__ (n=ChrisW@220.127.116.11) has left #zope-foundation
--> ChrisW (n=ChrisW@18.104.22.168) has joined #zope-foundation
<faassen> that's it.
<TresEquis> Jim Fulton continues as ZC's Strategic Developer rep
<faassen> the other directors are strategic developer director + ..
1 permanent ZC representative, Rob.
<TresEquis> Jodok Batlogg continues as Lovely Systems' SD rep
<aroldo> J1m: welcome to the new Board, Jim
<faassen> yes, thanks TresEquis :)
<aroldo> rsp_zope: welcome to the new Board, Rob
<faassen> the all new board! :)
* TresEquis moves the following http://foundation.zope.org/minutes/annual_meeting_2007/vote_of_thanks-aroldo
<faassen> I second that. :)
<faassen> rsp_zope: you can't vote twice!
<aroldo> Let me take a look at it.
<aroldo> Thanks a lot to all. It was a great experience working with this team. I'll be around for the next Zope adventures!
<TresEquis> OK, byloaws committe
<aroldo> TresEquis: Who would like to participate in the bylaws committee?
<TresEquis> I think I'd better unmoderate so we can recruit non-board folks
<faassen> is this committee only of board members or could others join this ocmmittee?
--- TresEquis sets mode -m #zope-foundation
<faassen> so to make clear what's up with the committee.
<ChrisW> how will the bye laws committee work? mailing list / irc / ?
<faassen> as I said before, we want to revamp the bylaws completely. the most likely plan right now is that we model them after the Python Software Foundation bylaws.
ChanServ ChrisW___ ChrisW
ChrisW: a combination of both sounds like a good idea, possibly supplemented by voice contact.
<TresEquis> There is also a collector on the foundation site which could be used
<faassen> both board members and non-board members who are ZF members are welcome on the committee.
<J1m> If there is only one volunteer, it doesn't much matter. :)
<TresEquis> At the moment, it is board only
* TresEquis volunteers
<J1m> OK, now it matters.
* ChrisW volunteers...
<faassen> J1m: you already volunteered, right?
<betabug> what amount of a time committment would you expect?
<faassen> I volunteer too.
J1m: ideas about time committement? don't make it too scary!
<J1m> I think someone needs to do a hack job on the PSF bylawys and then we should deal with any issues that come up.
I have no idea.
<faassen> yes, I think for most members of the committee it would come down to reviewing the proposed bylaws and offering comments.
<J1m> I'd liek to keep it small by innovating as little as possible.
<faassen> plus before this, making sure what our use cases are.
<betabug> ok, then I volunteer
that brings the committee to an unprecedented amount of members! :)
J1m, myself, Tres from the board, and betabug and ChrisW as members.
<J1m> I think we should assume our use cases are the same as the PSF and only consider use cases if someone has a problem.
k, I'll create a mailman list later.
<faassen> yes, J1m will incessantly advocate doing as little work as possible. He'll work hard at advocating this. :)
<J1m> Yeah, that's the rub.
<betabug> too bad the geographical distance is too big for joint pub visits
<J1m> A fairly controversial issue will by annual membership meetings.
<aroldo> Is there any objection against accepting these volunteers en bloc?
* TresEquis was wishing we could meet at the Thai restaurant in FXBG ;)
<faassen> TresEquis: i'd love to meet there. :)
<dataflake> no objection
<J1m> The PSF has physical meetings at PyCon.
<aroldo> I also volunteer.
<J1m> They see that as a potential problem, although their quorum requirements are very liberal.
--> notChrisW (n=ChrisW@22.214.171.124) has joined #zope-foundation
<-- ChrisW has quit (Nick collision from services.)
<J1m> They thing they and we should consider electronic meetings.
<faassen> aroldo: you are also volunteering to join this commission, correct?
--- notChrisW is now known as ChrisW
<aroldo> As there are no objections against these volunteers, I declare the By-Laws committee to be formed and in charge.
<faassen> aroldo: excellent!
<betabug> aroldo: need contact data?
<J1m> I'm worried that we don't know how to do that and I don't want to have to invent something.
* TresEquis notes that we may call a special meeting of the Foundation to approved the committee's output
<aroldo> I adjourn the meeting. Viva Zopista!
The discussion goes on.
<J1m> I think we should have physical meetings.
<dataflake> thanks aroldo
<aroldo> thanks to everybody too.
<TresEquis> PyCon? Plone Conference? Both?
<dataflake> J1m: +1, but who shoulders the cost?
<J1m> It seems to me that many of us shopw up at plone conferences.
<dataflake> i'll be at the plone symposium in june in new orleans ;)
<J1m> Which seem to be defactp zope conferences.
<TresEquis> Jim's Beach Party?
<ChrisW> what's wrong with irc/mailing list/tracker?
<J1m> so I think we should have our annual meeting in conjunction with that.
<betabug> +1 for irc/mailing lists
<ChrisW> or are we no longer talking about the byelaws committee?
<dataflake> we're talking ZF board now
<J1m> ChrisW, is we adopt the PSF bylaws, then voting takes place at annual meetings.
we have no voting mechanism for irc.
<ChrisW> ah, I see
<srichter> I would like to get back to the servers
<ChrisW> how do the PSF handle votes from members who can't attend the annual meeting?
<srichter> what is the status with download/svn/cvs.zope.org? Will it be transfered?
<J1m> Also, as someone who attends PSF meetings, I think there is a lot of vaklue in doing it face to face.
<ChrisW> fair enough
<faassen> while I think there's a lot of value in face to face meetings, I don't think we want to lock in on requiring them.
as in, general meetings of the membership.
anyway, shouldn't have this discussion in the committee?
<J1m> ok, we disagree.
I'd like to get wider input.
After all, we are having an at large meeting.
<faassen> as to srichter: are you asking about the operation of the physical servers, or the material in them?
<J1m> But maybe electronic at large meetings aren't suitable fo rdiscussion. ;)
<srichter> aehm both, I guess
<J1m> I absolutely don't volunteer to help figure out an electronic voting process for annual; meetings.
<srichter> so , officially the content, especially the repos, is already in ZF hands?
and ZC is sponsoring the server?
<faassen> J1m: sure, I didn't understand your goal there.
srichter: no, officially the content is still ZC's.
<-- ChrisW___ has quit (Connection timed out)
<TresEquis> srichter: you mean the copyrights for the software, right?
<faassen> yes, the copyright situation hasn't changed yet.
<TresEquis> The webservers are now managed by ZF volunteers
<srichter> faassen: ok, are there plans to transfer this? Is this part of the trademark transfer?
<TresEquis> trademark issues are separate from copyright
copyright is held up because of the bylaws problems
<TresEquis> e.g., being unable to add new committers
<srichter> so every committer will be a committer memeber?
<srichter> ok, that's what I thought
<TresEquis> under new bylaws, we are likely to have a different membership structure
<srichter> ok, so why is adding new committers so hard now?
<faassen> srichter: we are talking about the copyright transwer, not trademark
<TresEquis> where some members are elected for their contributions
<faassen> srichter: yes, there have been plans frmo the start, but they have been blocked by our weak bylaw infrastructure.
<TresEquis> new bylaws won't couple SVN access with foundation membership at all
<rsp_zope> srichter - getting new Committers today (to commit to the ZC-repo) is not hard. Getting them into the ZF is, actually, not even possible.
<J1m> srichter, we can't add committers now for 2 reasons:
<rsp_zope> hance, we can't move copyright unless we don't want any checkins from anyone other than original ZF contributor members
<J1m> 1. Commit access and membership are linked. I don't want to make someone a member *just* to give them commit access
<srichter> J1m: 1. --> Ahh this I did not know anymore
<J1m> 2. The Bylaws specify how committer members are added, but the specification depends on documents that don't exist and that no one wants.
<srichter> ok, I see
<J1m> Again, for emphasis, I want to reuse the PSF. This is much simpler and saner in the PSF.
<betabug> so the committer agreement on the foundation site is currently useless?
<J1m> betabug, yes
--> WebMaven (email@example.com) has joined #zope-foundation
<betabug> so let's get that bylaws thing on the way
<J1m> yes lets.
<faassen> yes. :)
the bylaws has been holding up a lot of stuff. we first tried fixing the existing bylaws.
but we gave that up as hopeless.
hopefully we can get the new bylaws adopted soon (which will require another meeting).
<srichter> faassen: is there a minimum attendence required to adopt new bylaws?
* J1m hates setting up mailman. Click click click
<faassen> srichter: good question. I don't know. :)
<aroldo> srichter: Many decisions can be taken outside meetings, if the members agree on this. I thinks this includes the changes to bhe By-Laws.
<TresEquis> 6.5. Major Decisions. For actions (i) approving or changing the name of the Zope
Foundation or the Zope Platform; (ii) approving or amending the Membership
Agreement, or (iii) amending these Bylaws or the Certificate of Incorporation of
the Zope Foundation; such action must be approved by two-thirds (2/3) of the
Membership At-Large represented at a meeting in which a quorum is present.
<faassen> aroldo: well, the changes need to approved by the membership.
<srichter> ok, so it has to be only 2/3 of the attending members; good :-)
<faassen> srichter: are you volunteering to help getting a quorum? :)
<aroldo> faassen: yes, I am talking about the formal procedures.
