1 files changed, 149 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/BoardOfDirectors/BoardOfDirectors/IrcLogs/2017/02-16.mdwn b/BoardOfDirectors/BoardOfDirectors/IrcLogs/2017/02-16.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..b52fae87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/BoardOfDirectors/BoardOfDirectors/IrcLogs/2017/02-16.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+[[!format txt """
+23:00 <+egbert> hi guys! i guess i volunteered to run the meeting today/night since danvet is off
+23:00 <+egbert> so who do we have here? whot, agd5f, bryce, robclark - i saw mupuf join
+23:00 < mupuf> hey you :)
+23:00 <+egbert> hey mupuf 
+23:01 <+egbert> so still wating for keithp
+23:01 <+egbert> shall we get started?
+23:01 < robclark> sure
+23:02 < bryce> yep
+23:02 <+egbert> agenda: elections, gsoc, paperwork, 
+23:02 <+egbert> khronos?
+23:02 <+egbert> ah, xdc
+23:03 <+egbert> anything else?
+23:03 < mupuf> sounds about right!
+23:03 <+egbert> lets start with elections
+23:03 <+egbert> so the expiry period is over i've just read. we can start with the next step.
+23:04 < agd5f> egbert, just waiting for the 30 day period to end.  going to send out the initial email tonight
+23:04 < whot> the first couple of weeks are mostly sending out emails anyway
+23:04 <+egbert> agd5f: i just read above that it did already.
+23:04 <+egbert> whot: right.
+23:04 < agd5f> egbert, yup
+23:05 < whot> it would be prudent to have the membership changes finalised at the start of the election period, so we 
+              don't have members have to read them on the last day
+23:05 < whot> but given the changes, it's not like this is a big issue
+23:05 <+egbert> whot: definitely.
+23:05 < whot> (note to self, link to git repo in email for diffs)
+23:06 < robclark> I guess I need to update memberagreement branch w/ r-b's, etc...  I guess we keep it on a branch, tho, 
+                  until after it is voted on?
+23:07 < whot> yep
+23:07 <+egbert> robclark: yeah, this sound like a good plan.
+23:07 <+egbert> so it looks like everything is on time and in plan regarding the election.
+23:08 < robclark> ok, I'll update branch.. I guess I should update bylaws too w/ the trick to get date from git...  
+                  although I assume mechanical changes like that don't need vote?
+23:09 < mupuf> robclark: people complained they did not have time to react before
+23:09 < mupuf> so, 
+23:09 < mupuf> let's release early!
+23:09 < whot> i forgot, do we need 2/3 or 50% this time?
+23:09 <+egbert> yes, i'd rather slip the election date by a week.
+23:09 < robclark> (btw, we should also find some better place than git for generated pdf but that is something I think we 
+                  can solve later)
+23:10 <+egbert> do we want a discussion period for the membership agreement?
+23:10 < mupuf> yeah, we should ask
+23:10 < robclark> mupuf, anyways, I can regenerate latest memberagreement.pdf tonight so we can send it out w/ election 
+                  notice if you want..
+23:10 < mupuf> asking for suggestions from the community
+23:10 <+egbert> not that i've seen too many discussions happening in the past, it is still goodp ractice to have one
+23:10 < robclark> (or I can send separately)
+23:10 < mupuf> nothing else
+23:11 < mupuf> robclark: would be absolutely perfect
+23:11 <+egbert> mupuf: also put a link on to it from the election page, please.
+23:12 <+egbert> ok, anything else regarding elections?
+23:12  * mupuf does not deal with elections this year
+23:12 < mupuf> :D
+23:12 <+egbert> shall we move on to gsoc?
+23:12 < mupuf> yeeeeppeeeee
+23:12 < mupuf> I can talk about the gsoc
+23:12 <+egbert> mupuf: please go ahead!
+23:12 < mupuf> One sentence: we are waiting for google to tell us if we got accepted or not!
+23:13 < mupuf> Answer on the 26th
+23:13 < whot> that's two sentences
+23:13 < mupuf> :s
+23:13 <+egbert> at least we've got a definitive date
+23:13 <+egbert> ok, so this is all about gsoc i guess?
+23:13 < mupuf> yep
+23:13 <+egbert> ok, so next topic: paperwork
+23:14 <+egbert> we did cover the membership agreement already
+23:14 <+egbert> anything we need to cover on spi, finaicial status etc?
+23:14 <+egbert> bryce?
+23:14 < bryce> heya
+23:15 < bryce> a few minor bits
+23:15 < bryce> Still waiting to hear back from SPI on a dump of our 2016 financial info; I re-pinged a couple weeks ago, 
+               will do so again.
+23:15 <+egbert> bryce: thanks!
+23:16 < bryce> I filed for the reimbursement for the dissolution fee, and was surprised they reimbursed immediately
+23:16 < bryce> so spi is slow on response on some stuff, but not other stuff.  :-)
+23:16 <+egbert> it is good to know that they at least pay in time :)
+23:17 < bryce> As per discussion last meeting, I've revised my finance docs branch, to remove names from changelogs (and 
+               filenames).  The branch is ready to land; I'd love to get a few +1 reviews, but can land it if no one has 
+               any further issues
+23:18 <+egbert> bryce: you want that tonight?
