Meeting log for 2009-03-18

Interesting meeting this one. Short sharp discussion on a couple of
points, but the meeting kept moving on along, without anyone appearing
to feel particularly hard done by. Are the board gelling?
Disappointed to see the AOB submarine still survives, though no-one
tried to ride a vote in with it.

HIGHLIGHTS

[item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in the Public Interest
board of directors meeting, which is now called to order. Today's
agenda and details of pending resolutions can be found on the web at
http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-03-18.html

[item 2, Roll Call]
<cdlu> David Graham <linuxpoet> Joshua D. Drake
<schultmc> Michael Schultheiss <Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert
<bdale> Bdale Garbee <Hydroxide> Jimmy Kaplowitz
<luk_> Luk Claes

<bdale> regrets from Martin and Neil

[item 3, President's Report]
<bdale> I mentioned briefly last month that I was running for a seat
on the Linux Foundation board representing individual affiliates.
Congratulations to Tim Golden was elected as a new board member, and
Larry Augustin who was re-elected to another term. I expect to attend
both the CELF Embedded Linux Conference and LF Collaboration Summit in
San Francisco next month.

[item 4, Treasurer's Report]
<schultmc> A report for February 2009 was sent out and is included in
the agenda. Several contributing members have expressed concern over
the relatively large bank balance SPI has currently Regardless of
SPI's own reserves, the associated projects should be encouraged not
to build up reserves but instead use the funds that have been donated
for their intended purpose

<bdale> only about 32k of the total is SPI's, the rest is held in
trust for associated projects. There was a point in time when SPI was
nearly out of cash, and needed to spend some money on things like
financial record keeping assistance and tax reporting.

<cdlu> I would argue that a large financial reserve is not a bad idea
to keep for SPI anyway, in the event of legal trouble or anything that
requires a rapid outflow of a lot of cash.

<linuxpoet> I just want to say I am happy that we are getting reports
regularly now, good work.

[item 5, Secretary's report]
<Hydroxide> nothing to add to what's in the agenda.

[item 6, Outstanding minutes]
Voting results for "Approve December 2008 minutes": Yes: 7
Voting results for "Approve January 2009 minutes": Yes: 5, Abstain: 2
Voting results for "Approve February 2009 minutes": Yes: 6, Abstain: 1

[item 7, Items up for discussion]
Voting results for "Resolution 2009-03-18.mcs.1": Yes: 7

[item 7.2, Resolution 2009-03-16.jrk.1.iwj.1: OpenWRT as associated project]

<Hydroxide> this one has been discussed a bunch on the list. I agree
that many of this resolution's flaws mentioned there are valid, but I
still think it's workable enough to approve.

<bdale> I support adding OpenWRT as an associated project. I don't
like the complexity of (5) in the current resolution and the ripple
effect it has on the rest of the resolution, and would prefer a single
identified contact.

<luk_> right, is also what I'm thinking

<Hydroxide> I replace my proposal with Ian's proposal here:
http://lists.spi-inc.org/pipermail/spi-general/2009-March/002737.html
and then replace "Andy Boyett and Gregers Petersen" with "Gregers
Petersen", then make appropriate grammatical changes

Voting results for "Resolution 2009-03-18.jrk.1": Yes: 7

[item 8, Any other business]

<linuxpoet> I requested calling out to members for help with the
membership application. I have heard no grumblings one way or another.
Thoughts?
<Hydroxide> keep membership(at)s-i(dot)o and admin(at)s-i(dot)o in the loop
and board@ preferably, though not necessarily on every email

<linuxpoet> I also wanted to know the status of the new web site
<Hydroxide> unchanged since last meeting. we've all been otherwise
occupied unfortunately.

