OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

kmip message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [kmip] Length of meetings

I agree with 2 hours every two weeks and Matt's suggestions as well.  This will give more time to discuss the items and less time doing roll calls/week.

From: Wierenga, Steven [mailto:steve.wierenga@hp.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 2:30 PM
To: Matthew.Ball@Sun.COM; kmip@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [kmip] Length of meetings

Hello all,
I would support having a well planned 2-hour meeting, every 2 weeks.  Simply adding another hour every week will not by itself improve our productivity, and will further impact all of our personal calendars.  I do fully support Matt's suggestions 1 through 4.
Steve Wierenga

From: Matthew.Ball@Sun.COM [mailto:Matthew.Ball@Sun.COM]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 12:18 PM
To: kmip@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [kmip] Length of meetings

Hi Folks,

I think scheduling 2 hours is also a good idea.  As the group gets larger, it becomes necessary to extend the meeting length just because the procedural portions (taking attendance, roll call votes, etc) also get longer.  Plus the work load usually increases.

I'm unhappy that we only got through one item today, and doubly so that it was partly my fault.  The group is still pretty new, and I think we're still trying to find the efficiency point.  Early in the alignment discussion, someone suggested that we immediately start an electronic ballot and get the issue over with.  In retrospect, that would have been more expedient, although I think we had some useful dialog on the pros/cons of 32-bit vs 64-bit.

I dislike meetings that go down a rat hole as much as the rest of you, and hope that we can learn (possibly through some trial-and-error) the processes that keep the meetings efficient.  Here are some of my thoughts on how we can keep the meetings lean-and-mean:
  1. Post agendas and (mostly) stick to them
  2. Streamline the taking of attendance:  I'm hoping that we can find a fast way to use WebEx to create the initial attendee list and avoid phone roll calls.  Ideally, we could use a Kavi tool to take attendance automatically (does OASIS support this?).
  3. During review of action items, only discuss status of the action items, not the item itself.  Otherwise, you may never get status updates on the other action items, or get Liaison reports and such... :)
  4. Adopt a policy of requiring all proposals to go to a 7-day electronic ballot before adoption by the committee and inclusion into the draft.  I learned this while fumbling through about 3 different revisions of the main motion in today's meeting.  This was made clear when a whole bunch of new objections were raised when the motion was changed from "requiring 64-bit alignment of the value field" to "adopt the 64-bit proposal".  I'm assuming that most of the objections were because the members did not have ample time to review the proposal.  By doing a 7-day electronic ballot, this provides time for a review.
Thoughts?  It always takes a little bit of time to figure out the group dynamic, but I think that after we get the mechanics down to a well-oiled machine we'll be able to make progress very quickly.


Marcus Streets wrote:
I believe it is clear that we do not achieve sufficient progress in a
one hour meeting.

Therefore, I propose we increase the meeting to two hours each week.

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]