Open Stack

gord chung wrote:
> maybe we should shift more emphasis to ML? working with non-native
> English speaking companies, i know they are very interested in
> participating but considering the oft hectic pace of the 'live'
> meetings, they tend to be viewers as they can't get their ideas into
> English fast enough.

Well, arguably we already do have cross-project topics discussed on the
ML. Most of the topics raised there are coming from a ML thread and/or
reviews. The trick is that sometimes:

- people ignore the thread. When the topic is raised at the
cross-project meeting they suddenly realize they missed it and have an
opinion on it

- the thread stalls without a clear next action. Talking live about it
is a great way to either check for consensus or give it a second life

- the thread goes nowhere. Factions talk past each other and no
consensus is within sight. Having less latency for a few exchanges
before going back to the thread is useful.

This is why for complex discussions I advocate for lasagna-style
progress: layers of ML threads with meaty IRC meetings in between.

Maybe we should be more explicit about that: require ML discussion
before putting a topic up, and escalate to meeting only in one of the 3
above cases. Then the meeting slot time is more like a booked empty slot
(or set of slots) in everyone's calendar where we can have direct
discussions on topics that otherwise don't seem to go anywhere on the ML.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)