2006-10 17 15:00:02 <schultmc>	*GAVEL*
2006-10 17 15:00:11 <schultmc>	[item 1, opening] Today's Software in the Public Interest meeting is called to order.  Today's agenda and any pending resolutions are listed at http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2006-10-17.html
2006-10 17 15:00:20 <schultmc>	[item 2, roll call] Board members, please state your name for the record.  As we have nine board members, quorum for today's meeting is six.  I note for the record that regrets have been received from Jimmy Kaplowitz, Bdale Garbee, David Graham, and Branden Robinson.
2006-10 17 15:00:20 <schultmc>	Guests, please /msg your names to Maulkin for the record
2006-10 17 15:00:27 <schultmc>	Michael Schultheiss
2006-10 17 15:00:28 <Diziet>	Ian Jackson
2006-10 17 15:00:30 <cdlu>	David Graham
2006-10 17 15:00:32 <Maulkin>	Neil McGovern
2006-10 17 15:00:40 <nanday>	Bruce Byfield
2006-10 17 15:00:45 <jberkus>	Josh Berkus
2006-10 17 15:00:50 <schultmc>	nanday: /msg Maulkin please
2006-10 17 15:00:58 <nanday>	right.
2006-10 17 15:01:10 <Maulkin>	For reference, nanday is press :)
2006-10 17 15:01:17 <schultmc>	Joey's here, correct?
2006-10 17 15:01:20 *	cdlu notes nanday's blue flack jacket
2006-10 17 15:01:24 *	schultmc is aware
2006-10 17 15:01:25 <Maulkin>	should be
2006-10 17 15:01:33 <cdlu>	Joey, SYN
2006-10 17 15:01:41 <schultmc>	if so, that's everyone expected today
2006-10 17 15:01:48 <schultmc>	bdale may be joining us later
2006-10 17 15:02:04 <schultmc>	[item 3, president's report]
2006-10 17 15:02:23 <schultmc>	I haven't heard of anything to report so I'll move on to item 4
2006-10 17 15:02:29 <schultmc>	[item 4, treasurer's report]
2006-10 17 15:02:34 <schultmc>	jberkus: you have the floor
2006-10 17 15:02:47 -->	seanius (~sean@81.170.234.204) has joined #spi
2006-10 17 15:02:49 <jberkus>	Well, I think I posted to e-mail most of what I want to say
2006-10 17 15:02:59 <Diziet>	jberkus: Excellent, just the way to do it :-).
2006-10 17 15:03:13 <Diziet>	Thanks to Josh for his work and I think we all wish him luck and fortitude !
2006-10 17 15:03:17 <jberkus>	mostly we're just suffering from years of not having someone with business exp. doing our accounts
2006-10 17 15:03:33 <jberkus>	so I need to backtrack to 1/1/2005 and redo everything from that point
2006-10 17 15:04:12 <Joey>	Sad to hear
2006-10 17 15:04:16 <jberkus>	right now, everything is in multiple spreadsheets of raw material, and I'm still missing stuff from early 2005
2006-10 17 15:04:43 <jberkus>	if anyone does have expense records from 2005 (e.g. Debconf) it would be helpful
2006-10 17 15:04:46 <bdale>	schultmc: carry on, my networking situation is sub-optimal
2006-10 17 15:04:50 <jberkus>	done
2006-10 17 15:04:52 <schultmc>	bdale: understood
2006-10 17 15:05:02 <schultmc>	[item 5, outstanding minutes]
2006-10 17 15:05:04 -->	slef (ENoPulsar@dial-dynamic-62-69-37-239.surfdial.murphx.net) has joined #spi
2006-10 17 15:05:04 -->	syntaxis (~syntaxis@cpc1-lamb2-0-0-cust860.bmly.cable.ntl.com) has joined #spi
2006-10 17 15:05:07 <schultmc>	Maulkin: you have the floor
2006-10 17 15:05:20 <Maulkin>	We could do with voting on the treasurer's report...
