Jenkins Governance Meetings, 14 Oct 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Jenkins Governance Meeting (Oct 14, 2020)

Description

At this Governance meeting we discussed the recent news and releases in the Jenkins community, reviewed the status of the elections, and discussed the new Jenkins Officer role descriptions proposal. We have also reviewed the trademark sublicense requests, and agreed on further adoption of the Linux Foundation trademark usage guidelines in the project. Full agenda and meeting notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Nr8QpqYgBiZjORplL_3Zkwys2qK1vEvK-NYyYa4rzg/edit#heading=h.29jiscwxwley

A

Hello welcome to the jinx governance uh meeting. Today is october 14th. uh We have uh several contributors on the call alexa.

A

Today we will go through the common agenda. We have some news to share and we will talk about trademark usage requests we received over the last week. We will talk about ongoing uh jenkins elections, um awaiting officer role, definitions and yes, schedule the next meeting. Basically, that's it, you might get more topics during the call somebody else joins, uh but yeah, let's start from the agenda, so oktoberfest yeah, maybe actually in the middle of october 1st. So it's a month long event.

A

We have a number of future projects uh published there and we need to see for our contributions in this featured project. So so far so good. uh Today we had an online meetup to talk specifically about jenkins documentation and contributing to jenkins. You've got.

A

How many 20 participants there in total or so, and we will publish a recording today, so hopefully it will help to facilitate contributions a bit but yeah compared to the previous year. Oktoberfest remains relatively slow.

A

So if anybody is willing to push particular areas, you're welcome to do that, but still we receive contributions we expected. So it's going pretty well, if you are watching this recording and if you want to contribute to jenkins. This is a good time to do so.

A

Okay, silicon. So last week we had a cdcon conference. We had a few jenkins talk, so there also, there was sports affiliate session where we discussed jenkins roadmap and yeah. There were other activities in the community booth in the city of bus.

A

So thanks to everyone who participated, the conference went well. The recordings should be published by the end of the month, so stay tuned.

A

We also want to organize a few events to talk about specific topics they and yeah. I guess that's it, you silicon and we don't have any major events planned uh until december. From what I know in december, there will be jenkins user conference, japan, where we have several speakers and yeah. This conference will be entirely about jenkins, so hopefully we will be able to have a remote move where usually it's not an option. But since everything is remote, this yeah, maybe we could do that.

A

Okay, on the technical side, last week we had lcs release. Mark who realized would you like to summarize it.

B

Yeah so 2.249.2 was released last week with a fix for a regression in one area and a few other improvements to jenkins 2.249.1 the release. Automation worked without a hitch flawlessly. It was great.

A

Great thank you and yeah. Quite a number of fixes.

A

Okay and the next lcs version, so on october 21st, according to our schedule, we will be selecting a new baseline. So if anyone is interested, please submit your feedback. Yesterday we had a common weekly release.

A

So unless something terrible happens, we will have only one release until the baseline selection and uh what it means that uh yeah, if you see any regressions- and it looks like there are some regressions reported, it's.

C

A

C

Not work anymore in two six one I don't know what's broken.

A

Yeah so some well, we updated jk what could possibly go wrong? Okay, but yeah. That's the point because yeah next week we'll be doing a selection and if you scroll down the well the last releases, you are not the stable, I would say so. Actually, 58 57 was at the last release.

A

When you had no regressions reported, so we will have a choice either to take something recent do reporting, and for that we will need information for the next meeting so that we can make decisions whether we can report things in time for that one or we proceed with conservative way but yeah. In such case it will exclude a lot of changes.

A

So, let's see yeah, the decision will be made next week. So I guess we'll start a thread for selection, selecting a new baseline, soon yeah, hopefully you'll be able to stabilize it in the next weekly so that we don't have to worry about the regressions.

A

Okay, any other news.

A

Commands? Okay, when we have two trademark usage requests, one from tech matrix another one from uh websoft9.

