[OE-core] OpenEmbedded General Assembly, 28 November 2011, Prague, CZ
Jeff Osier-Mixon
jefro at jefro.net
Fri Nov 4 17:28:31 UTC 2011
OpenEmbedded General Assembly, 28 November 2011, 6pm-9pm CET
Clarion Congress Hotel, Prague, CZ
Proceedings taken by Jeff Osier-Mixon, apologies for any misspellings
_____________________________________________________________________
Members present:
Board:
Philip Balister
Florian Boer
Membership:
Robert Schuster
Richard Purdie
Paul Eggleton
Marcin Juszkiewicz
Martin Jansa
Dirk Hohndel
Anden Darrander
David Stewart
Saul Wold
Frans Meulenbroeks
Esben Haabendal
Sean Hudson
Koen Kooi
Jeff Osier-Mixon
Total membership is 54, of which 32 were represented, including proxies
Proxy representation:
in person proxy 1 proxy 2
Phlip Balister Steve Sakoman Denys Dmytriyenko
Florian Boer
Robert Schuster
Richard Purdie Phil Blundell Joshua Lock
Paul Eggleton Andrea Adami Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
Marcin Juszkiewicz
Martin Jansa Tom King Simon Busch
Dirk Hohndel
Anden Darrander
David Stewart Scott Garman Marco Cavallino
Saul Wold Yu Ke Mark Hatle
Frans Meulenbroeks Andreas Oberitter Michael Lauer
Esben Haabendal
Sean Hudson
Koen Kooi Khem Raj Graeme Gregory
Jeff Osier-Mixon
Meeting chair: Philip Balister
_____________________________________________________________________
Agenda
- Financial status (Florian)
- Budget plan (Philip)
also discuss conferences
- Discussion on Phil Blundell's proposed voting procedure changes
if on members list, look over voting changes
- Discussion of relaxing 2-proxy rule
Richard: 2 to 4, proxy easy to change
superseded by Phil's proposal
on wiki under Organization
- Secretary
- Discuss future GA in the US
_____________________________________________________________________
Proceedings
Note: initials are used to indicate speakers
FB: financial status
not too bad
currently have 2000 euros left, mostly from a few donations from TI
& 2 other people to paypal acct
at least 1 requested anonymity
bank account: €2098.84 (local acct sprachasz ziegen), paypal: €141.28 (2
donations of €100 minus fees)
request 2 members present take look at written summaries
volunteers to check that paperwork is correct - Dirk & Sean
SH: dont see ti donation
FB: took a year to find out what forms to sign
DH: balance of paypal missing, otherwise books ok - SH concurs
expenses:
travel reimbursement 2010 for oedem in 2009 €200
€1086.33 = US$1500 plus €50 fees for hosting to OSUOSL
written donation receipt not exact amount due to entropy
bank in Germany takes some fees, US bank takes some fees
wire transfer, shared cost
not enough time to hunt down best way of tranferring mone
paypal is relatively expensive
donation of US$100, fees of 4.20%
to do: take whole amount of paypal & transfer to bank acct, stories of
frozen paypal accounts
bank acct already tied to paypal acct
question: need to spend money donated in 1/2 year?