[item 9, Next board meeting] 15th April at 20:00 UTC

TIMED LOG

20:11:57 <bdale> *GAVEL*
20:11:57 <bdale> [item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in the Public Interest board of directors meeting, which is now called to order.
20:11:57 <bdale> Today's agenda and details of pending resolutions can be found on the web at: http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-02-11.html
20:11:57 <bdale> [item 2, Roll Call]
20:11:58 <bdale> Board members, please state your name for the record. As we have nine board members, quorum for today's meeting is six.
20:12:01 <bdale> Guests (including board advisors), please /msg your names to Hydroxide if you wish your attendance to be recorded in the minutes of this meeting.
20:12:04 <bdale> I believe we have regrets from Martin and Neil?
20:12:04 <cdlu> David Graham
20:12:05 <linuxpoet> Joshua D. Drake
20:12:06 <schultmc> Michael Schultheiss
20:12:07 <Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert
20:12:08 <bdale> Bdale Garbee
20:12:09 <Hydroxide> Jimmy Kaplowitz
20:12:14 <Hydroxide> bdale: correct
20:12:18 <bdale> cool, quorum reached
20:12:31 <bdale> luk_: ?
20:13:04 <schultmc> bdale: today's agenda is at http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-03-18.html
20:13:09 <bdale> oops
20:13:12 <bdale> sorry about that
20:13:13 <luk_> Luk Claes
20:13:18 <bdale> un-edited cut'n'paste error
20:13:28 <bdale> cool, everyone expected is now here... let's proceed
20:13:41 <bdale> [item 3, President's Report]
20:13:41 <bdale> I mentioned briefly last month that I was running for a seat on the Linux Foundation board representing individual affiliates. Congratulations to Tim Golde
20:13:41 <bdale> n was elected as a new board member, and Larry Augustin who was re-elected to another term.
20:13:41 <bdale> I expect to attend both the CELF Embedded Linux Conference and LF Collaboration Summit in San Francisco next month.
20:13:44 <bdale> [item 4, Treasurer's Report]
20:13:44 <bdale> Michael?
20:14:15 <schultmc> A report for February 2009 was sent out and is included in the agenda
20:14:38 <schultmc> Several contributing members have expressed concern over the relatively large bank balance SPI has currently
20:14:43 <bdale> schultmc: was I correct in my assertion about the general reserves line in email?
20:15:06 <schultmc> bdale: yes, if I recall correctly
20:15:18 <bdale> good
20:15:30 <Hydroxide> seemed right to me too
20:15:56 <schultmc> Regardless of SPI's own reserves, the associated projects should be encouraged not to build up reserves but instead use the funds that have been donated for their intended purpose
20:16:05 <bdale> for the benefit of those here who didn't see the email exchange, I pointed out that only about 32k of the total is SPI's, the rest is held in trust for associated projects
20:16:23 <bdale> schultmc: agreed
20:16:27 <linuxpoet> agreed
20:16:27 <jello> why does SPI require such a large reserve?
20:16:33 <schultmc> That's all I have, unless there are questions
20:16:36 <linuxpoet> jello: we don't "require"
20:17:12 <bdale> there was a point in time when SPI was nearly out of cash, and needed to spend some money on things like financial record keeping assistance and tax reporting
20:17:24 <jello> then why not reduce the 5% fee, if it's not required _at this time_
20:17:51 <bdale> we can discuss that, preferably in email, and come to a resolution
20:17:56 <jello> fair enough
20:17:58 <linuxpoet> bdale: agreed
20:18:12 <bdale> any other questions about the financial report?
20:18:27 <linuxpoet> I just want to say I am happy that we are getting them regularly now, good work.
20:18:30 <cdlu> I would argue that a large financial reserve is not a bad idea to keep for SPI anyway, in the event of legal trouble or anything that requires a rapid outflow of a lot of cash.
20:18:58 <bdale> cdlu: yes, that's been my position too, but I'm happy to have some reasoned discussion on the topic possibly leading to a resolution
