path: root/meeting-logs/20100517.txt

21:00:29 <Calchan>	alright, woodpecker says it's time
21:00:34 *	dertobi123 yawns
21:00:39 <leio>	here
21:00:53 <Calchan>	leio is logging, Betelgeuse is probably logging as always, so we should be OK
21:00:56 <solar>	here
21:01:00 <ulm>	here
21:01:04 <Betelgeuse>	here
21:01:11 <Calchan>	solar, oh great, nice you could make it
21:01:15 <solar>	sorta
21:01:42 *	jmbsvicetto looks in
21:02:12 <Calchan>	so only scarabeus is missing right now
21:02:26 <Calchan>	let's give him some time while we finish the intro
21:02:30 <scarabeus>	damn sorry
21:02:33 <scarabeus>	i am around
21:02:35 <Calchan>	ah good
21:02:37 <scarabeus>	but eating dinner
21:02:42 <scarabeus>	i thought i have 5 more minutes :D
21:02:43 <scarabeus>	ok
21:02:44 <Calchan>	so, who wants to chair?
21:02:45 <scarabeus>	we can go :
21:02:47 <scarabeus>	]
21:03:21 <Calchan>	no answer, should I do it then?
21:03:41 <Calchan>	ko, I'll do it
21:03:47 <dertobi123>	just do it
21:03:55 <Calchan>	any remarks on the agenda before we start?
21:04:32 <Calchan>	dertobi123, did I correctly answer your worries about this meeting being useless in my email?
21:05:16 <dertobi123>	well
21:05:24 -->	javaJake (~javaJake@unaffiliated/javajake) has joined #gentoo-council
21:05:32 <Calchan>	dertobi123, ?
21:06:08 <Calchan>	anyway, lets go on
21:06:14 <Calchan>	2. Review of GLEP 39 overhaul propositions (30 minutes)
21:06:16 <dertobi123>	well, i still think it's quite useless do go through all proposed changes
21:06:29 <dertobi123>	but anyways, just move on ;)
21:06:39 <Calchan>	let's not go though all of them but just talk a bou the ones that might not be OK then
21:07:01 <Betelgeuse>	I'll just iterate that voting should move to the web app after GSoC is over.
21:07:09 <Betelgeuse>	Otherwise doing the webapp is kind of pointless.
21:07:13 <Calchan>	as I said in one of my emails some of the propositions are me interpreting what devs want
21:07:31 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, great, I'm looking forward to it
21:07:51 <Calchan>	let's start with http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_79dc0c2dc7d8987a9c9ecaaa30e17bb2.xml
21:07:59 <dertobi123>	Calchan: put the proposed ballots up for review a week before voting starts and everyone is able to send in fixes
21:08:23 <leio>	Calchan: maybe you want to link to the summaries instead?
21:08:37 <Calchan>	leio, sorry that was the thread
21:08:50 <Calchan>	http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_df5433a1e6cbe479462da8f5fe588299.xml
21:09:19 <Calchan>	^^^ the 5 choices that seem to appear from all the discussions we had
21:09:41 <Calchan>	the current situation would be number 2
21:09:59 <Calchan>	anything you want to add or delete from that list?
21:10:32 <scarabeus>	the last one is uttery dull, we should not be able to switch out votes
21:10:51 <Calchan>	scarabeus, it was proposed by somebody, can't remember who though
21:10:54 -->	NeddySeagoon (~NeddySeag@gentoo/developer/NeddySeagoon) has joined #gentoo-council
21:11:25 <Calchan>	scarabeus, but agreed it looks weird
21:11:28 <scarabeus>	it should be number 3
21:11:34 <ulm>	take off the last two points
21:11:46 <ulm>	they make no sense
21:11:56 <scarabeus>	actualy no
21:11:59 <scarabeus>	even that is bad
21:12:15 <Calchan>	ulm, number 4 is what was done a couple time this year and wasn't accepted so it makes sense to have it on the ballot
21:12:36 <scarabeus>	4. is most sane if we dont see the votes before we actualy vote
21:12:45 <Calchan>	btw, the idea is not to discuss the propositions but decide which ones should go on the ballot. If you disagree with some of the propositions (hopefully), then just talk them down on the corresponding thread and vote against them
21:12:46 <scarabeus>	because it might affect our decision to see how others decided :]
21:13:07 <ulm>	scarabeus: so?
