Stream: wg-governance

Topic: meeting length


nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:51, on Zulip):

I realize the calendar invite for our meeting is for 1hr

nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:51, on Zulip):

I thought it was for 30min

nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:51, on Zulip):

Any thoughts on the correct meeting length? :)

XAMPPRocky (Feb 27 2020 at 18:52, on Zulip):

Personally I think 1 hour or 45 minutes at least to give some padding to starting the meeting and wrapping it up.

BatmanAoD (Kyle Strand) (Feb 27 2020 at 18:55, on Zulip):

Welll, today, Erin's "Thanks everyone" came at 37 minutes, so obviously that's the correct length :laughing:

BatmanAoD (Kyle Strand) (Feb 27 2020 at 18:56, on Zulip):

45 minutes seems reasonable.

nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:57, on Zulip):

I think it depends a bit on how we expect to use the meeting

nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:57, on Zulip):

If the purpose of the meeting is to do work (i.e., we will discuss in depth or try to do some editing etc)

nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:57, on Zulip):

then an hour is good

nikomatsakis (Feb 27 2020 at 18:57, on Zulip):

that was part of our original idea, that we would do a lot of the work synchronously, but I feel like we've 'sort of' tended to do that

Val Grimm (Feb 27 2020 at 18:58, on Zulip):

I thought it was an hour as well but when you called it it seemed ok this time. So, next time an hour?

Val Grimm (Feb 27 2020 at 18:58, on Zulip):

But then, if we exhaust the agenda, then we add something if we've used up less than half an hour?

XAMPPRocky (Feb 27 2020 at 19:00, on Zulip):

Well maybe the problem is the agenda isn't full enough sometimes.

Val Grimm (Feb 27 2020 at 19:01, on Zulip):

yes

Val Grimm (Feb 27 2020 at 19:01, on Zulip):

although this is the first time it has been so recently. perhaps Zulip will help make it easier to select agenda items

XAMPPRocky (Feb 27 2020 at 19:05, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis What would you think of using the next meeting to brainstorm how to move forward with the "legal entity" issue? I'm just looking through our GitHub issues, and that's a topic that can definitely fill an hour of discussion.

Val Grimm (Feb 27 2020 at 19:07, on Zulip):

what would our goal be? I'm not against it, I just know there has been lengthy discussion on internals

XAMPPRocky (Feb 27 2020 at 19:16, on Zulip):

@Val Grimm I would say to try to make some progress in defining a initial scope of what we want to achieve, talk through the reasons for making a legal entity and find which of those reasons we think should be prioritised, and what we think should be left off the table for now even if we know it's important for the future.

Val Grimm (Feb 28 2020 at 09:14, on Zulip):

I'll update the agenda

nikomatsakis (Mar 03 2020 at 16:38, on Zulip):

@XAMPPRocky I don't think that's a good idea

nikomatsakis (Mar 03 2020 at 16:40, on Zulip):

I'm working through a few things internal to Mozilla first, getting some ducks lined up, and I don't want to disturb those discussions.

nikomatsakis (Mar 03 2020 at 16:42, on Zulip):

Sorry for the relative radio silence, one other thing I've been organizing is talking to some other organizations to get a better view of their experiences and trying to post some notes from those discussions -- a lot of people reached out to me after the blog post, for example. But I don't want to do those too publicly because it's harder for people to speak frankly. I'm trying to decide what's the right balance there. :)

XAMPPRocky (Mar 03 2020 at 16:49, on Zulip):

(deleted)

Last update: Apr 03 2020 at 18:00UTC