20:19:04 <bdale> let's just not try to deep-dive on it here
20:19:08 <cdlu> sure
20:19:24 <bdale> schultmc: thanks from me, too, for the good work on getting reports out each month... *very* appreciated!
20:19:32 * cdlu seconds
20:19:33 * Hydroxide agrees
20:19:37 <bdale> [item 5, Secretary's report]
20:19:37 <bdale> Jimmy?
20:19:50 <Hydroxide> nothing to add to what's in the agenda. I'll be glad to take any questions.
20:20:06 <bdale> I have none. anyone else?
20:20:20 <cdlu> not I
20:20:30 <bdale> [item 6, Outstanding minutes]
20:20:30 <bdale> Jimmy, we have several sets to vote on today?
20:20:38 <Hydroxide> yes
20:20:40 <Hydroxide> regarding minutes, I'm happy to say that I've caught up on all the backlogged minutes from my term as Secretary! :) I'll do the remaining few details for the March 2008 minutes before the April meeting as well as check in with Martin regarding the June-August 2008 minutes.
20:20:47 <bdale> woot!
20:20:59 <linuxpoet> Cool.
20:21:03 * bdale appreciates the progress being made
20:21:08 <Hydroxide> so we have Dec 2008 through Feb 2009 to vote on today
20:21:18 * cdlu reminds Hydroxide that the first year as secretary is always good, and the second year is always bad
20:21:18 <Hydroxide> do you want to do them individually or en masse?
20:21:24 <cdlu> who wants the job in july? :)
20:21:28 <Hydroxide> cdlu: I'm not planning to continue as secretary, no worries :)
20:21:36 <schultmc> Hydroxide: individually - I was absent for January 2009
20:21:41 <Hydroxide> schultmc: ok
20:22:02 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 7 people (bdale,hydroxide,cdlu,linuxpoet,schultmc,ganneff,luk_) allowed to vote on Approve December 2008 minutes. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:22:07 <cdlu> !vote yes
20:22:09 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:22:09 <luk_> !vote yes
20:22:10 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:22:14 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
20:22:19 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:22:26 <bdale> !vote yes
20:22:31 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "Approve December 2008 minutes": Yes: 7, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
20:22:34 <Hydroxide> Voting for "Approve December 2008 minutes" closed.
20:22:34 <Hydroxide> unanimously passes.
20:22:46 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 7 people (bdale,hydroxide,cdlu,linuxpoet,schultmc,ganneff,luk_) allowed to vote on Approve January 2009 minutes. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:22:50 <cdlu> !vote yes
20:22:50 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:22:51 <luk_> !vote yes
20:22:51 <bdale> !vote abstain
20:22:53 <schultmc> !vote abstain
20:22:54 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:23:12 * louis_to abstains
20:23:13 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: ?
20:23:19 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
20:23:23 * linuxpoet was reading
20:23:26 <Hydroxide> no problem
20:23:27 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "Approve January 2009 minutes": Yes: 5, No: 0, Abstain: 2, Missing: 0 ()
20:23:31 <Hydroxide> Voting for "Approve January 2009 minutes" closed.
20:23:39 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 7 people (bdale,hydroxide,cdlu,linuxpoet,schultmc,ganneff,luk_) allowed to vote on Approve February 2009 minutes. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:23:42 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:23:44 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:23:45 <bdale> !vote yes
20:23:45 <luk_> !vote yes
20:23:49 <cdlu> !vote abstain
20:23:53 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
20:24:04 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:24:11 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "Approve February 2009 minutes": Yes: 6, No: 0, Abstain: 1, Missing: 0 ()
