Re: [tag] Meeting schedules: some PROPOSAL

[Vladimir Sosnin <Vladimir.Sosnin@Sun.COM>]

Both schedules good for me. First is a bit more preferable.

Vladimir

Durand, Jacques R. wrote:
> OK, so looking at the current availability charts, let us try to get
> some reaction from those silent on their availability:
>  
> It appears that *Wednesdays* might be better for both schedules.
>  
>  
> *(S-A)* (would replace current 7am Thursday call)
> *Wednesday*: 5pm GMT (8pm StPetersb, [2am Beijing, 3am Seoul], 10am
> California, 1pm EastCoast, 5pm UK)
> (really bad for: Seoul, Beijing)
>  
> *(S-B)* (new alternate call)
> *Wednesday*: 4am GMT (7am StPetersb, 1pm Beijing, 2pm Seoul, 9pm
> California, [midnight EastCoast, 4am UK,] )
> (really bad for: EastCoast, UK)
>  
>  
> Comments?
> Note: an additional requirement is that both chairs can make both
> scehdules, in case one needs replacement.
>  
> Jacques
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Patrick.Curran@Sun.COM [mailto:Patrick.Curran@Sun.COM]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2007 3:57 PM
> *To:* Durand, Jacques R.
> *Cc:* tag@lists.oasis-open.org
> *Subject:* Re: [tag] Meeting schedules
>
> Well... As I explained in the Conference Call Availability
> <http://wiki.oasis-open.org/tag/ConcallAvailability> page on the Wiki,
> 7:00 am Pacific time on Thursdays probably will *not* work for me in
> the future.
>
> However, since tomorrow is OK and since I'll be out for the next few
> weeks, I don't suggest changing this now.
>
> As for the alternate week's schedule, it's difficult for me to respond
> without a more specific suggestion. I've indicated my availability -
> 9:00 pm Pacific time (5:00 am GMT) works for me (except for Friday)
> but 6:00 pm (3:00 am) does not.
>
> In general, as I've already said, I'm amenable to an alternating schedule.
>
> I really don't think we're going to be able to work this out unless
> *everyone* indicates their availability in writing. We have a Wiki
> page where we can do this (see the reference above, but so far only
> three of us have entered our data. I encourage the others to do so.
>
> Durand, Jacques R. wrote:
>>
>> COnsidering the option where :
>>
>> - we use alternate  1h meeting schedules:
>> week 1: schedule A
>> week 2: schedule B
>> week 3: schedule A
>> etc.
>> - and we accept the fact that not everyone will be able to make it at
>> every meeting, but that everyone will like at least one schedule (A
>> or B).
>>  
>> We could consider:
>>  
>> - schedule A is for accommodating everyone except Asia (could remain
>> 2pmGMT as current Thu,
>> or be 4pm or 5pm GMT.)
>> - schedule B is good for Asia (office hours) and for accommodating
>> everyone except UK and East coast (5amGMT) or everyone except UK and
>> Russia (3amGMT)
>>  
>> Would that be acceptable, knowing that all major decisions would be
>> taken by electronic ballot?
>> (conference calls would be used mostly to (a) make progress toward
>> consensus on some tech topic, (b) bring up new issues and initiate
>> some discussion, (c) discuss logistics and administrative aspects.)
>>  
>> -Jacques
>>  
>

-- 
Vladimir Sosnin
Sun Microsystems                   vladimir.sosnin@sun.com

begin:vcard
fn:Vladimir Sosnin
n:Sosnin;Vladimir
org:Sun Microsystems Inc.;J2SE JDMX BU322
adr:;;;St. Petersburg;;;Russia
email;internet:Vladimir.Sosnin@Sun.COM
title:Software Engineer
tel;work:x33105
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard

S/MIME Cryptographic Signature