On 08/08/25 14:58, Blair Noctis wrote:
This *is* worse than the status quo. If when we plan with weeks in advance 3 people show up, what would happen if we didn't plan in advance, fixed an automatic schedule (no effort put in choosing a date) and told people they are not even required to show up? I think your proposal would just result in team meetings becoming ordinary activity on IRC, no extra coordination resulting from them, with someone maybe recording the session, if that someone shows up at all.Drop-in: You are free to show up or not. So, it happens at a fixed schedule, but you can attend as you see fit.This isn't too worse than status quo: we already, practically, attend at will and by chance.
Do we have enough people to allow ourselves to split team meetings? If 3 people show up at "plenaries" (i.e. unified meetings), how many people are going to show up at partial meetings?As for the schedule, I suggest we have it biweekly, one at a far negative time zones friendly time, one at a far positive time zones friendly time, so people at both zone ranges could have equal chance, and effectively have a monthly meeting, except for those who are enthusiastic enough to show up on both ends.
On the other hand, I agree that meeting time is an issue. We should absolutely avoid 1800 UTC and take turns between earlier meetings (say 1200 UTC) and later meetings (say 1400 UTC). But we should avoid splitting them into multiple sessions and telling people they're not even supposed to show up.