FB: no, supposed to spend money we have at the time
can think about useful things to spend it on
PB: need to carry some money in case of emergency
DH: can not use eV to park money, e.g. if had 180k and would make money
on interest
for a group with 50 members, €2000 is reasonable & not a problem
FB: will solve that problem when we hit it
PB: no one inside TI noticed, accounting bouncing, took a long time to
figure out
now have correct form
KK: if in EU, read website of banking on how to transfer between EU
countries
PB: EU to US$ is a pain (EU countries specifically, not Europe in general)
PB: Budget plan
coming expenses:
€500 for an event box, can put together before FOSDEM (4-5 February,
Brussels)
cannot ship to FOSDEM, someone needs to take - collect dev boards,
cables, etc
not planning to ship video wall - only something a human can carry
plan is for human portable and not 9 monitors, not talking about Koen's
wall
PB: problem with budget planning is no steady income
DH: talk about reimburse travel for events, e.g. Florian made special
trip to come here
some go to FOSDEM
PB: people make trips to events to present OE stuff
KK: written down conditions to reimburse? no, basically using for
emergency or case by case
PB: not spinning enough cash to sponsor for travel
PB:
need to provide financial support to OSUOSL
our machines live in rack run by NAS admin, predate a lot of OSU people
there now
attended talk at LinuxCon Vancouver about history of OSUOSL
Leslie Hawthorn now working there
they are hiring sysadmins
spending money, project brings prestige to WORST university
(university used to be Western ORegon STate == WORST)
not a fly-by-night university operation
any help we can get for admin team would be helpful
right now admins are volunteers with day jobs
Tom King logs in from mountaintops
part of budget planning, basically incur costs from OSU for bandwidth &
occasional kick machine
KK: hardware from LF, yocto, ? if company donates large sum to yocto, do
we see anything coming out?
PB:
donation receipt for 1 machine - donations to yocto internal to yocto,
encourage donations to OSUOSL instead of yocto
if feeling generous and dont want to donate to ev, osu has web form
put down "for OE" on donation form
want OE to remain as a sponsor for the lab
significant costs to move money around, so donate to OSU and put on form
"for OE"
they can aggregate contribs as OE, sponsor levels - over US$2000 is
bronze sponsor
need to encourage people to support OSU
let us know if donate
we have paypal which is not great but better than not having money
given no stable income, welcome comments on generating stable income, if
so what should we do with it?
KK: list of companies using OE? with contacts?
PB: could do that, but without spending plan hard to ask for money
DH: would membership think a funded travel fund important?
solicit money, finding in relatively small quantities not that hard
has to be a plan what to do with it, needs to make sense to membership
within ethical boundaries of what companies find acceptable
giving presentations at events, infrastructure
FB: mostly a communication problem
1 - need better communcation, website, what spending money on
going forward, what to spend
2 - need to define target, say 5000 10000 etc. to spend on this, that, or
some other thing
makes communication with ev much easier for companies donating money
KK: legally have to say what money is spent on
DH: can specify donation for travel fund e.g.
legal consequences for not following guidance
can't say "travel fund only for TI employees", e.g., but can say this is
for travel fund
PB: safest is unrestricted gifts
what about PR material, banners, etc
FB: mostly for tables e.g. FOSDEM, don't look good
why donate travel money if people coming [sponsored by companies] anyway
SH: need to clarify
perhaps offer training? lots of smart people on IRC willing to help
people out for free
but might be opportunity to set up training for companies, private
individuals
DH: dangerous, risking status as eV - can't provide services for a fee
PB: if came up, encourage individuals to do it on their own and remember
us fondly
KK: used to refer to third parties on wiki
PB: don't want to be service provider or compete with OE users
KK: do we have a list of companies using OE?
PB: not really, but you are close to being volunteered to create one
RP: such a list would be very useful
PB: to all, please talk with KK to develop such a list
conflict because KK works for TI?
>> take action item offline - some companies may not want to be listed
PB: can send to list, ask people to self-report on wiki
can send info to PB if want to be privately listed
eg Eric Bernard would love to put Eutria on the list
perhaps someone like x company may not want to be on website
SH: no problem helping to sponsor travel
KK: LF said they can help out too
DH: ...but only to lf events
what would membership like? is interest in membership in specific
sponsorships?
then board needs to put draconian caps & rules, travel is expensive
for those of us working for big companies, sponsorship should not apply
if need, how much money needed? then start fundraising
PB: for one OEDEM a company gave some money to spend, we said anyone who
wanted
could ask for fixed amount to help reduce pain, which works
prevents hostel guys from staying in hilton, or Holder's place
FB: set up basic rules
DH: rules define travel on OE business
PB: good presentation at FOSDEM & LinuxTag
FB: dont have to pay for it, stands/tables at conferences quite expensive
certain amount of stands for projects, register & submit info
DH: LinuxTag is EU's largest free software conference, 14 yrs
now permanently in Berlin, part sponsored by German govt, part German
part English
very German centric, density of English speaking instuctors very
frustrating
15000 people attend
mostly community people attending
PB: good exposure
FB: useful to have some German speaking people attend, some English is
still ok
good thing in Berlin, easy to go there
MJ: had 3 German OE people at LinuxTag last year
FB: this year better
KK: plan to join embedded projects in a corner, join booths so larger
space (FB's idea)
requires coordination with other embedded projects
can't pay for larger booth, overly expensive
PB: LinuxTag worthwhile event, trouble getting people to go without
travel grants?