2006-10 17 15:05:28 <Diziet>	Maulkin: There wasn't much of a report really.
2006-10 17 15:05:33 <Maulkin>	okies
2006-10 17 15:05:36 <Diziet>	We can vote to accept the accounts when there are some.
2006-10 17 15:05:38 <jberkus>	I haven't issued any statements to approve
2006-10 17 15:05:47 <Maulkin>	So, two sets of minutes to approve this month.
2006-10 17 15:05:57 <Maulkin>	me and cdlu are cathing up :)
2006-10 17 15:06:00 <Diziet>	When were the web pages last edited ?
2006-10 17 15:06:07 <Diziet>	I mean, I read these earlier today.
2006-10 17 15:06:16 <Maulkin>	For minutes?
2006-10 17 15:06:21 <Diziet>	Yes.
2006-10 17 15:06:22 <Maulkin>	You have the latest set :)
2006-10 17 15:06:26 <Diziet>	Good.
2006-10 17 15:06:46 <Maulkin>	Should be straight forward. I suggest we vote seperatly
2006-10 17 15:06:51 <schultmc>	hrm
2006-10 17 15:07:02 <Diziet>	If they were sent round by email I wouldn't have to ask.  </axe-grinding>
2006-10 17 15:07:05 <schultmc>	the log for 2005-08-16 links to 2005-07-26
2006-10 17 15:07:19 <Maulkin>	Does it? Damn.
2006-10 17 15:07:43 <Diziet>	So it does.
2006-10 17 15:07:50 <Diziet>	I don't think that ought to stop us approving the minutes themselves.
2006-10 17 15:07:53 <jberkus>	can't approve that one then
2006-10 17 15:07:58 <jberkus>	no, just that one
2006-10 17 15:08:17 <Maulkin>	Sorry all :|
2006-10 17 15:08:18 <Diziet>	I mean, the only thing wrong is the url to the log, which isn't part of the minutes.
2006-10 17 15:08:22 <cdlu>	that's just an incorrect link.
2006-10 17 15:08:49 <Diziet>	So I'm happy to vote on the minutes now.
2006-10 17 15:09:12 <Diziet>	Or if someone quibbles we can formally move to amend the URL but that seems silly.
2006-10 17 15:09:19 *	Maulkin moves to vote on Board Meeting, August 16th, 2005
2006-10 17 15:09:19 <bdale>	I'm ok with voting
2006-10 17 15:09:24 *	cdlu seconds
2006-10 17 15:09:37 <Maulkin>	Voting started, 9 people (bdale,cdlu,diziet,hydroxide,jberkus,joey,maulkin,overfiend,schultmc) allowed to vote on Approve minutes of Board Meeting, August 16th, 2005. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
2006-10 17 15:09:42 <Diziet>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:09:42 <cdlu>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:09:43 <schultmc>	!vote abstain
2006-10 17 15:09:45 <Maulkin>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:09:46 <bdale>	!vote abstain
2006-10 17 15:09:49 <jberkus>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:09:58 <Maulkin>	!vote abstain
2006-10 17 15:10:02 <jberkus>	ok, I have to move not
2006-10 17 15:10:09 <jberkus>	er, now, offline for 5 min.
2006-10 17 15:10:22 <Joey>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:10:24 <Diziet>	bdale: AYT ?  Otherwise we lose quorum, don't we ?
2006-10 17 15:10:29 <bdale>	Diziet: I'm here
2006-10 17 15:10:33 <bdale>	Diziet: I even voted...
2006-10 17 15:10:39 <Diziet>	Oh, yes, so you did :-).
2006-10 17 15:10:40 <Maulkin>	Current voting results for "Approve minutes of Board Meeting, August 16th, 2005": Yes: 4, No: 0, Abstain: 3, Missing: 2 ( hydroxide  overfiend )
2006-10 17 15:10:47 <Maulkin>	Current voting results for "Approve minutes of Board Meeting, August 16th, 2005": Yes: 4, No: 0, Abstain: 3, Missing: 2 ( hydroxide  overfiend )
2006-10 17 15:10:50 <Maulkin>	Voting for "Approve minutes of Board Meeting, August 16th, 2005" closed.