20:24:14 <Hydroxide> Voting for "Approve February 2009 minutes" closed.
20:24:18 <Hydroxide> all approved. yay.
20:24:34 <bdale> and we'll address the ones Martin is working on next time?
20:24:44 <Ganneff> the march one seems to be ready?
20:24:48 <Hydroxide> to whatever extent he makes progress on them, yes. or else I'll start to catch up.
20:24:50 <Ganneff> besides its non-html-ified look
20:24:59 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: I have to do one or two tasks regarding that, like dig up the text of a resolution
20:25:05 <cdlu> registered guests not listed apparently
20:25:09 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: so I'll have that one for April
20:25:11 <Ganneff> well fine.
20:25:13 <bdale> ok, let's defer for next time
20:25:16 <Hydroxide> yes
20:25:27 <bdale> moving right along...
20:25:29 <bdale> [item 7, Items up for discussion]
20:25:29 <bdale> [item 7.1, Resolution 2009-03-18.mcs.1 - Update Ameriprise's owner list]
20:25:29 <bdale> Michael?
20:25:54 <schultmc> this is fairly routine and is necessary to reflect changes in our board makeup and inform Ameriprise of those changes
20:26:13 <bdale> looks fine to me
20:26:17 <bdale> any discussion?
20:26:20 * cdlu read it and is prepared to vote
20:26:26 * Hydroxide seconds the call to vote
20:26:31 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 7 people (bdale,hydroxide,cdlu,linuxpoet,schultmc,ganneff,luk_) allowed to vote on Resolution 2009-03-18.mcs.1. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:26:43 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:26:45 <bdale> !vote yes
20:26:45 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:26:46 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:26:46 <luk_> !vote yes
20:26:48 <cdlu> !vote yes
20:26:57 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
20:26:58 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "Resolution 2009-03-18.mcs.1": Yes: 7, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
20:27:01 <Hydroxide> Voting for "Resolution 2009-03-18.mcs.1" closed.
20:27:03 <Hydroxide> passed.
20:27:09 <bdale> great
20:27:19 <bdale> [item 7.2, Resolution 2009-03-16.jrk.1.iwj.1: OpenWRT as associated project]
20:27:19 <bdale> Jimmy?
20:27:37 <bdale> oops, another icky typo
20:27:51 * bdale whacks himself ... sorry
20:27:58 <bdale> oh
20:28:00 <Hydroxide> this one has been discussed a bunch on the list. I agree that many of this resolution's flaws mentioned there are valid, but I still think it's workable enough to approve
20:28:14 <Hydroxide> if anyone from OpenWRT is here, please speak up
20:28:17 <bdale> maybe not... what's with the rsolution suffix? is this an iwj modification of a jrk proposal?
20:28:29 <schultmc> bdale: yes
20:28:31 <bdale> ok
20:28:32 <Hydroxide> bdale: really it's a jrk modification of a iwj modification of a jrk proposal
20:28:39 <Hydroxide> bdale: but I didn't want to get too unwieldy
20:28:46 * linuxpoet laughs
20:28:58 <bdale> ok, in future, just increment the suffix number and don't do this concat thing, makes my brain hurt
20:29:05 <Hydroxide> heh
20:29:17 <luk_> what nick names do the OpenWRT people use, anyone an idea?
20:29:21 <Hydroxide> we should standardize resolution numbers anyway - sometimes punctuation has been inconsistent
20:29:26 <Hydroxide> glp is Gregers Petersen, but he's not here
20:29:39 <Hydroxide> I *hope* he's on spi-general but I dunno
20:29:44 <cdlu> hydroxide, there is a resolution defining resolution titles
20:29:49 <cdlu> erm, designations
20:29:53 <cdlu> check under 2001 :)
20:29:58 <Hydroxide> cdlu: I will :) later though
20:30:03 <bdale> so, to summarize my contributions to previous discussion. I support adding OpenWRT as an associated project. I don't like the complexity of (5) in the current resolution and the ripple effect it has on the rest of the resolution, and would prefer a single identified contact.