* srichter needs to look up what quorum is; same word in german, but I still don't know ;-)
<kenmanheimer> (seems like one of the first things we need is a roadmap to changing the bylaws)
<faassen> I think a quorum is a minimum amount of people who are there.
<TresEquis> 6.11.Quorum. Unless otherwise provided herein, the presence in person or by proxy
of at least a simple majority of the Membership At-Large shall constitute a
quorum for the transaction of business. For purposes of calculating the quorum
requirements set forth in this Section 6.11, Committer Members who are
employed by the same organization (including Affiliates) shall collectively be
considered one (1) Member.
<kenmanheimer> (would cover formal measures as well as planning, logistics, etc)
<faassen> kenmanheimer: that's a good point.
<srichter> ok, so one step would be to figure out what our quorum actually is
<faassen> srichter: yes, that would mean identifying the affiliation of committer members for a start.
srichter: we do have a list of the members on our website.
<srichter> based on the trunout today, I think it would be hard to get a quorum on IRC, so I guess we need our ssh voting again
faassen: but several members might work for the same company, so we can count them as 1
<TresEquis> that is tricky, because non-committers don't have SSH keys
I also do not think that a quorum can be reached at a conference
<faassen> srichter: yes, which is why we need the affiliation
<TresEquis> We could e-mail out credentials to a one-time-only web app which allowed people to vote
<srichter> TresEquis: if there is interest, I would sign up to develop a small app like this
<srichter> Roger and I have recently implemented systems that have some of the bits and pieces needed already
<J1m> I created firstname.lastname@example.org. This is a private list. Volunteers otherwise welcome.
<faassen> srichter: cool!
--> philiKON (n=philiKON@Z7b56.z.pppool.de) has joined #zope-foundation
<kenmanheimer> is the mechanism for voting to switchover the bylaws the most important step in the process?
<TresEquis> nope, drafting the new bylaws is
<rsp_zope> I'd like to bring up another topic.. :) the contributor agreement. We've been unable to engage some contrbutors due to employment situations that are not addressed in the current contributor's agreement. Does anyone want to help with that? Alternatively, we can't engage these people. The specific case is when an employer wants to be the contributor NOT the employee.
<-- ChrisW has quit (Connection timed out)
<srichter> kenmanheimer: I don't think so; getting the new by-laws written is much more important :-)
<TresEquis> I don't know how the employer could be a contributor
or maybe I mean "committer"
<rsp_zope> TresEquis: not in the current definition
<rsp_zope> but you understand the situation, right?
<srichter> rsp_zope: yes, I totally agree. We really need to fix that
<faassen> I guess the employer wants to be the one contributing the copyright?
<srichter> rsp_zope: I just do not know how to help there
<kenmanheimer> i guess that was a rhetorical question - seems like one of the first things for the site would be having a roadmap with all the steps - drafting, evaluating/feedback, voting, switchover, whatever
<rsp_zope> b/c the employee's work is a work for hire and technically the employer CAN'T commit it
<betabug> as in many companies, where intellectual property created by employess goes over to the company
<TresEquis> You mean they wish to retain the joint ownership?
<rsp_zope> yes, Acme wants JC with ZF
<J1m> kenmanheimer, are you volunteering tobe on the bylawas committee?
<rsp_zope> Acme does NOT want John Doe to have JC wth the ZF
<TresEquis> "work for hire" is the wrong term for copyrights created by employees
<rsp_zope> betabug: exactly
<rsp_zope> TresEquis - right sorry - same concept tho
<srichter> yes, the particular examples are Jim Washington and David Pratt (I think)
<kenmanheimer> not sure. i'm in this meeting, and it seems to have become/be becoming a bylaws committee meeting...
<rsp_zope> anyway, we can't solve it here but it needs addressed
either by saying "we can't do that" or by changing something
<srichter> Jim works for a university; the university has the copyright and wants to contribute; Jim cannot make that decision
<betabug> by looking at how the python guys/gals do it?
<TresEquis> Doesn't our existing agreement ask the employer to bless such contributions?
<rsp_zope> TresEquis - the ZF agreement does but not in a way that makes some universities happy
<rsp_zope> it grants the employee the right to donate the IP by vrtue of using their ssh key
<TresEquis> "patches accepted" from them
* rsp_zope gives TresEquis phone number to Acme Legal Dept
<rsp_zope> like I said, we can say "we don't do that" and some number (large? small?) of people won't be ablt to play
* TresEquis points Acme to the mailing list, suggests that the figure out 'diff -u'
<kenmanheimer> i'm not against it becoming a bylaws committee meeting, but then i see us just diving into whatever issue strikes our attention. obviously there's a pent-up need to tackle this, but (maybe because i've been out of the loop), it seems haphazard
<TresEquis> this is "ad hoc discussion"
<TresEquis> *not* a committee meeting ;)
another fine distinction
<srichter> TresEquis: we have the specific use case of Jim W. and he can't play right now, but does great work
<faassen> kenmanheimer: any other topics you'd like us to discuss?