2006-10 17 15:11:22 <Maulkin>	Next set...
2006-10 17 15:11:31 <Diziet>	Right, I'm happy to vote straight away.
2006-10 17 15:11:32 *	Maulkin moves to vote on Board Meeting, September 19th, 2006
2006-10 17 15:11:41 <Joey>	Could Janurary be fixed please?
2006-10 17 15:11:42 *	cdlu seconds
2006-10 17 15:11:48 <Maulkin>	Voting started, 7 people (bdale,cdlu,diziet,jberkus,joey,maulkin,schultmc) allowed to vote on Approve minutes of Board Meeting, September 19th, 2006. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
2006-10 17 15:11:54 <schultmc>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:11:57 <Maulkin>	Joey: sure
2006-10 17 15:11:59 <Diziet>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:12:02 <Maulkin>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:12:04 <cdlu>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:12:08 <bdale>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:12:12 <--	jberkus has quit (Quit: jberkus)
2006-10 17 15:12:35 <cdlu>	hmm, logging out will make it harder for him to vote from backlog
2006-10 17 15:12:42 <Maulkin>	Current voting results for "Approve minutes of Board Meeting, September 19th, 2006": Yes: 5, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 2 ( jberkus  joey )
2006-10 17 15:12:49 <Joey>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:12:55 <Maulkin>	Current voting results for "Approve minutes of Board Meeting, September 19th, 2006": Yes: 6, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 1 ( jberkus )
2006-10 17 15:12:59 <Maulkin>	Voting for "Approve minutes of Board Meeting, September 19th, 2006" closed.
2006-10 17 15:12:59 <bdale>	cdlu: as long as we remain quorate, it's ok
2006-10 17 15:13:24 <Maulkin>	That's it for minutes for this month
2006-10 17 15:13:33 <cdlu>	bdale, yeah, just thinking about it in light of the new attendance policy. I request maulkin consider jberkus' absence from those votes regretted. :)
2006-10 17 15:13:40 <schultmc>	[item 6, items up for discussion]
2006-10 17 15:13:46 <Maulkin>	cdlu: done :)
2006-10 17 15:13:46 <bdale>	cdlu: agreed
2006-10 17 15:13:48 <Diziet>	cdlu: regretted> Quite so.
2006-10 17 15:14:19 <Diziet>	I can't believe we still haven't had any info from Greg about this.
2006-10 17 15:14:19 <schultmc>	Item 6.1: Further on Debian trademark in Spain? (Resolution 2006-04-03.jfsp.1
2006-10 17 15:14:26 <schultmc>	bdale: any updates?
2006-10 17 15:14:57 <Diziet>	If there's a confidentiality thing (which there might be) then fine and we can do it in camera, but the continued lack of movement is distressing.
2006-10 17 15:15:01 <bdale>	I've made contact with Greg, we have not managed to sync for long enough to have a meaningful conversation about the list of open items, which in the last two weeks is mostly my fault
2006-10 17 15:15:25 <Diziet>	bdale: Do you need help ?
2006-10 17 15:15:39 <bdale>	Greg indicated that he will have more time going forward, hasn't had much to spare for a while
2006-10 17 15:15:51 <Diziet>	Do we need to try to look for answers elsewhere, then ?
2006-10 17 15:16:11 -->	josh (~josh@m010f36d0.tmodns.net) has joined #spi
2006-10 17 15:16:17 <josh>	sorry, airport
2006-10 17 15:16:19 <Diziet>	Hi again.