A

And basically, these requests us rankings trademark usage. So currently we don't have specific pre-approved patterns and every request should go through the jenkins governance meeting to be approved and yes, there are two requests that we received. So one is for tech, matrix jenkins support as a trademark, and another one is for jenkins on ubuntu by web software.

A

So we need to make a decision on that and yeah for that. I added additional topic to discuss whether it's a good time to actually start enforcing a linux foundation patterns because yeah as a part of integration from spi to continuously foundation.

A

We expected to transition trademark to the linux foundation and after that, these trademark usage guidelines would apply to the genghis project. So the trade, the market transition hasn't happened yet and we're going to have timeline it's one of the topics.

A

We just need to discuss later, but yeah the principle that at some point we will need to adopt these guidelines and actually these guidelines are very reasonable.

A

So we will refer read to these guidelines since 2016 or so, but we haven't been for some time so well. There is a lot of text but yeah important things that there are pre-approved trademark patterns which are considered as failures, and just it would allow to set a common rules how these trademarks should be used.

A

Secondly, these patterns seem to be very reasonable and my personal preference would be to proceed with adopting this trademark usage guidelines, even if the trademark is not officially transferred to use the larger foundation and linux foundation. At the moment,.

D

I'm a plus one on that for sure.

A

You could reserve right to make exception if you really see a need to do so, but yes, general guidance. I think this will uh fine. I do not see any problem with pre-approving these patterns because all the disclaimers added to the list, so for me this would be the preference that's.

C

A good idea, I think, as well.

B

So now do any of the do any of the proposals contradict or violate the guidelines that linux foundation offers here both contradict.

A

And yeah, so let me open approved.

A

Trademarks so yeah this list is a bit updated. uh It's actually my fault, uh because uh last time, when I was approving trademark for jenkins row, it was last spring. I took an action. I can immigrate this page to jenkins io well, basically, somewhere, then we had a discussion about how we store governance documents and we agreed that we can move these pages to jenkins io and now I have an action item to actually do that.

A

But if you take a look at the list of these trademarks we previously approved so the situation is, I guess, none of them actually fits the pattern.

A

So there are multiple reasons why it happens just because uh well, basically, if you want to use a an existing trademark, you would want to put the popular term in the front as many trademarks jenkins in the beginning, some trademarks first put to the company name, then the trademark name, then, for example, claudius jenkins, it's quite popular and and yet this is how trademarks are usually organized. So that's what we have, and none of that is compliant with a linux foundation, trademark guidelines.

A

So for me: firstly, whatever we do, we wouldn't apply this respectively. So whatever we have already approved is approved when linux foundation started, they had exactly the same case, because there is red hat enterprise linux, but yeah. It also doesn't give this trademark guidelines.

A

So I think that for us it's generally good. But if you take a look at these trademarks, you can just break them down, but none of them really is really complying so jenkins uh on ubuntu by websoft.

A

So yeah jenkins in the front on ubuntu is additional classifier, which is another trademark being used and I'm not sure how it should be approved in this case. But I guess it's not our problem, but yeah. This pattern doesn't work, so it could be, for example, yep.

A

A

Distribution for jenkins were works of nine ubuntu distribution for jenkins, etc. All of that would fit this trademark, but not uh like it's written now, pretty much the same for other trademark, so it's attack matrix jenkins support.

A

So this case is a bit more tricky because even if it doesn't match the trademark, as is we have a precedent when another simple trademark was approved. uh Basically, claudius support and club vision is excellent, so, even if it doesn't uh hit the trademark guidelines there, I rather do towards the same plus one for that. If they prefer this pattern well, I would still recommend the linux foundation pattern.

D

A

B

D

B

After you alex.

D

I was just going to say, since we haven't adopted the linux foundation uh usage, yet um I think we have to go with what the precedent is. So I think we need to plus one that for now and then once we adopt the um new naming conventions, we can specify that those override previous precedents um and new requests should meet the these. The the linux foundation pre-approved patterns going forward.

D

That's my my take.

B

And I think the the tech matrix example, for instance, if I read it correctly, could be- could be pretty easily changed if they were willing to do tech matrix support for jenkins. That fits with at least one pattern that the linux foundation seems to use.

B

We shouldn't we, we don't get to change their proposed trademark. I understand that I was just thinking it's they're, not that far from the the pattern that seems to be okay with linux foundation, guidelines yeah.

A

So here my recommendation would be to recommend them to consider a linux foundation pattern as our preference, but still approving uh the current trademark. If they want to do so.

D

Yeah, I think that sounds like a good plan.

B

So so, just to be clear that we give them approval for tech, matrix jenkins support and implicit and approval for if they chose it. Techmatrix support for jenkins got it thanks.

A

Techmatrix enterprise support commercial support, it's basically their own ventures, how they promote that and how they choose the name but yeah. As long as it remains within the 3d mark pattern, they don't even need to agree with us.

A

uh There are some uh exceptions, of course, but yeah yeah, so they still should avoid confusion, etc. So this pattern might still be a problem, so it's not guaranteed in all cases but yeah. I think that we should be able to prove it.

A

So everyone was a plus one for that right. Yes, yes,.

C

A

And on the plank requirements retrospectively, everything remains approved.

A

A

A

Well, any additional notes we would like to add there.

B

So that covers the tech matrix one. Could we go back to the web, soft, nine one or is, or were you planning to do that already.

A

Yeah, so let's uh finish with them first, I was just making a common note so yeah this is web. Soft, okay,.

D

We are going to in the approval message also say you know we are looking at um adopting these these forms. If you could change to this, that would be even better, but we do approve your the tech matrix support dragon sport, okay,.

A

I recommend using the rf pattern.

E

A

Yeah does it capture 12, alex.

D

Yep, that's good. Thank you.

A

Okay, then we go to.

A

Matrix of nine okay, so basically we received this request through changes, government support channels, so basically the original request from them was to confirm whether they needed to ask for trademark approval. So basically they reached out to us to confirm and we provided clarification.

A

uh There is already hosting with this name, so they open uh to adjust this name as we agree, I guess and yeah. Hence the request.

A

So the problem with that that is on ubuntu to buy websoft9, it doesn't match existing patterns by linux foundation and doesn't really match the precedent. At least I don't see a trademark which would be clearly returning.

B

To the same is jenkins jumpstart by cloudbees, a close enough approximation.

B

Or jenkins, virtual, as a workshop, I mean it's not really on so it's it's clearly not an exact match.

A

Yeah, it's yeah. Firstly, this one's here, the trademark usage names but uh they're, not a product name, so they're, not distributions they're, just workshops and whatever yeah. Basically, they ask permission for product jenkins on ubuntu uh yeah. We have jenkins on ubuntu.

A

Basically, we provide official distribution for ubuntu. What they actually do is provide aws market place entry where you can get it running.

A

So for me, it's not only so it's potentially causes confusion uh and, secondly, it doesn't really represent what they do, because.

D

So is this what they are asking for right here, how it would appear here? Are they asking to update this to say jenkins on on ubuntu by as the whole thing at the top.

A

uh I guess this is one of the options, because what we request from other vendors, that trademark must be used as a full name, always well. What.

D

The reason I'm asking so if you go back to the aws marketplace thing right, yep.

A

So you say: jenkinson ubuntu by websoft here.

D

Right is that what they're wanting or are they just wanting how it appears here, because here I think it's confusing right, because it just says jenkins on ubuntu- and it's not like you know, is this. The official image is not the official image who who's webstoff9, but if it's, if, if they change the title, the full title to be jenkins on ubuntu by websoph9, I think that would differentiate it from being um like an official jenkins on ubuntu from the jenkins progress. So that's my question is: is where are they you know?

D

How is that going to be updated or not?.

A

I guess it has to be updated because yeah for me, you know we would vote just for jenkins jenkins on ubuntu by web soft line yeah. I agree with you alex that in this case it provides.

A

Again, it's not our problem, whether they contact canonical to get approval for ubuntu, etc, right, it's their joe, but yeah. We can request the full name to be used everywhere.

D

So on the um approved trademark usage from from linux foundation,.

E

D

I had seen something where it had the on nomenclature, but maybe I don't know it was before for use with.

A

Yeah, none of these trademarks actually qualifies so yeah. It could be, let's say, websoft9 distribution for jenkins, which would clarify or what nine aws package for jenkins or whatever these ones will define. But there is no trademark where jenkins will go to the front right.

D

So we don't have a precedent on this one and it doesn't follow the linux foundation.

E

A

Okay, so what would be your preference alex.

D

So I I would say them moving their name. First, like is kind of the pattern in the linux foundation, so websoft9 jenkins on ubuntu or something similar.

A

So, basically requiring them to follow the linux foundation.

D

Yeah, do we so for adopting those guidelines? Are we um now that we've plus one that we're we're basically now going to apply those going forward correct.

A

Why not so we still need to recommend that but yeah, I guess it's perfectly fine. If we apply it to all the requests we discuss.

D

Yeah, I would say currently a negative one for their current proposal from me, based on on the linux foundation, examples and um yeah. So I don't know if we want to come back with suggestions for them or if we just point them to that page and say. Please look at these examples and give us another proposal.

A

D

Because there is no precedent for that for that pattern.

B

Okay, so would we accept if they were to, or is there one of the existing patterns that might fit more closely than something that complies with linux foundation, guidelines.

A

You mean one of the patterns we have here.

B

Exactly yeah the that would still fit in a cloud. I didn't see any of those patterns that I thought. Oh, I could understand how I might use that, so it feels like.

A

A linux foundation, distribution for aws.

D

Is there um so like on azure and aws? There are other jenkins images. um What are those patterns.

A

You mean on aws marketplace.

D

A

uh Yes, uh that is quite a lot actually, and yes, you may guess uh not all of them follow the trademark guidelines jenkins.

D

Like certified by bitnami and yeah.

A

You can start from here jenkins on ubuntu jenkins,.

E

D

Exactly yeah, none of those people have requested this license, so it is so. I think we should show our appreciation for web uh whatever. What are there weblogic, nine, whatever for actually requesting this sub license? That's that's very you know um like not nice, but thumbs up to them right, so at least they are doing that. So um I think we don't have to bend over backwards for them, but you know we can try to help them out with suggestions or something like that. So maybe we maybe that's how we do it.

A

Yeah, that's what's wrong!.

D

A

D

Images on there.

E

A

Venus foundation is logo usage guidelines. Actually it's a good question. What would happen with jenkins logos after that? But yeah our logo isn't trademarked from what I know and our logo is on the creative core ones. So it's let's say another concern for me if I see full future, but here cleaning up these things.

D

There are lots of pages there.

A

I have more important things to do.

D

A

D

I mean so there is some precedent that we haven't. You know contacted these companies either right with their usage of the trademark. So do I'm kind of now backpedaling a little bit on my minus one.

A

Yeah, that's fine.

D

Not that it's okay for those other um companies to have done that necessarily, but there is a precedent out there and there this company is the only one who's actually contacted us about it.

A

Yeah, so it's no longer minus one. Is it minus zeta or whatever.

D

Yeah, I would say that I I I think, because there's a bunch of stuff out there already and we haven't gone and contacted those companies about the trademark. I think we need to be a little bit more lenient. I think going you know now that we know this. We either have to go and contact these companies and say hey. We have a procedure for requesting to use the jenkins trademark.

D

You know and things like that and but I don't know that's a lot of work. I don't know if we want to do or not.

A

That's a lot of work. Of course there is a nuclear tactics reaching out to aws and uh raising a trademark dispute on this search base.

A

I'm not sure how it goes and, to be honest, I don't think it's appropriate.

D

Yeah, I agree yeah because we we want more people using jenkins right so but.

A

We also, we also.

D

Have to protect the trademark so that there's not a you know, someone provides a container that totally screws up everything, and then someone gets a bad um image of jenkins. So we just have to be careful about both of those things right.

E

D

Yeah, I will say I'm a minus, zero or plus.