make sense to sponsor?
FB: last year very few people, mostly only one, this year better
DH: other projects at LinuxTag provide travel sponsorship in return for
spending 50% of time in booth
in booth for 4 hrs/day, pay part of travel
I went to OE booth and found no one, possibly coincidence? having
people in booth very important
FB: half organized by LinuxTag ev, half by Berlin gov, sometimes
complicated
they realize "embedded" is interesting catchword
idea of having larger embedded area will go through
KK: video people already share an area
PB: worthwhile sponsoring, try to arrange reimbursements for LinuxTag,
high impact
DS: value in having joint booth with yocto project
PB: always open to more sponsorship
DH: LinuxTag giving me hard sell on sponsoring - using Intel booth as
joint OE/yocto could be a lot of fun
maybe bribe Niels into putting OE community both adjacent
KK: video wall comes with me in the box
DH: if OE willing to make sure people there to answer questions,
we can figure financial part of getting a nice space, all show more
presence
PB: other embedded projects in corner?
KK: free booths small, video wall big
Niels' idea
DH: competing projects next to each other?
FB: T2 directly competing with OE, several embedded projects
one doing open hardware bicycle computing
some from embedded area in the past
was quite interesting, not only ones with big collection of funky
hardware
MJ: someone had wall of suported mainboards
DH: will ask Niels if we can do adjacent booth & share space
PB: can show up with claptrap?
DH: yocto booth, can show anything
PB: no objections noted
EH: if TI allow to show video wall, problems if OE allows sponsorship for
demo OE supported boards on stand
could look like paying for product to be there
FB: smells fishy
EH: eaiser waty to get fundint
PB: if want to give money stand in booth great, only requirement is that
something looks cool & personally stand around to show poeple
EH: more selling hardware than OE
opportunity, gives value to those wanting to sell boards
DH: careful from media perspective, can't "sell" but tell people
donations welcome
invite people present with hardware & talk about it
EH: also have hardware not paid
DH & PB: all toys welcome
PB: we're here to talk about toys
EH: just not a cheap way to showcase hardwaere
PB: spend some money to have community people there, meets goals of ev
problem is not too little hardware, too much
EH: have not had too much money - ask for donations from showcased boards
DH: sales job, should not be doing
KK: donate money want marketing materials there
DH: need someone on OE side - yocto booth will have intel swag
keep tasteful & low key
KK: don't expect problem, but don't always know expectations
PB: if have to pay price to go, don't be annyoing
SH: ratify to go ahead & sponsor?
DH & PB: board decision, though no one objects
PB: think about other events
RS: .. CEBIT?
RP: problem FOSDEM? not many people there
trying to see if have plan to do things, then money - extra money
spend on FOSDEM
look for alternate events, arrange people to present
MJ: easier to find for linuxtag
need to clone myself into 10 copies, meet 500 people/hr
[7:30 - break]
(continued: other events)
PB: other European events, how about Tdose? KK can report back
ELCE? no community stand - looking for shows where we can get in for
nothing
possibly partner with other group like yocto
KK: for LF event, yocto better as LF project
MJ: session by toolchain group at Linaro Connect, dont know what about,
possibly using yocto as daily builds?