20:30:29 <luk_> right, is also what I'm thinking
20:30:30 <Hydroxide> we could just make Gregers Petersen the identified contact
20:30:33 <linuxpoet> I too support adding OpenWRT however I do not like the way the resolution reads
20:30:38 <Hydroxide> since we've never heard from Andy Boyett
20:30:51 <linuxpoet> Hydroxide: I don't think we can do that without talking to OpenWRT though can we?
20:31:11 <luk_> sure we can, they have to accept or deny anyway
20:31:12 <bdale> we can resolve anything, OpenWRT has the option of not accepting the invite and asking us to try again, right?
20:31:30 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: dunno. would anyone object to passing it as is and then requiring them to figure out a single identified contact, which we would then specify via an amended resolution?
20:31:41 <Hydroxide> or we can just specify Gregers
20:31:47 <Hydroxide> since he's the only one we've heard from at all
20:31:55 <bdale> I'd prefer the latter, I think.
20:31:59 <linuxpoet> I am not in favor of passing the resolution unless it has a single contact
20:32:03 * schultmc also prefers the latter
20:32:06 <Ganneff> i would vote against the current thing
20:32:13 * luk_ also prefers the latter
20:32:16 <bdale> seems like we're approaching a concensus
20:32:23 <Hydroxide> one sec, let me pull up an email...
20:32:24 <cdlu> hydroxide, proper procedure here would be to vote to have #5 and #6 amended (you can make the actual changes after the meeting) to reflect a single representative
20:32:28 <cdlu> and then vote on the amended (or not) resolution
20:32:46 <bdale> want me to so move?
20:32:47 <cdlu> we don't need to amend it in advance as long as the instruction to make it for a single contact is clear
20:32:52 <cdlu> bdale, sure, and I so second.
20:32:54 <Hydroxide> wait
20:33:24 * cdlu turns blue
20:33:32 <Hydroxide> I replace my proposal with Ian's proposal here: http://lists.spi-inc.org/pipermail/spi-general/2009-March/002737.html and then replace "Andy Boyett and Gregers Petersen" with "Gregers Petersen", then make appropriate grammatical changes
20:33:48 <Hydroxide> (s/have been/has been/ and s/liaisons/the liaison/)
20:33:52 <cdlu> correct, and append clause #6 to not say everyone, 'cause there's only one
20:33:58 <cdlu> but those are trivial changes and don't need us to argue over wording
20:34:00 <cdlu> imo
20:34:07 <linuxpoet> I could live with that
20:34:09 <Hydroxide> cdlu: in the version at the URL I gave it's the usual wording
20:34:15 <cdlu> works for me :)
20:34:26 <Hydroxide> and I'll number it 2009-03-18.jrk.1
20:34:27 <bdale> Hydroxide: I'm ok with your proposal to use that version with only Gregers as contact
20:34:52 <cdlu> shall we vote on the amendment or is it friendly? :)
20:34:53 <Hydroxide> just for consistency with schultmc's which was submitted in advance
20:34:57 <Hydroxide> it's friendly
20:34:59 <cdlu> 'k
20:35:09 <Hydroxide> ready to vote?
20:35:12 <bdale> so I move we vote
20:35:16 <linuxpoet> second
20:35:17 <Hydroxide> seconded
20:35:17 * cdlu thirds
20:35:32 <Ganneff> 4th
20:35:32 <Ganneff> :)
20:35:34 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 7 people (bdale,hydroxide,cdlu,linuxpoet,schultmc,ganneff,luk_) allowed to vote on Resolution 2009-03-18.jrk.1. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:35:36 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
20:35:38 <cdlu> !vote yes
20:35:39 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:35:40 <bdale> !vote yes
20:35:41 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:35:43 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:35:43 <luk_> !vote yes
20:35:47 * cdlu loves voting on unwritten resolutions. It's like town council. :)
20:35:53 <Hydroxide> cdlu: at least it's clearly specified
20:36:00 <Hydroxide> cdlu: in the log of this meeting