A

D

That's very helpful. I know.

A

A

Foreign, I'm sure, so I also don't have strong minus one about that. That's for sure, if it was jenkins on ubuntu by laps of nine uh yeah, I think it would be also okay for me.

A

But okay mark: what do you think.

B

I I'm okay actually with jenkins on ubuntu by websoft9, for this this request. I think I'm plus one for it because they asked now as a general pattern. We know, I think we we we have already agreed. We want to go to linux guidelines, but for this they asked.

B

I have no no objections to granting it so long as they use the full phrase. I agree with oleg that jenkins on ubuntu ubuntu, as listed there leaves me uncomfortable right just like jenkins, with centos 7.. It's it's not clear to me who's, providing it in the title. It's not clear to me.

A

I also don't know well, at least this is cheap.

A

D

For a windows, toy server, 2019.

A

Yeah, that's what I mentioned. It's t2.

D

So, can you go back um back one so there's also or one more sorry, there's also this. uh What supported images is that an amazon that jenkins on ubuntu 1804.

A

I guess it's a company.

D

Oh, it is a company, okay,.

A

Hey support images.com.

D

So they had a similar thing jenkins on ubuntu 1804, so.

A

um So well again,.

A

Any vendor is welcome to provide their packaging yeah, but the trademark is what we need to secure here.

D

E

D

Jenkins connect container powered by n2s, I think that's fine usage.

A

Yeah because yeah, it's not a linux foundation trademark, but I wouldn't have concerned about that. So as long as there is clear differentiation in the name or like junk is powered by class method. Yeah, okay, junkies, don't containers! No! It's not! Okay, right, yeah,.

D

A

It looks like they also have.

D

So the amazon, as well for websoft9 that jenkins on amazon, linux.

A

Yeah we can uh go far. For example, we can discuss whether microsoft requested the trademark approval for the official images on asia, but yeah.

A

So anyway, it's something you can figure out as we go right, yeah, I'm not really sure we are ready to invest in cleaning up this mess. Those some images should be just removed because of security concerns. There is they just create clear risk to users.

A

Yeah and the show what's uh aws policy on that, I'm definitely not trying to spend time uh working with vendors directly.

D

Yeah, I'm at plus one now. You guys have convinced me.

D

It's like that movie 12, angry men right.

C

But only if there is the company name as last thing.

A

A

A

A

Going forward you can document it.

A

Okay, that's good.

A

Yeah, I guess so.

A

And I still have an extra item uh to create a new trademark page on jenkins, io so mark, since you will be interested in doing so. What's your preference leaving it on my plate or doing it.

B

Given given the burden that you carry, I'd be happy to take it on, if you don't mind so I'm I am happy to do it and willing that way, you can keep focus on other things, all right, all right, yeah, that's I'll, submit the pull request for to migrate the trademark page to some place. I assume a dedicated page on jenkins that I was a good things just like we have on the wiki today.

A

A

We have zinc sierra trip; no, we don't so what uh I would rather recommend. So, firstly, I haven't clicked under the project because under the project is protected, which basically requires approval from the board- and here you can just introduce a new trademark section.

A

Then we can take the content of this page. Maybe recommend some recommendations, basically taking uh what linux foundation documents. This is proper retribution and yes, we have this governor's document which looks much better than it looked one year ago, but yeah. So there is also trademark here.

A

So this part will need to be either moved or be duplicated.

A

I believe that all content here is perfectly valid at the moment, but yeah most likely, we need to migrate trademark contribution.

A

A

So I guess all this content should be removed and we just retain hyperlink.

B

Well, and I have a- I need to find a way to do redirects of interior contact content anyway for another purpose, so this is a great excuse to be sure. I can do that here as well excellent. Thank you.

A

Okay, thanks for taking that any other comments about this topic.

A

Okay, then moving on election status yeah, I hope it won't take over 40 minutes so uh yeah deadline for bolton officer nominations is tomorrow. We've got some nominations and most likely we'll also have more nominations. Coming to the last moment like it happened uh one year ago, but still interracial contributors, including current officers and current board members to submit their name nations so that we have a diverse list of candidates.