will report back, minutes will be available
PB: under travel - ask OE person to go to Linaro Connect? havent had much
followup due to sched conflicts, etc
MJ: next Linaro Connect is the week before ELC, right after FOSDEM
PB: good thing to have an OE person not related to Linaro there
MJ: each time decision made to represent, irc channel, audio feed - can
listen & ask questions on irc
will report on how
may be possible to move to more EU friendly time
FB: Embedded World
no deal yet, more or less perfect enviroment for us, commercial fair,
fairly big
surrounded by potential users, customers, etc
lots of companies using OE there
DH: events frustrating as open source person
value opinion surrounded by potential customers, pain involved in
being there
complete lack of understanding of 90%
PB: some us small guys have to deal with that environment
work out if we can expand our reach
FB: EW usually in march near CEBIT
RS: CEBIT, consumer electronics show, in Hanover, famous, international
DH: largest show in world
RS: no focus on open source software, this year & few years ago have open
source corner
free stands to community projects
had an OE stand, tv & show devices
nice way to display oe
lots of traffic, asked about Embedded World a week before, lots of
people say using OE
PB: real staffing problem, RS only, 7 day event
FB: used to be 8, several people died (laughter)
DH: actually only 5 days now, 800k true unique visitors
22 large fair halls, multiple stories
takes a week to see everything
keep stopping & starting open source booths
need to solve staffing
FB: useful even to sponsor people
staying in Hanover very expensive or involves driving
DH: cheaper to stay in berlin
will not find another event with 1/10 of people, free booth there
extremely useful
disagree that Embedded World is more useful
lot of biz people go there to figure out next thing
FB: most important thing, mechanism for projects to get in, EW doesn't
have
PB: one thing is to look at minutes [for GA], come up wtih proposed
travel budget for next year
take to potential sponsors
RS doing advocacy stuff, show stuff, continue? if get money to sponsor
people?
RS: have day job too
>>PB: look at minutes, propose travel budget: PB, RS - use GSA per diem
schedules
>>DH: note that normal travel budget does ont apploy to CEBIT/Hanover, will
help with this specific issue
US events:
PB: SCaLE (Tom & Khem went last year)
also big shows, not os friendly
DH: Open Bridge in Portland, very open-source friendly
PB: low OE density in US
KK: if show & present at a conference, sometimes petition for travel,
possibly ELC?
DH: for us, no value in commercial events, not visible & not right people
RP: better to start talking now, need multiple people
lots of regionals
DH: OSCON waste of time for embedded, audience 80% web devs
PB: in US, there is SCaLE (should help with money), open bridge,
regionals
on mailing list, say lots of events to have OE booths to see if
worthwhile,
dont want to put lots of money in without good plan
do events where we cant staff a booth?
DH: only sign up for booth if know have staff to cover, otherwise looks
like dead project
PB: conclusion, need large travel budget, come up wth estimated needs
if get funding then do, if not then only do free stuff
reasonably good chance to improve LinuxTag & do CEBIT
LinuxTag 23-26 May, CEBIT 6-10 March
[8:00]
proxy rule
PB:
problem is that to stay active in eV, need to attend GA in person or
submit proxy
proposal to raise proxy from 2 to 3, could be worthwhile - very full up
with current rule
Phil Blundell has made proposals for voting procedure like voting for 1
candidate
anyone had chance to review elec voting proc?
RP: did read, radical changes
currently all votes anonymous from vote manager, just decision back
if internet voting, need list of people covering who voted
other complaint never get feedback on percentage voting - was it
close?
or even how many people voted
Phil's proposals open up voting radically, results have list of
voters,
summary of stats, how many people voted yes or abstained
actual vote still confidential
FM: one concern - list of members who partcipate
personally prefer that if the vote is about things ok to disclose, if
people then not
don't want to give people a bad feeling if they just won with small
margin
then their contribution not appreciated
been in other groups with rule like this
anon in terms of metrics
RP: in voting instructions, lots of classifications listed
new members, groups of people, generic decision making process
FM: not only new members, but also TSC, board - personal feeling
RP: just stating what proposals represents
could take both ways
one tech question - if we change internet voting procedure, can we
hold an internet vote on changing procedure or must decide at GA?
Phil's proposal late in cycle
question to all: read out proposal?