21:13:17 <ulm>	it's the same now
21:13:46 <scarabeus>	probably yea, since we dont have anonymous voting
21:13:55 <scarabeus>	but now the time you have to do it is bit shorter :]
21:14:13 <Calchan>	anybody else against having 3 and 4 on the ballot? if not I'll consider we have a majority for keeping them
21:14:15 <dertobi123>	Calchan: this should also not be about what is on the ballot, since it's not us to decide what people want on the ballots.
21:14:39 <ulm>	Calchan: 3 and 4? or 4 and 5?
21:14:46 <Calchan>	dertobi123, agreed in this case, you'll see later that some of the proposals are the result of my interpretation
21:14:51 <Calchan>	ulm, sorry, 4 and 5
21:14:55 <ulm>	or do you start counting from zero
21:15:01 <ulm>	;)
21:15:15 <Calchan>	ulm, it's still monday morning here ;o)
21:15:46 <scarabeus>	i am definitely against last one and number 3 if i count from 1
21:15:56 <scarabeus>	noone should be able to affect council meeting after it ends
21:16:13 <leio>	against having it on a ballot, or your opinion of what we should choose..?
21:16:38 <Calchan>	scarabeus, make sure you make the difference between your personal opinion  and whether it makes sense on the ballot
21:16:54 <ulm>	Calchan: well, put them all on the ballot. we can trust devs not to vote for the stupid ones
21:16:58 <Calchan>	leio, was that for 4 and 5?
21:17:19 <leio>	Calchan: that was directed to scarabeus, same meaning what you said
21:17:25 <Calchan>	ulm, that's also my opinion for the ballot, as for voting yeah, I think some are wrong or don't make sense
21:17:27 <scarabeus>	keep them all indeed, if we can see how they can break transparency devs are smart enough too
21:17:30 <solar>	3 & 4 are fine.
21:18:06 <Calchan>	ok, so let's make it simpler: anybody against having all these on the ballot, and if so which one?
21:18:33 <Calchan>	I'm ok with all of them on the ballot, scarabeus and ulm too it seems, others?
21:18:33 <solar>	"- There should be no vote by email." imo should not be there
21:19:22 <leio>	I don't think the option for developers to choose to keep the status quo should be removed from the ballot
21:19:27 <Calchan>	solar, I agree that it may be stupid, but some think we should only vote on meetings, thus I put it on the ballot draft, vote will sort them out
21:20:01 <Calchan>	so solar you're against 1 and 5 or just 1?
21:20:01 <solar>	we are not required to vote via IRC. Only to hold a monthly meeting
21:20:40 <solar>	giving ppl the option to choose on something we already decided on seems silly.
21:20:57 <Calchan>	solar, what we're required to do now and what we'll do in the future based on devs wishes are different things
21:21:04 <solar>	and as Betelgeuse pointed out there is a webapp in development.
21:21:39 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, can you associate the webapp with any of these choices or do you want to add another one for it?
21:21:51 <scarabeus>	me would like webapp that would make things more fluent
21:21:55 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: It should talk about voting during a meeting and outside it.
21:22:20 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, OK, so am I understanding in think this is orthogonal?
21:22:30 <scarabeus>	also i would maybe prefer votes to be anonymous and displayed after we voted, so we cant theoreticaly affect each other :] at least most governments does it that way... :]
21:22:43 <Betelgeuse>	scarabeus: the web application can do that
21:23:11 <Calchan>	I still need an answetr for the ballot from Betelgeuse solar and leio
21:23:42 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: put everything suggested there
21:23:51 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, ok
21:23:59 <Calchan>	so we have a majority for keeping them all
21:24:02 <Calchan>	next
21:24:11 <solar>	what answer do you need from me?
21:24:14 <leio>	Is the ballot going to be condorcet of each of these, so developers can put a preference list of all these?
