[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tag] Meeting schedules: some PROPOSAL
A slight correction: In S-B, it is "Wednesday" for California time, but not for GMT time where it is 4am Thursday... (so that would be a Thursday 7am for Victor in StPeter) But so far does not seem to create any clash - Victor can also do S-A, technically. -Jacques -----Original Message----- From: Vladimir.Sosnin@Sun.COM [mailto:Vladimir.Sosnin@Sun.COM] Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 8:28 AM To: Durand, Jacques R. Cc: Patrick.Curran@Sun.COM; tag@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tag] Meeting schedules: some PROPOSAL 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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]