+23:18 < bryce> egbert, that would be great
+23:18 <+egbert> bryce: i have to admit i haven't really looked at it in detail, but i'd still think it's ok
+23:19 < bryce> also, still needing gpg keys from board members, I'm not sure we sorted out a plan of attack there, but I'm 
+               open to whatever.  But until that's done no one else will be able to access the financial docs
+23:19 <+egbert> bryce: ok
+23:19 < bryce> egbert, the branch's content is encrypted so the review is mainly checking that it's not leaking anything 
+               sensitive.  I don't expect any in depth reviewing of what's inside.  :-)
+23:20 <+egbert> ok
+23:20 < bryce> last bit, I've started drafting the 2016 treasurer report.
+23:20 < bryce> just the bones though; I can only go so far without the data from SPI
+23:21 < bryce> egbert, think that covers everything from me, thanks.
+23:21 < robclark> (jfyi, updated https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/foundation/bylaws/log/?h=memberagreement-updates 
+                  including regenerated pdfs .. if someone is sending election noticed feel free to include link)
+23:21 <+egbert> bryce: cool, thank you for the report!
+23:21 < agd5f> robclark, thanks!
+23:21 <+egbert> robclark: thanks to you as well
+23:21 < robclark> updated the date on bylaws too to take from git.. I *assume* that isn't the sort of thing that needs 
+                  voting on but if anyone disagrees I'll update branch)
+23:21 <+egbert> next item: khronos - anything to discuss there?
+23:22 < robclark> I think khronos is danvet?  So probably no?
+23:22 <+egbert> right
+23:22 <+egbert> last thing on my list was xdc.
+23:22 <+egbert> have we heard anything about a date proposal, yet?
+23:23 < robclark> iirc, last I heard was "soon" but marcheu might be able to update?
+23:24 < bryce> are there any concerns over USA travel restrictions?
+23:24 <+egbert> it would be good to have a definitive date by mid of march.
+23:24 <+egbert> bryce: well, i wanted to bring this up last meeting but then decided against it.
+23:25 < robclark> bryce, well perhaps some concerns over USA still being here in the fall ..  not sure how much we can do 
+                  about that..
+23:25 <+egbert> as it looks atm things might not be all that bad
+23:26 <+egbert> if we wanted to move elsewhere - we'd find a new organizer and place very quickly.
+23:27 <+egbert> as people would like to know where to go and when soon.
+23:27 < whot> i heard mexico is just on the other side of the wall :)
+23:27 < whot> but yeah, we can't predict things like this, so right now just going for a confirmed date seems prudent 
+              enough
+23:27  * robclark kinda hoping the checks and balances (aka judicial branch) thing works out..  although starting to 
+          reconsider taking pgp keys with me when I leave the country..
+23:29 < bryce> if things do need to be changed, guess we should just ensure it's communicated early enough to not disrupt 
+               too many travel arrangements
+23:30 < whot> i think if we end up not being able to host the conf in the US then disrupting travel arrangements may be 
+              the least of anyone's worries...
+23:30 <+egbert> bryce: right. but to change anything we'd need to find a new organizer.
+23:30 < robclark> even in the unlikely chance the EO is reinstanted (or some new variant of it holds up), I don't think it 
+                  effects too many XDC attendees?  (and probably in that case there are bigger problems)
+23:30 <+egbert> we may have to start doing virtual conferences ....
+23:31 < robclark> yeah
+23:31 < robclark> yeah
+23:31 <+egbert> robclark: this is true - on the other hand if it affects anyone it would be bad still
+23:32 <+egbert> but, yeah, without an alternative in sight, let's just hope for the best.
+23:32 < robclark> yeah
+23:32 <+egbert> is anyone pinging marcheau regarding a date?
+23:33  * robclark did on this channel 10min ago, if that counts :-P
+23:34 <+egbert> right, let's do it again, this time without me mistying ;) 
+23:35 <+egbert> marcheu: do you have any information on possible dates for xdc?
+23:35 <+egbert> i guess this is all on xdc.
+23:35 <+egbert> have i missed any subject?
+23:36 <+egbert> topic i mean..
+23:36 < bryce> egbert, fast meeting :-)
+23:37 <+egbert> bryce: yeah! i'm tired ;)
+23:37 <+egbert> it is almost midnight here 
+23:37 <+egbert> ok, looks like there's nothing else.
+23:37 <+egbert> i guess, we can close the meeting, then.
+23:38 < robclark> nothing more here
+23:38 <+egbert> i will write up minutes and publish the irc logs - not tonight though.
+23:38 < robclark> k, gn
+23:38 <+egbert> tomorrow morning
+23:38 <+egbert> good day/night everybudy!
+23:40 < bryce> thanks!
+"""]]