21:24:31 <Calchan>	leio, most probably yes, but we'll discuss that inthe second part
21:24:46 <Calchan>	second topic: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_76311b25ccb18fff4764955db55ad0ea.xml
21:25:20 <leio>	I don't think any of the options present allow to replace e-mail with webapp, but that's also somewhat covered next in regards to who and how the rules can be changed later
21:25:33 <leio>	(re: first topic)
21:25:44 <Betelgeuse>	I wouldn't hardcode any media.
21:26:20 <Calchan>	so there's 3 main ideas here
21:27:13 <ulm>	Calchan: can you add a point without any glep?
21:27:16 <Calchan>	keep the text as a glep, make it as some sort of consitution to make it clear that council can't change it (unlike gleps), or split it so that it's easy for us to update practical aspects of how council works
21:27:23 <scarabeus>	ulm: there is, the last one
21:27:35 <Calchan>	ulm, right I forgot that one
21:27:40 <ulm>	scarabeus: not really
21:27:48 <scarabeus>	ulm: disregard that, i now read it once again
21:28:22 <ulm>	IMO this vote is beyond the scope of a glep, and I don't konw why it was a glep before
21:28:26 <Calchan>	indeed, thare should be one item which says (or something along this): The new text should be a "constitution"
21:28:27 <ulm>	*know
21:28:29 <Calchan>	(anybody feel free to propose a better word here) which can only be
21:28:34 <Calchan>	updated with an all developer vote
21:28:56 <Calchan>	I'll add that, thanks ulm
21:29:09 <Calchan>	anybody else with a comment about this ballot?
21:29:48 <Calchan>	let's switch to the next one then: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_6009db554b00ae9de67047206c7698be.xml
21:30:36 <Calchan>	depending on how people interpret glep 39 the current situation is either 1 or 3, and I comment in the summary that I'm not sure 3 makes sense
21:30:52 <Calchan>	that's one of those I'm particularly intersted in your opinion
21:31:10 <ulm>	it's all very vague
21:31:45 <scarabeus>	we should be 2 or 4 if we have time :P, but its all really not well worded
21:31:55 <scarabeus>	it does not state exact powers and capabilities
21:32:00 <Calchan>	ulm, indeed, but unfortunately it's hard to draw the line for this kind of matter, any better idea?
21:32:25 <Calchan>	scarabeus, again it's not about what the result should be but about the choices we suggest to devs for the vote
21:32:55 <ulm>	"the council only reacts to requests from developers" doesn't make much sense, because council members are developers too ;)
21:32:55 <scarabeus>	thats why i put the smiley there, second part of my sentence is important :]
21:32:59 <Calchan>	does it make sense to have on the ballot the possibility of a council responsible for being proactive but with rather limited powers?
21:33:24 <dertobi123>	if people want it that way ...
21:33:37 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: possible new option: Each council should set its mode of operation after being elected.
21:34:11 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, I'll add that to the list
21:34:19 -->	chithead (~chithead@gentoo/developer/chithanh) has joined #gentoo-council
21:34:20 <Calchan>	if nobody is against it
21:34:29 <solar>	no objections
21:34:55 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, do we want it with and without the trustees thing? I'd say yes to both
21:35:24 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: The trustee option could be a separate vote
21:35:45 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, indeed, with this many choices it would make it simple, let's do that
21:35:56 <Calchan>	I'll update the ballot on the list
21:36:16 <Calchan>	are we ok with this one? any more comments?
21:37:09 <Calchan>	ok, next one then: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_3806fe4e42dc8ce013e247a081e3d4a0.xml
21:37:29 <Calchan>	I know solar might have things to say about this one
21:38:17 <Calchan>	so, anybody objects to any of this?
21:38:35 <scarabeus>	it corners all cases for devs to vote upon
21:39:09 <Calchan>	scarabeus, ok, so at least from this point of view we should be covered
21:39:11 <--	comprookie2000 has quit (Quit: Heading home)
21:39:47 <Calchan>	solar and I discussed yesterday about some like number not being pertinent, does anybody else think this way?
21:40:02 <solar>	- Unlike other projects the council does not need a lead.
21:40:11 <solar>	that is what I agree with.
21:40:14 <scarabeus>	expect i think it is bad idea having the 3rd option, really that one should not be even thinked upon
21:41:12 <Calchan>	scarabeus, it's similar the way devrel operates for example, the lead can break ties which avoids the possibility of procrastinating on decisions
21:41:46 <scarabeus>	well that is why there is 7 of us
21:41:52 <scarabeus>	not 6 or 8
21:41:53 <scarabeus>	:]
21:42:03 <Calchan>	scarabeus, but someone could be missing
21:42:27 <Calchan>	or we could be in the process of re-electing a new member, which happened
21:42:44 <scarabeus>	ok
21:43:34 <Calchan>	so, apart from solar who (it seems) would like to remove all but number one, anybody else wnats to remove any of these propositions?
21:44:03 <ulm>	I agree with solar on this one
21:44:33 <dertobi123>	i agree with solar, too ... but again, every proposed item should be added to the ballot
21:45:05 <Calchan>	ulm, dertobi123, so are you against having those on the ballot? please be explicit
21:45:26 <scarabeus>	we dont like idea of having lead, yet we respect devs that they want to vote about it themselves
21:45:30 <solar>	dertobi123 was pretty explicit
21:46:13 <Calchan>	solar, actually no, he says he doens't want them in the ballot and that he does want them in the ballot in the same sentence
21:46:22 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, scarabeus ?
21:46:46 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: anything goes, the more options the better
21:47:00 <dertobi123>	Calchan: jesus ..... i agree with solar, that the council doesn't need a lead. but once again, every proposed item should be added to the ballot.
21:47:06 <dertobi123>	that's explicit enough?
21:47:13 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, dertobi123, ok thanks
21:47:43 <Calchan>	and I'm for leaving those options to devs too so we have a majority
21:48:02 <Calchan>	anybody with anyhting to add before we switch to the second part?
21:48:05 <leio>	same as Calchan for me
21:48:54 <Calchan>	ok, then: 3. Scheduling and voting issues (20 minutes)
21:49:11 <Calchan>	so here's the issue
21:49:29 <Calchan>	devs will likely want to vote on the final text so that leaves us with 2 votes
21:49:32 <leio>	nothing regarding the second part (how lead is elected if a lead is chosen in the vote)?
21:49:45 <Calchan>	leio, oh sorry
21:49:54 <Calchan>	so guys go ahead with that
21:50:14 <leio>	I have nothing (like objections or whatnot) on it though
21:50:19 <Calchan>	obviously that question applies only if some for of lead is decided to the previous question
21:50:31 <solar>	this is a waste of my time
21:50:40 <dertobi123>	solar++
21:51:01 <Calchan>	solar, dertobi123 feel free to leave the meeting now, you don't have to stay
21:51:18 <solar>	I'm looking for a proxy for the rest of the council.
21:51:45 <solar>	my term. If any dev plans to run next year and you don't suck. let me know so I can make you my proxy
21:52:17 <Calchan>	ok, back to 3. Scheduling and voting issues (20 minutes)
21:52:35 <Calchan>	devs will likely want to vote on the final text so that leaves us with 2 votes
21:52:48 <Calchan>	and that the schedule will be tight for that before the next election
21:53:24 <Calchan>	so one question is: do we want to do everything possible to be done before the next election, or we want to take whatever time it takes to do it
21:53:44 <dertobi123>	well, what solar said ... basically the same for me, especially the "if you don't suck" part ...
21:54:19 <scarabeus>	we should not rush things before the end of our "time"
21:54:28 <ulm>	scarabeus++
21:54:35 <ulm>	we're not in such a hurry
21:54:36 <dertobi123>	Calchan: such important things shouldn't be waived through in about some weeks or so ... so it's not practically doable to do "the right way" when rushing things through
21:54:46 <dertobi123>	+it
21:54:58 <Calchan>	scarabeus, at first I though it would have been nice to finish before the end of our term, but I think more and more it will be impossible without rushing it
21:55:14 <Calchan>	dertobi123, agreed here
21:55:45 <ulm>	Calchan: there should be enough time for discussion on MLs
21:55:47 <scarabeus>	i think it will be impossible. and we should not push through something half baked on such important topic
21:56:17 <leio>	has the discussion in mailing lists been going on for enough and is quieting down?
21:56:26 <Calchan>	so we have dertobi123 scarabeus ulm and me for doing it right and not rushing it
21:56:38 <Betelgeuse>	no hurry for me either
21:56:38 <leio>	I'm with not rushing too
21:56:42 <scarabeus>	come on, everyone will say that
21:56:47 <Betelgeuse>	the current GLEP doesn't really impede that much
21:56:51 <Calchan>	leio, yes, no progress in like a couple weeks, but not a good neough reason to stop it there
21:57:45 <leio>	I think if we get somewhere with this from a well timed vote, then after this is in effect we don't need to wait for the whole year of the next term
21:57:59 <Calchan>	another point raised on the ml is we could vote on that (and I'm guessing it's only for the first part, i.e. voting on all the propositions) on the forums instead
21:58:04 -->	darkside_ (~darkside@gentoo/developer/darkside) has joined #gentoo-council
21:58:19 <Calchan>	and frankly I don't like that much
21:58:37 <leio>	and I have not been participating in any discussion as I didn't even notice any was going on, as I admit to not having been subscribed to gentoo-project. I imagine many other developers aren't as well (there was a dev-announce starter though).
21:58:56 <scarabeus>	maybe migrate to -core
21:58:59 <scarabeus>	everyone will get the mail
21:59:03 <Calchan>	leio, I sent a tracker to dev-announce
21:59:23 <Calchan>	scarabeus, no point to hide that in core, not what it's intended for
21:59:42 <scarabeus>	well i didnt want to hide it
21:59:48 <Betelgeuse>	If someone doesn't read -dev-announce that's their problem
21:59:49 <scarabeus>	that is only list every dev is getting
21:59:50 <Calchan>	leio, but that's ok, it's always time to jump in the discussions
21:59:57 <scarabeus>	but yea Peteri is right
22:00:01 <Calchan>	scarabeus, no
22:00:01 <scarabeus>	people should read d-a
22:00:10 <--	blueness has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
22:00:17 <Calchan>	scarabeus, devs *have* to be subscribed to -dev-announce
22:00:42 <Betelgeuse>	scarabeus: you're better off with Betelgeuse (it's Petteri)
22:00:53 <Calchan>	so, about voting on forums?
22:01:13 <Betelgeuse>	It's easier to write with tab too :)
22:01:14 <ulm>	Calchan: forums would imply voting by non-devs?
22:01:21 <Calchan>	ulm, indeed
22:01:22 <leio>	yeah, we'll just assume the discussion will be happening in a mailing list that we aren't subscribed to, instead of thinking there's silence, based on the To and Reply-To being something and we look closely at that to know that we are missing a subscription :)
22:01:32 <ulm>	Calchan: doesn't make sense to me
22:01:41 <scarabeus>	Betelgeuse: i tried, somehow quassel didnt complete so Petteri is shorter if you write it out :P
22:01:49 <dertobi123>	can we please get proposals for topic #3 for the next meeting? or on the council mailinglist ... that's kinda pointless do start a discussion now and here
22:02:31 <Calchan>	dertobi123, ok, no emergency on that
22:02:58 <dertobi123>	ulm: btw. there's a forum restricted to developers, but i guess not every developer has an account on f.g.o
22:03:15 <Betelgeuse>	I think forums have any added benefit.
22:03:21 <Betelgeuse>	+don't
22:03:36 <Calchan>	anything else to add to this before we move on?
22:03:54 -->	jsbronder (~jsbronder@gentoo/developer/jsbronder) has joined #gentoo-council
22:04:22 <Calchan>	ok then
22:04:24 <--	billie has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
22:04:29 <Calchan>	4.1 Action list. Who does what and when?
22:04:53 <Calchan>	I will update the propositions and prepare the ballot list
22:05:31 <Calchan>	4.2 Who takes care of the summary and log for this meeting? When?
22:05:46 <Betelgeuse>	I have exams for this week so rather not.
22:06:04 <Calchan>	I can do it, or maybe we can ask tanderson
22:06:16 <leio>	raw log, me as usual, before next sleep
22:06:24 <Calchan>	anybody opposed to him doing the summaries btw?