A

We should we can confirm all these candidates and then have a lot of nominees published, but let's see so we got nominations for all the roles. So it's not like uh we on fire is having no nominations somewhere.

A

uh Nominations still need to be confirmed, but it looks that we are always set. Yeah on animations would be still good.

A

One problematic topic for us right now is number of uh voting registrations because we are quite low there and uh since we don't have any announcement at least so, if you're not subscribed to the jinx developer mailing list, you may miss notifications, I'm actually thinking about asking the infrastructure team to dump a list of maintainers, etc, and at least limited distribution reminded contributors to register for actions.

D

Have we done anything on social media as well.

A

Yeah, but uh still uh contribution uh registrations are quite low. Yeah.

D

It's like 20 or something right.

A

Yeah, one of the reasons is that yeah, firstly, it's almost half a month until the deadline and again uh spike usually comes a few days before the design but yeah. I would rather start pushing petroleum so mark. What do you think? Is it feasible to get a dump of maintainers etc and do distribution through sand grid?.

B

I think so olivier certainly did a distribution through sandgrid last year, using the entire ldap database, a subset that our maintainers we would. Where would we ask that? Is that a question we would ask of github through the github apis to identify meditators.

A

We have repository permission updater, we have tools which dump lists of maintainers from there and you can quite held up to retrieve emails. If you have proper access.

B

Right so given given a github id, we can ask our ldap for the email address associated with that id and we can notify that.

A

We do not even need github id because we store artifactor ids.

B

Right we need, we need their jenkins. Login name is basically well known, basically, okay, so all right, yeah.

A

There are always concerns about that, because we will be basically identifying a subset of our users.

A

I will uh one may argue that uh defined through maintenance is also need to tank subset of users, because not everyone watches them sure yeah, I'm just thinking about it as an option.

A

D

Do mass distribution.

A

But yeah, I'm not sure we want to do that because last time it wasn't.

B

Yeah, I'm not in favor of the mass distribution. Again I think last year's experience was was not not good enough for us to say: let's do mass distribution again, but using the maintainer generating a list of maintainers seems reasonable. Would you like me to discuss with olivier and the infrastructure team to see their assessment of it.

A

Yeah, if it's possible, I would appreciate it.

A

A

Here you can also do another push through social media because yeah one thing I discovered uh last week that even if you had a jumbotron here for elections, uh yeah this jumbotron was broken because url was incorrect and it was pointing to fall for. I have fixed it just one week ago or so.

A

B

Yeah well and the fact that we heard no reports that it was 404 is a bad sign right that maybe no one attempted to even click it. So ouch yeah right.

A

So, okay, basically it just fixed it a while ago you can also remove cdcon. I guess it's no longer relevant, so it would not just the first jump button to open.

A

A

I'm open to other suggestions how we could boost registrations.

B

uh Is is this one of those where we could ask for alyssa's help to do some community marketing some things that might help us get the word out in different ways.

A

A

Nice, so I will remove silicon later. We may just put another cdf, but for now I think it's fine.

A

A

D

D

I've never had to deal with uh an election like this before so I'm not sure I have any um good ideas, but I will definitely think about it.

A

So we still have some.

A

Time and maybe we could ask for a strip about gently selections and probably should say in the beginning of november, good timing. Yeah, you shouldn't do that.

A

A

Yeah, so, let's reconvene next week and see where we stand, I think that one of action, I think which we need to handle anyway, is creating uh email announcement mailing list, but just for announcements, low traffic one. So similarly how to other projects too. So basically, it's subscription mainly increased by the announcement of news conferences.

A

Events like let's say hydrogen fest, but yeah it's really limited traffic.

A

It won't help us with these elections, but I think that in general it would be nice to have it in the coming year.

D

I think it's a good.

B

And can announce yeah, something like that.

A

Yeah, I can take this action item because I was doing it for other projects already so well. It's actually quite easy.

A

The difficult part is to get people subscribed not to having this mailing list.

A

A

So I will handle that.

A

Updating officer definitions should we move on to this topic? Just have several minutes left.

D

Yeah, I think so.

A

Okay, so I have finally pushed a full request, which summarizes what was proposed in the mailing list, so basically shifting officers wrote descriptions more towards cartilaging the things and the leading the teams doing everything on their own.

A

Actually, it was implied expectation for a long time before when we started publishing six working groups, but the documentation was quite different, so I started rewarding creative and the current state just.

A

So current state looks like that, so I added some documentation and you can see that I named the page from jenkins team leads to team leads and officers.

A

These assumptions that there are two types of roles team leads are basically roles appointed by the jenkins governance meeting, leading particular teams. Let's say hosting team like we introduced last summer, etc, and the junkies officer is an elected role, so the distinction basically appointment process, but in principle also remain the same with regards to responsibilities.

A

uh There are common responsibilities and the work inside the teams and sikhs that they need and aborting new membership and knowledge sharing officer rotation.

A

Yeah wording probably needs to be changed. I just want to put it explicitly to highlight that it's not only importing new contributors but also implementing a ladder within the team, so that contributors could basically adopt other roles and eventually be able to take the key roles in the community, uh then facilitating initiatives.

A

Maintaining the team's roadmap, ensuring shittiers, are reflected on the public jenkins roadmap and representing the jenkins community within the area of their responsibility. It's also something new before that. Basically, the jenkins board was responsible for representing the project.

A

Well, I think that we should rather set the default estate when officers represent the project. For example, olivier told talks to dozens of vendors and the infrastructure daniel handles security contacts also yeah other officers also do such communications here and there yeah.

A

Basically many contributors sat on behalf of the project, but I see no reason why team needs and officers shouldn't do that. So that's why I put this item and then common responsibilities. This one, probably still, it still needs to be polished to.

A

More focus on cutting again the work and leading the work, but yeah some voting changes have been already applied and the event officer definition has been completely rewritten, as we discussed in the last meeting. This is plus one for the current description.

A

Okay, so I'm not sure whether we are ready to vote for that today, but it would be nice to vote for that next week, so that officer terms are finalized. When we announce the nominations.

D

Sounds good, I'm good with that.

A

So I would ask everyone to just review the list and if you see any other improvements which we could do or changes, we need to make. Please highlight that again. These documents is not something which we need to finalize for one year. We can uh greatly improve it after the elections, but I think it would be important to update these expectations before the cycle happens.

D

Yeah sounds good. Thank you for doing this update.

A

Well, there is a lot of typos also. I will fix that.

A

A

So yeah miss reviews.

A

Okay, anything on role, definitions, so.

A

Proving it on october.

A

A

Any other topic so just like sneaking taking the time.

D

Nope not for me so.

A

Yeah, my proposal would be to have for the next medium congruent next week. Yeah. I know that the schedule was a bit chaotic already, but uh yeah actually next week would return us to the normal schedule, as it will be lcs baseline selection. So I think it will be important.

A

D

A

A

Yeah also an open question about the timing, because I'm not sure whether you want to keep this time for governance meetings, uh I'm not sure how forward. For me, this is a bit late and many other contributors from europe expressed uh concern that it's too late and at the same time, it's not too late, so that the asian and pacific region can participate.

D

I'm fine with moving it up. If that would be helpful to to you and uli for sure.

B

Me as well earlier in the day is better for me.

C

A

We do, I suggest to make it effective only in november after summer time winter time changes are over uh but yeah it would be nice to start doodle or whatever and agree on.

C

And maybe we should wait for the election because different people come in and.

D

Yeah fair point.

C

They have other.

C

A

A

It's totally afraid, because you have five officers and two board for rotation so yeah. I agree with you. Then after elections.

D

I'm good with that.

A

Okay and that's it so thanks everyone, especially for productive discussion about other trademarks, so we have a clear path there.

A

Let's keep working on the elections and other topics.

D

All right thanks, everyone.

C

Thank you bye. Thank you.