2006-10 17 15:16:20 <josh>	back on now
2006-10 17 15:16:24 <bdale>	Diziet: the question I really want to ask Greg when we touch base next is how much time he has to offer and how we should bound the scope of what we expect him to address
2006-10 17 15:16:25 <Maulkin>	welcome back josh :)
2006-10 17 15:16:32 <cdlu>	for reference, would it be worthwhile for us to consider retaining gmp as a lawyer who is not pro bono and could thus make us a priority?
2006-10 17 15:16:32 <Diziet>	josh: We're onto the Spanish trademark.
2006-10 17 15:17:03 <Diziet>	cdlu: That can get very expensive very quickly.
2006-10 17 15:17:12 <bdale>	Diziet: I thought he was very interested in the trademark issues when he first signed on, at least.  Some of the other items on our DPL questions list, etc, are somewhat beyond the scope of what he may think he signed up for?
2006-10 17 15:17:12 <Joey>	cdlu: At some point we'll need a paid lawyer, I guess
2006-10 17 15:17:13 ---	josh is now known as Guest1875
2006-10 17 15:17:18 <Guest1875>	FWIW, PostgreSQL has worked with a US trademark atty, who's willing to offer discounts to OSS-NPOs
2006-10 17 15:17:39 <Diziet>	Guest1875: Oh ?  That sounds interesting; do you have any details to hand ?
2006-10 17 15:17:39 <Guest1875>	augh
2006-10 17 15:17:41 <schultmc>	Guest1875?
2006-10 17 15:17:42 <bdale>	we have other options, but before we pursue them I'd like to have the scope bounding conversation with Greg
2006-10 17 15:17:45 ---	Guest1875 is now known as jberkus
2006-10 17 15:18:01 <Diziet>	bdale: OK.  Can we expect some email report from you within (say) the next week ?
2006-10 17 15:18:08 <bdale>	I apologize to the board for my part of the delay in this process
2006-10 17 15:18:15 <bdale>	Diziet: yes
2006-10 17 15:18:19 <Diziet>	Excellent, thanks.
2006-10 17 15:18:35 <Maulkin>	Cool :)
2006-10 17 15:18:36 <schultmc>	shall we move on?
2006-10 17 15:19:01 <Diziet>	jberkus: You're having fun, I see.  If you could mail the details of this PostgreSQL TM firm to the list, that would be helpful.
2006-10 17 15:19:05 <Diziet>	schultmc: I think so.
2006-10 17 15:19:08 <schultmc>	Item 6.2 Engaging the services of Rich and Bander of New York (Resolution 2006-10-17.jmb.1)
2006-10 17 15:19:12 <schultmc>	jberkus: you have the floor
2006-10 17 15:19:27 <jberkus>	Diziet: sure.  Its' the one I was going to transfer ...
2006-10 17 15:19:29 <jberkus>	ok, later
2006-10 17 15:19:35 <Diziet>	jberkus: Ta.
2006-10 17 15:19:36 *	Maulkin suggests a vote, we've discussed this to death :)
2006-10 17 15:19:46 <jberkus>	Ok, you're all familiar with this one: any last minute questions?
2006-10 17 15:19:47 *	schultmc seconds
2006-10 17 15:19:59 <Diziet>	I'd like to ask how confident we are that this is the right firm, after we seem not to have been ideal at matching our requirements last tinme round.
2006-10 17 15:20:47 <cdlu>	Diziet, jberkus has more experience on this side of things than the rest of us combined, I suspect. I trust his judgement on this one.
2006-10 17 15:20:54 <Maulkin>	ditto :)
2006-10 17 15:20:58 *	schultmc too
2006-10 17 15:21:10 <jberkus>	Diziet: I've not had any references for other firms, and rate a firm with a reference above the yellow pages.
2006-10 17 15:21:28 <Diziet>	I'm certainly impressed with Josh's firm hand with the treasurer stuff, but it still seems like a fair question.
2006-10 17 15:21:36 *	Maulkin nods
2006-10 17 15:21:37 <jberkus>	If you wanted us to have more options, you could do the legwork.