EH: also proxies, no one with proxies
RP: ok to change procedure because it is not part of statutes
can now agree to hold the vote on that using internet system
PB: Phil wrote it up late & people need to read it, use existing internet
voting procedure
agree ok under statues
collected proxy representation from 30 of 50 people who may want to
put end to this
can read carefully, anyone vote on tonight?
SW: need amendment
PB: need to know & not to spend 30 minutes agreeing with each other
FB: continue process
PB: do internet vote now, anything else?
RP: this about internet voting procedure can change
only other question is on proxy. 16 people here, 16 proxies
concern is that org needs to adapt; lots of bureaucratic steps
espescially when issue concerns statutes
need 3/4 vote, hard to get
EH: could get more people to hand in proxy
KK: if extend to 3 or 4 proxies per attendee, can hold GAs with 25 or 20%
of complete
membership & make majority decision? that's icky
SW: were there still people looking for proxies?
all: yes
KK: question of trust - many members don't know each other
EH: do proposals have to be available in advance? proxy can instruct on
specific votes
DH: have to be specific based on German laws
RP: given instructions on specific instructions e.g. phil's proposal
KK: met in person, discussed things on agenda, so knew what thinking
RP: do worry about currenty proxy levels tying up organization
EH: law states that a proxy is not general proxy; less problem with
specific proxies
FB: exactly specified degree of function of proxy in German law
if specified somehow, rules on how to do it
person proxying says vote x on y, but there is no secure way to check
whether they voted that way
PB: had discussing on mailing list, but people wont fill out agenda
got a concrete voting proposal 1 hr before voting starts
frustration
RP: is proposal on changing statute about # proxies
KK: proposal to change or change to specified number?
RP: to change to 3 or 4
FB: suggest reducing pressure behind needing to have proxies, see how to
attend remotely
so people not attending could vote
RP: what are rules, do we have to hold a physical GA?
FB: law doesnt know about anything not physical
have to announce location & time
EH: similar in denmark
can have all virtual
RP: much fairer way to get the organization together
KK: only need 12 people to get 2/3 currently
PB: 2/3 only for changing statutes
KK: for those who don't exercise vote, they are demoted?
RP: memership classes need to reflect the fact that it is a virtual
organization effectively
PB: one thing that requires 3/4 is to disband org
SH: there are 16 people here, 33 represented with proxies
all rest are potentially going to next level of membership?
RP: only if they miss two GAs
PB: they automatically go into extraordinary membership, but can petition
board to be put back
>> I will examine attendances to see who needs to change status
SH: concerned about effectiveness at having people show up & vote
RP: if changes required, today is a moot point to try to change statutes,
not enough voters
SH: reasonable approach to try to have people attend remotely
RP: propose to board that needs investigation, English translation is
unclear
PB: our statutes very similar to KDE ones
SH: adding ways for people to attend is extremely valuable
if can do that then [Mentor Graphics] could help with logistics
PB: can't change proxies if not enough people (and no proposal)
other one didn't come in soon enough but can change with internet vote
FB: changing statutes requires 3/4 majority of complete membership?
or of votes in meeting? but at least half of active members
EH: if we have remote attendance, obviates issue
RP: need German speakers to decipher rules
FB: if fine with german law then ok
SH: consult german attorney?
JO: possibly FSFE legal help?
>>PB: hold internet vote, discussion on list to make sure everyone is happy
with Phil's proposal,
can proceed with existing procedure
trying to solve problem of people downgrading to extraordinary
may be non-problem; reapplying costs nothing
PB: personal distaste for conference phone
RP: IRC meeting would be fairer
PB: still encourage people to physically attend
KK: language in statutes for phoning? e.g. "show of hands"?
RP: secret ballot using cards
PB: who will take & run with? changing statutes potentially with proxies
for timeout, changing internet voting procedure
hoping that Phil ok with turning into internet vote so people can
read before voting
KK: avoid deadlock
PB: anyone going to run this through if Phil doesn't?
KK: then no one cares and dont need to do it
PB: agree in principle
will hope Phil finishes
>>RP: general consensues in room? yes. if phil doesn't, RP will bring it
up.