20:36:02 <cdlu> yep
20:36:03 * linuxpoet would rather vote on unwritten versus unread :P
20:36:08 <bdale> Hydroxide: I assume you'll notify Gregers of the invitation?
20:36:12 <cdlu> linuxpoet, hahah
20:36:13 <Hydroxide> bdale: yes
20:36:23 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "Resolution 2009-03-18.jrk.1": Yes: 7, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
20:36:26 <Hydroxide> Voting for "Resolution 2009-03-18.jrk.1" closed.
20:36:28 <Hydroxide> they're approved.
20:36:30 <Ganneff> linuxpoet: what, we have to read something?
20:36:31 <Hydroxide> yay.
20:36:36 <bdale> [item 8, Any other business]
20:36:36 <bdale> Do any board members have other items for discussion they would like to address briefly?
20:36:41 <linuxpoet> I have a couple of things
20:36:56 <slef> cdlu: town councils here aren't allowed to do that ;)
20:36:58 * cdlu is still available for hire if anyone wants him... but other than that, no. :)
20:37:15 <cdlu> slef, here they do it all the time. the city clerk sits there and frantically writes all the resolutions as the meeting progresses. :)
20:37:18 <linuxpoet> I requested calling out to members for help with the membership application. I have heard no grumblings one way or another. Thoughts?
20:37:39 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: I don't object, though keep membership(at)s-i(dot)o and admin(at)s-i(dot)o in the loop
20:37:45 <cdlu> who's membership ctte these days?
20:37:47 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: (admin@ handles sysadmin stuff)
20:37:54 <schultmc> cdlu: schultmc, Maulkin and luk
20:38:04 <cdlu> k
20:38:08 <bdale> anything else?
20:38:14 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: and board@ preferably, though not necessarily on every email
20:38:20 <linuxpoet> I also wanted to know the status of the new web site
20:38:34 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: unchanged since last meeting. we've all been otherwise occupied unfortunately.
20:38:42 <linuxpoet> O.k. that is all I have.
20:38:51 <bdale> [item 9, Next board meeting]
20:38:51 <bdale> I believe our default would be Wednesday, April 15th, 2009. That date is ok for me, but We need to decide on 19:00 vs 20:00 UTC. Any strong opinions?
20:39:09 * Hydroxide notes that the EU will be on summer time by then
20:39:09 <Ganneff> 20utc
20:39:14 <linuxpoet> When did we do it then?
20:39:16 <linuxpoet> err now
20:39:18 <Ganneff> dont care about idiotic time moves please
20:39:27 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: it's currently 20:00 UTC.
20:39:39 <linuxpoet> O.k. I am good with 20:00
20:39:41 <bdale> 20:00 works fine for me
20:39:44 <bdale> any strong objections?
20:39:47 <cdlu> not from me
20:39:49 <Hydroxide> I think someone did who isn't here
20:39:54 <Hydroxide> but, tough luck to them :)
20:39:55 <linuxpoet> snooze you lose
20:39:56 <bdale> right
20:39:57 <Hydroxide> yes
20:40:02 <schultmc> 20:00 works for me although I occasionally have conflicts at 21:00
20:40:03 <cdlu> yes, people who can't make it to meetings have a lot of trouble arguing their case for different times. :)
20:40:06 <Hydroxide> 20:00 is fine with me
20:40:18 <Hydroxide> cdlu: zobel has a pretty good reason this time, which he told me privately
20:40:18 <bdale> ok, then let's do 15th April at 20:00 UTC
20:40:20 <Hydroxide> but, yes
20:40:27 <Ganneff> cdlu: they now get it an hour different in their local time :)
20:40:39 <bdale> I know zobel's reason for today, too, and agree it's a good use of his time
20:40:40 <cdlu> can we move to abolish DST? :)
20:40:43 <bdale> Ok, thank you to everyone present for participating today.
20:40:43 <bdale> *GAVEL*

Hope that helps,
--
MJ Ray (slef)
Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small
worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
(Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237