22:06:34 -->	ABCD (~abcd@gentoo/developer/abcd) has joined #gentoo-council
22:06:59 <Calchan>	ok, so I'll see with him whetehr he wants to do it, if not I'll do it
22:07:03 <Calchan>	4.3 Next meeting date/time.
22:07:28 <Calchan>	how's june 14th for what should be our last meeting?
22:07:32 <leio>	when is our term ending exactly?
22:07:57 <Betelgeuse>	should work for me
22:07:59 <Calchan>	leio, I'd say late june early july
22:08:02 <jmbsvicetto>	According to http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev-announce/msg_20ba6ea38ae349fc57470bd8a78f4b5f.xml it should end at the end of June / early July
22:08:26 <NeddySeagoon>	jmbsvicetto, so the election process shuold have started
22:08:48 <Calchan>	NeddySeagoon, or soon will, are we late already?
22:08:53 <jmbsvicetto>	NeddySeagoon: no
22:08:55 <dertobi123>	NeddySeagoon: election process should start in early in june
22:09:02 <jmbsvicetto>	It should start around June 1st
22:09:20 <jmbsvicetto>	2 weeks nomination + 2 weeks voting
22:09:28 <NeddySeagoon>	ok
22:09:47 <dertobi123>	anyways, june 14th should work for my last council meeting, just in case i don't find a proxy
22:09:49 <jmbsvicetto>	with 1 or 2 days in between - depends on how much time the infra contact require to setup the election
22:10:15 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, dertobi123 and I are available on june 14th, how about the others?
22:10:20 <leio>	fine
22:10:30 <Calchan>	dertobi123, not much usually happens on the last meeting though
22:10:45 <ulm>	fine with me too
22:10:57 <scarabeus>	works ok
22:11:10 <dertobi123>	Calchan: we'll see ... already today and for quite some time nothing happened ... so that's quite ok for me.
22:11:51 <Calchan>	ok, for the 14th then
22:12:01 <Calchan>	who does the agenda?
22:12:05 <Calchan>	any volunteers?
22:13:17 <Calchan>	sigh, I'll do it then
22:13:28 <Calchan>	5. Open floor
22:13:33 <jmbsvicetto>	Calchan / dertobi123: We'll be ready for any ideas about a "Coup d'état" ;-)
22:13:38 <Calchan>	thanks all for your participation
22:13:56 <Calchan>	jmbsvicetto, meh?
22:13:58 <jmbsvicetto>	We shouldn't be trying to rush a voting about GLEP39 "reform"
22:14:08 <dertobi123>	jmbsvicetto: lol ;)
22:14:13 <jmbsvicetto>	Calchan: about the "quiet" last meeting ;)
22:14:57 <dertobi123>	all glep39 stuff should be voted on by all developers, so they should've the options they want - nothing to rush a vote on in the next meeting
22:15:26 <Calchan>	jmbsvicetto, the "quiet" last meeting wsn't organized by me so I'll abstain from criticizing (in the goold old "do it or shut up" fashion)
22:15:31 <leio>	we weren't creating ballots for our next meeting vote, but for a vote to be done by all developers
22:15:48 <jmbsvicetto>	yes, but we should first establish some agreements
22:16:17 <jmbsvicetto>	leio: yes, but that's too early
22:16:39 <leio>	jmbsvicetto: I don't necessarily disagree that, clarifying dertobi123
22:16:44 <leio>	with that*
22:16:45 <jmbsvicetto>	there haven't been concrete proposals yet. People were talking about general concepts before Calchan did the summaries
22:16:51 <jmbsvicetto>	ok
22:18:05 <jmbsvicetto>	Calchan: I was joking about your (council members) expectation that the last meeting of your term would be "quiet"
22:21:14 -->	billie (~billie@gentoo/developer/billie) has joined #gentoo-council
22:24:59 <leio>	anything else for the open floor?
22:25:19 <--	darkside_ (~darkside@gentoo/developer/darkside) has left #gentoo-council
22:25:28 <dertobi123>	guess not
22:25:34 <leio>	I hope that developers will comment on the summaries too with further stuff then
22:31:04 <jmbsvicetto>	leio: I'll take further comments to the project ml
22:32:40 <leio>	ok, I'll consider this the cut point for raw log then, meeting done unless todays chair says otherwise and I cut from later :)