<TresEquis> If it is his employer who balks, let them propose alternate language
not our problem to try to guess what would make their shysters happy
<kenmanheimer> i'm quite interested in seeing the bylaws discussion continue, maybe just would like some overview of what needs to happen
<betabug> point 8 in the committer agreement?
<srichter> TresEquis: Jim W. does not have the connections to do that; it effectively means that he still cannot play
<rsp_zope> TresEquis - we know what would make them happy - Acme gets the JC wit the ZF. The issue is how do we make that happen? Acme doesn't have an ssh key on svn
<rsp_zope> srichter - true but i/we know what the univ wants - they want to be the signatory
<betabug> what's JC?
<faassen> 'joint copyright'
<rsp_zope> joint copyright
<TresEquis> BTW, the first meeting of the new ZF board is scheduled for Monday, 12 November 2007, at 14:00 UTC
rsp_zope: I still say "patches accepted"
<srichter> rsp_zope: so maybe we should give Acme an ssh key and all employees use that; it's sub-optimal, but it works
<TresEquis> because I am not interested in trying to draft language for them
<betabug> I doubt it, it's the right, not the key
<srichter> rsp_zope: another solution would be to link several ssh keys to one organization
<TresEquis> you can create an account with multiple keys
one per employee
and have all checkins come through that account
<rsp_zope> my intent here was not to come to conclusion but to let everyone know there is an issue to address or ignore :)
<srichter> rsp_zope: right
<rsp_zope> should this be a part of the bylaws commte effort?
<TresEquis> you can even set the environment so that the affiliation is shown in checkin messages, etc.
<srichter> is there some place on foundation.zope.org, where we can log the open issues and maybe give them an urgency rating?
<kenmanheimer> ... and use permissions to circumscribe their authority ...
<TresEquis> I don't think its a priority unless Jim's employer is willing to cooperate by contributing draft language which would make them happy
but its board-only at the moment
we could add accounts for non-board members of the BLC
<kenmanheimer> (hmm - by "circumscribe" i meant "control the extent of")
<J1m> rsp_zope, shouldn't we ask the SFLC for advice on the JC issue?
I gotta go.
See y'all later.
<-- J1m (email@example.com) has left #zope-foundation ("Leaving")
<rsp_zope> imo, this is not a legal issue it's a zf policy issue - do we want to spend time working on this now (or later)
generally speaking any large company will have the same concerns about employees checking stuff in
<srichter> rsp_zope: ok, I would try to resolve it now; it opens up our contributions
rsp_zope: I am willing to assert some effort on this, but I am not savy with legal stuff
<rsp_zope> srichter: agreed if we can keep the effort low - to TresEquis point noone wants to be sucked down a copyright rathole
<rsp_zope> ok, let's go offline
<rsp_zope> i have to go too - team meeting
thanks everyone - aroldo
* rsp_zope golf claps
<srichter> see ya
<faassen> thanks everybody!
<srichter> thanks all
* betabug waves
<aroldo> Thanks all
<kenmanheimer> bye all...
<-- rsp_zope (firstname.lastname@example.org) has left #zope-foundation
<thisfred> thanks all, bye
<aroldo> Good bye everybody.
<-- aroldo (email@example.com) has left #zope-foundation
betabug (firstname.lastname@example.org) has left #zope-foundation
kenmanheimer (email@example.com) has left #zope-foundation ("ERC Version 5.0.4 $Revision: 1.726.2.19 $ (IRC client for Emacs)")
<klmtest> /who *
<-- klmtest (firstname.lastname@example.org) has left #zope-foundation
dataflake has quit ()
mcdonc (email@example.com) has left #zope-foundation
<philiKON> so, is there a transcript?
i missed the first hour :_
(thought it'd be over already)
<thisfred> philiKON, it's logged, and I think a version will be put up on the site
i sure hope so
* philiKON doesn't see a logging bot
<philiKON> so somebody has to copy'n'paste :)
<thisfred> TresEquis has logged it, he indicated
<philiKON> ah, ok
<TresEquis> I've mailed log of formal meeting to Stephanie, who will turn to minutes
<thisfred> if you're in a hurry/curious, I can send you the log, philiKON
<philiKON> depends on how long stephanie needs
thisfred: if it's not too much trouble... :)