W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > March 2006

Re: whether to have (IRC or otherwise) regular meetings

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 15:05:04 +0100
Message-Id: <7F0EDB8D-313B-42C5-8EE6-3B661EB3E75C@w3.org>
Cc: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>

Terje, thanks for your fresh take on the question - which I have not  
been pushing as much as I should have since opening it again.

I guess my answer is a good +1 to try what you suggest. Finding a  
schedule which does not need a reminder, and trying to make regular  
progress without having very long meetings are good ideas.

Whether to try and keep most discussion out of the meeting is  
interesting - I would tend to think that meetings are an efficient  
way to discuss rather quickly and get to a decision quickly, but  
perhaps IRC meetings aren't so good at that. And I have to agree with  
your observation:

> We've had a tendency to go off on tangents or large issues which  
> lack common
> context in the IRC meets. This just leads to boring the crap out of  
> everyone
> else on the meeting unless we have a common reference for the issue  
> in some more
> suitable form (i.e. email or a WikiPage) to avoid expounding on an  
> issue as
> we're in the process of arguing (typically, an obscure detail of) it.

I wonder, however, if we were to have meetings as you propose, how  
new "action items" would be assigned. In our previous meeting scheme,  
these would happen when after a discussion, someone agreed to own the  
issue. Also, a meeting dealing mostly with Action Items may not be  
very sexy, I don't know if people would like to come and attend that ;)

Anyway, that's not a showstopper, we can give it a try. Would  
everyone who showed some interest in starting the meetings again be  
interested in testing a weekly meeting for a while? Would our  
previous schedule of 16:00 UTC mondays [1] suit everyone?

http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html? 
year=2006&month=3&day=6&hour=16&min=00

thanks,
-- 
olivier
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2006 14:05:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:46 GMT