2006-10 17 15:21:39 <Diziet>	jberkus: Hmm.  Well, fair enough, but we need to be prepared for it not to pan out, then ?
2006-10 17 15:21:39 <bdale>	I didn't see any probles with them.  jberkus, does this feel like a "they're a good thing for us" proposal or a "we need somebody and this is all I've got" thing?
2006-10 17 15:22:04 <jberkus>	bdale: no, I think they are a good firm.  They're definitely interested in the whole OSS-DB field.
2006-10 17 15:22:11 <Maulkin>	Cool :)
2006-10 17 15:22:13 *	bdale wishes his 'M' key were ore reliable...
2006-10 17 15:22:19 <Maulkin>	heh
2006-10 17 15:22:21 <Diziet>	Good firm and interested in us sounds like a very good start.
2006-10 17 15:22:25 <bdale>	jberkus: ok
2006-10 17 15:22:25 <cdlu>	jberkus, if they see this resolution, will they charge us $6000 even if they only do $3000 of service? :)
2006-10 17 15:22:27 <jberkus>	my only nervousness is that they're discounting services for us, which won't last forever
2006-10 17 15:22:40 <jberkus>	cdlu: no, that's why it's "budget up to $6000"
2006-10 17 15:22:46 <Diziet>	jberkus: I think we'll be in a much better position having had one lot to know what to want next time.
2006-10 17 15:23:00 <Maulkin>	Well, if it is needed for the short term, then I'd still say go for it.
2006-10 17 15:23:01 <bdale>	jberkus: I'm actually ok with that, because I figure if we get things under control and have a well-oiled financial reporting machine, our needs might change anyway.
2006-10 17 15:23:13 <Maulkin>	yeah... what bdale said :)
2006-10 17 15:23:22 <Diziet>	Quite.
2006-10 17 15:23:23 *	cdlu is prepared to vote
2006-10 17 15:23:25 <Maulkin>	moves to vote :)
2006-10 17 15:23:27 <Diziet>	Let's.
2006-10 17 15:23:34 <cdlu>	is that a second? :)
2006-10 17 15:23:40 <Diziet>	Yes ...
2006-10 17 15:23:40 *	schultmc already seconded
2006-10 17 15:23:42 <Maulkin>	Voting started, 7 people (bdale,cdlu,diziet,jberkus,joey,maulkin,schultmc) allowed to vote on Approve Engaging the services of Rich and Bander of New York (Resolution 2006-10-17.jmb.1). - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
2006-10 17 15:23:46 <Diziet>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:23:47 <schultmc>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:23:48 <cdlu>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:23:48 <jberkus>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:23:49 <Maulkin>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:23:55 <bdale>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:24:07 <Maulkin>	missing Joey 
2006-10 17 15:24:34 *	cdlu feigns surprise
2006-10 17 15:24:39 <Diziet>	Let's move on.
2006-10 17 15:24:58 <Maulkin>	Current voting results for "Approve Engaging the services of Rich and Bander of New York (Resolution 2006-10-17.jmb.1)": Yes: 6, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 1 ( joey )
2006-10 17 15:25:02 <Maulkin>	Voting for "Approve Engaging the services of Rich and Bander of New York (Resolution 2006-10-17.jmb.1)" closed.
2006-10 17 15:25:06 <schultmc>	Item 6.3 OFTC election results
2006-10 17 15:25:11 <schultmc>	cdlu: you have the floor
2006-10 17 15:25:12 <cdlu>	brief announcement re OFTC
2006-10 17 15:25:25 <Diziet>	Why couldn't this have been sent round by email ?
2006-10 17 15:25:28 <cdlu>	first off, thanks Maulkin for leading the counting crew :)
2006-10 17 15:25:31 <cdlu>	diziet, give it up.
