[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tag] Meeting schedules: some PROPOSAL
I'd like to remind once again, that SPB is GMT+4 for now. So it will be 9pm, which is a bit too late, but I'll try to attend. Victor Rudometov wrote: > Hi, Jacques. > > S-A works for me. > > Thanks. > Victor. > > 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 >>> >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]