KK: if possible to do remotely & we agree, then likely won't need to
extend proxy rule
also need to find out about secret ballot & physical requirement
PE: proposal not to keep votes
KK: might need to verify to proxies
RP: people not willing to step forward to handle voting, need people to
step up
PB: problem trying to solve is timing out & deadlock issues
statutes relatively sound now, only real concern is saturated for
proxies
KK: or remote stuff works out [obviating need for proxies]
PB: up to members to develop current proposal, has to be voted at GA or
extraordinary GA
KK: if proposal to address timeout issue, articulate better then get rid
of one problem?
PB: reserve right for board to make decision
KK: non problem
PB: regarding the extraordinary list, if you are on this list and dont
want to be there, contact board
EH: not deadlocked today anyway
PB: if group wants to make proposal - don't want to hear on and on with
no reasonable proposals
PB: anyone want to change statutes today? no, move on
New Secretary
PB: Graeme resigned mid GA, had internet vote to elect, Denys voted to
board
statutes state that has to be revoted
DS: nominates denys
Denys keeps minutes for board meetings, very important
PB: has been a huge help
all in favor for 3 year term
or step into remaining time?
PB: my interpretation, use internet vote to carry to GA, then vote to new
term
next year and 1 yr from now, other board members terms expire, then 3
peoples terms stagger
natural process for letting it become staggered
normally these things are staggered from start, ours wasn't
PB: read statutes, 3 year term, then next year can replace him
all in favor of electing denys to 3 yrs term? [all hands]
DH: request for compliance with German law to ask if anyone voting for
self or proxy against proposal
is anyone voting against proposal for self or proxy? no hands
RESULT: Denys elected
GA in US
PB: several people based in US asked to have a GA there because they
heard about how fun they are
KK: what are the rules for timing of GA?
PB: required to have one per year, says nothing about having another one
KK: must be 6 weeks between? so there is a maximum per year
PB: is there anyone who doesn't think we can have 2 GA in a year? (none)
RP: first one is GA, next is extraordinary GA
PB: partly helps (or RP says makes works) timing
EH: dumb idea, should have one, not two
PB: good to have a get together
SH: doesn't have to be a GA
MJ: how about a US OEDEM
PB: enough attendance to do a developers meeting?
KK: what was proposal put fwd?
RP: representatives from members who would like to be able to attend GA
but not travel to EU
DS: perhaps this is wrong group to ask?
KK: one solution is 2012 GA can be held in US if go through <vote>?
then the next in europe? one way to address
keep with one GA per year & alternating so not two GA in same area
twice
helps issue with people timing out & becoming extraordinary members
PB: would be convenent to have at ELC in Feb (San Francisco bay area)
board requires an announcement 6 weeks in advance
could hold one every 8 weeks?
EH: always have very specific time
FM: purpose is to get results on financials etc, member declare all well
& board ok
FB: can have GA for any puprose if 20% membership ok
is that extraoridnary?
PB: helpful as board member
RP: helpful to have meeting, not necessarily a GA which is business
makes sense to condense business portion
move to discuss on mailing list, keep GA as a formality and do rest
through online voting
fine next year to hold formality of GA in US rather than here
encourage more developer meetings
KK: takes away problem of interacting with proxies
PB: have heard people say they want more developer meetings
SH: admin overhead
EH: need purpose for GA, no purpose is not a purpose
other issues dont even talk about
KK: could have at ELC
EH: not really that interested in discussing voting procedures
>>result:
hold virtually if can happen
keep as small as possible
face to face developer type meeting
GA short
discuss beforehand, make GA a formality
make concrete proposals on list well in advance
Conclusion
PB: anything else?
RS: next ga?
PB: board will announce 6 weeks in adavance, may discuss ELC on list
if good corporate sponsorship, have in good diving location
meeting adjourned 9:04
--
Jeff Osier-Mixon http://jefro.net/blog
Yocto Project Community Manager @Intel http://yoctoproject.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20111104/ece8eb5b/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list