2006-10 17 15:25:31 <Joey>	!vote yes
2006-10 17 15:25:38 <Maulkin>	Joey: ta :)
2006-10 17 15:25:42 <cdlu>	OFTC voted 100% in favour of remaining with SPI
2006-10 17 15:25:48 <cdlu>	and I won re-election as chair of OFTC
2006-10 17 15:25:49 <Joey>	ql
2006-10 17 15:25:52 <slef>	Diziet++
2006-10 17 15:25:54 <cdlu>	that is the news from that front
2006-10 17 15:25:59 <Diziet>	cdlu: I'm not happy with us all sitting here waiting for you to type stuff.  It's a waste of our time and rude of you.
2006-10 17 15:26:15 <cdlu>	Diziet, you're the rude one. I finished my whole thing in the time it took you to write your useless bitchfest.
2006-10 17 15:26:26 <jberkus>	it's a 3-line report
2006-10 17 15:26:33 <bdale>	Diziet/cdlu: gentlemen
2006-10 17 15:26:44 <Maulkin>	IMO, it shoudl be done here, as it's a public meeting, and board@ isn't.
2006-10 17 15:26:54 <Joey>	Diziet: see the board, Josh felt offended and not willing to go for mail voting again when the next irc board meeting was less than 2 weeks away
2006-10 17 15:26:55 <Diziet>	Maulkin: It should go round on -general first.
2006-10 17 15:26:59 <Maulkin>	As long as it's quick :)
2006-10 17 15:27:15 <Diziet>	I'll take this argument offline.
2006-10 17 15:27:20 <bdale>	schultmc: thank cdlu for the report and move on
2006-10 17 15:27:28 <cdlu>	Diziet, please do. You've already wasted several times the amount of time the announcement took.
2006-10 17 15:27:34 <schultmc>	the chair thanks David Graham for his report
2006-10 17 15:27:46 <schultmc>	Item 6.4 Results of email resolutions
2006-10 17 15:27:51 <schultmc>	Maulkin: you have the floor
2006-10 17 15:27:58 <Maulkin>	Two email votes have been tabled since our last baord meeting
2006-10 17 15:28:08 <bdale>	cdlu: I'm actually in agreeent with Diziet on this, but I think it's more an issue of what our secretary accepts for the agenda than a proble on your part.  We'll work on this for future meetings.
2006-10 17 15:28:08 <Diziet>	Maulkin: Never say `tabled'.
2006-10 17 15:28:12 <Maulkin>	Gah, sorry
2006-10 17 15:28:15 <Maulkin>	Raised
2006-10 17 15:28:19 <jberkus>	"aborted"
2006-10 17 15:28:27 <Diziet>	In the UK it means `proposed'; in the US `put aside perhaps never to be seen again'.
2006-10 17 15:28:43 <Maulkin>	Both failed. This is due to some oddness in NY NP laws that are yet to be fully understood
2006-10 17 15:29:09 <Maulkin>	They were 2006-10-04.jmb.1 and 2006-09-27.nm.1
2006-10 17 15:29:19 <Maulkin>	Done
2006-10 17 15:29:36 <schultmc>	Item 6.5 GPG keys  - request of admin@spi-inc.org
2006-10 17 15:29:37 <jberkus>	Maulkin: pending a response otherwise from an attorney, I think that the annoying interpretation is correct
2006-10 17 15:29:51 <Maulkin>	jberkus: correct
2006-10 17 15:29:52 <jberkus>	Maulkin: the NY State incorporation law is unfortunately clear
2006-10 17 15:30:04 <schultmc>	refer to board@spi-inc.org (and Ian's summary of the admin request) for more information
2006-10 17 15:30:05 <Maulkin>	Right, gpg keys
2006-10 17 15:30:09 *	Maulkin nods
2006-10 17 15:30:29 <schultmc>	in short, the admin team is setting up a unified userdir-ldap system (which is what Debian and Debconf use)
2006-10 17 15:30:32 <jberkus>	gah.  I have 15 min
2006-10 17 15:30:40 <schultmc>	please send your gpg key id to admin@spi-inc.org
2006-10 17 15:30:58 <Diziet>	Thanks.  Next item ?
2006-10 17 15:30:59 <schultmc>	if you don't have a gpg key, contact admin@spi-inc.org and the admin team will assist you with setting one up
2006-10 17 15:31:17 <schultmc>	Item 6.6 Items requesting comment from the DPL - see discussion
2006-10 17 15:31:36 <Diziet>	Items 1-3 there are Greg stuff.
2006-10 17 15:31:38 <schultmc>	as I understand it, the DPL's requests are waiting on Greg
2006-10 17 15:31:41 <Diziet>	Item 4 is treasurer, we're working on it.
2006-10 17 15:31:43 *	Maulkin assumes this also waits on greg?
2006-10 17 15:31:51 <Diziet>	We dealt with item 6.
2006-10 17 15:31:53 <schultmc>	5 is also treasurer
2006-10 17 15:32:02 <Diziet>	So nothing for us to do at present ?
2006-10 17 15:32:10 *	Maulkin guesses so.
2006-10 17 15:32:15 <schultmc>	not until we hear from Greg or Josh
2006-10 17 15:32:19 <jberkus>	hmmm
2006-10 17 15:32:33 <jberkus>	can someone talk to Greg about how much time he realistically has?
2006-10 17 15:32:42 <schultmc>	bdale has that on his agenda
2006-10 17 15:32:42 <Diziet>	jberkus: Bdale has said he'll do that.
2006-10 17 15:32:46 <jberkus>	Debian can afford an attorney if Gred is strapped
2006-10 17 15:32:47 <Diziet>	Up ^ there
2006-10 17 15:32:51 <jberkus>	ok
2006-10 17 15:32:56 <schultmc>	Item 7: Next board meeting
2006-10 17 15:33:02 <bdale>	jberkus: we'll sync after I talk to Greg next
2006-10 17 15:33:04 <Maulkin>	Next meeting is Tuesday 20th November, 2006, 19:00UTC. If it changes, I'll notify everyone.
2006-10 17 15:33:10 <schultmc>	The third tuesday is November 20, 2006
2006-10 17 15:33:18 <schultmc>	i.e. the tuesday before Thanksgiving
2006-10 17 15:33:20 <Maulkin>	21st...
2006-10 17 15:33:22 <Maulkin>	Sorry
2006-10 17 15:33:24 <bdale>	I'm not available on the 20th
2006-10 17 15:33:25 <schultmc>	21st
2006-10 17 15:33:31 <jberkus>	hmmm
2006-10 17 15:33:32 <bdale>	21st is fine
2006-10 17 15:33:45 <Maulkin>	Time may adjust depending on DST
2006-10 17 15:33:46 <jberkus>	I think I'm available
2006-10 17 15:33:49 <Diziet>	I will be flying back from California on the 19th/20th.  I should be de-jet-lagged by the 21st I think.
2006-10 17 15:33:54 *	bdale arranged his holiday travel to be available on the 21st
2006-10 17 15:33:59 <jberkus>	Diziet: you coming here?
2006-10 17 15:34:03 -->	schoinobates (~master@5.xs4all.nl) has joined #spi
2006-10 17 15:34:10 <schultmc>	we should try for the 21st and discuss on -board if there are any issues with that date
2006-10 17 15:34:14 *	Maulkin nods
2006-10 17 15:34:17 <Diziet>	jberkus: Canonical/Ubuntu meetings, including the Ubuntu Developer Summit in Mountain View.
2006-10 17 15:34:18 <bdale>	agreed
2006-10 17 15:34:25 <Diziet>	schultmc: OK.
2006-10 17 15:34:29 <Maulkin>	I'll try and get more repsonses to changing the meeting times too
2006-10 17 15:34:30 <Diziet>	1900Z as usual, the plan ?
2006-10 17 15:34:31 <bdale>	Diziet: will see you there Thu pm/Fri am, perhaps
2006-10 17 15:34:39 <schultmc>	*GAVEL*