On 2025-08-14 22:51, Ananthu C V wrote:
Hey Blair, On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 08:58:20PM +0800, Blair Noctis wrote:The time and choice of time, occasionally the method to choose the time (aka votes), seem to have created some turmoil in the past. Now, let me introduce a new take on that: Recurring Drop-in. Recurring: A fixed, recurring schedule.I was pretty sure that we had already agreed on having a fixed time since the last discussion on this topic.Drop-in: You are free to show up or not.It is already like that, it's not like we do or can force anyone to join.
Then it seems I was just summarizing the status quo. So that part doesn't change anything, only made up a fancy name.
(Sorry, I used the word too many times. Someone help with an alternative?)
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. 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.Now here is the real question. WHY? Personally I am one of the people who always get the short end of the stick with meeting timings past midnight and whatnot, but still turn up nonetheless. I *might have* joked about this before, but never complained. That is because I understand there is not a single timezone that fits everyone. And I also understand we always have more people from europe, so it's easier to work with european timezones.
Thus rendering me (and you) as the minority. And I feel quite content asserting my "minority rights". Just kidding, though I do wish to stay late less. Sleep is sweet.The suggestion of split meeting isn't meant to be debated and followed verbatim, but more like starting the ball rolling. Feel free to suggestbetter ideas.
No, we cannot cater to everyone's best timings.
Thus this new take. Note that I didn't say it's better.
And if you remember our past meetings, we typically have very few people attending it and one of the pain points is that we don' get to finalize on things since it's a minority speaking. And this usually turns to a "we have a consensus, let's discuss this further on the ML". I do not want to make this even worse by having split meetings. There's no limit to when people can discuss things in our IRC or ML. There is also a meeting log that people can make use of, thanks to having meetbot. Yes' I have read the rest of the mails in this thread and your reasonings. But this time I very very strongly disagree with the idea.
And your observations echo with my opinions in another of my replies. I'll just be the bad guy and say the word: the meeting is sometimes practically useless (in terms of decision making). It "degrades" to a virtual meet-up where a few of the team members exchange news, talk about personal plans, and that's it. No decision making on the team level. If all we expect from a meeting is so, is it necessary for all the formality?
Ultimately, I opened this thread assuming the meeting should be able to conclude with team wide decisions. If that's wrong, just ignore this thread and carry on.
Also, I doubt we have topics and people availability for biweekly meetings; bimonthly or monthly would be probably good enough.
Fairly true. Then we can expand the span to monthly, thus effectively bimonthly, for that matter.
(For people near +0, hi! I hope it doesn't annoy you too much. If it does, please speak up.) For the day of the week, in the past we mostly fixed on weekends. Again, anyone is free to show up or not. -- ,Sdrager Blair Noctis 🇵🇸It is sort of nice that we are trying to find solutions for this people problem, but after more than enough discussions on this topic, now this just feels like bikeshedding.
I don't quite agree with this. Bikeshedding means we mostly know it's not worth it, and, in the source of that word, the subject is mostly subjective. (The latter is not necessarily true for every case.) This case, on the other hand, is worth it: there is a real problem, we are trying to solve it. The subject itself is fairly subjective (people have different feelings), but the problem is objective (misalignment of time slots, with real life impact).
-- ,Sdrager Blair Noctis 🇵🇸
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature