Re: Foundation Meeting April 2022 minutes?

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Hi Luna,

The April minutes won't be available until they get approved at the
May meeting (11 May). We are usually able to post them shortly after
that. (Although we had somewhat of a backlog, which I've cleared out
just now.)

Cheers,
Philip

On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 10:41 AM Luna Jernberg via foundation-list
 wrote:
>
> Hey!
>
> is the meeting notes from todays Foundation Meeting gonna be posted somewhere 
> online?
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list



-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: New Foundation & Emeritus Members

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 2:53 AM Andrea Veri  wrote:

> Hello everybody!
>
> The GNOME Foundation Membership Committee is proud to announce our newly
> approved Foundation and Emeritus members. Please welcome and thank them for
> their great and valuable contributions over the GNOME Foundation!
>

Welcome everyone! (And what a pleasant surprise to see people joining
through GNOME Circle!)
-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Moving foundation-list to discourse?

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 1:50 PM Tobias Mueller 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2019-10-04 at 18:35 -0700, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I don't find it the best policy to optimize for the convenience of
> > non-members who want to send insulting rants to foundation-list
> Sure. But I don't think we're optimising for those. In fact, the number
> of insulting rants is surprisingly low.


I would _expect_ zero. I don't sign up to the mailing list of a nonprofit
so I can watch people abuse the nonprofit's staff.


> Arguably lower than the number
> of posts that were banned for no obvious reason.
>

Are we currently moderating posts on foundation-list or not? I thought this
whole discussion was about the fact that we are not. If we are, and if
legitimate posts are truly being banned, then clearly we need a different
moderation process because it's not working in either direction. Can you
give an example of a post that was banned for no obvious reason so we know
what we're talking about?
-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of October 7, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20191007

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 7 October, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * TristanVanBerkom

== Regrets ==

 * BrittYazel
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobertMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * Additional travel funding for LAS 2019

== Minutes ==

 * Additional travel funding for LAS 2019
   * This emergency meeting was convened specifically to decide what to do
with the LAS travel funding, as described in
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/132. The LAS travel sponsorship
budget has been used up, so the travel committee had to fund some people at
a lower rate. This has led to some people cancelling their trip as they
would have to pay too much out of pocket. The travel committee has polled
the people who cancelled to find out how much more funds they would need to
be able to attend. They are requesting additional funds to spend on LAS
travel sponsorship. For USD 2,500 they would be able to make up the
difference so that the people who otherwise would cancel would be able to
attend. For USD 3,190 they would be able to fund the requests entirely.
   * Federico: Where would this money come from?
 * Allan: General funds, though there is the issue of KDE matching on
conference income.
 * Neil: It's probably worth thinking about it as coming from next
year's travel funds. The goal was to raise EUR 14,500 for LAS; we'd be
running the conference on a deficit anyway.
   * Tristan: If we were to give it support, would we have a better chance
of getting more funding for LAS in the future?
 * Neil: Last year we made a profit on LAS, but not this year.
   * Philip: It's a bit of a gamble to determine what hackfests might be
held next year that would otherwise be diverted to this.
   * Tristan: Is next year's travel budget significantly larger than this
year's?
 * Neil: The budget has not been presented to the board yet, but
currently no.
   * Allan: This amount of money is not an outrageous amount to shuffle
around, to facilitate our goal of allowing people to attend GNOME community
events.
   * '''VOTE''': Approve an additional USD 2,500 travel funding for LAS
2019, to be administered by the Travel Committee.
 * +1 unanimous
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of September 30, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location; https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190930

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 30 September 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * BrittYazel
 * AllanDay
 * FedericoMena
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RobertMcQueen
 * CarlosSoriano

== Regrets ==

 * TristanVanBerkom

== Agenda ==

 * Decide location for GUADEC 2020
 * Adjust spending authorization limits
 * Announcements

== Minutes ==

 * Decide location for GUADEC 2020
   * We have two bids in progress for GUADEC 2020. See issue at
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/121.
   * Allan: There is one thing that complicates the decision making this
time, which is that there is one bid outside of Europe.
   * Neil: I intentionally went looking for bids outside of Europe, in
order to reflect the fact that GNOME is a global project, not just based in
Europe, US, and Canada. This has been done successfully with other
conferences such as DebConf. I am also looking to expand the time that bid
teams have to work on the conference. There has been some skepticism about
whether bid teams would stay motivated for two years, but it's my sense
that these bids would, and it's an opportunity for bidding teams to become
involved in the previous year's conference.
   * Allan: What effect would a GUADEC outside of Europe have on the
attendance and travel budget?
 * Neil: Typically if it is outside of Europe, it tends to be smaller;
but not much smaller. For example, DebConf attracts 400 when in Europe and
275–300 when outside. It's not only dependent on Europe but also how easy
the location is to get to. You do get an increase in the number of people
within the area. You do get somewhat of an increase in travel budget, but
that is offset by quite often lower costs of organizing the conference.
   * Allan: What kind of conference would it be? A developer conference
like GUADEC that we know, or more user and outreach-focused?
 * Neil: It tends to be much the same. Even within Europe, you get some
local flavour in the branding and style, but it remains much the same.
   * Allan: Would there be a smaller event in Europe if we had GUADEC
outside of Europe?
 * Neil: That's up to whether people want to organize it.
 * Allan: It might also discourage people from attending the actual
GUADEC.
   * Carlos: Is it not the case that if there was demand for a conference
outside Europe, it would be organized?
 * Neil: It goes both ways, we also force Federico to fly to Europe
every year. Aside from that, despite what the acronym says, GUADEC is our
main conference, not just our Europe conference. Therefore it's important
to hold it in locations not just in Europe.
 * Federico: We have held GUADEC in certain locations specifically in
the past to increase local participation in that location.
 * Neil: I think it's certainly possible to have the twin goals of
maintaining the "GUADEC feeling" and increase outreach in a particular area.
   * Carlos: I agree with the goal, but I think in practice some members of
the community are concerned about not being able to attend. I got some
feedback at GUADEC to that effect. Let's think about ways to mitigate that.
   * Allan: I'm also in favour, but I think we need to consider whether
changing the location will have an impact on how the community gets its
work done.
   * Rosanna: The diversity goal is not served by having GUADEC in Europe
every year.
   * Allan: We should also think about the environmental impact of flying a
lot of people halfway across the world.
 * Philip: We already fly a lot of people halfway across the world to
Europe every year.
 * Allan: We can get numbers on this.
   * Neil will proceed with finalizing the bids, and therefore is happy to
have heard any concerns. Board members should continue reviewing the bids
and asking questions.

 * Adjust spending authorization limits
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/124
   * Deferred.

 * Announcements
   * Next meeting is 7 October, and will be an ED report followed by board
only discussion (Allan)
   * Board hackfest update: We're pushing the hackfest back to around
FOSDEM; please check issue https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/117
(Allan)
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of September 23, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190923

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 23 September 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * FedericoMena
 * AllanDay
 * BrittYazel
 * TristanVonBerkom
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * RobertMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * Approve draft meeting minutes of 21 August, 2nd September, 9th September
 * Travel spending authorization for board hackfest 2019
 * Allocate travel budget for GNOME.Asia 2019
 * Code of conduct
 * Adjust spending authorisation limits
 * Announcements

== Minutes ==

 * Approve draft meeting minutes of 21 August, 2nd September, 9th September
   * Allan and Tristan have submitted some minor textual clarifications.
   * Minutes are approved, with the proposed amendments.

 * Travel spending authorization for board hackfest 2019
   * We propose approving travel spending for Neil, Rosanna, and all
directors, under the Foundation travel policy, to attend the board hackfest
which is co-located with LAS. We are proposing to use the Foundation travel
policy in order not to have the costs come out of LAS's travel sponsorship
budget by requesting sponsorship. See
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/117.
   * Carlos and Britt aren't able to attend.
   * Rosanna wants to know if she should attend.
   * Philip: If two directors can't make it, should we look for a different
date and location?
 * We decide to revisit the decision to organize the hackfest at LAS,
and hold an informal poll to see if attaching it to another event would be
better.
   * '''VOTE:''' Approve travel spending for all directors and Neil and
Rosanna, under the Foundation travel policy, to attend the next board
hackfest.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Allocate travel budget for GNOME.Asia 2019
   * The GNOME.Asia budget originally didn't include a travel sponsorship
budget. We propose allocating USD 9,000 for GNOME.Asia travel sponsorship.
See https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/127.
   * Philip: Sometimes GNOME Asia has allocated travel budget within its
own budget, and sometimes from the travel committee's budget. I'm all in
favour of allocating more money for travel sponsorship, but we should
consider this a change of plans rather than an oversight.
 * Allan: If there was an oversight here it was the board's oversight;
we should add this to the bid checklist so it's always included in future.
 * '''ACTION''': Allan will move that forward.
   * Tristan: as an anecdote, when GNOME Asia was in Seoul they didn't know
I lived there, and thought that it would be very expensive to bring me to
the conference.  Allocating more money to GNOME Asia may make it easier to
bring people from Europe/Americas to the conference.
   * Carlos: Where does the amount come from?
 * Allan: From Rosanna.
   * Philip: treasurer, does this amount make sense?
 * Neil: The amount makes sense; this has been inconsistently applied
in the past and we'd like to see it consistent. The funds are also coming
out of next fiscal year's budget.
   * VOTE: allocate USD 9,000 for GNOME.Asia 2019 travel. This is to be
managed as a separate budget by the Travel Committee.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Code of conduct
   * See https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/112 for discussion and
background.
   * Federico: I've been reading the comments that everyone gave on the
!GitLab issue and have sent some of them on to our consultant Sage Sharp.
   * Federico: Question about scope for speech that happens outside of the
umbrella of the GNOME project. Sometimes it's clear cut, e.g. hate speech
on a personal blog; sometimes not, e.g. posting to a random mailing list of
another project.
 * Carlos: When we previously discussed this, you said you would
consult with Sage, did that happen?
 * Federico: Sage's contract ran out of billable hours.
 * Carlos: This sounds like something to contract with them on, but
also a question that the board can weigh in on. I am leaning towards erring
on the side of not overreaching, but at the same time I don't like the
consequences of that.
 * Neil: It needs to be treated on a case by case basis. If a GSoC
student publishes hate speech on their blog hosted outside of gnome.org,
it's very different from if I were to publish hate speech on my blog no
matter where it's hosted, with a different reflection on the project and a
different effect on project participants.
   * Tristan: What about the power to order the refund of travel
sponsorship funds?
 * Neil: Separately from this, we can add to the travel sponsorship
text that the sponsored individual must behave representatively of the
GNOME Foundation and abide by the code of conduct.
 * Allan: We'd be trusting the committee to apply the rules
proportionately. This might apply, for example, in the hypothetical case
where we paid for a speaker who came under false pretenses.
 * Tristan: There is a possible point of failure in trusting the

Re: Moving foundation-list to discourse?

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 12:32 AM Tobias Mueller 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 2019-10-03 at 11:00 -0500, meg ford via foundation-list wrote:
> > I do need to send emails to foundation list on
> > behalf of the Travel Committee though and dealing with moderation as
> > someone who isn’t a list member could be time consuming.
> It's not so much, esp. since a whitelist could be set up.
>
> And you could (and should) configure your Email setup to filter what you
> want or not want to see.
>

I don't find it the best policy to optimize for the convenience of
non-members who want to send insulting rants to foundation-list. I'd rather
optimize for the convenience of members who don't wish to read insulting
rants. As a member I wouldn't expect to have to set up an email filter — or
do anything, really — for this.

Regards,
-- 
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of September 9, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190909

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 9th September, 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay
 * BrittYazel
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobMcQueen (leaving early)

== Regrets ==

 * TristanVanBerkom
 * RosannaYuen

== Agenda ==

 * Work session planning
 * Announcements

== Minutes ==

[ Rob leaves ]

 * Work session planning
   * Next board session is Monday 16th September, 15.30 UTC and this will
be a working session. If possible every board member should be signed up to
work on a topic. We go over the current topics:
* 2019 board hackfest https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/117 -
Philip is interested
* Remove the sponsorship committee
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/118
* Replace the Zazzle store
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/17
* Requirements for conference bidding process
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/39

 * Announcements
   * Allan: Poll for the regular board meeting time is missing Tristan's
response
   * Allan: Planning for the 2019 board hackfest is happening in
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/117; provisional date is 11
November
   * Philip: Draft minutes of August 21 are not complete yet, apologies
   * Allan: Meg noted that the talk proposals for LAS have included few
women so far - https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/125
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of September 2, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190902

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 2nd September, 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * RobMcQueen
 * AllanDay
 * PhilipChimento
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen

== Regrets ==

 * BrittYazel

== Missing ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * TristanVanBerkom

== Agenda ==

 * Approve minutes for 5th and 12th August
 * Renew committee memberships
 * Funding for Outreachy December 2019 internships
 * Code of conduct next steps
 * Announcements

== Minutes ==

 * Approve minutes for 5th and 12th August
   * No amendments were proposed.
   * Approved.

 * Renew committee memberships
   * In the board meeting of 21 August, we left the reappointment some
committee members pending who had not recently been active. We spoke to all
of the pending committee members at GUADEC and all are intending to take a
more active role in the coming year.
   * '''VOTE''': Reappoint pending members of the committees who were not
reappointed in the board meeting of 21 August.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Funding for Outreachy December 2019 internships
   * Each internship costs $6,500. The deadline for GNOME to register is 5
September.
   * Internships are only awarded to candidates of a sufficiently high
quality: approving a number of internships doesn't guarantee that we will
fill that number of places.
   * Input is sought from community members to ensure that internships are
on topics that are important to GNOME.
   * Carlos: We also have the GNOME internships, and the budget is shared
between Outreachy and the GNOME Internships. Does anyone feel we should
pursue any topics for GNOME Internships in addition to or instead of these?
 * Allan: I thought the GNOME Internships came from restricted funds?
 * Carlos: The previous round did come from the restricted privacy
funds.
 * Neil: There is still some money in that pot.
   * '''VOTE''': Approve funding for three Outreachy internships for
December 2019 to March 2020; total cost up to USD 19500
 * +1 unanimous

 * Code of conduct next steps
   * Ticket: https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/112
   * Allan: The intention is to approve it as quickly as possible. I had a
list of topics that I'd like to get the board's opinion on before
proceeding:
 * CoC scope: What is the scope of a "GNOME online space"? What happens
if someone uses their personal blog, not hosted by us, to attack someone?
What if a member of the GNOME project abuses people on Twitter? Can we get
some feedback from Sage Sharp on how many of these cases can be
realistically included?
   * Carlos: I would guess that this has been discussed, I've seen this
topic in Sage's material before.
 * CoC committee reporting: Do we want the committee to report back to
the board about enforcement actions?
   * Rob: I'm not sure that the board should get more reporting than
would otherwise be available for transparency's sake. My gut feeling is
that the information will generally be private.
   * Philip: I thought the examples of transparency reports included in
the draft were sufficient. If we deemed it necessary, we could ask for a
transparency report more frequently.
 * Adoption process (consultation, community endorsement, etc):
   * Carlos: I think consulting the community in the way that we did
with the events code of conduct was a good balance: the community could
send feedback to the code of conduct committee, and the committee decided
what to do with the feedback.
   * Rob: There are GNOME community members who aren't Foundation
members, so I agree that some sort of consultation is a good idea.
   * Allan: We are short on time, so let's discuss this further next
time.
   * Rob: We can get feedback from the committee.
   * Rosanna: We already have some guidance from Sage on this topic.
 * Communications strategy: how do we go about presenting this? It's
not just a matter of adopting a policy but also promoting it as a positive
move for the project.
   * Carlos: One thing that could work here is to communicate
individually with some people like Discourse admins.
   * Philip: Given the whole room applauding at GUADEC when the topic
came up in a talk, I don't think we will need to do that much promotion.
 * Which powers to delegate to the CoC committee? We need to be
explicit about this. Some of the sanctions that can be taken are board
powers, such as rescinding Foundation membership.
   * Allan: Alternatively, are there any actions that we would consider
the committee does need to defer to the board?
   * Rob: I do think it needs to be highlighted somehow: either
delegated, or the board's role made clear.
 * Rob: As for online spaces vs. events, my understanding from Federico
was that we would eventually move the new code of conduct to cover events,
but we can't do that now while there are events pending which are being
organized under the current 

Minutes of the board meeting of August 21, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190821

Note: These and the following minutes were approved earlier this week in
the board meeting of Monday, September 23. I apologize for the delay in
publishing them; due to some obligations this week I have had less time
than I expected to complete this work.

= Foundation Board Minutes for Wednesday, August 21st, 13:00 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * BrittYazel
 * KatGerasimova
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NuritziSanchez
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RobertMcQueen
 * TristanVanBerkom
 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay (attending remotely)

== Agenda ==

 * Approve minutes of 5 August and 12 August
 * Review conflict of interest policy updates
 * Renew committee memberships
 * Approve Neil's trip to OpenSUSE.Asia, GNOME.Asia and LAS
 * Review and approve new code of conduct

== Minutes ==

 * Approve minutes of 5 August and 12 August
   * Deferred until next meeting, due to time constraints.

 * Review conflict of interest policy updates
   * Neil: Everyone has sent in the conflict of interest form. Over the
last year there were no decisions which involved a conflict of interest. We
are required to review the policy annually. The system has worked well from
my point of view. Do any board members think differently?
   * No one has any comments or objections.

 * Renew committee memberships
   * We need to renew the current committee memberships and formally remove
the sponsorship committee. See the !GitLab issue:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/115
   * We also need to assign committee liaisons:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/111
   * The slate of committee memberships is as follows:
   * Code of conduct committee:
 * Federico Mena Quintero (liaison)
 * Felipe Borges
 * Rosanna Yuen
 * Christel Dahlskjaer
   * Membership and elections committee:
 * Tristan van Berkom (liaison)
 * Tobias Mueller
 * Andrea Veri (chair)
 * Pascal Terjan
 * Kunal Jain
   * Travel committee:
 * Adelia Rahim
 * David King
 * Germán Poo-Caamaño
 * Guillaume Gomez
 * Meg Ford
 * Philip Chimento (liaison)
 * Rosanna Yuen (ex officio)
 * Umang Jain
   * Engagement committee:
 * Nuritzi Sanchez
 * Sriram Ramkrishna
 * Neil !McGovern (ex officio)
 * Kristi Progri (ex officio)
 * Rosanna Yuen
 * Caroline Henriksen
 * Britt Yazel (liaison)
   * '''VOTE''': Thank the members of the sponsorship committee and
formally remove it.
 * +1 unanimous
   * Allan: Do we want to remove the engagement committee as well? Is it
still active and required?
 * Nuritzi: The engagement committee was set up originally to provide
expenditure authority for the engagement team. We now have a dedicated
staff member for program coordination (Kristi) who could potentially take
responsibility for this for the Foundation.
 * Neil: Staff should have time to do this, if required.
 * Allan: Has the engagement committee received many requests this year?
   * Nuritzi: Mainly for marketing expenditures, but the committee is
helping to set marketing outreach and strategy.
 * Tristan: Is there any risk of keeping the committee for another year?
   * No.
 * There isn't a consensus for removing the engagement committee, it
needs more discussion.
   * There is one new member to appoint to the Engagement Committee.
   * '''VOTE''': Appoint Caroline Henriksen to the Engagement Committee.
 * Britt abstains due to a conflict of interest.
 * +1 Nem. con.
   * There are committee members in the above slate who haven't been active
recently. We decide to poll them individually to see if they intend to
become more active before reappointing them.
   * Marcin Kolny has resigned from the membership and elections committee,
and Carlos is passing on the liaison responsibility to Tristan.
   * '''VOTE''': Thank Marcin Kolny and Carlos Soriano for their service on
the membership and elections committee, and otherwise re-confirm and
appoint the committee memberships as set out above, with the exception of
inactive members to be confirmed later if appropriate.
 * +1 unanimous
   * '''ACTION''': Allan - Update the wiki with the changes to the
committees, add the compensation committee to the public list, and remove
references to the sponsorship committee.

 * Approve Neil's trip to OpenSUSE.Asia, GNOME.Asia and LAS
   * '''VOTE''': Approve Neil's trip to OpenSUSE Asia, GNOME.Asia, and LAS
 * +1 unanimous

[ Carlos leaves. ]

 * Review and approve new code of conduct
   * Federico: I hope everyone has had a chance to review the draft. We
contracted Sage Sharp of OtterTech Consultancy to consolidate the existing
documents and fix them up, and provide the training for the responders. We
are asking for the board to approve the code of conduct for use throughout
GNOME.
   * Federico walks us through the draft.
   * Nuritzi: There are some things that relate

Delay in minutes of August 21

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

As per the guideline [1], this is a notification that I wasn't able to
complete draft minutes of the board meeting of August 21 in time for the
board meeting of September 9. The intention is to approve them, together
with the minutes of the board meeting of September 2 which will then come
due, during the next following board meeting, September 23. I don't foresee
any problems in preparing them which would cause any further delay.

[1] https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/Guidelines

Regards,
-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of August 12, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190812

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 12th August 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * BrittYazel
 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen
 * TristanVanBerkom
 * CarlosSoriano

== Regrets ==

 * NuritziSanchez
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Approve minutes of 22 July
 * Officer elections
 * Compensation committee membership
 * GUADEC preparation
 * GUADEC in-person board meeting
 * Notices

== Minutes ==

 * Approve minutes of 22 July
  * Allan submitted two clarifications; there are no objections to these.
  * Minutes are approved.

 * Officer elections
   * The slate being presented for the board to decide on is:
 * President: Robert !McQueen
 * Vice President & Chair: Allan Day
 * Treasurer: Carlos Soriano
 * Secretary: Philip Chimento
 * Vice Secretary: Federico Mena Quintero
* '''VOTE''': appoint board officer positions, as listed above.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Compensation committee membership
  * The compensation committee must include the president and treasurer, as
well as one other individual.
  * Carlos: The compensation committee already fulfilled its function of
recommending the compensation of the executive director based on comparable
organizations, so the only task remaining is to set a compensation policy
that ties the compensation to the ED's performance evaluation.
* Philip: Isn't there a requirement to re-evaluate the compensation
annually?
* Neil: I will check, but I believe so.
* Rob: Annual re-evaluation would be a best practice, anyway.
  * '''VOTE''': Appoint Allan Day to the compensation committee, alongside
the president and treasurer.
 * +1 unanimous

 * GUADEC preparation
   * Background is https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/109
   * Key things to clarify:
 * What's the overall plan for the advisory board meeting?
 * Who is going to be responsible for reaching out to teams and
committees?
 * Who is going to be responible for the slide decks?
 * Who is going to ask the community for pants nominations?
 * Are the president and treasurer able to prepare their presentations?
   * Allan: GUADEC preparation is traditionally an area where the board has
done a lot of work, and I'd like us to do less in the future.
   * Neil: The advisory board meeting has two purposes: 1) give an update
to the advisory board on what the Foundation has been up to in the past
year, and 2) feedback from the advisory board members. We've found this
valuable in past years.
 * Allan: Do you need anything from us for the advisory board meeting?
 * Neil: Not at the moment, I will probably need specific things from
people but I will let them know.
 * Rob: There's a president's report part of the advisory board meeting.
 * Allan: I think it's fairly typical to have a treasurer's report as
well.
 * Neil: Anyone who hasn't filled out the Framadate for the advisory
board meeting, please do so.
   * Allan: At the GUADEC AGM (annual general meeting), there is typically
a slide deck that the board presents, which needs to be put together. Team
leads need to be emailed, and other tasks must happen.
 * Rob: I would appreciate help with this. Things are busy the
following couple of weeks.
 * Carlos: There is typically a president's report and treasurer's
report here as well.
 * Allan: It always involves a lot of chasing people down to get them
to submit their slides.
 * '''ACTION''': Allan, Federico, and Philip will chase people down.
   * Allan: We have to ask the community for pants nominations.
 * '''ACTION''': Federico will do this.

 * GUADEC in-person board meeting
   * Allan: We have a provisional agenda, including the standard topics:
 * 2018-2019 retrospective
 * Task handover
 * Pants award
 * AGM planning
 * Advisory board meeting planning
   * Rob: I would really like to close the loop on the "Definition of GNOME
Software" topic, and finish the goals/priorities discussion that we started
last year.
   * Neil: I'm happy to lead a session on the strategic goals.
 * Allan: Depending on how long this takes, if it takes the whole day
we may want to do it at the Foundation hackfest instead, in the fall.
 * Neil: I expect it will take a few hours or half the day.
 * Philip: I think we should make use of the opportunity of being in
the same place to cover this topic.
 * Allan: Last Foundation hackfest we didn't finish it.
 * Philip: I think with Neil facilitating the session we will be able
to use the time more efficiently.
   * Neil: We need to add an item to review our conflict of interest policy.
   * Allan: There are a few GitLab issues that need to be turned over to
new board members.
   * Allan: It's been a while since we did a financial review. Should we
include this?
 * Neil: I think it would be a good idea.

Minutes of the board meeting of August 5, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190805

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 5th August 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * BrittYazel
 * TristanVanBerkom
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobertMcQueen
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NuritziSanchez
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento

== Regrets ==

 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Officer elections
 * Committee (re-)appointments
 * GUADEC preparation
 * Approve Neil's trip to GUADEC
 * Approve minutes of July 22

== Minutes ==

 * Officer Elections
   * The following people have expressed interest in officer positions:
 * President: Robert !McQueen
 * Vice President & Chair: Allan Day
 * Treasurer: Carlos Soriano
 * Secretary: Philip Chimento
 * Vice Secretary: Federico Mena Quintero
   * Britt: Is everyone aware that officers don't have to be board members?
 * Rob: We generally appoint officers from the board, both because we
are elected from the ranks of the membership in order to be representative,
and because usually no-one else is queueing up to do these jobs.
   * Britt: Should the committee liaisons be vice president positions, it
seems like they have a lot of responsibility? Otherwise it seems like the
vice president doesn't have a lot of responsibilities.
 * Neil: In California nonprofit law the vice president is just a
stand-in for the president in case they are not available. In general we
don't specify too much other than the minimum responsibilities in the
bylaws, so that we don't have to change the bylaws if we delegate more or
fewer responsibilities to fit the situation.
 * Rob: The board also delegates board members into other roles (such
as committee liasions) when appointing committees, but these are not
officer positions (which carry a specific legal function.)
   * Allan: Would the candidates for the officer positions like to give a
statement about why they are interested and what they hope to achieve?
 * Philip: It sounds like not everyone has had a chance to figure out
whether to make themselves a candidate for an officer position, and if we
want the current candidates to give a statement then we won't have time for
Neil to present the executive director's report.
   * Vote is deferred until next week.

 * Committee (re-)appointments
   * Deferred.

 * GUADEC preparation
   * Deferred.

 * Approve Neil's trip to GUADEC
   * '''VOTE''': approve Neil's trip to GUADEC:
  * +1 unanimous

 * Approve minutes of July 22
   * Deferred.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of July 22, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

I should note that these minutes were to be approved in the board meeting
of August 5th, but the board deferred the approval until today because
there was only limited time for the meeting of August 5th. According to the
guideline that we recently adopted, I should have notified
foundation-announce of this, but I forgot. I am interested in feedback
about whether readers would have found this notification useful? If so, I
will make a better effort to ensure it happens next time, or if not we can
reconsider whether it belongs in the guideline.

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 22nd July 2019, 15:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190722

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * FedericoMena
 * TristanVanBerkom
 * BrittYazel
 * RobMcQueen
 * RosannaYuen
 * NuriziSanchez
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento

== Regrets ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Approve minutes of July 8
 * Approve minutes of July 15
 * LAS 2019 Bid
 * Officer Elections
 * Email from Chronojump
 * Email about article in Opensource.com

== Minutes ==

 * Approve minutes of July 8
   * Approved,

 * Approve minutes of July 15
   * Amendments: Add Kat and Federico to list of (missing) attendees.
   * Approved.

 * LAS 2019 bid
   * Rob and Allan have led the discussion during the past week about the
requirements to move forward with the LAS bid. This has resulted in the
writing of a draft co-hosting agreement for the conference, which defines
the shared sponsorship and how the funds are to be held and handled.
   * Allan: One requirement of this is that we would have someone on the
Foundation side to monitor the progress of the fundraising.
 * Neil: That would be the responsibility of myself and Molly de Blanc,
with a shared spreadsheet.
   * Britt: I feel that negotiating this contract should have been the
responsibility of the staff, not the board. I'm willing to vote on it now,
but would like to see it done differently in the future.
 * Rob: In the previous board term we discussed that Neil did not want
to divert resources from existing priorities to LAS unless the board was
fully behind it. I agree with you, but that's the context of why things
happened this way. The hope is that this can be re-used for future LAS
events.
 * Britt: Neil, are you OK with the state of things?
   * Neil: Now that we have more staff compared to previous years,
there is a period of adjustment for the board moving to a strategic role
rather than an operational one.  For this particular issue, it is fine.
 * Philip: Neil, are you happy with the contract?
   * Neil: Yes.
 * Allan: The division of responsibilities between the ED and the board
probably needs a more extensive conversation during GUADEC or a board
hackfest.
 * Britt: Could this be discussed in the board days prior to GUADEC?
   * Tristan: What is the maximum risk for the Foundation?
 * Rob: In case no funds are raised, we would be committed to spend
half of the minimum budget of the conference, which is around EUR 5000.
   * Nuritzi: The space for the signature has my name pre-filled in it. We
should amend the draft under discussion to have a blank for the GNOME
representative's name.
 * Rob makes the amendment.
   * '''VOTE''': Approve executing the LAS co-hosting agreement.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Officer elections
   * Deferred because not all board members are present.
   * We decide to elect officers on August 5th, before the executive
director's report, and ask people to communicate beforehand which positions
they're interested in so that we can have the discussion all prepared and
vote quickly.
 * '''ACTION''': Neil - send around an email asking about board
members' interest in officer positions.

 * Email from Chronojump
   * We received an email on the board list asking to make a Gitlab project
(chronojump-server) private, as the maintainers are considering licensing
away from the GPL.  They want the server component of Chronojump to be
hidden while they make this determination.
   * Neil: I have taken a position of saying no, since we host only free
software.
   * Philip and Tristan don't see any reason to deviate from that.
   * Rob: I can upload proprietary code to my personal space on GitLab,
this isn't that different.
   * Tristan: No, we don't have the ability to create private repositories
on our GitLab without admin assistance.
   * Rob: So they should just delete it then?
   * Philip: What is the relationship between Chronojump and GNOME?
 * Federico: It's one of the oldest end-user applications in GNOME and
the relationship has been cordial over the years. It's an application for
recording data from sports competitions, and the server component isn't
necessary to use the application.
   * The board agrees with Neil's last communication to the Chronojump
team; we are willing to delete the server repo but not to make it private.
   * '''ACTION''': Neil - Reply to the Chronojump 

Minutes of the board meeting of July 15, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190715

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 15th July 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * TristanVanBerkom
 * RobMcQueen
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * BrittYazel
 * CarlosSoriano
 * AleixPol (guest for part of the LAS bid discussion)

== Regrets ==

 * NeilMcGovern

== Missing ==

 * KatGerasimova
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Agenda ==

 * LAS bid

== Minutes ==

 * LAS bid
   * Nuritzi: Aleix Pol is a member of the board of directors of KDE. He
met up with Nuritzi and other GNOME members at LAS last year which is where
they started discussing a jointly organized LAS. We will go over the bid (
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/93). Aleix is here to help
answer any questions, and has been the one working most directly with the
local team.
 * Philip: Note that due to vacation I haven't had a chance to read the
bid yet.
   * Nuritzi: Relative to the dates mentioned in the bid, the conference
has now been moved one week earlier, to November 12–14, with the BOF day on
November 15, because of a QT contributors conference in Berlin on the
original dates, that the organizers weren't aware of.
   * Aleix: The venue is a community hub available until 6 PM. We are
considering having one track for the conferences. Admission costs are still
up for discussion, we are considering charging for admission. Video
recording is available via the local free software organization although it
could be scaled up or down.
   * Nuritzi: The fee for the venue varies depending on whether we charge
for admission. We have been considering charging because in previous
editions of LAS where we didn't charge, people signed up and didn't show,
and when we did charge, about the same number of people showed. Options for
video recording are to rent a camera for EUR 200 or on the other end to
have someone come in and record all the talks professionally which would be
EUR 3000. The amount we could spend on refreshments also varies, since the
conference has a corporate tone we are considering spending more. We have a
budget for attendance (speakers, etc.) and above that a travel sponsorship
budget. The travel sponsorship budget should be a bit higher due to the new
GNOME travel policy and because we want a media presence and are
considering sponsoring media members to attend.
   * Philip: What's the relation between the budget in the bid PDF and the
one in the spreadsheet?
 * Nuritzi: The one in the PDF is submitted by the local team making
the bid, and the one in the spreadsheet is an expanded version of it from
the LAS team including things like travel sponsorship.
   * Allan: What is the commitment you are looking for at this point?
 * Aleix: We would like to know whether to move forward, so this is the
chance to ask questions and clear up any doubts. We think that approving a
budget will help move things forward.
 * Allan: Are you looking for us to approve a certain figure?
 * Nuritzi: Yes, the budget includes a figure that each organization
commits to sponsoring.
 * Allan: From a Foundation point of view I would like to have clarity
about the amounts of money we are committing to.
 * Nuritzi: Expenditure is linked to the fundraising in bands.
Initially, both GNOME and KDE are committing to meet 50% of the "expected"
sponsorship income, unless there is a common sponsor (e.g. OpenSUSE) who
normally sponsors both organisations, whose sponsorship would reduce the
overall amount (i.e. the commitment from both halves equally). As each
fundraising level is exceeded (low, expected, high) the expenditure limit
is raised to the next level, so the maximum approved / possible overspend
is limited.
   * Tristan: As I understand, there is no precedent for a co-organized
conference with a concept of shared sponsorship?
 * Aleix: The desktop summit was a precedent for this, although I
wasn't around at the time.
 * Nuritzi: On this topic, we had reached an agreement with the
previous board on how the shared sponsorship would work.
   * Tristan: How does the shared fundraising work logistically?
 * Nuritzi: Once both organizations commit, Neil will be able to start
fundraising. Foundation staff will be involved with keeping track of the
funds.
 * Allan: We need a formula for when funds will be released.
   * Nuritzi: The next step after approving would be to announce the dates
and the location. Last time we did a blog post from both GNOME and KDE. We
are hoping to do this as soon as possible, because last time we received
the feedback that there were a number of app-related organizations wanting
to attend but didn't have enough time to plan their attendance.
   * Carlos: How do we separate out GNOME travel sponsorees from KDE travel
sponsorees? Membership of which foundation?
 * Aleix: GNOME should be able to sponsor who they want without asking
permission from KDE and vice versa.
 * Carlos: I'm 

Minutes of the board meeting of July 8, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190708

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 8th July 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * PhilipChimento
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * TristanVanBerkom
 * BrittYazel
 * NuritziSanchez
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RobertMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Approve minutes of June 17
 * Approve minutes of June 24
 * Delayed officer elections
 * Committee membership confirmation
 * Impostor's Syndrome workshop costs
 * GUADEC travel sponsorship status
 * Note of thanks to outgoing board members

== Minutes ==

 * Approve minutes of June 17
   * Philip: One possible correction: I wasn't sure about whether Federico
was present or not, because he didn't speak during the meeting, and I was
attending by phone and so didn't see the list of attendees.
 * Federico was there.
   * Rosanna: Can we email the draft minutes with the agenda next time? If
they are in Etherpad it's difficult to see if anyone changed anything since
the last time we read it.
 * '''ACTION''': Philip - Change the guideline to say that the draft
minutes should be emailed along with the agenda.
   * June 17 minutes are approved.

 * Approve minutes of June 24
   * June 24 minutes are approved.

 * Delayed officer elections
   * Nuritzi: The proposal is to reappoint the current officers for now,
since it is required annually; and then elect new officers when Allan
returns from vacation, likely in the meeting of July 22.
   * '''VOTE''': Re-elect current officers to their posts.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Committee membership confirmation
   * Neil: Committees are appointed annually like officers, so this is
similar to the previous item.
   * Nuritzi: The only committee that has been inactive is the Sponsorship
committee. We also wanted to re-evaluate the membership of each committee
and remove inactive members.
 * Neil: It's possible to remove inactive members at any later time,
such as at GUADEC.
 * Britt: I'd prefer to wait to remove inactive members until GUADEC
when I have a better idea of who's doing what on each committee.
   * Britt: Should it be a public announcement so that committee members
can decide to withdraw themselves if they are not active?
 * Rosanna: It is up to each committee's liaison to talk to their
members.
   * '''VOTE''': Re-appoint current committee members to their respective
committees.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Impostor's Syndrome workshop costs
   * Nuritzi: As a part of improving diversity and inclusion initiatives at
GNOME, the GUADEC organizers wanted to have some sort of workshop for the
participants to attend. Kristi Progri found an impostor's syndrome workshop
including also a portion on unconscious bias and how to combat it. The
workshop leader is willing to give the workshop for free if we reimburse
the flight costs. The reason we are not requesting this through the travel
committee is because it should come from a different bucket, e.g. the same
way we approved training for the code of conduct committee. Proposal is to
approve up to EUR 500.00 for this expense.
   * Carlos: Why does this not go through the travel committee?
 * Rosanna: It's the same rationale as for keynote speakers.
  * Federico: Does lodging not need to be included?
* Nuritzi: The workshop leader didn't request it.
   * '''VOTE''': Approve up to EUR 500 in travel costs for the workshop
leader to attend GUADEC.
 * +1 unanimous
  * '''ACTION''': Nuritzi - Communicate the approved costs for the workshop
to Kristi.

 * GUADEC travel sponsorship status
   * We've received a mail from Meg Ford from the travel committee asking
us to discuss three questions in the board meeting:
 1. Is the money that Google sent for mentors available to pay for GSoC
student travel?
 2. What is the current travel sponsorship budget from GUADEC, which
depends on the conference's sponsorship income?
 3. A proposal to spend USD 3000–5000 of the travel committee's annual
budget on the GUADEC travel budget.
   * Rosanna: The biggest issue currently is not knowing whether they can
use EUR 3 or EUR 35000, based on the figures from GUADEC budgets with
low, expected, or high sponsorship income. They hope to use leftover budget
for visa fees; the priciest people to be sponsored right now come from
GSoC. Some people who requested financial assistance didn't specify a
number; they just asked for the package itself. They are currently hoping
to spend an additional USD 731 for visa costs and USD 544 for financial
assistance costs.
  * Philip: To clarify, financial assistance is about extra expenses like
food. This is not about "pre-imbursements" which is a different program.
  * Philip: What do we normally use the mentor money for?
* Rosanna: It goes into general funds and has already been for
accounted in our budget.
* Carlos: So using the regular travel committee budget is equivalent to
using the Google 

Re: Board of Directors Elections 2019 - Candidacy - Benjamin Berg

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 6:36 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> Hi Philip,
>
> On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 11:56 +0200, Tobias Mueller wrote:
> > On Thu, 2019-06-06 at 11:20 -0700, Philip Chimento via foundation-list
> > wrote:
> > > If elected to the board, how would you help to build trust and
> > > collaborative working relationships among the directors, and encourage
> > > healthy debate?
> > I think this is a great question for all the candidates and I would be
> > delighted to read statements of candidates who want to position
> > themselves.
>
> I don't particularly like bringing this up again, however, I do find it
> sad that you never responded to this question.


I saw no purpose in that.


> Also, I was surprised to
> see that the archives have been updated recently but no public
> statement has been made yet.
>

I am not intending to make any public statement. The board decided to make
this change as a result of a private conversation with a person who was
involved in that discussion, who intended that it be resolved without
making a fuss.

To be specific you updated the minutes of 2018-05-29 on the 2019-07-08
> adding[1]:
>
> """
>   * Code of conduct approval (Alexandre)
>* Alexandre wants to have on the record that he disagrees with how
>  the board approved the CoC
> """
>
> In contrast, your original summary on foundation-list read:
>
> """
> […], I am clarifying explicitly in this addendum that Alexandre Franke
> was not present at the above board meeting (see list of attendees), and
> that in the following board meeting he went on the record stating that
> he disagreed with the outcome of the above votes.
> """[2], similar during the 2018-10-09 Board meeting [3]
>
> Now. What strikes me is that this was a considerable misrepresentation
> of what Alexandre said at the time, and the possibility of exactly such
> a misrepresentation was a major concern in the discussion[4]. It may
> appear like be a detail at first, but the fact that Alexandre voiced
> his disagreement with *how* the vote happened and not with the
> *outcome* of the vote is a fundamental difference. From his own
> statement, we do not know whether or not Alexandre agrees with the
> outcome.
>

That was how I read it at the time. I think the interpretation that I
initially assumed is a reasonable interpretation of those words. I agree
that yours is, too. I do not intend to argue about the meanings of words. I
myself have no clue what Alexandre meant, as I was not part of the board
when that discussion took place. Also honestly I don't care. The full
extent of my involvement is that I inherited this action item from the
2017–2018 board.

Now, I do believe that mistakes like this can and do happen. But
> considering the situation, do you think that Alexandre or any other
> foundation member have grounds to trust you?
>

I don't get to decide whether people have grounds to trust me. People make
up their own minds. But this insinuation is ridiculous.
-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of June 24, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190624

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 24th June 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * PhilipChimento
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobertMcQueen
 * NuritziSanchez
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen

== Regrets ==

 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Guidelines for meeting minutes and confidentiality
 * LAS 2019 Bid
 * Further define GNOME Foundation Staff's role
 * Board transition
 * Note of thanks to outgoing board members

== Minutes ==

 * Guidelines for meeting minutes and confidentiality
   * Philip: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/Guidelines is
finished now. Federico and I have split the previous version of the
document, into two parts, one with information for the Foundation at large,
and one with internal procedures for the Board. The idea is to have minutes
ready for publication two weeks after the meeting date. The board would
approve the minutes for the previous meeting in each new meeting. There are
explicit guidelines on how to deal with confidential topics which should
provide a better understanding about why.
   * Rosanna: We need more lead time to be able to read modified minutes
before approving them in the next meeting.
 * Philip: The timeline of meeting plus 13 days was intended to give at
least 24 hours before the next biweekly board meeting for reading the
minutes.
 * Rob: typo: "no more than 13 days" should be "no less than 13 days".
   * Allan: The usual procedure is to present draft minutes along with the
new meeting's agenda.
   * Allan: I'm concerned that the wording "the board must approve
minutes..." is too strong. Change "must" to "should" throughout.
 * Neil: The board ''must'' approve the minutes, but ''should'' approve
them at the next meeting. Split the sentence into two: "The minutes of the
board meeting must be approved by the board. Normally this should happen
..."
   * Rob: These seem reasonable to me with the slightly reduced commitment
level suggested by Allan and Neil. Happy to vote on this.
 * Neil: It doesn't seem necessary. I don't see an advantage other than
making them harder to update, which may be an advantage or a disadvantage.
 * Philip: I was originally hesitant to vote on the guidelines because
I would like them to stay adaptable at least until they are tested out.
Maybe these guidelines will end up not working well.
 * Nuritzi: We can start following the guidelines and vote later if
necessary.
   * The board formally acknowledges the guidelines and urges the incoming
board to adopt them.

 * LAS 2019 Bid
   * Nuritzi: We have received a bid for Barcelona; from a team that has
held conferences before. We don't have a set budget yet, so there's nothing
for the board to vote on yet. They have a space in Barcelona with all the
requirements for a 200-person conference with BoF days. Suggested dates are
November 19–21; this doesn't conflict with GNOME Asia, which is the second
weekend of October. The initial budget is USD 9000 for the conference and
venue. We are still getting info on the deadline for confirming.
   * Nuritzi: We'll need info on how much travel sponsorship we will
require, if people don't naturally belong to KDE or GNOME travel
sponsorship target groups — e.g. speakers or wider community participants.
 * Federico: Didn't one of the recently discussed initiatives suggest
being able to sponsor people who are not Foundation members?
 * Nuritzi: That's from the travel committee, for newcomers, etc. The
proposal is to split the travel funding between GNOME and KDE.
 * Philip: GUADEC and GNOME.Asia supply the money for travel
sponsorships to their conferences, separately from the travel committee's
budget.
 * Nuritzi: We can have a separate travel "bucket" in the conference
budget, out of which both GNOME and KDE can sponsor people outside the
GNOME and KDE projects.
 * Allan: Does this affect the amount to be raised from the original
proposal? Will the money be raised by LAS itself, or GNOME and KDE?
   * Nuritzi: The responsibility lies on GNOME and KDE to both raise
money for the operating budget, as in the shared sponsorship scheme in the
original proposal. The LAS organization would allocate it.
 * Rob: I propose that instead of a separate bucket for people outside
either community, we split the extra travel money between the GNOME and KDE
travel sponsorship committees.
   * Carlos: Wouldn't sponsorships for people outside either project
need to be handled by someone else?
   * Rob: The idea is to avoid a third team just by allocating people
outside of either project to either of the existing travel committees.
   * Nuritzi: GNOME decides how many people to send from the GNOME
Foundation, so that shouldn't be affected by the extra travel budget for
people outside of either project.
   * Rob: This is not how GNOME currently accounts for conference
travel budgets — I 

Minutes of the board meeting of June 17, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190617

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 17th June 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * NuritziSanchez
 * AllanDay
 * KatGerasimova
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobertMcQueen (arriving late)
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Agenda ==

 * Travel approval - OSCON and West Coast Hackfest
 * Diversity & inclusion initiatives and Foundation events
 * Status of stopthemingmy.app
 * Status of travel committee
 * GNOME's values (email from Sam Hewitt)
 * Guidelines for meeting minutes and confidentiality
 * Further define GNOME Foundation Staff's role

== Minutes ==

 * Travel approval - OSCON and West Coast Hackfest
   * Neil: GNOME have a booth at OSCON. It's more of a corporate conference
rather than one of our traditional ones. The West Coast Hackfest (
https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/WestCoastHackfest) is on after that, which
comprises a couple of workshop days (engagement, documentation and GTK).
The available accommodation is unfortunately out of policy, the cheapest
sensible option is about USD 190 per night, so the board will have to
approve an exception to the per-diem.
   * Why is the accommodation out of policy?
 * Neil: There are a few areas where the US Department of State
per-diem guidelines, on which the Foundation travel policy is based, don't
fit well with our needs, for example because they are based on being able
to receive a government rate.
   * '''VOTE''': Approve Neil's trip to OSCON and the West Coast Hackfest,
with a waiver of the per-diem for the hotel cost.
 * +1 Nuritzi, Carlos, Allan, Kat, Philip
 * Vote passes unanimously. Note: Rob had not arrived yet.

[ Rob arrives ]

 * Diversity & inclusion initiatives and Foundation events
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/98
   * Nuritzi: The enagement team has started a group of people who are
interested in the topic and have discussed potential initiatives. With
GUADEC coming up, it would be good to foster initiatives that promote
inclusion and diversity at the conference (for example, opportunity grants.)
   * GUADEC would be an ideal location for training on how to communicate
in ways that promote inclusion and help us create a stronger community.
   * Creating an inclusive environment starts at the top, so the board
should lead the initaitive.
   * Possible ideas include travel bursaries outside the usual scope.
 * Wording would need to be important as we are not a grantmaking
organisation
   * If we had opportunity/inclusion funding or workshop funding, then we
would be showing that we're doing what we say we want to.
   * Much more scope for discussion here, we need to put together some
numbers to assess.
   * Would be good to have more research into what make a meaningful impact
and guidelines for how to run the initiatives.
   * The interest group can come up with more specific proposals to bring
to the board.
   * Two of the people in the interest group are staff members, the board
should talk to Neil to figure out if this is a priority for staff.
   * Nuritzi: This initiative is important for goals relating to a diverse
community, and that would be the object of investing more resources.
 * Carlos: This fits with the discussions that we need to have about
the Foundation's goals, to figure out where this fits in our priority scale.
 * Rob: At the hackfest we talked about having a stronger community in
terms of contributor base, so this fits with our high level goals.

 * Status of stopthemingmy.app
   * Neil: I have talked to the advisory board, and there was a positive
response to the discussion. We are looking at a couple of options for
GUADEC to help us progress and improve on the situation.
   * Nuritzi: Last week the board wanted to have something public which
shows that this is being looked at.
   * Neil: We need to have a clear goal for any public communication: who
it is aimed at and what it wants to communicate.
 * Nuritzi: Our goal with a public communication would be to confirm
that we do see the issue as an important topic, and facilitate further
discussion.
   * We need to find a good approach to progress the issue (possibly a
hackfest or something else).
   * Nuritzi: How should the Foundation be involved in facilitating
discussions like these? Should the board be involved? Or staff?
 * Neil: This is within the ED's remit.
   * '''ACTION''': Neil to contact the key individuals and facilitate a
discussion.

 * Status of travel committee
   * Philip: We should be on the last round of feedback on the updated
travel policy from new committee members. We need to know which speakers
will be accepted, in order to be ready for incoming travel requests. The
committee has contacted the GUADEC papers committee. The three new members
are very engaged; things are on the right track. There are already a few
sponsorship requests for GUADEC trickling in.

 * GNOME's values (email 

Minutes of the board meeting of June 3, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190603

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 3rd June 2019, 15:00 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez (leaving early)
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * KatGerasimova
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * CarlosSoriano (leaving early)
 * RobMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * Travel committee status
 * Community pulse: stopthemingmy.app
 * Diversity & inclusion initiatives and Foundation events

== Minutes ==

 * Travel committee status
   * Philip: Waiting to proceed until the new committee members sign the
confidentiality agreement.
 * '''ACTION''': Neil to check the status of the new members'
confidentiality agreement.
   * Philip: I lost access to RT temporarily, but Andrea Veri fixed that.
   * Allan: is there a plan for onboarding the new committee members?
 * Philip: The existing travel committee members may or may not have
time to do an onboarding session. In the end, we may just have to give them
Germán Poo-Caamaño's documentation.
 * Nuritzi: Could the Foundation (a board member, or someone from the
staff) organize an onboarding meeting for the new members, and have some
sort of retrospective on how the travel committee has worked?
 * Philip: The only people who can probably give a real onboarding
experience are Germán and David King; Adelia Rahim mentioned that she
didn't get a proper onboarding when joining the committee last year and
would like to join one now. I would only be able to tell new members about
the documentation that is available anyway.
   * '''ACTION:''' Philip to report back in 2–3 weeks on the status of the
new travel committee members
   * Nuritzi: Can we send out info about the new committee members, as well
as the changes to the sponsorship policy?
 * Philip: Since it'll be the responsibility of the committee to
implement the policy, I'm waiting on feedback from the new members about
the policy, before announcing it more widely.
 * Allan: This would be something to cover in the onboarding.

 * Community pulse: stopthemingmy.app
   * Allan: This issue was raised to us by the advisory board. A number of
individuals including GNOME Foundation / community members and app
contributors have created a website to request that distributors and others
stop applying third party GTK themes to their apps.
   * Rob: This has an effect on the public perception of GNOME. People
downstream have already seen messages, as a result of third parties
incorrectly interpreting the open letter, such as "GNOME community members
are targeting such-and-such company." It's useful for us to have an opinion
and make a response, because it affects the public perception of the
Foundation and the perception by the advisory board members. Secondly, this
is not a productive way to conduct the discussion, which has now turned
into a highly visible, passive-aggressive subtweeting thing. I don't know
specifically what we should do, but we should do something, for example
communicate with the parties involved, and figure out what to say publicly
to reassure and bring parties together for a more constructive discussion.
   * Neil: Additionally, we have staff with extensive media experience. In
the future, it would be useful if when making major announcements, or when
wanting to post something that may be controversial, to give Neil a heads
up — we can help refine the message so that it has a bigger or better
impact.
   * [ Nuritzi leaves ]
   * Federico: It might be worth dedicating resources from the Foundation
to make a technical investigation of how the theming bugs happen, to see if
it is something that can be fixed at the theming level or do we need an
extra API. This might be a good topic to work on at GUADEC.

[ Carlos leaves ]

 * Diversity & inclusion initiatives and Foundation events
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/98
   * Deferred.

== Actions ==

 * '''Neil''' - Check the status of the confidentiality agreements sent to
the new travel committee members.
 * '''Philip''' - Put the status of the new travel committee members on the
agenda in 2–3 weeks.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Board of Directors Elections 2019 - Candidacy - Benjamin Berg

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 7:32 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> Name: Benjamin Berg
> Affiliation: Red Hat
> E-Mail: bb...@gnome.org
> IRC: benzea
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to run for the Board of Directors of the GNOME Foundation.
>
> I have been contributing to GNOME since 2006. In addition to
> development work I have regularly helped with events and also organised
> GUADEC 2016 in Karlsruhe.
>
> The Foundation is still undergoing deeper changes with the hiring of
> multiple employees. This is an interesting challenge as the role of the
> Board continues to change and it may have a large impact on the
> Foundation and the GNOME community. I expect that shaping this future
> will be an important part of the Boards work and I would like to be
> part of this. Both by reflecting on whether we are moving in the right
> direction and constructively working with everyone to get there.
>
> Apart from that I keep wondering about how to enable more collaboration
> between the Board and the membership. An example on how I think the
> situation can be improved is to move some tasks like the ongoing work
> to develop 5 and 10-year goals into focused working groups. Doing so is
> associated with an overhead but it guarantees that the work happens in
> a transparent manner and that everyone can join the conversation.
>
> That is just one idea. As a Director I would like to work on creating
> such opportunities for members to take on responsibilities inside the
> Foundation. I believe that this is important so that members can grow
> into new roles, creating a path from being an active member of the
> community to joining a committee or serving as a Director.
>

Hi Benjamin,

It's public knowledge that you've disagreed with decisions made by the
currently sitting board of directors. Different points of view,
disagreement, and debate within the board are normal, healthy, and
expected, but I believe that so are collaboration, respect, and trust while
engaging in debate.

On several occasions you've insinuated publicly that the current directors
are untrustworthy or involved in something shady, without making any overt
accusations that could be responded to factually.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/60 is an example of this. I
can't speak for any of the other candidates, but I would find an atmosphere
where people operate out of distrust, if it existed on the board,
detrimental to a good working relationship.

If elected to the board, how would you help to build trust and
collaborative working relationships among the directors, and encourage
healthy debate?

Regards,
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of May 20, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 20th May 2019, 15:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190520

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * NuritziSanchez
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * RobMcQueen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern

== Agenda ==

 * Travel committee update
 * Compensation committee proposal (board-only)

== Minutes ==

 * Travel committee update
   * Philip: The new committee members have been appointed and notified.
Currently waiting for a signal when Neil returns from vacation that they
have signed their confidentiality agreements, then we can proceed with
adding them to the wiki, RT, etc.

[ Rosanna leaves ]

 * Compensation committee proposal
   * The GNOME Foundation board is recommended by US law to have a
compensation committee that evaluates the executive director's compensation
package based on research of other comparable nonprofit organizations, and
prepares a yearly report where they propose updates if applicable. This
committee was created earlier this year and has now prepared a report,
which was discussed among the board without the GNOME Foundation staff
present.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of May 13, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 10:23 PM  wrote:
[snip]

>  * Travel sponsorship policy updates
>* Philip has completed a draft of the revised travel sponsorship policy.
>

It was pointed out to me, after finalizing the minutes, that this doesn't
convey what I intended it to mean. By "completed" I meant "made the final
modifications to". The draft policy, the first version of which was
discussed in the board meeting of February 11 [1], was written by Nuritzi
and me jointly, as I mentioned in my recent candidate statement. The way
it's worded makes it seem like I wrote the whole thing, but that isn't
accurate.

[1] https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190211

-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of May 13, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 13th May 2019, 15:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190513

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * NeilMcGovern
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Regrets ==

 * RobMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * New travel committee members
 * Travel sponsorship policy updates
 * Mail from Zeeshan Ali about Mozilla Location Service
 * GNOME software definition proposal

== Minutes ==

 * New travel committee members
   * We now have three new volunteers for the travel committee. We propose
to appoint Guillaume Gomez, Umang Jain, and Meg Ford to the travel
committee. We have written a short Discourse topic about the new
volunteers, it's still missing info about Guillaume. Philip has notified
the current travel committee members of the new volunteers, and received
positive feedback from Adelia Rahim.
   * Nuritzi: I had a chance to talk to Adelia and she is enthuiastic about
the chance to have discussions about the more nuanced points.
   * Federico: Guillaume Gomez is one of the maintainers of gtk-rs, the
Rust bindings for GTK, and also is part of the Rust developer tools and
documentation teams.  He’s a GNOME Foundation member and has attended all
the past Rust/GNOME hackfests.  Guillaume is one of those super helpful
people generally, and I’d be happy for him to be a part of the travel
committee.
   * Carlos: We discussed in the past that travel committee members would
have to sign a confidentiality agreement.
 * Neil: Yes. It will be similar to the confdentiality agreement that
board members must sign.
   * '''VOTE:''' Appoint Guillaume Gomez, Meg Ford, and Umang Jain to the
travel committee.
 * +1 unanimous
   * '''ACTION:''' Philip to notify new members and current committee that
they have been appointed, send their email addresses to Neil, and add them
to the mailing list and wiki.
   * '''ACTION:''' Neil to send confidentiality agreement to new members
and add them to RT.

 * Travel sponsorship policy updates
   * Philip has completed a draft of the revised travel sponsorship policy.
The goals of this revision are to fix some problems with the old policy:
 * It doesn't work well for people who cannot carry the cost of a trip
until reimbursement after the trip is over.
 * The wording is very stern and seems to demand that people justify
themselves.
 * Some policies are not written down (e.g. that we sponsor travel to
and from an airport.)
 * Verifying costs takes a lot of effort from the travel committee.
   * Carlos: You mentioned at one time that pre-imbursements would be part
of the policy, but I don't see it?
 * Philip: It's listed under "What to do in unusual cases".
Pre-imbursements are agreed on a case-by-case basis.
   * Allan: Are we meant to vote on this? Isn't it the responsibility of
the travel committee to spend their budget as they see fit?
 * Philip: I disagree. As the board of directors, we want to use this
policy to achieve certain goals.
 * General consensus is that we don't need to vote on it.
   * Allan: I don't think we need to review the policy line by line right
now. We can agree with the general idea that this proposal is a good way
forward.
 * Neil: At this point, the travel committee should be able to change
things to work better on their own initiative.
   * Philip: Practially speaking, should I put this on the wiki now that
the board has given feedback?
 * Nuritzi: Yes, but we should give the new travel committee members a
chance to discuss it first.

 * Mail from Zeeshan Ali about Mozilla Location Service
   * Zeeshan Ali has sent an email about Mozilla Location Service. Geoclue,
and with it functionality in GNOME, depends on Mozilla Location Service for
resolving the location of Wifi networks. Mozilla is not maintaining this
service any longer, but it is still running. Recently it has been blocking
users of the Geoclue API key, but even if that gets resolved there are
still problems depending on an unmaintained service. Zeeshan proposes
investigating whether we can maintain the service.
   * We would like to discuss this in the community to see if any solutions
present themselves.
   * '''ACTION''': Federico to open an issue about online services which we
can't maintain - https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/97

[ Note: In the meantime since the above discussion, the issue with the API
key has been resolved with Mozilla. ]

 * GNOME software definition proposal
   * Allan: Board members have had another week to look at it now.
   * Philip: It's short and general. Short and general is good, but have
you considered any cases where some software meets all the requirements but
we wouldn't want them as a GNOME Affiliate?
 * Allan: That was not really the goal of this.
 * Carlos: It's meant more as a guideline for a committee to decide
what's a GNOME Affiliate.
   * Allan: GNOME Affiliates is 

Minutes of the board meeting of May 6, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 6th May 2019, 14:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190506

== Attending ==

 * KatGerasimova
 * NuritziSanchez
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * CarlosSoriano
 * AllanDay
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Regrets ==

 * RobMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * Travel Committee status
 * LAS co-hosting proposal
 * GNOME Software definition proposal

== Minutes ==

 * Travel committee status
   * Philip: There were a lot more pending requests than I thought at first
glance. I started processing them thanks to Germán's detailed documentation
and we are now caught up on sponsorship requests and reimbursements. I
contacted Guillaume Gomez and he's still interested in volunteering.
   * Nuritzi: Umang Jain is interested to join the committee as well.
   * Neil: I have looked into how the Foundation could make things easier.
I don't yet have any recommendations, but am still working on it. Currently
I don't have a good picture of what is the most time consuming part.
 * Philip: A huge bottleneck is the tools: RT and nextcloud. Another
time suck is the verification of flight searches, which should become much
easier under the draft sponsorship policy which we will hopefully adopt
soon. Germán's documentation is here:
https://wiki.gnome.org/Travel/ApplicationProcess
   * Nuritzi: If we are planning to appoint new people into the travel
committee, we should train them as early as possible before the GUADEC rush.
   * Philip: I propose not appointing them now, but first giving the travel
committee a heads up.
   * '''ACTION''': Philip - Communicate to the travel committee our
intention to appoint more people to the committee
   * '''ACTION''': Federico - Introduce Guillaume to the board on Discourse
   * '''ACTION''': Nuritzi - Introduce Umang to the board on Discourse

 * LAS co-hosting proposal
   * Nuritzi: There have not been too many edits since the last time we
discussed it. The main changes have been about fundraising and how any
surplus is split after the event. Sponsorship from organizations that
donate to both GNOME and KDE will be considered "joint sponsorship".
   * Nuritzi: Regarding branding, the conference is pursuing a visual
identity which is distinct from both KDE and GNOME, but there are designers
from both communities contributing.
   * Nuritzi: The committee is currently blocked on sending out the call
for locations and would like the GNOME board to vote on the proposal.
   * Philip: When did the name change from Libre Application Summit to
Linux Application Summit?
 * Nuritzi: Quite early on. We thought that Libre implied that only
representatives of free software applications were welcome at the
conference.
   * Carlos: How do we determine which organizations are considered "joint
sponsorship"?
 * Nuritzi: Looking at whether they donate to GNOME and/or KDE
conferences regularly in other years.
   * Carlos: Do we have representation in the group that decides things
around fundraising?
 * Nuritzi: Yes, Sri has expressed interest.
   * Carlos: The Contributor Covenant is mainly for online situations,
could that pose a problem when applied to a conference?
 * Nuritzi: We consulted with the code of conduct committee about this.
 * Federico: The language in the Contributor Covenant is quite similar
to the GNOME events code of conduct already.
 * Nuritzi: We are considering adding some of the details from the
GNOME events code of conduct, such as how to report incidents.
   * Allan: At some time early in the process I would like the committee to
present to the board. Otherwise I don't see an opportunity to provide
feedback.
 * Nuritzi: Can we do this as part of presenting the bid?
 * Allan: We can make a note that the board would be able to provide
feedback on branding, fundraising, etc. at that point.
   * Allan: Neil, what's your opinion on this document?
 * Neil: The document has the right level of detail for this stage. We
would want more detail when a bid arrives. The main risk to the Foundation
here is if we ask people to put time into this and it ends up not
happening, and this document goes a long way towards de-risking that.
   * Neil: I'm not sure the board needs to vote on this necessarily, as no
funds or trademarks are being committed.
 * Carlos: Since the process is new and uncertain, voting would send a
clear message of support to the committee.
   * Nuritzi: Would there be a way to remove some of the risks from the
branding? Would it help to present the branding before a bid arrives, if it
is ready? Would the board or the GNOME design team evaluate the branding?
 * Allan: Since we have to approve the trademark use, the board has to
approve it. The GNOME design team can give input.
 * Nuritzi: Allan, I would like to discuss this further with you to
figure out this process.
   * The board formally acknowledges the proposal.

 * GNOME software definition 

Re: Question to candidates: eco-friendliness

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Hi Philip,

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:11 AM Philip Withnall 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for running for the board!
>
> What steps do you think the Foundation could take to reduce its
> environmental impact, and the environmental impact of the project as a
> whole?
>
> I’m asking in more of an organisational sense than a technical sense.
> It’s up to individual maintainers to ensure their software is not
> resource-hungry, etc.
>
> I imagine this is the kind of question where it’s easy to just say
> “yes, I care about environmental friendliness”, so I suggest you might
> want to reply with your ideas about things the board could do to reduce
> environmental impact — whether those things are big, small, incremental
> steps to reduce our physical resource usage, or fundamental changes to
> how we organise the project to reduce the impact of travel. It would be
> interesting to hear them all, and how feasible/practical you think any
> improvements are.
>
> Obviously, those who have already served on the board will have some
> insight to share about what the board already does, and concrete ways
> it could improve; hopefully this doesn’t disadvantage those who haven’t
> already served on the board.
>

I tend to think it's more likely to disadvantage those who answer later,
since the candidates who responded already have mentioned a number of ideas
that I wish I had thought of first. So I had better get my response in now
:-P

I am trying to think what I can contribute to this discussion that others
haven't already, and what I've come up with that I'm personally interested
in, is figuring out how it might be possible to change the GNOME culture to
make it easier to participate in hackfests remotely. I have tried remote
participation with a few GNOME hackfests and it's difficult. That may sound
odd coming from me since I have worked 100% remote for the last 6 years but
I do have to say it's a lot harder to do it in GNOME than in a work
environment. We tend to go either fully text-based/asynchronous, or fully
face-to-face. Either we send our merge requests and our blog posts, and
most of the time we don't pay too much attention to the human side, or we
go to the other extreme and travel to a hackfest or conference where we
spend 16 hours a day hacking, presenting, and celebrating in each others'
company for a short, intense time. There is no in between. In fact I
believe this is problematic for other reasons than the environment, as I've
seen a number of instances of flame-first-ask-questions-later on GNOME
mailing lists in the past year, that I hope would not have escalated so
badly if people were actually talking out loud with their voices to another
person's face on their screen.

I see a few reasons for these extremes, first of all it's difficult to get
human connection outside of the face-to-face events. People don't have time
(e.g. I personally am okay to write this email to foundation-list at 11 PM
whereas I would not get on a video call at that time). Also people have
varying levels of comfort with video calls which we need to respect.

Second, we don't really have much precedent for remote participants in
hackfests. On the occasions when I've tried it, I've been the only one.

Third, the free software tools for video calling and remote collaboration
are quite far behind the proprietary tools. Furthermore I'm not sure that
fixing this is where the expertise of the GNOME community lies.

I think it would be interesting to experiment with all-remote hackfests,
where we try to build an experience in between the normal "type text, hit
submit, wait for text in return" interaction, and the resource- and
time-intensive hackfest/conference experience. Not to replace either of
them, but to supplement them. The board can't dictate that community
members do this, but I would be interested in seeing how we could
facilitate it.

Regards,
-- 
Other Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Question to candidates - Minutes of the board meeting

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 5:43 PM Max via foundation-list <
foundation-list@gnome.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for running for the board.
>
> Thanks everyone who want take times to make GNOME better.
> Just a simple question about Minutes of the board meeting.
>
> Data and information might be different.
> For me - a GNOME foundation member
>
> Data - Get "Minutes of the board meeting" after 1 month or 2 weeks after.
>  Because maybe the event is already close or over.
>
> Information - Get "Minutes of the board meeting" in 1 week or 10 days.
>  Because something might be happening and everyone could discuss with
> board and reply.
>
>   Here is the question 
>
> Could you promise to think a way --- Everyone get "Minutes of the board
> meeting" in a very close time?
>
> Here is my suggestion.
> Maybe there will be a table to record the "Minutes of the board meeting"
> announcement time and does it announce in short time?
>
>
> 
> | board meeting  |  Minutes|   in 10 days ?
>   |
>
> 
> | 2019/4/29  |   2019/5/22|  No
> |
>
> 
> | 2019/4/8   |   2019/5/15|  No
>  |
>
> 
> | 2019/3/13   |   2019/5/15|  No
>  |
>
> 
>
> Maybe it could be a record in GNOME annual report？
>  There are  ? % for Minutes of the board meeting on time to announce.
>
> I want to say --- It not just secretary task, It's the information we want
> to get from all GNOME Board member.
>
> Thanks again for all who take time to running the board
>

Hi Max,

This question seems quite relevant and timely, and as I'm sure you know
publishing the minutes has been my responsibility over the last year. You
may have noticed that I just replied on another foundation-list thread that
I am proposing a guideline to the board for best practices around minutes
[1].

I can speak about my experience publishing the minutes. Looking back over
the 2018-2019 board term that I've served, sometimes it's been easy for me
to get the minutes done by the time of the next board meeting, and
sometimes, as you have noticed, it takes longer. As being a director is a
volunteer position I don't think it's feasible to always require it to be
done in 7 or 10 days. Sometimes it is delayed waiting for information that
needs to be included in the minutes or because another director needs to
carry out an action item first. It seems to have been inevitable in
practice every year that there are sometimes delays despite each
secretary's best intentions. My personal opinion in a situation like this
where a short schedule has not proved sustainable, is that there's no point
in saying "I'll just do the same thing, but faster next time" as that is
likely to fail.

We could require the responsibility of writing the minutes to rotate
through all 7 directors so that everyone only has to do it once in a few
months, but I believe that it's actually important to have the same person
continue to write the minutes, so that they are written with a consistent
voice and level of detail as much as possible.

Part of my proposal linked above, the section named "Delays" [2], is that
the secretary should have the draft minutes ready to be approved after 13
days, to give board members 24 hours to read them before the start of the
meeting two weeks later. I hope that by putting the minutes as the first
item on the agenda for every board meeting, that will provide a consistent
motivation for the secretary to generally have them ready to publish after
14 days, and also normalize that the secretary should ask another director
to prepare the minutes when their schedule is busy. I don't think this will
eliminate all delays, but I do think it will help share the work among the
directors and also make more visible to the membership when delays occur
and when to expect the delay to be solved.

I would also like to ask you: what do you think would help encourage the
kind of discussion you are looking for, other than minutes published after
7 or 10 days?

[1] https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/Guidelines
[2]
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/Guidelines#Appendix:_Delays

Regards,
-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of March 13, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Hi,

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:51 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 2019-05-23 at 18:37 -0700, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 4:55 AM Benjamin Berg 
> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2019-05-15 at 18:08 -0700, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:11 AM Benjamin Berg <
> benja...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2019-05-14 at 22:30 -0700, Philip Chimento via foundation-
> > > > > list
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >* Philip: Everyone please read this, we'll discuss it again
> in the
> > > > > > next meeting. As suggested in Allan's comments, I can split the
> parts
> > > > > > that are more of interest to Foundation members into a wiki page.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the proposed policy fully available to foundation members for
> review
> > > > > and/or as a reference at this point in time?
> > > >
> > > > It's not a policy. It's an informal guideline for the board members,
> > > > suggesting what standards the minutes should meet, and a procedure
> > > > for approving the minutes of the previous meeting at the start of
> > > > each meeting.
> > > >
> > > > […] The remaining board guideline part is honestly not going to be
> > > > very interesting unless you like parliamentary procedure, but will be
> > > > put on a wiki page as well when the board members agree on it.
> > >
> > > And I am very much interested in reviewing those. We had longer
> > > discussions in the relevant tickets and so far I had not gotten the
> > > impression that the Board has addressed the issue of missing meeting
> > > minutes adequately. I do have a real hope that these documents will
> > > improve the situation a lot for the future, and I am very much
> > > interested in doing a review. Ideally before the Board votes on them.
> >
> > Sure, I have pinged people about it to get things moving again. I
> > personally am going on vacation tomorrow and will check what the
> > progress is when I get back next week. The goal is to put both online
> > before the end of the board term.
>
> Thanks. I am looking forward to seeing the actual document(s), as it is
> much easier to talk about this once everyone has the full information.
>

The explanatory wiki page:
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard#General_information_on_meeting_minutes

The guidelines that I am proposing to the board to adopt in the future:
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/Guidelines

> But just to be clear, it's not a policy, and I don't believe the
> > board is planning to vote on it. The wiki page is an explanatory wiki
> > page which we will be happy to answer questions about, but is not
> > going to represent any change from the status quo. The other document
> > is basically a guideline for the board saying "approve the previous
> > meeting's minutes at the start of each meeting, define a procedure by
> > which corrections are to be made, and make sure to delegate the
> > publishing of the minutes to someome else if the secretary hasn't
> > been able to do it by then." As a fairly minor procedural change to
> > the board meetings, it's not something we'd seek review or input on.
>
> To be honest, the above explanation makes the situation more confusing
> to me. I simply can't make much sense of it, partially because I cannot
> map it to my experiences[1] and partly because it does not answer the
> questions that I have about this topic.
>
> Benjamin
>
> [1] I have been involved with various bodies primarily in the
> university and student council context. I have also worked on different
> bylaws and rules of procedures over the years (and reviewed state law
> in Germany). I believe I did learn quite a bit about good practices
> during that time even if it will not directly map to an anglo-saxon
> system.
>
> To be specific as to why I am struggling. My expectation would be that
> approving minutes is a mandatory procedure for the Board. And
> introducing such a procedure requires a vote. In contrast you seem to
> be handling it purely as a non-binding guideline which seems odd to me.
>

I will try to explain my understanding. I think it's accurate to say that
so far, minutes are approved by unanimous consent, since the directors all
have access to the draft minutes before they are published and have the
opportunity to comment on them. In the case where something is written
incorrectly, the other directors do propose corrections to me. However, in
my p

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of March 13, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 4:55 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2019-05-15 at 18:08 -0700, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:11 AM Benjamin Berg 
> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2019-05-14 at 22:30 -0700, Philip Chimento via foundation-
> > > list
> > > wrote:
> > > >* Philip: Everyone please read this, we'll discuss it again in the
> > > > next meeting. As suggested in Allan's comments, I can split the parts
> > > > that are more of interest to Foundation members into a wiki page.
> > >
> > > Is the proposed policy fully available to foundation members for review
> > > and/or as a reference at this point in time?
> >
> > It's not a policy. It's an informal guideline for the board members,
> > suggesting what standards the minutes should meet, and a procedure
> > for approving the minutes of the previous meeting at the start of
> > each meeting.
> >
> > […] The remaining board guideline part is honestly not going to be
> > very interesting unless you like parliamentary procedure, but will be
> > put on a wiki page as well when the board members agree on it.
>
> And I am very much interested in reviewing those. We had longer
> discussions in the relevant tickets and so far I had not gotten the
> impression that the Board has addressed the issue of missing meeting
> minutes adequately. I do have a real hope that these documents will
> improve the situation a lot for the future, and I am very much
> interested in doing a review. Ideally before the Board votes on them.
>

Sure, I have pinged people about it to get things moving again. I
personally am going on vacation tomorrow and will check what the progress
is when I get back next week. The goal is to put both online before the end
of the board term.

But just to be clear, it's not a policy, and I don't believe the board is
planning to vote on it. The wiki page is an explanatory wiki page which we
will be happy to answer questions about, but is not going to represent any
change from the status quo. The other document is basically a guideline for
the board saying "approve the previous meeting's minutes at the start of
each meeting, define a procedure by which corrections are to be made, and
make sure to delegate the publishing of the minutes to someone else if the
secretary hasn't been able to do it by then." As a fairly minor procedural
change to the board meetings, it's not something we'd seek review or input
on.
-- 
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of April 29, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 29 April 2019, 15:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190429

Note: The meeting of Monday 22 April 2019, 15:30 UTC, was postponed to this
date due to not reaching quorum.

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NeilMcGovern
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RobMcQueen
 * PhilipChimento

== Agenda ==

 * GNOME.Asia bid approval (Neil)
 * Form 990 approval (Neil)
 * Board elections dates aproval (Carlos)
 * GIMP expenditure authorisation (Neil)
 * LAS Update (Nuritzi)
 * Travel committee status (Philip)
 * GNOME software definition proposal (Allan)

== Minutes ==

 * GNOME.Asia bid approval
   * GNOME.Asia have received a couple of bids and are recommending going
with Indonesia. The local team is seeking approval from the board. Last
week we discussed the bids in our work session and did not have any
questions or concerns.
   * Carlos: Are we only approving the location, or the budget as well?
 * Neil: The bid includes a budget, but it can be revised if necessary.
 * Allan: There's nothing in the bid regarding income. So, what exactly
are we voting on? Are we approving the budget with expenditures only, and
authorizing a float for the organizers to start spending money?
 * Nuritzi: Do we have sponsors already?
   * Neil will check what the status of this is.
 * Nuritzi: The total budget is small enough that I would feel
comfortable authorizing it right now, pending sponsorship.
 * Allan: We could authorize a float, but we would have to explicitly
include it in the vote.
 * Nuritzi: Looking over the budget, it does not look like they would
need a float.
   * VOTE: Approve the Gresik, Indonesia bid for GNOME.Asia 2019 with a
maximum expenditure of USD 5000.
 * +1 unanimous

 * Form 990 approval
   * The Foundation's yearly required tax forms were presented to the board
members in advance of the meeting.
   * Philip: Since this is about fiscal year 2017, it's hard to check
things there since I wasn't well acquainted with the Foundation back then.
   * Rob: The accompanying letter from the accountant suggested that we
evaluate whether we meet 509(a)1 criteria in the future. Does that mean we
might need to be under a different tax jurisdiction?
 * Rosanna: That has to do with how donations are accounted for.
   * Allan: I don't remember approving one of these in past years.
 * Kat: I do.
 * Neil: The requirement is for the board to review the form every year.
   * VOTE: Approve the draft Form 990 for tax year 2017 and related
California Form 199 presented to the board on April 17 2019.
 * +1 Nuritzi, Kat, Rob, Federico, Carlos, Philip. Abstained: Allan
 * Vote passed.

 * Board elections date approval
   * Andrea Veri sent an email with proposed election dates to the board
list; this is the last possible meeting where we would be able to approve
the suggested dates.
   * For convenience, here is a copy of the proposed dates for the GNOME
Board Elections 2019:
 * 2019-05-12: List of candidates opens.
 * 2019-05-26: Last day to announce candidacies, submit summary
statements.
 * 2019-05-27: Final list of candidates.
 * 2019-05-28: Instructions mailed to eligible voters, voting begins.
 * 2019-06-11: Voting closes.
 * 2019-06-12: Preliminary results are announced.
 * 2019-06-19: Last day to challenge preliminary results.
   * However, if we are still planning to change the length of the board
terms, we would need to do so before announcing the elections.
   * Neil: We are talking to lawyers at the moment; we may need to change
the bylaws to increase the board term length, so it may not be possible for
this election.
 * Carlos: If the term is already fixed, do we have any power to adjust
it for any date changes in the first place?
   * Rosanna: The term is strict.
 * Allan: The bylaws say that the term is set at the time of elections.
   * Neil: You could indeed set the term of this election to be 2
years, but there is no way under the current bylaws to move to split-term
elections where half the board are elected for 2 years every year. if we
announced that the coming election was for a 2-year term, then the vote
after that would be in 2 years from now. We could have another 1-year term,
and have that year to adjust the bylaws.
   * Philip: Under what circumstances should we not be confident about
these dates?
   * Nuritzi: How are these dates in relation to the board handover during
GUADEC? GUADEC is a bit late this year.
   * VOTE: Approve the election dates that Andrea Veri proposed
 * +1 unanimous
   * ACTION: Carlos - Respond to Andrea with the results of the vote.

 * GIMP expenditure authorization
   * The GIMP developers want to go to the Libre Graphics Meeting, and hire
an AirBNB. They would like approval of up to EUR 10,000 from the funds
earmarked for GIMP.
   * Rosanna: They 

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of March 13, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:11 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 2019-05-14 at 22:30 -0700, Philip Chimento via foundation-list
> wrote:
> >* Philip: Everyone please read this, we'll discuss it again in the
> > next meeting. As suggested in Allan's comments, I can split the parts
> > that are more of interest to Foundation members into a wiki page.
>
> Is the proposed policy fully available to foundation members for review
> and/or as a reference at this point in time?


It's not a policy. It's an informal guideline for the board members,
suggesting what standards the minutes should meet, and a procedure for
approving the minutes of the previous meeting at the start of each meeting.

Allan suggested at the time splitting it into two parts, since some parts
were more interesting as a reference for GNOME Foundation members. Federico
is working on splitting it and putting the reference part in a wiki page.
The remaining board guideline part is honestly not going to be very
interesting unless you like parliamentary procedure, but will be put on a
wiki page as well when the board members agree on it.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of April 8, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 8 April 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * NuritziSanchez
 * AllanDay
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * NeilMcGovern
 * KatGerasimova
 * CarlosSoriano

== Agenda ==

 * Board initiatives check in
 * Travel committee status

== Minutes ==

 * Board initiatives check in
   * This is a short check in for initatives that the board members have
been working on, in order to determine what we should work on during the
hacking session next week.
   * Allan has been working on the GNOME software definition.
 * Going back and forth with the release team for ideas.
 * Next step is to brainstorm ideas for what to call the collection of
apps and libraries.
   * Nuritzi has been working on the compensation committee report with Rob
and Carlos.
 * Will take another week or two to come up with a recommendation,
which will be presented at a board-only meeting to get the board's input.
   * Nuritzi has been working on GNOME Foundation goals with Philip.
 * We took the goals that we came up with at the Foundation hackfest in
October, and have been reorganizing and prioritizing them.
 * Still a lot of work to be done. It's quite late in the board term,
so we would like to get this set up for the next board can easily jump into
it.
 * Since this is a 10-year plan, maybe the Board doesn't need to do
much more than to ensure that these are valid goals for GNOME.
 * Federico: Do we give out the goals to the staff, and have them
figure out how to accomplish them?
   * Philip: It's Neil's job to direct the staff with actionable tasks.
 * Nuritzi: It's important to ensure good continuity for Neil, even
across board terms.
 * Rob: The board needs to own the goals, but not change them all the
time.
 * Nuritzi: This is something we need to cover in the board handover
meeting at GUADEC, and make sure we have enough time to discuss it
thoroughly.
 * Federico: We should leave this well-documented in a place such as
GitLab.
 * Nuritzi: We are going to work on operationalizing the 10 and 5-year
goals into 1-year goals.
 * Nuritzi: Are we overstepping into Neil's work?
   * Philip: Neil has said we haven't; he expects us to provide the
operational plan.
   * Rob: Please keep me in the loop on that conversation. It's one of
my regrets from the Foundation hackfest that we didn't complete this at the
time. Neil should be a participant in this conversation and can help
provide the continuity.
 * Federico: It's easy for the board to fall into a trap of discussing
things but without being sure how to put them into action. Neil and Rosanna
play an invaluable role in providing context.
 * Nuritzi: We should recommend that next year's board tries to
prioritize this during the handoff.
   * Philip is working on the travel sponsorship policy. There are still
some open questions, which he posed in a thread on Discourse. There was a
legal notice in the application form that from the Discourse discussion,
sounds like it needs to be preserved, which needs to be reincorporated into
the draft. People are welcome to read it and give feedback; the plan is to
vote on it during the next meeting. Not expecting much feedback from the
travel committee at this point; already sent a draft and got very little
response.
   * Philip is writing guidelines on meeting minutes. Working on splitting
the draft into information for the foundation, and procedures for the board.
 * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/95

 * Travel committee status
   * There is a big backlog of unreplied requests.
   * Rosanna talked to Adelia Rahim (travel committee member); Adelia said
she needed an updated spreadsheet of how much the travel committee has
spent, and how much budget is left.
   * Philip mailed Adelia asking about what needed to happen with the
spreadsheet on Sunday.
   * We may have to approve requests ourselves, especially for hackfests
that already happened.
   * Allan: What would it look like if we started approving requests?
 * Philip: This already happened last GUADEC, so there is a precedent
for it.
   * Federico: Guillame Gomez has also expressed interest in helping the
travel committee.
   * Allan: Would we need to allowing the travel committee some particular
amount of money to spend while the spreadsheet is being reconstructed?
   * Nuritzi: Will we need to have a meeting next week to vote on this? If
so, let me know by Thursday to announce it.
   * Rosanna: I have the information to reconstruct the spreadsheet, but I
need the time.
   * '''ACTION:''' Nuritzi, Rob - Ask Neil to allocate time for Rosanna to
reconstruct the travel committee's spreadsheet.
   * '''ACTION:''' Philip - Figure out from Adelia what the travel
committee needs, and figure out a plan for how to proceed.

 * Nuritzi: should we ask committees to produce status reports for May?
   * Will start a discussion on 

Minutes of the board meeting of March 13, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190318

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 18 March 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RobMcQueen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * CarlosSoriano

== Regrets ==

 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * GINA 2019
 * Sri's email about investing in documentation
 * Travel sponsorship policy
 * Guidelines on meeting minutes, approvals, and confidentiality
 * Request to act as a fiscal agent for Mallard

== Minutes ==

 * GINA (GNOME In North America) 2019
   * This is a general poll of directors on the relative importance of
organizing a GINA conference this year, especially relative to LAS (Linux
Application Summit).
 * It is also desirable regarding our nonprofit status to maintain
active events in the United States.
   * Allan: It's important to me that GINA happens organically, that there
isn't an event organized that no-one is interested in going to. Maybe we
should research what interest there is in North America.
 * Rosanna: When we first organized GNOME.Asia, there was no interest
in it; we created interest by having an event that started and grew a
community, as opposed to GUADEC where we invite an existing community. For
GINA we should figure out what mix we need in order to make it successful.
 * Rob: The question before the board now is whether that's something
we want to prioritize this year.
 * Allan: Do we prioritize LAS or GINA?
   * Federico: LAS is primarily a conference for developers, we can see
the GINA proposal as jump-starting a community including non-developers.
   * Allan: We also have to think of maintaining what we already have; if
we don't do an event, does this make the North American community wither
away? Do we need some investment in the short term to maintain interest?
What if instead of thinking of "an event for the whole continent", we try
for local communities, i.e. the Boston Summit helped form a community in
the East Coast.
   * Federico: I know someone who organized a Linux conference in Mexico
for several years, stopped, and now wants to start again. If I ask him
about organizing a GNOME conference, the first question will be if he can
get sponsorship. What would be our budget for such an event?
 * Neil: Yes, we would need a proposal for what is being organized.
There are a number of options.
   * Nuritzi: Neil, what's your feeling on the resources for this? If we
allocate resources to a GINA conference, then will that take resources away
from LAS?
 * Neil: It really depends on the scope of the two events. If GINA is a
more hackfest-like event, or if LAS basically organizes itself without too
much input from Foundation staff, then it's quite feasible with the
resources we have. It's also possible that it won't be.
   * Rob: It sounds like we want to give resources to LAS, and then ask for
proposals from elsewhere in the USA. For example, have a smaller scale
regional event, another "East Coast summit" for example.
   * Rosanna: There hasn't been any push from the community on this; people
in the USA are happy to travel. But while advisory board members can offer
us space, it's not space that we are lacking, just people power to organize
things.
 * Allan: That's why I'd like to do some research on the amount of
interest in such an event. Maybe we'll find out that there are people
interested.
   * Nuritzi: This year LAS would need a lot more input from the
Foundation, because of the co-hosting.
   * Carlos: We are talking of organizing conferences, but that seems like
the last step in community building. We should start small, with hackfests.
 * Nuritzi: That relates to what Rosanna said about the Foundation
fostering a community in Asia partly by organizing a conference there.
 * Rosanna: If you're trying to target users as well as developers,
then a hackfest isn't the right way to do that.
 * Carlos: Release parties or such might work for users.
 * Federico: Maybe we should make it easier for people to have smaller
gatherings. For example, Meetup allows people to do that. Could we have a
section in Discourse for people to announce local gatherings?
   * Nuritzi: Summarizing, it sounds like we are not planning to prioritize
having a large North American event this year, but we will encourage
fostering a community through smaller events with a future GINA in mind.
We'll try to gauge interest with a survey.
 * Neil: If we have a bit more information about what we want to
research with the survey, then the Foundation may be able to help put it
together.
   * Carlos: Nuritzi, you mentioned that you need more resources for LAS
right now. What exactly?
 * Nuritzi: Keeping the conversations around logistics going with KDE,
right now I'm the only one in these conversations.
 * Rob: Have we stated our intention publicly around LAS? Maybe we can
publicize it and get someone from the 

Minutes of the board meeting of March 11, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190311

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 11 March 2019, 15:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * RosannaYuen
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RobMcQueen
 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay (sent regrets initially, joined later)
 * NeilMcGovern (sent regrets initially, joined later)

== Regrets ==

 * KatGerasimova
 * CarlosSoriano

== Missing ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Agenda ==

 * Approval for travel to FOSS North (Neil)
 * Engagement Committee change of membership (Nuritzi)

== Minutes ==

 * Meeting is initially adjourned, and all nonessential agenda items are
deferred to next week, while we wait for quorum.
 * Rosanna leaves.
 * Allan arrives.
 * Meeting is reopened.

 * Approval for travel to FOSS North 2019
   * VOTE: Approve Neil's travel to FOSS North 2019
 * +1 unanimous

 * Neil arrives.

 * Engagement Committee change of membership
   * Neil and Nuritzi propose adding Kristi Progri (GNOME Foundation
program coordinator) to the Engagement committee.
   * VOTE: Appoint Kristi Progri to the Engagement committee
 * +1 unanimous

== Actions ==

 * Nuritzi - Add Kristi to the relevant Engagement materials such as the
wiki
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of March 4, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190304

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 4 March 2019, 16:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * NuritziSanchez
 * PhilipChimento
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay

== Agenda ==

 * Status of board initiatives (Nuritzi)
 * ED report (Neil)

== Minutes ==

 * Status of board initiatives
 * Travel sponsorship policy
   * Philip: I'm currently polling the travel committee on how they
might like to fill in the gaps that exist in our draft policy, but haven't
heard an answer yet. The next step will be to go ahead and propose
something to fill in the gaps anyway; if people don't like it, we can
propose something else.
 * Definition of GNOME software and events
   * Carlos: The last update was by Allan, on the Gitlab issue. We are
OK with what we have right now; details remain to be fleshed out.
   * Nuritzi: Is there a timeline for finishing this?
 * Carlos: No.
 * Nuritzi: If the board's term ends before the initiative is
finished, how does this affect the initiative?
 * Carlos: We want to finish this before the possible end of term
   * Carlos: The next step is to ask for feedback from the board and
then the community. This is currently waiting for Allan to come back from
vacation.
* Compensation committee
  * Nuritzi: The committee has met. We don't have a hard deadline for
producing the advice to the board, but will try to put serious progress on
this next month.
* GNOME.Asia
  * Kat: There is trouble finding a venue for next year's GNOME.Asia.
We probably need to help them out.
  * Neil: There are some details about this in the ED report.
   * Schedule check: This first Monday of the month is an ED report and
board-only discussion (that is, without Neil and Rosanna.) The second
Monday is a standard board meeting, the third Monday is a hack week, the
fourth Monday is a standard board meeting, and the fifth Monday of the
month, if it exists, is a hack week. Short discussion about whether we want
to have a short board meeting on the ED report week as we are doing today,
but we decided to stick with what we discussed previously. (Clarification:
this means that going forward, there will be no longer be an official board
meeting during the ED report weeks. During the subsequent board-only
discussion, we discuss Neil's monthly report and any feedback that we want
to give to Neil on the basis of the report presentation, not any regular
board business.)

 * ED report
   * Neil presented his monthly report to the board. He is continuing to
ensure a smooth onboarding experience for the new Foundation staff, and a
big priority right now is the end-of-year fiscal preparations. Other
highlights of the report include Foundation support for conference
organizers, and the GTK and Engagement teams' trial of the Discourse
community management software.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of February 25, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190225

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 25 February, 2019, 16:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen
 * KatGerasimova

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay

== Agenda ==

 * GUADEC 2020 call for bids (Kat)
 * Outreachy interships for May 2019 (Philip)
 * Trip to !LibrePlanet (Neil)
 * Updates from last week's hack week (Nuritzi)

== Minutes ==

 * GUADEC 2020 call for bids
   * We should start organizing a call for bids. Kat is interested in doing
this.
 * Nuritzi: Kat, go for it! How might we include Foundation staff as
well?
 * Kat: It would be helpful if Foundation staff could do the legwork of
organizing.
   * Neil: Let me know what will be necessary.
   * ACTION: Kat to email Neil about the support that will be necessary
from Foundation staff.

 * Outreachy interships for May 2019
* Philip: We received an email from Marina Zhurakhinskaya asking
whether we'll participate in Outreachy. Last round we had 3 internship
spots. We need to make a decision on how many slots we can take in this
round. Does the board need to vote on this every time, or can this just be
covered by the budget?
  * Neil: The board does need to vote; it's too much money to do it
automatically.
* Carlos: Outreachy happens twice a year, so do we need to fundraise
twice?
* Philip: Last time, there was talk of spending the Developing Nations
fund on this if it was necessary to free up more funding for internships. (
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180918)
* Kat: We need more community involvement in running Outreachy.
* Nuritzi: How many internships? Three is in line with our diversity
and inclusion goals and also is in line with feedback we've had from our
advisory board.
* Neil: If the board wants 3 interns, it needs to vote on it.
* Philip: Can we vote on the internships in principle, conditional on
whether there's money available for them? The deadline is March 5, so we
need to have an answer for Marina before the next board meeting.
  * Neil: Yes, I can investigate and reply to Marina.
* Federico: There was something about encouraging interns to apply
through Google Summer of Code?
  * Philip: This was up to the interns themselves in cases where the
same project was being offered for mentorship through either program. The
stipends from Outreachy and GSoC can work out differently in different
countries, so interns who are eligible for both programs can potentially to
apply through whichever program is more advantageous to them.
* VOTE: Approve up to three internships for the Outreachy May '19
round, conditional on approval by Neil.
  * +1 unanimous
* ACTION: Neil to notify Marina of the decision.

 * Trip to !LibrePlanet
   * Neil intends to go to !LibrePlanet in Cambridge (Mass.) at the end of
March, possibly with a booth.
   * VOTE: Approve Neil's travel to !LibrePlanet
 * +1 unanimous

 * Updates from last week's hack week
   * Deferred, please send updates to the mailing list or post on IRC.

== Actions ==

 * Kat - Email Neil about what support will be necessary from Foundation
staff for organizing the GUADEC 2020 call for bids.
 * Neil - Investigate Outreachy internships expenses and notify Marina of
the decision.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of February 11, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20190211

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 11 February, 2019, 16:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Travel sponsorship policy (Philip)
 * Executive Director report (Neil)

== Minutes ==

 * Travel sponsorship policy
   * Points to discuss:
 * Fare search screenshots - We'd like to have people submit a
screenshot of their airline fare search with their application. This way
the travel committee doesn't have to duplicate everyone's searches, but can
just look at the screenshot and verify that the flight is within the
guidelines. For hotels and accommodations we'd like to do something
similar, but are not sure how exactly to implement that.
 * Financial assistance package - We'd like to offer a "financial
assistance package" which will be extended to sponsored individuals who
wouln't otherwise be able to attend the event without sponsorship for meals
and incidental expenses. In these cases the board would approve the extra
spending on a case by case basis.
 * Small local events - We aren't quite sure how large an event needs
to be in order to be covered. For example, two people who live on opposite
sides of a metro area could meet in the middle to hack for a day, and rent
a coworking desk or pay for a train ticket or parking. Should we sponsor
this?
 * What is a GNOME event?
   * Allan: What does the board need to discuss about the above points?
 * Philip: The fare search and the financial assistance package are the
largest departures from the existing sponsorship policy, so I expect people
will want to discuss that and ask questions about it. The small events is
still an open question that I'd like to resolve. The "What is a GNOME
event" question is not one that will block the implementation of the new
policy, but the board should be aware that it influences travel
sponsorships.
   * Federico: Regarding small local events, the engagement committee has a
budget for such events. Is the question about that?
 * Nuritzi: Sometimes there are travel expenses related to small local
events, such as parking for the participants. Should they be able to
request travel sponsorship for such things? Currently the travel committee
sponsors only large events like conferences and hackfests.
 * Kat: I think the travel committee should be able to handle these
small events as well.
 * Carlos: I think it's better for the engagement committee to handle
small events and let the travel committee handle the large events.
 * Allan: At what point would the Engagement committee have to defer
this to the Travel committee — if there are flights involved, for example?
 * Federico: Does the engagement committee have a maximum per event?
   * Nuritzi: No, the way it currently works is that someone requests a
budget for an event. For example: "We need snacks for 15 people and
decorations, it will cost up to USD 150."
   * Neil: Regarding hotels, you could use the Foundation travel policy's
guidelines for what's a reasonable hotel price.
 * Nuritzi: We found those per-diem guidelines a bit on the high side.
 * Philip: From what we understood they are almost never reached in
practice, so we don't want to give them as a maximum.
   * Neil: Regarding financial assistance package, I could do those
approvals on a case-by-case basis or the board could delegate it to the
travel committee.
   * Nuritzi: What are the next steps?
 * Philip: I need to fill in the remaining gap regarding hotel
searches; clarify a few minor points; then the draft will be ready to vote
on.

 * ED Report
   * Neil presented his report for February. The Foundation is busy with
onboarding and supporting the new staff members as they start their
positions, as well as end-of-year fiscal preparations. We had a discussion
about what is the proper role for the board members in interactions with
the new Foundation staff.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of January 14, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180114

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 14 January, 16:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * KatGerasimova
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobMcQueen
 * PhilipChimento
 * NuritziSanchez
 * AllanDay
 * RosannaYuen

== Regrets ==

 * NeilMcGovern

== Agenda ==

 * Improving board elections (Allan)
 * Board meeting frequency, attendance, and priorities (Nuritzi)
 * FOSS North email, see board-list (Philip)
 * Invitation to Kavayitri Bahinabai Chaudhari North Maharashtra
University, see board-list (Philip)


== Minutes ==

 * Improving board elections
   * Allan: We want to have elections where it's easy for all Foundation
members to meaningfully engage and debate with the candidates, so that the
Foundation members feel like they're having more of an influence over the
election. It feels like the last election or two haven't really lived up to
that. Some candidacy emails were quite short on detail. We want to have a
process where it's clear what the candidates stand for, so that Foundation
members know who they're voting for.
   * Allan: Some ideas:
 * Have a template for candidates to fill in, with sections including
things like relevant expertise, priorities as directors, and time
commitment.
 * Have voting forms link to the candidacy statements, for easy
reference during voting.
 * Have candidates send their candidacy statements in to the membership
committee so that they determine beforehand, rather than after the fact, if
a candidate is eligible to stand for the board.
   * Allan: Also consider how we can encourage debate? Do we encourage
people to ask questions? If there haven't been any questions after a week
or three days, do we send an email to the membership to get the questions
rolling?
   * Nuritzi: should the old board prepare questions that the candidates
can answer?
 * Allan: If they are the same questions for each candidate, that might
be repetitive for >7 candidates.
   * Philip: I was surprised to get no questions at all during the last
election, given the candidate statement that I wrote.
   * Allan: Are there any other open source projects whose elections we can
learn from?
   * Kat: It would be good for the board to prepare questions for
candidates.  However, we don't want to discourage potential candidates with
a form.
 * Allan: It doesn't have to be a whole essay, but maybe short
questions like "How many hours a week can you commit?"
   * Rob: Aren't we planning to change the term lengths for board members?
We would only need three candidates if that went through.
 * Kat: If we change the terms this year, then we would still need
seven candidates and only three/four the following year.
   * Nuritzi: We discussed changing the term lengths during the Foundation
hackfest, but I didn't find anything in our GitLab issues about it. Neil
had a plan worked out, and would know how this is progressing.
   * Federico: Can we encourage people to run for the board by reminding
them that we need board members as chairpeople or liaisons on the
committees?
 * Carlos: Maybe we can highlight things the board has done over the
past years, so people can realize what they can do in the board. (e.g., the
quote from Didier on how he wasn't aware of just how much stuff there is to
do and how much impact it has.)
   * Philip: Does it ever happen that candidates stand who are ineligible?
 * Allan: That's maybe less related to engagement, it was more a
question I had last time when a lot of candidates announced themselves at
the last minute and if any of them had been ineligible there wouldn't have
been time for the membership committee to validate their candidacies before
the deadline, causing confusion among the members.
 * Rob: In Debian, for example, the project secretary assembles the
candidacies on a webpage.
   * Nuritzi: Would like the Foundation's web page to have up to date bios
on the staff.
   * Nuritzi: Until now, the Engagement team has been running the gnome.org
web site. Now that we are expanding, should we have staff working on it?
Rob: That seems like a question for Neil.
   * ACTION: (Neil): Present to the board on how the board term length
change is progressing.
   * ACTION: (Carlos): Figure out with the membership committee what would
be involved in a change in the election process.

 * Board meeting frequency, attendance, and priorities
   * Nuritzi: We started discussing this at the hackfest. As the Foundation
expands, it's not necessary for all the staff to attend the meetings. It
also seems like we have been getting fewer items each meeting - or is that
just the beginning of the year? In any case, it seems like we have more
work to do, rather than items to discuss. With the Foundation expansion,
relatively more tasks will be taken over by the Foundation staff.
   * Rob: I also struggle to make time for some items, and it's not always
the case that the board meeting time is as 

Minutes of the board meeting of January 7, 2019

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180107

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 7 January, 16:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RobMcQueen
 * RosannaYuen
 * KatGerasimova

== Regrets ==

 * CarlosSoriano

== Agenda ==

 * Emails with trademark licensing questions (Philip)
 * Expectations for board around hiring (Allan)
 * FOSDEM advisory board meeting (Nuritzi)

== Minutes ==

 * Emails with trademark licensing questions
   * We received an email from Phil King about use of GTK trademark in a
book.
 * Philip: Do we own that trademark as well as the GNOME foot?
 * Neil: I believe so, will check. I'll also check informally with the
GTK team members before answering the email.
   * We received another email notifying about royalties from Gabor Kum EV
for GNOME-branded merchandise.
 * Philip: Is there a way to publicize that trademark licensing
questions should go to the staff instead of the board?
 * Neil: Trademark questions should indeed not go to the board; they
should go directly to licens...@gnome.org, which is redirected to the staff
list. It may be that people are using the wrong address.

 * Expectations for board around hiring
   * Allan: Are we expected to formally welcome new hires in a
meet-the-board gathering, as part of their onboarding?
 * No. Better to informally meet them at, say, FOSDEM or other
conferences.

 * FOSDEM advisory board meeting
   * Nuritzi: Is the board preparing any presentation for the advisory
board meeting at FOSDEM?
 * Neil: Traditionally not, it's only a half day as opposed to a full
day at GUADEC. I will prepare a presentation.
   * Neil: Those attending the advisory board meeting at FOSDEM, please
fill in the Framadate poll so we can pick a time for the meeting.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of December 17, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181217

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 17 December, 16:30 UTC =

== Attending ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * CarlosSoriano
 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * RosannaYuen
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Leo Utskot's mail about sponsoring a Rust hackfest in Mexico (Federico)
 * Meeting time
 * Designate Sri Ramkrishna as The Document Foundation advisory board member
 * Review board initiatives (Nuritzi)

== Minutes ==

 * Leo Utskot's mail about sponsoring a Rust hackfest in Mexico (Federico)
   * Neil will reply.

 * Meeting time
   * This time works for Nuritzi as well. We'll adopt this as the meeting
time until the next daylight savings time change.

 * Designate Sri Ramkrishna as The Document Foundation advisory board member
   * Sri has responded to the call for volunteers.
   * VOTE: designate Sri Ramkrishna as The Document Foundation's advisory
board member:
 * +1 unanimous
   * ACTION: (Rob) Follow up with Sri and close
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/72

 * Review board initiatives
   * Ongoing discussion from the board hackfest about how to define GNOME
software. This group will have a call soon.
   * Employee handbook, https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/43 —
can this be closed now that it is being done?
   * Policy for private minutes,
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/61 — Philip will try to work on
this during the holiday break. (Not done yet.)
   * Hackfest approvals — need to define better what a GNOME event is.
Pam's advice was to write a description of the events that may use the
trademark (iin other words, describe a hackfest) and supply that as a
guideline.
   * Committees — need to revisit this one in the new year.
 * What was the status of the sponsorship committee? - Wait for
development coordinator to be hired, and see how the board needs to support
that person with a committee.
   * Who is going to FOSDEM?

== Actions ==

 * Rob - Follow up with Sri Ramkrishna about The Document Foundation
advisory board position. (Done.)
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of December 10, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Foundation Board Minutes for Monday 10 December, 16:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181210

== Attending ==

 * RobMcQueen
 * AllanDay
 * KatGerasimova
 * CarlosSoriano
 * PhilipChimento
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen

== Regrets ==

 * NuritziSanchez

== Missing ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Agenda ==

 * FOSDEM travel approvals (Allan)
 * Donation for FLOSS Desktops For Kids project (Neil)
 * Review board initiatives (Allan)
 * Holiday meeting dates (Allan)
 * Michael Hall's resignation from the travel committee (Philip)

== Minutes ==

 * FOSDEM travel approvals
   * VOTE: Approval for Neil and any board members attending the advisory
board meeting at FOSDEM to use the Foundation travel policy.
 * +1 Unanimous

 * Donation for FLOSS Desktops For Kids project
   * https://opensource.org/node/954
   * This request came in from Sri. The Open Source Initiative's
fundraising drive this year is to support the FLOSS Desktops For Kids
project. This supports children learning about computers, and installing
free software on old hardware.
   * Kat: Is there anything GNOME-related in this project?
 * Neil: No particular members are involved, but they do install Ubuntu
on the computers so GNOME is going on the desktops.
   * Neil: The OSI is a 501(c)3 so we are allowed to give them money, and
this aligns with our mission.
   * Philip: How large would the donation be?
 * Neil: It's up to the board, but USD 1000 would be a meaningful
donation.
   * Carlos: How needed is the donation? Are they relying on us?
 * Neil: No, this was a nice suggestion from Sri for something that we
might want to support.
   * Kat: What impact would a donation of USD 1000 make and how will it be
used?
   * Philip: Leaning towards yes, it's a good cause and nice gesture, but I
would like to read more about the program.
   * Carlos: Leaning towards no, not convinced about donating to other
organizations without more clear direct benefit to GNOME.
   * Rob: In the middle, it seems like there are many more of these causes
that we could support and I'm not convinced that GNOME donors would expect
us to use GNOME funds in this way.
 * Kat: Agree with Rob.
   * Rob: What would you do, Neil?
 * Neil: I've always been wary of funding other things with GNOME
funds, we are not a grant-making organization, but it is a relatively small
amount of money, quite aligned with what we do, and enables children to get
exposed to free software and technology.
   * VOTE: Donate USD 1000 to the FLOSS Desktops For Kids project.
 * +1 Rob, Allan, Kat, Philip
 * -1 Carlos
 * Vote passed.

 * Review board initiatives
   * It's been a while since the last meeting and it would be good to
review what we're working on and identify things that have possibly stalled.
   * Rob: We should push forward with the "What is a GNOME module"
question, as we will have to have a period of community consultation before
making anything official in that topic.
 * Allan: Let's have a call next week about this.
   * Carlos: We should finish discussing the Foundation's 1-year goals that
we didn't finish during the hackfest.
 * Allan: What's the status of that?
 * Neil: The next step is for me to operationalize the 5- and 10-year
goals into 1-year goals, and propose those to the board. I haven't had time
for that over the past couple of weeks due to interviews, but I will be
able to do it in the new year.
 * Carlos: I will look at the existing document and polish it up a bit
before sending it on to Neil.
   * Kat: I can pick up the devolved conference bidding process next week.
 * Allan: We can have a call about it after you do that.
   * Philip: I will try to work on the revised travel policy over the
holidays, and get it into a state where we can have some rounds of edits
when Nuritzi returns.
   * Allan: How about FOSDEM and the advisory board meeting?
 * Neil: Make sure to sign up so there is space for you at lunch, if
you attend in person.
 * Neil: There will be a GNOME Beers event, and a copyleft conference
on Monday for people who are staying for it.
 * Kat: Anything to do for GNOME Beers?
   * Neil: The venue might change, it was overloaded last year.
   * Kat: Let me know if the venue changes and I will update the poster.
 * Kat: I will print merchandise for FOSDEM, reimbursements?
   * Neil: As long as we know the value of the merchandise we sold.
   * Allan: I would like to do a budget review in the new year.
 * Neil: March would be a good time for that, considering workload, and
we will be at half of the fiscal year at that point.
   * Allan: Kat, is there anything to take note of for GUADEC?
 * Kat: The board could book their travel already.
 * Kat: We have a keynote speaker, and are looking at booking a whole
hotel for the participants. Looking at registration system right now
(OpenEvent) - going a bit slowly as we don't have the needed 

Minutes of the board meeting of November 27, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181127

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobMcQueen
 * RosannaYuen
 * NeilMcGovern
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Regrets ==

 * NuritziSanchez
 * PhilipChimento
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Conflict of interest policy (Neil)
   * https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/ConflictOfInterest
 * Compensation committee charter (Rob)

== Minutes ==

 * Conflict of interest policy (Neil)
   * https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/ConflictOfInterest
   * We are continuing the discussion from the previous meeting about a
conflict of interest policy for the GNOME Foundation, with the intention to
vote this week. This is a requirement for nonprofit organizations, in order
to avoid legal sanctions for the organization or for individual directors
in the case where a conflict of interest were to occur. We do this
informally through the Board elections, but this policy is a more formal
way of doing it.
   * Carlos: Article II, point 3 - how was the specified number chosen?
 * Neil: It matches the legal definition of "key employee"; see the
requirements for the compensation committee.
   * Carlos: Does "program" mean something like GUADEC?
 * Neil: Yes.
   * Carlos: "The Board shall take appropriate disciplinary and corrective
action" - does this have legal implications?
 * Neil: It depends on the specific case. It's left somewhat open so
it's up to the board what to do about it.
   * Allan: Board members are supposed to declare conflicts of interest as
they happen?
 * Neil: They are supposed to be declared per transaction. Most things
we do wouldn't be covered.
   * Federico: What if a staff member wants to be a Board member?
 * Neil: No, we cannot have staff as board members.
   * Allan: Are board members supposed to acknowledge and sign the policy
as soon as their term starts?
 * Neil: Yes, this is in the works as part of the new board member
"package."
   * VOTE: Adopt the conflict of interest policy as a Foundation policy
 * +1 unanimous
   * Neil: Everyone needs to sign the form now! We should open a gitlab
issue.
   * ACTION: Federico - Make a GitLab issue for board members to sign the
Conflict of Interest policy form.
   * Allan: would like to have links from wiki pages back to Board minutes
when these votes/decisions are made, to be able to track when things got
implemented.

 * Compensation committee charter (Rob)
   * Background: There is a legal requirement for the Foundation to prove
to the tax authority that there is an independent process for determining
the executive director's compensation package by examining how similar
organizations compensate their senior leaders. Specifically, it must prove
that the ED does not set their own salary. Many nonprofits choose to
appoint a compensation committee that does the required research and
reports to the board. We would like to do this as well.
   * See for the discussion https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/78
(draft charter is https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/78#note_366247
)
   * The board cannot delegate the setting of the salary directly; the
compensation committee has to submit their recommendation to the board and
then the board approves it.
   * Carlos: does the charter mention this non-delegation?
 * Rob: each committee charter says what powers the board has delegated
to them, in this case, none (they cannot set the salaries directly, the
board has to approve them).
   * VOTE: Approve the compensation committee charter with the addition of
the point below; appoint Nuritzi, Carlos, and Rob as members
 * +1 unanimous
   * ACTION (Carlos): Create a wiki page with the compensation committee's
charter.
   * ACTION (Carlos): Create a mailing list for the compensation committee.
   * This is a committee within the board; it doesn't need a board liaison.
   * Allan: does the committee need to propose salary numbers now?
 * Rob: We would like to have a proposal by early February.

 * Allan: Please don't forget to review open issues on GitLab.

== Actions ==

 * Federico - Create a GitLab issue to track whether everyone has signed
the conflict of interest policy -
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/87
 * Carlos - Create a wiki page with the compensation committee's charter -
https://wiki.gnome.org/CompensationCommittee
 * Carlos - Create a mailing list for the compensation committee

'''Text to be added to the compensation committee charter:'''

  Powers that the board is devolving to the committee:

  None. The committee is not able to set the salaries autonomously. It
makes its own inquiries and makes recommendation to the board to consider.

___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of November 13, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

I apologize for the delay in the past few meeting minutes. I will be
publishing the upcoming ones over the next few days.

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181113

= Foundation Board meeting minutes for Tuesday, November 13th, 2018, 16:30
UTC =

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * NuritziSanchez
 * PhilipChimento
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Conflict of interest policy
  * https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/ConflictOfInterest
 * Budget updates
 * Sponsorship committee liaison

== Minutes ==

 * Conflict of interest policy
   * Neil has sent an email with a conflict of interest policy for the
GNOME Foundation. This is a requirement for nonprofit organizations, in
order to avoid legal sanctions for the organization or for individual
directors in the case where a conflict of interest were to occur. We are
not voting on it today, as not everyone has had enough chance to read it;
we will vote next time. This week is for questions.
   * Nuritzi: Is there a timeline for signing the statements?
 * Neil: No particular timeline, but as soon as possible.
   * Carlos: What happens if the majority of the board has a conflict of
interest and there is no quorum?
 * Neil: Quorum is 3 in that case, but that case seems quite unlikely.
   * Carlos: Do we have a strict policy on what constitutes a conflict of
interest? How about personal connections, e.g. if you know someone who is
involved in a decision?
 * Neil: Conflicts of interest can be financial or not financial. There
are examples in the policy.
   * Carlos: All the examples in the policy are financial, can we add
another example of a non-financial conflict?
 * Neil: I would prefer to answer the above question by email, and any
others, so that I can answer more comprehensively and the people who aren't
present can refer back to the answer as well.
   * Nuritzi: If a director has a conflict of interest, does it enter the
minutes as such?
 * Neil: It should be stated publicly.

 * Budget updates
   * Nuritzi: Did anyone else have an area in the budget that they wanted
to revisit?
   * Nuritzi: I wanted to revisit the marketing budget.
   * Neil: If anyone has anything they want to revisit, please reply to my
email.
   * Rob: Kat had something to revisit as well, I believe for an
internship. I had an idea for a hackfest involving the Developing Nations
donation.
   * Nuritzi: On the hiring front, does the board get the announcement
before the community?
 * Neil: There will probably be notice periods involved, so they cannot
be announced to the community immediately.
 * Nuritzi: And will we announce the hires all at once?
 * Neil: If we do it one at a time, you can introduce people a bit more
individually.
* Helpful link for decoding work weeks: https://whatweekisit.com/

 * Sponsorship committee liaison
   * We will defer the discussion of the committee structure and the
liaison until the development coordinator is hired. Rob will continue to be
the liaison for the moment, although he will not have time to contribute
much, and once the development coordinator is hired we will work out with
them what the new structure of the committee should be.

 * Kat would like the record to state that the meeting time shift due to
daylight savings time was not adequately communicated in her opinion, and
is not missing this or next week's meeting frivolously.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of November 6, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181106

= Minutes of the Foundation Board meeting for Tuesday, November 6, 2018,
16:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, November 13, 2018, 16:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * PhilipChimento
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Executive Director's report
 * Do we want to offer GNOME cloud services?
 * Remove Alberto Ruiz from sponsorship committee & thank him (see email on
board-list)

== Minutes ==

 * Meeting times: UTC 15:30 is problematic for some people after all the
daylight savings; we will discuss new times in the mailing list.

 * Executive Director's report
   * Neil submitted a report to the board. We discussed a few items but
there were no big surprises. It will be published on Neil's blog in due
course.
   * Added later, for reference:
https://blog.halon.org.uk/2018/11/gnome-ed-update-october/

 * Do we want to offer GNOME cloud services?
   * This came up in design discussions, thinking about what to include in
the online accounts.
   * Historically GNOME has been linked to the desktop, but to be relevant
as application developers in 2018 we may need to offer an online / mobile
component.
   * In the past, one of the things preventing us from doing this has been
sysadmin resources. We may be in a position to do something about this now.
   * In the context of raising money, we have been talking about donors and
sponsors, but we could also think about commercial services as a way to
raise income. This would need more investigation to see whether it would be
worthwhile.
   * Note, not advocating building anything that requires a web frontend;
services would be consumed by the desktop.
   * This is a potential strategic direction that we could facilitate the
community in taking.
   * We'd need to get Neil's input on how feasible he thinks this is.
   * Rob: Is this primarily for fundraising or primarily for online
features? - Allan: Both.
   * Allan: I've become a bit skeptical about relying on third-party
services like Google or nextCloud. There's a strong argument to develop
cloud services hand-in-hand with the clients that consume them, as this is
standard practice in most cases elsewhere.
   * Federico: If we were to provide cloud services to GNOME users for a
fee, would that affect our nonprofit status?
   * Federico: Would it be just secrets such as passwords, or other things
such as files and documents?
 * Allan: It would be important not to try to compete with the big
players, so we would have to identify certain services that it would make
sense for us to provide. For example, desktop config or notes.
 * Philip: The services provided by the big players are the ones that
many apps use, so we would regardless be developing clients of third-party
services.
 * Allan: There are certain services that are specific to a desktop
that we could provide.
 * Rob: The UbuntuOne config service was quite nice.
   * Rob: In small and medium scale we will definitely spend more money
than we would get back, because we would need to provide small, free,
versions of every service. At large scale we might recover the costs.
   * Rob: It should be kind of like GitLab; we run it, but we don't write
it. We can work with other open source projects to improve their
integration with GNOME, e.g. nextCloud.
 * Allan: It would be difficult to get the full benefit by working with
services that we don't have complete control over, as we have certain
expectations of the UX that others don't necessarily share.
   * Rob: I like it, conceptually; we should float it by Neil and get his
comments.
   * Philip: In theory I like it. Practically we don't generally have these
skills in the community, which could be a good or a bad thing.
   * Philip: It's important to stay competitive with proprietary software.
   * Federico: Would this be a good topic for GNOME internships?
 * Allan: We'd definitely need someone with expertise to mentor.
   * Nuritzi: Should this go onto Carlos's Initiatives board?
 * Allan: At this point it's not well-defined enough.
   * Nuritzi: It would be nice to see what others in the community think
about this; enthusiastic or not?
   * Federico: Summing up, from the board's point of view, the questions to
answer are: Do we have funds for this? Do we have staff to maintain it?
 * Rob: It would take more people time than it would take compute
cycles at the moment. However, it comes out of the same pool of compute
cycles that were donated to us, and donors might be sensitive to what the
compute cycles are used for, so that might be a concern as well.
   * Federico: Would a proof of concept or playground be useful to the
design team? Is cloud.gnome.org only for Foundation members?
 * Rob: If you wanted to prototype something, you could use an existing
cloud service for a paltry cost on 

Minutes of the board meeting of October 30, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181030

= Minutes of the Foundation Board meeting for Tuesday, October 30th 2018,
15:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, 6th November 2018, 16:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * NuritziSanchez

== Agenda ==

 * Red Hat acquisition (Philip)
 * Other business

== Minutes ==

 * Red Hat acquisition
   * Announcement of the acquisition of Red Hat by IBM was made over the
weekend.
   * Neil doesn't know anything other than what has been reported in the
press; looks like this should not have much of an effect on GNOME at this
stage. Red Hat may be run as a unit within IBM; what happens in the future
is of course unknown.
   * Philip: do you expect trouble retaining Red Hat as an advisory board
member?
 * Neil: no, no reason why that should happen.
   * We discussed possible scenarios and came to the conclusion that it's
best for the Foundation to wait and see what happens. It's good to have a
diversity of companies paying people to work on GNOME, but that was also
true before the acquisition.

 * Other business
   * Philip: Can we upload the 2018-2019 forecast that we approved during
the hackfest, to the wiki? I'd like it to be in place before sending out
last week's minutes.
 * Neil: People were planning to suggest some changes, are we not
waiting for that?
 * Kat: My understanding was we were approving this forecast, and
making changes later.
 * Rob: Agreed. We should also consistently refer to the budget as a
forecast, since that's what we did during the hackfest.
   * Allan: Do people have changes they want to do to the budget?
 * Neil: Some people have spending ideas; to discuss whether that comes
from reserves, or from another program.
 * Allan: We should discuss in the mailing list the changes that people
want.
 * ACTION (Neil): Upload the forecast to the wiki, as approved during the
Cambridge hackfest.
 * ACTION (Neil): Start a thread on board-list asking for everyone's
spending ideas so we can flesh them out.

== Actions ==

 * Neil - Upload the forecast to the wiki, as approved during the Cambridge
hackfest.
 * Neil - Start a thread on board-list asking for everyone's spending ideas
so we can flesh them out.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of October 19, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

= Minutes of the Foundation Board meeting for Friday, October 19, 2018,
12:30 UTC =

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181019

In-person meeting at the Foundation Board Hackfest, Cambridge UK

Next meeting Tuesday, October 30, 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NuritziSanchez
 * KatGerasimova
 * PhilipChimento
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * Travel committee spending allowances (Nuritzi)
 * Approve 2018-19 budget (Nuritzi)
 * Cancel next week's meeting
 * Compensation committee (Rob)
 * Board term lengths (Nuritzi)

== Minutes ==

All board members were present in person and notified the Secretary that
they waived their 48-hour notice for this meeting.

 * Travel committee spending allowances
   * Background: the travel committee seldom pays out the full amount
budgeted for travel, since people cancel their requests, or don't submit
reimbursement requests. The Board feels travel sponsorship is an important
part of the Foundation's activities, for community cohesiveness and
inclusion, and would like to see the full budgeted amounts spent more
reliably.
   * To account for this slack, we will communicate to the committee that
they can exceed the budgeted amount with the total of the requests that
they approve (accepting that this may sometimes result in more expenditure
than anticipated.) It needs to be a percentage rather than a fixed amount,
since we also want the same thing to apply to the travel sponsorship parts
of the conference budgets. We also want to have a time limit on when people
can submit reimbursements (e.g. 6 months after travel) so that we can
accurately determine when funds are not needed to be spent.
   * VOTE: Allow the travel committee to allocate 20% over the figure
specified in the budget, for conferences and other events.
 * +1 unanimous, vote passed.

 * Approve 2018–19 budget
   * Neil presented a draft 2018–2019 forecast to the board which was
reviewed and agreed in principle.
   * Kat: Can we attach the budget to the minutes?
 * Neil: It will be published in the usual place for budgets (
https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/BudgetAndSpending) and we'll include a
link in the minutes.
 * The link is:
https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/BudgetAndSpending/2018-19%20Budget
   * We plan on amending the budget later, based on the conversations we've
had during the Foundation hackfest, but we want to approve it so that the
Foundation staff can proceed with spending money in the meantime.
   * VOTE: Approve the 2018–19 budget as presented during the Foundation
hackfest.
 * +1 unanimous, vote passed.

 * Cancel next week's meeting
   * All in agreement.

 * Compensation committee
   * Rob: There was some concern that the compensation committee seemed to
include positions that don't exist, such as the financial director.
However, for legal reasons the committee needs to set the compensation for
any role that gets paid a sufficiently high salary, so we want the
committee charter to include any future situations that might come up.
   * Rob: The other concern was whether the executive director should be a
part of the committee.
   * Proposed committee membership is Carlos as the treasurer, Rob as the
ED's line manager, and Nuritzi as the president.
   * This needs some final revisions and we should hopefully be able to
vote on it next meeting.

 * Board term lengths
   * We intend to change the board terms to two or three years in order to
ensure continuity, following the goal-setting exercises we did in the
Foundation hackfest.
   * This may or may not involve a change to the by-laws. Currently, the
by-laws allow for a term of up to 2 years.
   * This needs some research.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of October 9, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181009

= Minutes of the Foundation Board meeting for Tuesday, October 9, 2018,
15:30 UTC =

Next week's meeting is moved due to the Foundation hackfest, to October 19.

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NuritziSanchez
 * KatGerasimova
 * PhilipChimento
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * Private minutes again (Philip)
 * Neil's travel approval - Sustain Summit and Freenode.Live (Neil)
 * Review GitLab issues

== Minutes ==

 * Private minutes again
   * See comment on issue #60:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/60#note_341238
   * Summary: Alexandre Franke has asked for the private minutes from May
29 to be published as an addendum to the private minutes from May 15 that
we already published, because they show that he went on the record
disagreeing with the outcome of the vote, since he was not present at the
May 15 meeting.
   * This seems unnecessary just for one line from the minutes. Alexandre
could have replied to the email himself.
   * '''ACTION''' - Philip to reply to the published minutes with an
addendum indicating Alexandre's dissent.

 * Neil's travel approval (Neil)
   * Sustain Summit (https://sustainoss.org/) is a one-day event in London,
which follows an unconference format. Attended by a number of people who
are interested in free software and how to make it more sustainable. It's
nearby and inexpensive, and Karen Sandler is going.
   * Freenode.Live (https://freenode.live) is a two-day event in Bristol,
where Neil has a talk. It's pretty much the same thing as last year; lots
of free software faces show up.
   * '''VOTE''': Approve Neil's travel to Sustain Summit and Freenode.Live
 * +1 unanimous, vote passed.

 * Review GitLab issues
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/boards
   * Kat: Neil, have you started looking at doing the sponsorship brochures
for next year's conferences?
  * Neil: not yet, normally we start in January
  * Kat: have had trouble in the past requesting sponsorship from
companies if they plan their spending on October
  * Neil: if we do the brochure too early, we don't have the status of
things like GNOME.Asia to put in the brochure.
   * Questions about conference budgets (Allan)
 * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/81
 * Allan: Last time we voted on the GUADEC budget, it was a bit
ambiguous what we approved because of the low, medium, and high bands in
the budget. I'm not sure at what level the GUADEC team intend to manage the
budget.
   * Kat: (speaking on behalf of the GUADEC team, not the board) What
the GUADEC team understands is that we can spend up to the minimum right
away even though the sponsorship hasn't come in yet, and to spend over the
minimum we rely on Neil to communicate when sponsorship comes in. We will
only go over the minimum when enough sponsorship has been received.
   * Allan: That's completely different from our current conference
spending policy.
   * Kat: The conference spending policy should be revisited, based on
our experiences last year.
   * Nuritzi: We can take a look at policies at the hackfest. Kat,
could you make a draft?
   * Kat: has been drafting a new conference spending policy as part of
the GUADEC preparations.
   * Allan: We need to examine what the merits of the new policy are
above the old.
   * Kat: The current policy does not allow for making a loss at all,
which is not good because it would mean that we would have no GUADEC rather
than a small loss.
   * Neil: The policy Kat described isn't completely different from the
current policy. We could describe it as, the minimum sponsorship is what we
consider to be minimally viable, without which we won't have a conference.
   * Neil: we could have flowcharts to illustrate decision making based
on how much money can be spent as it comes in for each sponsor.
   * Discussion about what minimum and maximum spending means.
   * Allan: It's odd that we seem to have a policy that we adopted last
year, and a de-facto policy that seems to be different.
   * Kat: As Neil said, it's not all that different, although it's
differently phrased.
   * Allan: The banding seems to create extra bureaucracy for the
GUADEC team.
   * Rob: The board could approve just a minimum and maximum
expenditure, rather than three different projections, and the GUADEC team
could basically act on their own discretion within those boundaries,
prioritizing their expenses based on the sponsorship that comes in.
   * Allan: That was what we intended with the conference spending
policy.
   * Philip: Only in this discussion did the issue become clear to me,
so I think we could communicate it better in the spending policy.
 * Allan: We also approved that GUADEC could make a loss, but that's
ambiguous because the spending bands are linked to how much is raised.
 * 

Minutes of the board meeting of October 2, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20181002

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, October 2nd, 2018, 15:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, October 9th, 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento

== Agenda ==

 * Monthly Foundation report from the ED (Neil)
 * URGENT: Banking authorization for Rosanna (Nuritzi)
 * Fortnightly hiring update (Nuritzi)
 * Gabor GNOME T-Shirts approval, see board-list (Carlos)
 * Apple Developer certification, see board-list (Philip)
 * Travel committee status and Pipewire hackfest (Allan)

Deferred to next week
 * Review compensation committee charter (Rob, see
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/78)

== Minutes ==

 * Monthly Foundation report from the ED
   * Recruitment: second and final interviews for two of the positions;
program coordinator scheduling the first interviews; good candidate for
development coordinator.
   * End of fiscal year coming up; lot of work in the next 2-3 weeks to
finish up our books and file tax returns.
   * Need a new budget for the new fiscal year. This should be able to be
discussed at the Foundation hackfest.
   * Changing how we are doing the switchover between Gnucash and Odoo:
rather than running things in parallel, we will finish out this fiscal year
with Gnucash.
   * We have a confirmed booth at SeaGL.
   * Neil was asked to speak at Freenode Live, Nuritzi as well.
   * Donations via Friends of GNOME were broken horribly, but are now
fixed. We can now process Friends of GNOME donations.
   * Kat: The call for papers at FOSDEM is open, first round deadline is
October 15 if you want to submit anything.
 * Neil: I'll add it to my list.
   * Kat: What does 27 registrations at LAS mean?
 * Neil: it's people who have signed up on the website and bought a
ticket. There are others who didn't go through the same system.
 * Rosanna: It was above 60.
   * Allan: would it be of interest to invite the LAS organizers to one of
our meetings? - Yes.
 * Nuritzi: We're also talking to KDE about co-organizing something.
   * Philip: Neil, are you planning a blog post for this report as well? -
Yes.
   * '''ACTION''': Allan - Invite the LAS organizers to a subsequent board
meeting to give a report.

 * URGENT: Banking authorization for Rosanna
   * In order to open an account with a new bank, we need to sign a new
letter authorizing Rosanna to do banking on the Foundation's behalf; the
old letter was not sufficient for the new bank.
   * '''VOTE''': The Director of Operations is authorized to open new
checking, savings, and other accounts for the Foundation at additional
financial institutions to meet the financial needs of the Foundation. The
Director of Operations is also authorized to exercise the depositing and
disbursement of funds under section 10.9 of the Bylaws.
 * +1 unanimous, vote passed.

 * Fortnightly hiring update
   * Allan: It seems like the hiring is a bit delayed relative to the
original plan, and there are some conditions attached to the donation about
time scales for hiring - Neil: Not exactly. There is an expectation that we
will spend money on hiring soon, i.e. in months rather than years, and not
just put the donation in our bank account. I talked to the donor's
organization recently and they were happy with the current timeline.
   * Allan: Any idea when we can announce our first appointment?
 * Neil: It depends on who we select at the end of the interview
process, where they are based, and how long the contract negotiations take.
Very roughly, we are looking at confirming offers at the end of the month,
and the timeline after that depends on the hires' notice periods at their
previous employer.
   * Federico: I'm looking at the table in the ED report and having trouble
understanding the different columns and how many people are pending for an
interview. - Neil: people in the "first interview" column have had an
interview. They move to "second interview" when they have had a second one.
Process goes: applications come in, we process them and remove irrelevant
ones, then they get sent a questionnaire (e.g. "How do you know about the
GNOME Foundation", "Tell us about free software", salary range and
location), then if we want to continue with them they go into "first
interview".
   * Nuritzi: Are we still accepting applications? We should mention in the
blog post if they are still open.
 * Neil: GTK developer and devops positions are closed, and likely
progam coordinator will close soon.
 * Nuritzi: We should mention the ones that are still open, in any case.
   * Nuritzi: We should do a larger retrospective on hiring, but are there
any blockers for now that we should know?
 * Neil: We didn't quite expect this volume of applications and we
should use Odoo from the start next time. We should link up an email to
Odoo in order to 

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of September 18, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:17 PM  wrote:

> [...snip original minutes...]
> 
>
> By request, here is an excerpt from the minutes from the meeting of May
> 15, 2018, which was private at the time pending an announcement and now
> public, along with a list of the attendees of that meeting. See
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/60
>
> Wiki location of the full minutes of that meeting:
> https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180515
>
> == Attending ==
>
>  * NuritziSanchez
>  * CarlosSoriano
>  * AllanDay
>  * MegFord (planned early departure)
>  * DidierRoche (planned late attendance)
>  * NeilMcGovern
>  * RosannaYuen
>
> == Regrets ==
>
>  * AlexandreFranke
>  * CosimoCecchi
>
> == Minutes ==
>
>  * Events code of conduct (Allan)
>   * We've had the events code of conduct proposal on the table for some
> time now. Board members have had chance to review it. Only Alexandre has
> raised concerns. These include:
> * GDPR - Neil doesn't think this affects the events code of conduct
> (in a blocking way) and thinks that any issues can be dealt with at a later
> date
> * Release parties: do we have guidelines for what release parties
> should follow?
> * Concern about prohibiting speech based on it being "offensive",
> since this could be subjective.
> * Question about prohibiting weapons: does this include pepper spray,
> multi-tools
>* Two potential amendments have been discussed with Alexandre:
> * 1. Add a sentence to the photography policy: “If press photographers
> are present, the event organizer will ask them to comply with this policy.”
> * 2. Remove the section of the incident reporting page that encourages
> reporting incidents that you might have observed ("if you see someone
> violating the Code of Conduct")
>  * Nuritzi - observing incidents can make people feel
> uncomfortable/unwelcome. Neil - if you observe a crime, you report it.
>   * VOTE: accept the events code of conduct that has been presented (
> https://wiki.gnome.org/Diversity/CoCWorkingGroup/DraftEventsCoC/ ) as
> official GNOME Foundation policy, for all future events
>* Passed unanimously
>   * VOTE: 1st amendment
> * Passed unanimously
>* Didier joined at this point.
>   * VOTE: 2nd amendment
>* -1 unanimous, (Carlos cites concerns that have been expressed to him
> by community members)
> Meg leaves.
>

At Alexandre's request (see comment on
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Board/issues/60), I am clarifying explicitly
in this addendum that Alexandre Franke was not present at the above board
meeting (see list of attendees), and that in the following board meeting he
went on the record stating that he disagreed with the outcome of the above
votes.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of September 18, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180918

Next meeting date Tuesday, September 25th 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RobMcQueen

== Agenda ==

 * GUADEC dates
 * Discuss hackfest agenda (Kat)
 * Committee requirements (Kat)
 * (semi-urgent) SeaGL trip approval (Neil)
 * Review compensation committee charter (Rob, see
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/78)
 * Funding Outreachy intern spots (Philip) - see board-list,
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/83
 * COSCON'18 speaker invitation (Nuritzi)
 * LAS GNOME report (Nuritzi)
 * Review to-do GitLab issues -
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues?label_name%5B%5D=To-Do
 * From issue 39 (devolved conference bidding process) - how can we
allocate conference budget for CoC-enforcement training for one or two of
the local organizers? (Federico)

== Minutes ==

 * GUADEC dates
   * Kat polled our ex-interns and general consensus is end of August. The
local team would also prefer end of August.
   * The options are July 5–10 or August 23–28.
   * Allan: Is August 23–28 going to conflict with the release cycle?
 * Kat: Can we move the release schedule?
 * Carlos: Usually no, because of the downstream distributions.
 * Philip: During the last weeks of the release cycle is actually
better than right before the feature freeze like this year's GUADEC.
   * Nuritzi: Does this affect our other conferences such as GNOME.Asia? We
should not prevent core members from going to both conferences. No need to
move this date, but we should let the GNOME.Asia organizers know that they
need to keep this date in mind.
   * Federico: The concern last time we discussed this was conflict with
school semesters starting.
 * The dates are inconvenient for Rosanna and Federico.
   * Kat: The end of July isn't an option because it conflicts with Debconf.
   * Nuritzi: When is Akademy next year? - They are still on the call for
hosts, so the date is not known yet.
   * '''VOTE''': Set dates of GUADEC 2019 to be August 23-28.
 * +1 Nuritzi, Kat, Carlos, Allan, Philip, Federico. Abstained: Rob
 * Note from Philip, Federico, Rob: This date seems not-ideal, but also
seems the best out of a number of not-ideal options.
   * Nuritzi: Can we let bidding teams know what the board considers ideal
dates?
 * Kat: This should be a broader discussion with the conference
organizers.
 * Philip: Would be good to set what those dates are based on, e.g. no
earlier than the stipend payments of the internships, no later than the
beginning of school semesters in X country, with exceptions possible.
 * Kat: Announcing is the job of the GUADEC team; they can work with
Engagement on this.
   * '''ACTION''' - Allan: add a comment to our GitLab issue about setting
a date range.

 * Hackfest agenda
   * Current agenda, after making the changes discussed in this meeting:
 * [[https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/New|Hackfest policy]]
 * Financial policies and transparency (Nuritzi)
 * Fundraising & campaigns (Carlos)
 * Approve budget for next year (Nuritzi)
 * Committee check-ins (Nuritzi)
 * Topics for future rounds of GNOME internships (Philip)
 * Community check-ins (Philip)
 * Board & Foundation planning
 * Project-wide Code of Conduct (Federico)
 * Cross-project hackfests (Kat)
 * Travel sponsorship policy (Philip)
 * "Hacking time" (Allan)
   * Kat: Let's keep the agenda relatively light so we have time to work on
things.
   * Neil: Work out a timeline for the day, and what we're going to discuss
at what times, to maximize the efficiency of our time.
   * Nuritzi: We should pre-plan lunch options.
   * Nuritzi: We should also figure out which day we want to hold the
community event. How about Thursday evening?
   * Neil booked a hotel for everyone already.
   * Nuritzi: Are there whiteboards? - Kat: Yes
   * '''ACTION''' - Philip: Add the things mentioned here to the agenda
   * '''ACTION''' - Nuritzi: Plan out a schedule for the days

 * Committee requirements
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/67
   * What's the status of this?
   * Nuritzi: The engagement committee discussed it, but didn't get all the
way through the items.
   * Philip: Sent an email to the travel committee mailing list.
   * Federico: Sent an email to the CoC committee mailing list.
   * Rob: Will send an email to the sponsorship committee mailing list.
   * Carlos: Will send an email to the membership committee mailing list.
   * Philip: Rob, Carlos, feel free to adapt my email text.

 * SeaGL trip approval
   * Neil: We've been offered a booth, at SeaGL, November 7-9 in Seattle.
   * Neil and Rosanna are going to attend, and combine it with a trip to
Denver to talk to James Donnelly (LuNEL) on work for Odoo.
   * Nuritzi: Any talks or 

Minutes of the board meeting of September 11, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180911

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, September 11th 2018, 15:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, September 18 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * KatGerasimova
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen
 * PhilipChimento

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * NeilMcGovern

== Agenda ==

 * Akademy report (Carlos)
 * Rust hackfest venue sponsorship. See board-list (Carlos)
 * Review compensation committee charter (Rob, see
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/78)
 * Review to-do GitLab issues -
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues?label_name%5B%5D=To-Do

== Minutes ==

 * Akademy report (Carlos)
   * Carlos went to Akademy with Felipe Borges. There is a blog post about
his experience (
https://csorianognome.wordpress.com/2018/08/24/a-gnome-dev-enters-an-akademy-and/).
There are a few things that could be useful to us.
   * They have 3-year board terms, so only one-third of the board turns
over every year.
   * They have a code of conduct, both for conference and the project
 * Kat: has the CoC fixed any issues in their community?
   * Don't know. This would be something to ask them.
   * Color-coded badge straps to implement photo policy. Not sure whether
it is working well.
   * They didn't have any employees. Now they have contractors for
marketing, thanks to the Pineapple funding. It's working very well.
   * Anyone in the community can reach out directly to the marketing
contractors: "need feedback on X", "need to promote this".
   * They split into the KDE Community and KDE Projects. There is no single
KDE project anymore.
 * The KDE Community is a loosely defined group of people with free
software goals.
 * An example of a KDE Project is Plasma (the desktop product).
 * KDE is kind of like an umbrella for projects made by the KDE
Community, rather than a specific product.
   * They have a process to get software in: how a project can be called a
KDE project.
 * Carlos discussed with Tobias Bernard and others during GUADEC about
having something like this for GNOME.
   * KDE has a committee doing that.
   * Changed their focus to usability / user experience, rather than doing
everything for everyone.
   * We do newcomers onboarding better; we have tooling/people for that.
   * Kat: they have better GSoC retention rates than we do (info from 3-4
years ago)
 * They integrate more with the students, whereas our students work
more in isolation.
 * Krita reduced number of students to increase quality
   * They do diversity better.
 * They have age diversity, both younger and older. The young people
are not only from Google Summer of Code.
 * More women, maybe the proportion is twice as much as in the GNOME
community.
   * Things to collaborate on:
 * Wayland. There is an opportunity for a hackfest here. They feel that
GNOME pushes hard on Wayland because we have more manpower; some feel like
they try to catch up.
 * Flatpak. Their VP is the KDE maintainer of Discover and Flatpak
integration.
   * Carlos discussed with Alex Larsson about this.
  * The discussion turned briefly to GNOME-branded hardware.
* Kat: What are the criteria to define that hardware works with GNOME
properly? Usability?
* Rob: We need to define requirements to let someone use the GNOME
trademark.
* Taking small steps first is better. We should first define a process
to get software into GNOME.
* Rob: There are different requirements for the GNOME logo on hardware,
vs. "GNOME Foo" for a foo program.
* Federico: There's been some work done on making it easy for ISVs to
integrate their software into GNOME - is there a list of requirements in
terms of certification?
  * '''ACTION''' - Philip or Federico - create a task in GitLab to
investigate hardware certification and assign it to Neil

 * Rust hackfest venue sponsorship. See board-list (Carlos)
   * The hackfest is in Greece, and the organizers are asking just under
EUR 500 for a coworking space for 4 days for 15 people. There's a hackfest
page and an agenda. 7 participants so far, mostly from Europe. Federico
plans to attend.
   * Kat: It would be interesting to have the hackfest in Thessaloniki,
because then Federico can take a look around at the GUADEC venue.
   * Rosanna: Is this something that the engagement committee is supposed
to approve?
 * Federico: The engagement committee should be asked in any case for
marketing materials such as stickers
 * Carlos: There's a pending GitLab issue to figure out what to do with
hackfests. Currently it's not clear who has to approve it.
   * Rosanna: The board hasn't been asked for sponsorship for a hackfest in
a long time; it's not in our minds.
 * We'll vote on this hackfest, since it's time sensitive, and then
consider how the process should be in the future.
   * Rob: What budget is this coming out of?
 * Rosanna: 

Minutes of the board meeting of September 4, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180904

Next meeting date Tuesday, September 11 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * PhilipChimento
 * RosannaYuen
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RobMcQueen
 * NuritziSanchez
 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay
 * KatGerasimova

== Agenda ==

 * Conference bidding process review (Kat)
 * Committee responsibilities (Kat & Nuritzi)
 * Figure out what's blocking on finishing the board handover (Kat)
 * Foundation hackfest (Kat)
 * Conference budget questions [see mailing list] (Allan)
 * Switch meetings to California time (Allan)
 * Odds and ends (Neil)

== Minutes ==

 * Conference bidding process review (Kat)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/39
   * https://etherpad.gnome.org/p/conferences
   * Board were supposed to review and give feedback on the bid template -
not everyone has done so yet.
   * Neil added a lot of stuff, there are still some "to-do" bits.
   * Federico: Is the code of conduct covered? - Yes, on
https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/Conferences where the bid template will
be added eventually.
   * Nuritzi: We should also think about standardizing the conference
organizing process, such as finding good keynote speakers. That doesn't fit
in this document, but we should think about those resources as well.
 * Neil: Could be integrated after the acceptance of the bid:
"Congratulations, your bid has been accepted. Here's how you organize a
GUADEC/GNOME.Asia/etc"
 * Neil: for keynote speakers, use the standard budgeting spreadsheet.
 * Carlos: There is https://wiki.gnome.org/GUADEC/HowTo/
   * Carlos: The HowTo page also includes bid and budget information, which
should be updated after this is adopted.
   * Nuritzi: Need to talk to the Engagement team about talking to local
team. Designate someone as the lead marketing person.
   * Next steps: Everyone who hasn't reviewed it please review it; Finish
off the to-do bits, adopt it, and publish it.

 * Committee responsibilities (Kat & Nuritzi)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/67
   * We discussed this last week during the informal meeting and made an
action for liaisons to contact the committees to get feedback about how
they would like to define these requirements.
   * Federico: The Code of Conduct committee has discussed this a bit. It
may happen that we discuss sensitive issues in this committee that should
not be public or even shared with the whole board.
   * Carlos: Travel committee has a similar situation with private/public
issues in their minutes.
   * Nuritzi: The Engagement committee will be meeting at LAS GNOME, so we
will discuss this next week.
   * We want feedback from committees on the points in #67 (active/inactive
members, response times)

 * Figure out what's blocking on finishing the board handover (Kat)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/76 still has
adboard-list not updated.
   * Kat volunteered to be second moderator on the list, hasn't heard
anything back.
   * Philip: There was one email sent to the list last week.
   * Does the email require a response? Even if it doesn't contain a
question, it should be responded to.
   * Nuritzi: We should generally keep a low response time for the advisory
board list, and think about ways to involve the advisory board with
day-to-day goings on via this list.
   * '''ACTION''' - Neil to double check if everyone is subscribed and
subscribe if not.
   * '''ACTION''' - Philip to forward the received email to the board.

 * Foundation hackfest (Kat)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/75
   * Next step: get approval for travel and accommodation.
   * Rosanna (mentioned before the meeting, by email): Everyone should book
their own accommodation if we are using Travelodge, or if we are using
Airbnb then one person should book it; there's no Foundation credit card.
   * Discussion about proposed Airbnb options. Sleeping arrangements are
described inconsistently in one of them.
   * We should book for the 16th through the 20th instead of 17th through
19th, as we need to allow for travel the preceding and following days.
   * Discussion about where to look for options; the area directly around
Collabora is not likely to have good options.
   * Neil suggests YourSpace (www.yourspaceapartments.com), you can book
multiple apartments in the same building - map here:
https://www.yourspaceapartments.com/apartments-list-half-map/
   * Should we have an event on the evening of Friday 19th where we invite
local people? Yes.
   * Any recommendations for how to get to Cambridge? Stansted is ~30 mins
by train. City is also good. Heathrow and Gatwick are acceptable. Avoid
Luton and Southend.
   * '''ACTION''' - Everyone should begin booking their travel, before
September 11.
   * '''ACTION''' - Neil to email YourSpace, and book the accommodations if
possible.

 * Conference budget questions [see mailing list] (Allan)
   * It would be 

Board meeting of August 28, 2018 cancelled

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180828

tl;dr: No quorum, meeting cancelled, here are some brief notes of an
informal discussion that the attending board members and Neil had.

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, August 28th 2018, 14:30 UTC -
MEETING CANCELLED =

Next meeting date Tuesday, September 4 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * PhilipChimento
 * KatGerasimova
 * FedericoMenaQuintero (late)

== Regrets ==

 * AllanDay
 * RobMcQueen
 * NuritziSanchez
 * RosannaYuen

== Missing ==

== Agenda ==

 * Conference bidding process review (Kat)
 * Committee responsibilities (Kat & Nuritzi)
 * Hiring bulletin (Philip)

== Minutes ==

 * At the beginning of the meeting we did not have quorum. This meeting was
cancelled.
 * Instead we had an informal discussion about some of the proposed agenda
items. Notes follow.

 * Conference bidding process review (Kat)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/39
   * Template bid and template budget
   * For the template budget, we'll use something based on the spreadsheet
from GUADEC 2019
   * Discussion about spending tiers - on the one hand multiple tiers are
useful for the local team to think about different scenarios, and the
minimum shows what the Foundation is on the hook for if we get no
sponsorship at all. Stretch goals are easy to compare when placed in an
extra column side by side the other two scenarios. On the other hand it
makes the budget complicated and we don't want local teams to just fill in
arbitrary numbers because they don't know. In the end, the GUADEC 2019
format seems to be the most useful for Neil and the organizing committees.
   * Board members please read, add comments or make changes directly in
the proposed template.

 * Committee responsibilities (Kat & Nuritzi)
   * We don't necessarily have to require all committees to have regular
meetings, e.g. the travel committee probably doesn't need to, although we
should ask them to have a meeting when they discuss certain official
business, e.g. new members.
   * Rather than defining the criteria for the committees ourselves, we
should ask the committees to provide the information. Committee liaisons,
please ask your committees to do this.

[ Federico arrives ]

 * Hiring bulletin (Philip)
   * Follow-up from a discussion at GUADEC. It would be good to summarize
all the communication about the ongoing hires that has happened in the
mailing lists, AGM, etc.
   * When hires happen, introduce the hires to the community and start
building that relationship.
   * Federico volunteers to make a wiki page which we can then send out in
a general communication.

== Actions ==

 * Federico - come up with a text to explain the whys, hows and status of
the hirings
 * All committee liaisons - communicate the requirements to their
committees and ask them to define things that need to be defined
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of August 21, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 8:27 PM Sriram Ramkrishna  wrote:

> re: ED report
> Would the ED report be available for the rest of us?  It would be nice to
> know what's happening from the ED perspective for all our members.
>

We are still figuring this out. As you can see in the minutes we haven't
discussed this with Neil yet, so this is a bit difficult to answer. This is
my personal opinion, not discussed with Neil or the board, so take it with
a grain of salt: obviously regular reports should be made available to the
Foundation members in some form or another, but it is also true that
writing a report for hundreds of people to read, is a different task,
requiring more time and care, than writing a report for the board where the
board members already know the context of all the items in the report and
you get the chance to discuss it on a call and answer any questions right
away. Personally I am a fan of Neil's reports on his blog.

Also huge kudos to Phillip for consistently putting minutes out every week,
> on time like clockwork.  Bravo!
>

Thank you.

Thank for rest the board for all your hard work. :D
>
> sri
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 5:33 PM Philip Chimento via foundation-list <
> foundation-list@gnome.org> wrote:
>
>> Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180821
>>
>> Note to interested Foundation members: In coming weeks I'll be trying out
>> some different styles of note-taking. So far the minutes have been quite
>> detailed. The level of detail that comes naturally to me, although I've
>> received some positive comments on it, does often prevent me from engaging
>> fully in discussions, so I'll be trying to find a better balance.
>>
>> = Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, August 21st 2018, 15:30 UTC =
>>
>> Next meeting date Tuesday, August 28 2018, 14:30 UTC
>>
>> == Attending ==
>>
>>  * PhilipChimento
>>  * AllanDay
>>  * NuritziSanchez
>>  * CarlosSoriano
>>  * NeilMcGovern
>>  * RosannaYuen
>>  * FedericoMenaQuintero
>>  * RobMcQueen
>>
>> == Regrets ==
>>
>>  * KatGerasimova
>>
>> == Missing ==
>>
>> == Agenda ==
>>
>>  * Executive Director report (Neil)
>>  * ED remunerations and appraisals (a guest advisor with nonprofit
>> experience dials in from 15:45 UTC - 16:15 UTC)
>>  * Foundation hackfest (Allan)
>>  * Formal thanks to Max Huang for his work on GNOME.Asia (Neil)
>>
>> == Minutes ==
>>
>>  * Executive Director report
>>* Neil sent a draft of a report, everyone please review it. It's quite
>> verbose and took a long time to put together, so if we want to maintain
>> that level of detail it should be monthly. If we are okay with less detail,
>> it could be biweekly.
>>* Carlos: This draft is great. Can we have this and also a shorter
>> weekly update?
>>  * Neil: Weekly could be too short to properly give context for some
>> things.
>>* Nuritzi/Neil: This will also tie into our discussion with the
>> nonprofit advisor later in the meeting.
>>* '''ACTION''' - Everyone please review the report if you haven't
>> already.
>>
>> [ Neil and Rosanna leave ]
>>
>>  * ED remunerations and appraisals (a guest advisor with nonprofit
>> experience dials in from 15:45 UTC - 16:15 UTC)
>>* The goal of the session is to review our current practices against
>> the advisor's best practices, as well as California law which the
>> Foundation is subject to.
>>* The most important job of the board is evaluating the executive
>> director's performance and setting their compensation. This is standard
>> practice across many nonprofits but has not happened in a consistent way
>> over the last few years.
>>  * We need to figure out if this is something we want to do, and if
>> so, how.
>>* Anything relating to the rest of the Foundation's staff, is the
>> responsibility of the ED, not the board.
>>* What's the best reporting frequency for the ED and what form should
>> these reports take?
>>  * It's important to ensure accountability to the board, but on the
>> other hand it should not be overly burdensome.
>>  * We decide that, going forward, the ED should aim to present a
>> report in the first board meeting of every month.
>>* Many nonprofit boards create a compensation committee to set the
>> ED's compensation.
>>  * We think this is a good idea.
>>* Points raised around the importance of continuity in the board as
>> relates to accountability and accomplishing goals.
>>  * We discussed the p

Minutes of the board meeting of August 21, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180821

Note to interested Foundation members: In coming weeks I'll be trying out
some different styles of note-taking. So far the minutes have been quite
detailed. The level of detail that comes naturally to me, although I've
received some positive comments on it, does often prevent me from engaging
fully in discussions, so I'll be trying to find a better balance.

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, August 21st 2018, 15:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, August 28 2018, 14:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * CarlosSoriano
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

 * KatGerasimova

== Missing ==

== Agenda ==

 * Executive Director report (Neil)
 * ED remunerations and appraisals (a guest advisor with nonprofit
experience dials in from 15:45 UTC - 16:15 UTC)
 * Foundation hackfest (Allan)
 * Formal thanks to Max Huang for his work on GNOME.Asia (Neil)

== Minutes ==

 * Executive Director report
   * Neil sent a draft of a report, everyone please review it. It's quite
verbose and took a long time to put together, so if we want to maintain
that level of detail it should be monthly. If we are okay with less detail,
it could be biweekly.
   * Carlos: This draft is great. Can we have this and also a shorter
weekly update?
 * Neil: Weekly could be too short to properly give context for some
things.
   * Nuritzi/Neil: This will also tie into our discussion with the
nonprofit advisor later in the meeting.
   * '''ACTION''' - Everyone please review the report if you haven't
already.

[ Neil and Rosanna leave ]

 * ED remunerations and appraisals (a guest advisor with nonprofit
experience dials in from 15:45 UTC - 16:15 UTC)
   * The goal of the session is to review our current practices against the
advisor's best practices, as well as California law which the Foundation is
subject to.
   * The most important job of the board is evaluating the executive
director's performance and setting their compensation. This is standard
practice across many nonprofits but has not happened in a consistent way
over the last few years.
 * We need to figure out if this is something we want to do, and if so,
how.
   * Anything relating to the rest of the Foundation's staff, is the
responsibility of the ED, not the board.
   * What's the best reporting frequency for the ED and what form should
these reports take?
 * It's important to ensure accountability to the board, but on the
other hand it should not be overly burdensome.
 * We decide that, going forward, the ED should aim to present a report
in the first board meeting of every month.
   * Many nonprofit boards create a compensation committee to set the ED's
compensation.
 * We think this is a good idea.
   * Points raised around the importance of continuity in the board as
relates to accountability and accomplishing goals.
 * We discussed the pros and cons of having staggered board terms of 2
or 3 years with half or a third of the board turning over every year.
   * '''ACTION''' - Rob: Propose a charter for the compensation committee.

[ Neil and Rosanna return ]

 * Foundation hackfest (Allan)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/75
   * Allan: 17-19 October (not including travel). Very likely going to be
Cambridge, office space is booked, we just need to figure out who needs
accommodation and when
   * (Info from Kat:) Cambridge accommodation options (e.g.):
 * £62 per room 1-2 people for Travelodge
 * £25 per person for 3 people per room in Travelodge
   * We'll look for an Airbnb or equivalent local large place as well
   * Nuritzi: Staying in the same place increases informal camaraderie
   * '''ACTION''' - Update the GitLab ticket with who needs and who doesn't
need accommodation (provisionally assigned to Allan, Kat)
   * '''VOTE''' - Approve travel for the Foundation board and Foundation
employees to attend the Foundation hackfest 17-19 October
 * +1 Nuritzi, Rob, Federico, Allan, Carlos, Philip

[ Carlos leaves ]

 * Formal thanks to Max Huang for his work on GNOME.Asia (Neil)
   * '''VOTE''' - The board expresses its thanks to Max for all the hard
work he has put into GNOME.Asia and requests that Neil sends a formal thank
you
 * +1 Rob, Philip, Allan, Nuritzi, Federico

== Actions ==

 * Everyone - review the Executive Director report
 * Allan, Kat - Update the GitLab ticket (
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/75) with who needs and who
doesn't need accommodation during the hackfest
 * Rob - Propose a charter for the compensation committee
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the board meeting of August 14, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180814

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, August 14th 2018, 15:00 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, August 21 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * NuritziSanchez
 * KatGerasimova
 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

== Missing ==

== Agenda ==

 * URGENT: GUADEC 2019 Thessaloniki bid (Allan)
 * Private meeting minutes issues (Nuritzi)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/60
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/61
 * Foundation hackfest planning (Allan)

== Minutes ==

 * GUADEC 2019 Thessaloniki bid
   * Neil has helped them rework the budget.
   * Philip: I already sent some questions to board-list. There's nothing
in my list that really blocks the bid, just some things I was wondering
about.
   * Philip: The only thing in my list pertaining to the bid as given, is
the price of the lunches.
 * Kat: We'll check what the university includes for that price.
 * (The reply from the local team was that that was the standard price
for conference lunches, not university cafeteria lunches.)
   * Allan: A few items I don't understand in the budget:
 * The line item for keynote speakers, is that for travel?
   * Neil: keynote speakers usually get their flights expensed by the
Foundation
 * The number for social events is high, do they come out of the main
budget or do we expect the local team to do fundraising for that?
   * Kat: We can also not have events if there's no room in the budget,
but that's not so nice.
   * Allan: In past GUADECs we've done specific fundraising for social
events.
   * Neil: We can certainly try and fundraise for these.
 * Smaller items like gifts for the speakers, is that something we
normally do at GUADEC?
   * Kat: we have done them at least since 2010, budget permitting
   * Allan: Will they require a float? Do we need to preapprove any
immediate spending in order to book the venue?
 * Yes.
   * Nuritzi: Is 35k a good travel budget or should we be expecting larger?
This is our flagship conference and we should bring in people from other
places around the world, which would be more expensive.
 * Kat: We could also give all our interns full sponsorship for the
flights. That would require more travel budget as well.
 * Kat estimates that 20K is too low a budget; 30k minimum, 35k
expected, 40k-50k high.
   * Nuritzi: How about 40k expected?
 * Kat: In the past, on the travel committee, we did blog posts on the
numbers; in recent years we didn't do them, but I still have some drafts
from those years.
 * Nuritzi: We should prepare ourselves to increase this budget if
necessary.
   * Federico: From the Code of Conduct committee, we would like all
subsequent conferences to use the new code of conduct, and we will provide
all the resources they need to implement it.
   * Nuritzi: Is there anything blocking our approving the bid in this
meeting?
 * Kat: I would like to see the amount on the travel line updated.
 * Allan: That would have us approving the budget at a loss, so maybe
we can revisit it when we get more fundraising?
 * Neil: The numbers for fundraising now are my best guess as to what
will come in. Generally we should try to make a profit at GUADEC although
some years that might not happen.
   * Allan: What exactly are we approving? Just the "expected" column?
 * Neil: The whole thing; the different scenarios are linked to the
amount of money we raise.
   * Neil: One possible way forward, with the travel budget question, is to
approve the conference (float for the venue), start moving forward, and
approve the budget in a future meeting.
 * Kat: That might lead to the situation where we approve a budget that
the local team doesn't support.
 * Neil: It sounds like some people are not comfortable voting on the
whole budget.
 * Allan: Are we voting on increased travel amounts?
 * Philip: What are the consequences of increasing the travel budget if
there's no matching fundraising?
   * In that case we run the conference at a loss.
 * Rob: We can see if we can increase the baseline budget in a future
meeting
 * Kat: Propose to vote on the existing proposal, Allan sends questions
to Kat or the local team/travel committee, as appropriate.
   * Allan: The date is late for GUADEC, do we see that being a problem?
 * Rosanna: It's after school starts, so I'm not sure I'd be able to go.
 * Federico: ditto.
 * Carlos: For Summer of Code / Outreachy students it would be late,
after the internship ends.
 * Rosanna: Term might also have started by then, too.
 * Kat: Moving it earlier would be inconvenient for the local team, and
later is better for students.
   * Allan/Philip: Later is better, but not so late as to be after the
end of the internship.
 * Kat: There are two 

Minutes of the board meeting of August 7, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180807

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, August 7th 2018, 15:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, August 14 2018, 15:00 UTC (note adjusted meeting
time!)

== Attending ==

 * KatGerasimova
 * AllanDay
 * NuritziSanchez
 * PhilipChimento
 * RobMcQueen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * RosannaYuen

== Regrets ==

 * CarlosSoriano

== Missing ==

 * NeilMcGovern

== Agenda ==

 * Regular hiring update (Nuritzi)
 * Transparency between employees and the board/community. i.e. status
reports (also read emails from Kat) (Carlos)
 * Removing old Board members from board communications (Nuritzi)
 * GUADEC 2019 Bid (Nuritzi)
 * Foundation hackfest 2018 planning (Nuritzi)
* https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/75
 * Designate a TDF (The Document Foundation) Advisory Board member (Nuritzi)
* https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/72
 * Conference bidding process (Kat)
 * Odds and ends from the community at GUADEC (Philip)
 * Publish private meeting minutes issue (Nuritzi)
 * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/60
 * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/61
 * Response to emails update (Nuritzi)
 * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/66
 * Review to-do GitLab issues -
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues?label_name%5B%5D=To-Do
(Nuritzi)

Next meeting:
 * Privacy and security internships status and possible ideas (Carlos)
 * Switch meetings to California time (Allan)

== Minutes ==

 * Regular hiring update (Nuritzi)
   * Interviews starting soon

 * Transparency between employees and the board/community. i.e. status
reports (also read emails from Kat) (Carlos)
   * Kat: Neil said in a blog post at the start of the year he would start
blogging every couple of weeks to keep the community updated. Even on the
board we don't have a clear view of what Neil does day to day. Previously
on the board we wanted this to be a requirement for executive directors.
Members of the community have said that they're not sure what Neil does.
This should be communicated better.
   * Allan: This has been raised by the previous board.
   * Rob: We've been discussing this in our 1:1s, as line manager of the
ED. We want to separate the two lines of reporting, where Neil reports to
the board (perhaps a slot in the board meeting every other week). I'll
share some notes from the 1:1s but in the future this should be for the
whole board and minuted. Then, Neil can blog about whatever he's told us.
We do have the responsibility to show the Foundation members and donors
that we're effective, and that's Neil's responsibility.
   * Rob: As soon as Neil gets back from vacation we should initiate a
standing agenda item.
   * Allan: Note, Neil is not reporting just for himself, but for the whole
Foundation staff.
   * Rob: We'll have a biweekly standing agenda item starting two weeks
from now.
   * Nuritzi: The advisory board have said that they would like more
regular communication as well.
 * Rob: It's easy once we have regular blog posts to marshal them into
a quarterly report for the adboard.
 * Philip: Can we post the blog posts to the adboard list?
 * Kat: Neil might want to add something private for the adboard,
better to do it separately.

 * Removing old Board members from board communications (Nuritzi)
   * Old board members are still on some of the communication channels. We
need to compile a list of all the channels and review.
   * '''ACTION''': Allan - create an issue and coordinate to remove old
board members and add Rob, Kat, and Philip to adboard-list and board-only
list.
 * [done - https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/76 ]

 * GUADEC 2019 Bid (Nuritzi)
   * Bid arrived! Kat helped review the bid from their side. No-one else
has had a chance to look at it from the board side yet.
   * Deferred to next week; if we have the meeting 30 minutes earlier Kat
and Nuritzi can join from GNOME.Asia.
   * Nuritzi: Are there any upcoming deadlines, e.g. for booking the venue,
that we need to be aware of?
 * Kat: No, but we need to get the dates out as early as possible to
avoid double-booking, and from feedback from previous years we know that we
need to publish the date as soon as possible.

 * Foundation hackfest 2018 planning (Nuritzi)
   * https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/75
   * Everyone add any dates where you're not available in October to the
GitLab issue.
   * Kat: Alternative proposal, let's take two sets of dates and have
people choose between them: 12th-14th or 26th-28th
   * Rob, Allan, Kat: More likely to be able to attend if the hackfest is
in the UK.
   * Federico: Should I continue to research Mexico if people can't attend
outside the UK? - No.
   * Kat: Collabora can provide soundproof office space for the meeting.
   * Allan: Last time we considered hiring a big place and working there in
retreat-style, as we've got a small closed group.
 

Minutes of the board meeting of July 31, 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Wiki location: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180731

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, July 31st 2018, 15:30 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, August 7 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * NuritziSanchez
 * KatGerasimova
 * CarlosSoriano
 * AllanDay
 * RobMcQueen
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * PhilipChimento

== Regrets ==

 * FedericoMenaQuintero

== Missing ==

== Agenda ==

 * Hiring update (Neil)
 * Standardising bidding and budgetting processes for conferences (Kat)
 * GUADEC 2019 bidding process update (Kat)
 * Travel committee update (Philip)
 * Adding Christel to the code of conduct committee (Federico)
 * Code of Conduct questions from Benjamin Berg (Allan)
 * Who responds to what on the board mailing list (Philip)
 * Review to-do GitLab issues -
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues?label_name%5B%5D=To-Do
(Allan)

Low priority:
 * Transparency between employees and the board/community. i.e. status
reports (also read emails from Kat) (Carlos)
 * Internships status and possible ideas (Carlos)
 * Switch meetings to California time (Allan)
 * Odds and ends from the community at GUADEC (Philip)

== Minutes ==

 * Hiring update (Neil)
* General update: few more applications for sysadmin and program
coordinator.
* Sysadmin/devops - first batch of interviews planned.
* GTK+ developer - pre-interview questionaire scheduled.
* Allan and Kat have been added to Odoo.
* We'll figure out who to send the questionnaire to from there.
* Allan: we should have some questions and screening around online
conduct. Whoever we hire will also be a kind of champion of the project.
They have to have good online behaviour.
  * Neil: We do have questions about this. I'm drawing on my experience
writing similar questions for Collabora. The questions will reflect that
working for the Foundation is different.
* Nuritzi: PSA, don't add the name of the person who should answer the
agenda item, instead add the name of the person who proposed it.

 * Standardising bidding and budgetting processes for conferences (Kat)
   * Kat: Meeting tomorrow with Allan and Carlos to talk about what we want
to standardize across conferences. After that, a call with conference
organizers. More updates next week.

 * GUADEC 2019 bidding update (Kat)
* Kat: Nuritzi mentioned that Turkey '19 was likely to drop out. No
contact yet with Muhammet. Greece '19's bid looks relatively solid, they
are still on track to send it in by the deadline of August 6.
* Nuritzi: Turkey '19 is stuck at getting the venue information and
that's why they are not likely to get it in on time.
* Kat: Some of the '20 bids are already starting to look at venues.

 * Travel committee update (Philip)
* Philip has got access to infra.
* Philip: 2 members may become unavailable due to personal
circumstances in the near future.
* Philip: may need to increase committee at least temporarily - will
consider after talking to the other TC members first.
* Email from Adelia about possibly going over budget. Question is,
stick to the deadline (27 July) for LAS and stick to the budget, or allow
applications after the deadline (since the CFP deadline is 30 July) and go
over budget?
* Kat: What's the reason that the GNOME.Asia sponsorships are coming
out of the general Foundation budget?
  * Allan: Can't remember, but we should ensure that each conference
has its own budget line for travel
* General consensus is that we should still allow LAS applications
after the CFP deadline as people may have been waiting to see if their
paper was accepted.
* Rosanna: Deadline was only announced on foundation-list, so many may
not have been aware.
* Kat: travel committee can work this out and ask for more budget if
needed.
* Philip: we should decide now whether we're OK with a reasonable
budget increase.
* Nuritzi: let's tell them to use the LAS surplus for GNOME.Asia and
ask for more budget for LAS.
* '''ACTION:''' Philip to communicate that we would like them to ask
for a budget and we'll vote on it next week, in the meantime they can move
the budget from LAS to GNOME.Asia as they see fit to accommodate the
last-minute requests.

 * Adding Christel to the code of conduct committee (Federico)
   * (Submitted by Federico, by email) During GUADEC, the CoC committee met
with and invited Christel Dahlskjaer to be part of it. The Board met her
during the Advisory Board meeting; she's the representative for Private
Internet Access. She is also one of the Freenode.net moderators, and has
experience dealing with troublesome people and with CoC enforcement. With
the Board's approval, we'd like to have Christel as part of the CoC
committee :)
   * Nuritzi: We did mention that we wanted more members from other parts
of the world
 * Kat: Are the current committee members explicitly looking for more
members from different backgrounds, e.g. Asia?
 * Rosanna: The committee itself 

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board 4 July 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:11 PM meg ford  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the minutes!
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:16 AM Philip Chimento via foundation-list <
> foundation-list@gnome.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello from your new secretary! A few points of order to accompany these
>> minutes:
>>
>> These minutes were recorded during the meeting and published on the wiki
>> by Allan. Starting with the following board meeting, the minutes will
>> generally be recorded by me or Federico.
>>
>> I apologize for the delay in sending them to foundation-list as I wasn't
>> yet aware of how the full process was supposed to work. For future board
>> meetings, you will be able to count on them being sent more promptly.
>>
>> Also note that the date of the next meeting is wrong, but in order to
>> avoid a discrepancy between the published minutes on the wiki and on the
>> mailing list I've left it as is. The next meeting is actually Tuesday 24
>> July 2018 at 15:30 UTC.
>>
>
> Will the Board be meeting on Tuesdays from now on? It’s good to know in
> case there’s a urgent request and I (or anyone else) wants to send it
> before the Board meets.
>

For the time being, it will indeed be on Tuesday every week at 15:30 UTC.

Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Minutes of the Foundation Board 4 July 2018

[Philip Chimento via foundation-list]

Hello from your new secretary! A few points of order to accompany these
minutes:

These minutes were recorded during the meeting and published on the wiki by
Allan. Starting with the following board meeting, the minutes will
generally be recorded by me or Federico.

I apologize for the delay in sending them to foundation-list as I wasn't
yet aware of how the full process was supposed to work. For future board
meetings, you will be able to count on them being sent more promptly.

Also note that the date of the next meeting is wrong, but in order to avoid
a discrepancy between the published minutes on the wiki and on the mailing
list I've left it as is. The next meeting is actually Tuesday 24 July 2018
at 15:30 UTC.

Location on wiki: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20180704

= Foundation Board Minutes for Wednesday, July 4th 2018 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, July 10th 2018, 18:00 UTC

== Attending ==

* AllanDay (remote)
* NuritziSanchez
* CarlosSoriano
* PhilipChimento
* FedericoMenaQuintero
* RosannaYuen
* DidierRoche
* RobertMcQueen (remote)

== Regrets ==

* KatGerasimova
* CosimoCecchi
* MegFord
* NeilMcGovern

== Missing ==

== Agenda ==

* Appoint board officers
* Appoint committee members and board liasons
* Executive Director line manager

== Minutes ==

* Appoint board officers
  * VOTE: appoint the following as listed:
* President: Nuritzi Sanchez
* Vice-president: Allan Day
* Secretary: Philip Chimento
* Vice-secretary: Federico Mena Quintero
* Treasurer: Carlos Soriano
* Vice-treasurer: Rob McQueen
* +1 unanimous

* ED line manager
  * Currently Allan. Has bi-weekly calls with Neil, sends a report to the
board.
  * Question - what is the role of the line manager? Purely pastoral, or
board representative? Technically the ED is answerable to the board as a
whole, but the board doesn't currently have board-only discussions.
  * Rob - board meetings are typically when the ED is held to account by
the board. The line manager is more of a pastoral role. Should cover
professional development.
  * Rob has management and HR expertise and could take on the role - he'll
take over from Allan
  * Rob to provide progress reports and assist setting up HR processes for
the Foundation

* Appoint committee members and board liaisons
  * We want to have a board member on each committee, to act as liason.
Each liason doesn't have to be an active committee member - just has a
formal membership so they can participate in a limited capacity.
  * VOTE: appoint the following committee members as listed:
* Code of conduct: Federico Mena Quintero (*), Felipe Borges, Rosanna
Yuen
* Sponsorship: Alberto Ruiz, Emily Chen, Sri Ramkrishna, Wen Qixian,
Executive Director, Rob McQueen (*)
* Travel: David King, Germán Poo-Caamaño, Michael Hall, Adelia Rahim,
Philip Chimento (*)
* Engagement: Nuritzi Sanchez (*), Sri Ramkrishna, Rosanna Yuen, Neil
McGovern
* Membership: Tobias Mueller, Andrea Veri, Pascal Terjan, Kunal Jain,
Marcin Kolny, Carlos Soriano (*)
* (*) indicates board liaison
  * +1 unanimous
  * In future, the board would like to create guidelines for committees, so
that we can set expectations and ensure that members are active and
responsive.

* ACTION: each liasion to communicate the vote back to their respective
committee - https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Board/issues/68
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: It's time again for pants nominations

[philip . chimento]

I nominate Rob McQueen for setting up, arranging donations for, and
administrating Flathub.
I also nominate Federico Mena Quintero for pioneering the use of the Rust
language in the GNOME stack.
I also second Sri Ramkrishna's nomination for continuing to engage in a
constructive manner with the /r/linux community despite the obvious
difficulties.

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 7:53 AM Didier Roche  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> GUADEC is coming up soon, and with GUADEC comes the annual Pants Award.
> Every year, GNOME awards a pair of pants to somebody in recognition of
> their outstanding contributions. The board will make the final decision
> on who receives the pants, but we'd love to hear your nominations.
>
> The award can be for any kind of contribution to our software or our
> community. It does not have to be software development work. The only
> requirements are that the person is attending GUADEC to receive the
> pants, and that it's not a current or outgoing board member. Not sure
> if the person fits the requirements? Just nominate! We'll sort it out.
>
> Please feel free to send your nominations as a reply to this email. Or,
> if you'd prefer to nominate someone anonymously, email board-list.
>
> Thanks,
> Didier
>
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

GNOME Board of Directors Candidacy - Philip Chimento

[philip . chimento]

Name: Philip Chimento
Email: philip chimento at gmail com
Affiliation: Endless

I would like to announce my candidacy for the GNOME Foundation board of
directors.

I've been a GNOME user since 2002. Since 2006 I have used some
GNOME-related technologies to develop software, but I did not really join
the community of GNOME contributors until I started working more directly
on GNOME at Endless. This led into becoming a GNOME Foundation member and
the maintainer of a core GNOME module (GJS) in 2016. I'd now like to
volunteer for GNOME in a different capacity.

I have some experience serving on boards of volunteer organizations, though
GNOME would be by far the largest. One thing I came to believe through that
experience is that a board should put forward a strategic plan for their
term. These are some themes that I care about and would advocate to include
in the board's policy vision for 2018-2019, if elected:

* Welcoming environment.
I believe the GNOME community has always had a more welcoming environment
compared to many of its peers in the world of open source. However, I think
recently we are being eclipsed by other communities that make more of a
deliberate social effort, and use better tools than we do. In both areas we
have seen some improvement: a code of conduct is underway, and the move to
GitLab is an example of better tools that make the environment more
welcoming; but I believe more is necessary. I think we have the will but
not yet the way, and I would like to look at what works in other
communities and be open to adopting it for ourselves.

* Funding needed work through internships.
The GNOME Foundation has traditionally had no influence over the technical
direction of the GNOME project. But the recent announcement of the GNOME
internships means the Foundation now has a means to help technical progress
in GNOME along in a direction consistent with its vision. The first round
of internships is focused on privacy and security. How can we continue
using this program to advance the goals of the Foundation?

* Sustainable maintainership.
A few interrelated things I've noticed: There has been recent movement
towards personal fundraisers for some GNOME maintainers. Some critical
components of GNOME are currently un- or under-maintained. I've read recent
discussions around the web about maintainer burnout. Lastly, some GNOME
maintainers lately have been on the receiving end of nastiness from toxic
communities. How should GNOME ensure that all of its software is maintained
sustainably, that maintainers have the resources they need, and that in the
future contributors continue to volunteer to become maintainers?

* Staying ahead of proprietary competitors.
More and more in the future, proprietary software will be relying on
collected user data and machine learning to provide convenient features for
users, and users will come to expect this sort of convenience. We don't,
currently can't, and probably shouldn't collect user data in this way, but
how should GNOME anticipate this threat to our relevancy, and what should
be our response?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but they are questions that I
think the board is in a good position to answer, and I would like to help
answer them.

Thank you for your attention,
Philip
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Proposal for an Events Code of Conduct and Policy Referendum

[philip . chimento]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:15 AM Tobias Mueller  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2018-04-30 at 15:48 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > The big picture here is that the working group went to great effort to
> > make sure that everyone was able to participate, and that we had a
> But it sounds like it was made sure that "everyone" was having the same
> opinion rather than allowing dissent.
>

Wow, there's really a lot of jumping to conclusions going on in this
thread, isn't there?

None of us know what went on except the participants, which as I've said
before renders this entire discussion meaningless. But, Allan did
specifically say earlier in the thread:

"Large parts of the current draft were directly influenced by Ben's
contributions, and we've expended a great deal of energy trying to
accommodate his views."

Doesn't sound like cracking down on dissent. Then again, I really have no
idea. Please, can we stop the wild speculation and preferably just end this
discussion? I don't see anything beneficial coming out of it.

Regards,
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Proposal for an Events Code of Conduct and Policy Referendum

[philip . chimento]

On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:36 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 19:09 -0700, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
> > We discussed the topic of Events Code of Conduct during today's board
> > meeting.
> >
> > The board intends to consider your motion separately from the Code of
> > Conduct that was proposed by the working group; we will soon proceed
> > to seek membership consultation on the working group proposal.
>
> I think my stance is quite clear. As Allan stated quite literally, he
> continued working on the Draft without including the rest of the WG in
> this work. Regardless of whether Allan was acting as a board member or
> chairman of the WG, he has overstepped his authority by doing so. As
> such, I do not consider the current documents to be a legitimate
> proposal from the WG that the board could even start to consider.
>

It seems to me that Allan and Neil are free to take the (public) draft and
amend it any way they like without consulting the rest of the working
group, as long as they don't misrepresent it as a product of the working
group. As would you or I, for that matter, be free to do.

And, although I'm not familiar enough with the bylaws to say for sure what
applies in this case, it also seems to me that since the board can delegate
responsibilities to committees, the board can also rescind them — for
example, if they feel that a committee is no longer capable of fulfilling
them, which seems to be the case here. I have no idea what the board
intends to do, but as far as I can tell, they are not obligated to consider
the working group's proposal.

In the end, the board was elected by us, the working group was not, so it's
up to the board to do what they feel best represents the foundation
members' interests. I don't see any overstep of authority here. This
particular foundation member's interest lies in adopting a code of conduct
sooner rather than later, and not in voting in a referendum forced because
of a never-explained personality conflict.

Regards,
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Proposal for an Events Code of Conduct and Policy Referendum

[philip . chimento]

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:40 AM Benjamin Berg 
wrote:

> Dear Board,
>
> Codes of Conduct (CoC) and especially the policies surrounding them are
> a very political issue (which easily becomes emotional). Unfortunately,
> in my view, the CoC Working Group (WG) was unable to set these politics
> aside enough to create a proposal that finds a balance in the wide
> spectrum of different viewpoints, legal consequences, required
> resources, rights, freedoms and the ability to deal with issues when
> they occur.
>
> I would have very much preferred if the WG had succeeded in this task.
> Unfortunately, it seems like it was too political and too biased
> (considering the political and regional spectrum that was represented)
> for the whole time. That compounded to inter-personal issues that could
> never be resolved as neither the session chair nor other members (or
> the ED for that matter) were able to create an environment where these
> issues could have been sufficiently addressed and a viable way to work
> together been developed. On top of this, it has recently come to my
> attention that members of the WG who are also on the Foundation Board
> have decided to continue working outside of the scope of the WG,
> thereby silently excluding me from the proceedings.
>
> At the current point in time, I believe that the proposal below is the
> best way forward. The idea to address it in a WG was good, but it turns
> out it was too political to be an adequate forum. This proposal however
> creates a forum that can legitimately resolve this political issue for
> years to come.
>
> I would like the board to adopt the proposal for a referendum below and
> I am happy to work on revising it. Failing to do so, I am intending to
> ask for support from foundation members to enforce this to be a
> referendum as per the bylaws.
>
> Should you have an alternative proposal on how to move forward, I am
> happy to hear about it.
>
> Regards,
> Benjamin
>
> -
>
> DRAFT: Event CoC and Policy Referendum
>
> Timeline (in weeks before vote):
>  * Announce referendum (13w)
>  * Proposal writing phase (6 weeks overall)
>  * Deadline for initial proposals (7w)
>  * Discussion phase (6 weeks overall)
>  * Last updates to proposals based on feedback (1w)
>  * Vote
>
> Proposals should generally include a main CoC document and important
> pieces of the policy. If a proposal e.g. requires creating a Committee
> then it may define policy parts that are intended to be created or
> proposed by this body after adoption and are therefore not part of the
> proposal.
>
> Proposals should include elaborations and take into consideration the
> impact that policies have on affected parties (e.g. GUADEC or hackfest
> organisers, the Foundation Board).
>
> Proposals should be endorsed by 3 foundation members to be considered,
> however a foundation member may endorse multiple proposals.
>
> Proposals should be kept in Git or another GNOME hosted system that
> easily allows any changes to be followed. This is in order to ensure
> that voters can easily check modifications done during the discussion
> phase.
>
> Foundation employees must remain neutral.
>
> The voting system is the single transferable vote (STV) system, which
> is also used for the board elections.
>

Hi Benjamin,

Your email references vaguely some recent events. Reading between the
lines, something must have happened in the WG to make the situation
untenable for you, but I have no idea what. According to [1], the WG's
mailing list is private, and there are only public minutes up until
February 2017, so I'm assuming that these events are not documented
anywhere that I can read.

I encourage you to continue to discuss your concerns with the board
privately. With this little context, it sounds like public action runs a
risk of making things even more "political," since you are effectively
asking the subscribers of foundation-list to form their opinions without
knowing what is going on. That will likely lead to assumptions, projection,
and more misunderstandings.

[1] https://wiki.gnome.org/Diversity/CoCWorkingGroup

Regards,
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: New Foundation Members

[philip . chimento]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:37 AM Andrea Veri  wrote:

> The GNOME Foundation Membership Committee is proud to announce our
> newly approved Foundation Members. Please welcome and thank them for
> their great and valuable contributions over the GNOME Foundation!
>
> They are: *
>
> 1. António Jorge Pinto Fernandes (Bug reporting, triaging, Design
> contributions)
>
> 2. Hau Heng Haggen So (Help organise GNOME.Asia)
>
> 3. Mingcong Bai (GNOME L10n Chinese)
>
> 4. Ondrej Holy (GNOME Control Center, GNOME Settings Daemon, Glib, Gvfs)
>
> 5. Mohammed Sadiq (GNOME control center, Calendar, ToDo, Nautilus, Builder)
>
> 6. Manuel Quiñones (OLPC and Sugar Labs, Flatpak)
>
> 7. Niels De Graef GNOME Contacts Maintainer)
>
> 8. Didier Roche (GNOME packaging in Ubuntu)
>
> 9. Christoph Simon (GUADEC 2016 organization, helping travel committee)
>
> 10. Tobias Bernard (Contributing to designers team)
>

Welcome, all you new members!
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Highlight individual project fundraisings

[philip . chimento]

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM Sébastien Wilmet  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> There are a number of GNOME or GNOME-related project fundraisings:
>
> For GIMP:
> https://www.gimp.org/donating/
> https://www.patreon.com/pippin
> http://film.zemarmot.net/en/
>
> PulseAudio: https://www.patreon.com/tanuk
> GTK+, Corebird, ...: https://www.patreon.com/baedert
> And now GtkSourceView: https://liberapay.com/GtkSourceView/
>
> (Are there others?)
>
> Those projects are useful to GNOME. But none of them have reached their
> funding goals. GNOME has a nice website, it would be nice to highlight
> the above fundraisings on the website, and/or writing a news article,
> talking about them on social media, etc.
>
> But… when someone donates to one of the above fundraisings, the GNOME
> Foundation doesn't receive any money. So there would be in some way a
> "competiton" with https://www.gnome.org/support-gnome/ . So maybe the
> GNOME Foundation doesn't want to highlight other fundraisings on the
> website. But this would come in conflict with the goal of the GNOME
> Foundation which is to "further the goals of the GNOME Project".
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Sébastien
>
> PS: I'm the author of the GtkSourceView fundraising.
>

Let me mention first that I'm merely a person with an opinion, with no role
in the GNOME foundation, and my assumptions about how things work may well
be wrong :-)

I definitely wish you and the other fundraisers much success! Don't get me
wrong, I do support such things, and I have donated sometimes! But I think
for GNOME to structurally highlight these would create inequality between
GNOME projects (or even individual GNOME contributors, in the case of
personal Patreons) where setting up a fundraiser is required to "compete"
under the GNOME umbrella. Some inequality already exists because it's
easier to get donations for a visible end product such as an app, rather
than plumbing such as a platform library, or a thankless task such as
keeping builds green on Continuous, and I wouldn't want GNOME to magnify
that difference. (I do hope you prove me wrong with your fundraiser for
GtkSourceView.)

I disagree with your statement that _not_ highlighting these fundraisers
would come into conflict with the goal to "further the goals of the GNOME
project." Furthering the goals of the GNOME project does not mean
exhaustively taking every possible action that might help those goals by
any amount, no matter how big or small.

In my opinion, GNOME should spend its resources strategically on what helps
GNOME the most (and maybe that is a GNOME project's or individual's
fundraiser in some cases), and for that reason I'd rather GNOME continue to
promote donations for the foundation itself rather than for projects or
individuals.

Regards,
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: public money public code - supporting current FSFE campain

[philip . chimento]

I am also in favour of this, but I think before sending a patch that speaks
on behalf of the Foundation you should have an explicit okay from the
board, rather than implicitly by no objections within a day.

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 2:11 AM Tobias Mueller  wrote:

> Hi.
>
> The FSFE has launched the following campaign: https://publiccode.eu/
>
> I strongly believe that it's in GNOME's interest to co-sign the
> following open letter. I've prepared a patch to have GNOME listed as
> supporter. I intend to send the patch in a day or so. If you think we
> shouldn't be supporting this effort, please speak up.
>
>
> Open Letter
>
> Publicly funded software has to be Free and Open Source Software. While
> there are plenty of good reasons for this, many politicians don’t know
> about them yet.
>
> Free Software gives everybody the right to use, study, share and
> improve software. This right helps support other fundamental freedoms
> like freedom of speech, press and privacy.
>
> This is where you can help! Sign the open letter to give our message
> more weight. 6505 people and 38 organisations have already signed. We
> will hand over the letter and signatures to your representatives and
> make sure that they understand that: Public Money? Public Code!
>
> Public Money? Public Code!
>
> Digital services offered and used by our public administrations are
> the critical infrastructure of 21st century democratic nations. In
> order to establish trustworthy systems, public bodies must ensure they
> have full control over the software and the computer systems at the
> core of our state digital infrastructure. However, right now, this is
> rarely the case due to restrictive software licences that:
>
> Forbid sharing and exchanging publicly funded code. This
> prevents cooperation between public administrations and hinders further
> development.
> Support monopolies by hindering competition. As a result, many
> administrations become dependent on a handful of companies.
> Pose a threat to the security of our digital infrastructure by
> forbidding access to the source code. This makes fixing backdoors and
> security holes extremely difficult, if not completely impossible.
>
> We need software that fosters the sharing of good ideas and
> solutions. Like this we will be able to improve IT services for people
> all over Europe. We need software that guarantees freedom of choice,
> access, and competition. We need software that helps public
> administrations regain full control of their critical digital
> infrastructure, allowing them to become and remain independent from a
> handful of companies. That is why we call our representatives to
> support Free and Open Source Software in public administrations,
> because:
>
> Free and Open Source Software is a modern public good that
> allows everybody to freely use, study, share and improve applications
> we use on a daily basis.
> Free and Open Source Software licences provide safeguards
> against being locked in to services from specific companies that use
> restrictive licences to hinder competition.
> Free and Open Source Software ensures that the source code is
> accessible so that backdoors and security holes can be fixed without
> depending on one service provider.
>
> Public bodies are financed through taxes. They must make sure they
> spend funds in the most efficient way possible. If it is public money,
> it should be public code as well!
>
> That is why we, the undersigned, call our representatives to:
>
> “Implement legislation requiring that publicly financed software
> developed for public sector must be made publicly available under a
> Free and Open Source Software licence.”
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Tobi
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of December, 20th, 2016

[philip . chimento]

>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017, 21:51 Cosimo Cecchi  wrote:
> [...]
> * libertyVPS server donation
>

Another potential use for this would be to host the Devdocs server for
GNOME API documentation in JavaScript. It disappeared off the web last year
when my AWS free usage ran out after 12 months. So far I've heard that it
is missed, but nobody actually has a place to host it.

It's pretty lightweight and could be hosted alongside other proposed uses.

Regards,
Philip C

>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Introduction: Philip Chimento

[philip . chimento]

Hi list,

I've just become a member of the Foundation. I received a welcome email
encouraging me to introduce myself to this list.

So: hello! First of all I'm happy to be a member.

My last name is pronounced as if it started with the letter K. I can be
said to be from several different places but I live in Vancouver, BC,
Canada. On IRC I can sometimes be found lurking under the nickname
"ptomato". Using that name I also answer questions on Stack Overflow about
GTK and Autotools. I usually sign myself "Philip C" on GNOME mailing lists
to avoid confusion with the many other Phil(l)ip(p(e))s.

It's 10 years ago this month that I started writing code using GTK and the
GNOME stack, in my "copious" spare time while in grad school for
experimental physics. Not until several years after that did I actually
make contributions to GNOME. I started out by fixing a bug here and there,
wandered from there into documentation reviews, and tried to participate
remotely in hackfests from time to time. When I started working for Endless
I started writing more substantial features, primarily for GJS so far. My
first in-person hackfest was this June's GTK hackfest in Toronto, where I
started some GTK patches that I still need to find time to finish :-)

I've also written a few tools that other GNOME contributors may find useful:
https://github.com/ptomato/jasmine-gjs - Port of the Jasmine test framework
to GJS that integrates nicely with Autotools
https://github.com/ptomato/osxcart - Library for interfacing between GNOME
and file formats commonly used in Mac OSX such as plist and RTF(D)

I look forward to seeing some of you at GUADEC in a few weeks.

Regards,
Philip C
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: [Builder] Developer experience (DX) hackfest 2016

[Philip Chimento]

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Christian Hergert 
wrote:

> On 12/24/2015 11:17 AM, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > I'm really interested in participating but circumstances prevent me from
> > attending in person. I just signed up as the first remote participant.
> > My purpose with this e-mail is to encourage other remotees to sign up;
> > and to ask for some ideas about how remotees can meaningfully
> participate.
>
> This is great, and something I'd like to see more of, given what travel
> does to our environment.
>
> What can we do to make sure you feel enabled to participate?
>
> Assuming you'll be in Vancouver, -9 hours from Belgium, this is going to
> be quite a sacrifice for you. We usually get started between 09:00 and
> 10:00, so midnight to sunrise for you.
>
> Alternatively, if we're good about having work items on a public board,
> you could work on things while we sleep, in true F/OSS fashion.
>
> So I guess that brings me back to my question, what can we do?
>

Sorry for the delay in replying; partly to let the video chat discussion
settle, and partly disconnecting for holidays.

It's unlikely that I'll be able to contribute meaningfully if I stay up all
night. So, I would prefer the asynchronous method. I am still trying to
figure out how much time I can devote to the hackfest, but if there is a
discussion or whiteboarding session at the beginning of the (GMT+1) day,
then I can definitely join in, either on a one-way live stream, or on a
multi-way conversation, and figure out what to contribute to from there.

I am still trying to figure out just how much time I am able to devote
during those days.

 * Remote video? (assuming participants are comfortable with that)
>

I personally am comfortable.


>  * More IRC conversations, or dedicated stenographer?
>

Probably a list of outcomes of conversations, for people who are not able
to join in live. I personally like to do this even if all the participants
in the same room.

 * Etherpad for notes/conversations?
>

Never tried it, but it seems great.


> I think one thing that would help is for remote participants to prepare
> a list of topics they'd like to ensure are discussed, since we usually
> start by white-boarding topics for the 3-day session.
>

Yep, I added my topics to the list when I signed-up (namely, documentation
browser that I've been working on, and GJS), but I'd be happy to elaborate
on that so that you have more than just a few keywords.

Regards,
-- 
Philip C.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: [Builder] Developer experience (DX) hackfest 2016

[philip . chimento]

Hi!

I'm really interested in participating but circumstances prevent me from
attending in person. I just signed up as the first remote participant. My
purpose with this e-mail is to encourage other remotees to sign up; and to
ask for some ideas about how remotees can meaningfully participate.

(Other) Philip

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:06 AM Philip Withnall 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> A reminder that the DX hackfest is happening in a little over a month,
> so please make sure you are signed up on the wiki page, and your
> transport and accommodation are sorted out!
>
> Philip
>
> On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 13:50 +, Philip Withnall wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There’s going to be a developer experience (DX) hackfest at the end
> > of
> > January 2016 (27–29th January) in Brussels, just before FOSDEM. This
> > should be a really useful hackfest for pushing forward the roadmap
> > for
> > developer tools and toolkits in GNOME!
> >
> > https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/DeveloperExperience2016
> >
> > Anyone who has relevant interests in the developer experience is
> > welcome, so please sign up ASAP on the wiki page.
> >
> > If you plan to apply for travel or accommodation sponsorship, please
> > do
> > so in the next week (and certainly no later than the end of December)
> > to the travel committee, so they have time to process requests.
> >
> > https://wiki.gnome.org/Travel
> >
> > The venue will be the betacowork coworking centre in Brussels. It is
> > kindly being sponsored by betacowork and ICAB. Thanks!
> >  • http://www.betacowork.com/
> >  • http://www.icabrussel.be/
> >
> > Philip___
> Builder-list mailing list
> builder-l...@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/builder-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list