[09:23] == gsauthier [81b8540d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.129.184.84.13] has joined #ow2-tc [09:23] == KPTN [~KPTN@dslm0.nerim.lyon.linagora.net] has joined #ow2-tc [09:23] hi all [09:24] Hi Clement [09:24] Hi Alice [09:24] Hi everyone [09:26] == alefebvr [~alefebvr@freeway.rd.francetelecom.com] has joined #ow2-tc [09:26] == mode/#ow2-tc [+o alefebvr] by ChanServ [09:27] == chamerling [~Adium@AMontpellier-554-1-38-92.w86-202.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #ow2-tc [09:27] Hi all, thanks Guillaume for the reminder! [09:28] just have 3 minutes for a coffee [09:29] That's OK Christophe :) [09:30] == lgu [c202a37c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.194.2.163.124] has joined #ow2-tc [09:33] We're still missing Petr and Stefano, right ? [09:33] And Marc .. [09:35] <@alefebvr> Hi this is Alex [09:35] == lgu [c202a37c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.194.2.163.124] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] [09:36] Hi Alex [09:36] I've sent a reminder mail to stefano and co... [09:37] let see if they show up :) [09:37] <@alefebvr> ok [09:37] In the mena time, maybe we should/could start with action point review ? [09:39] <@alefebvr> yes [09:39] <@alefebvr> I'm looking at the last minutes http://www.ow2.org/xwiki/bin/download/TechnologyCouncil/2011/OW2%2DTC%2DMinutes20110512.pdf [09:40] <@alefebvr> Action ALE: to ask JPS to submit his script. (Gitorious) [09:40] <@alefebvr> I haven't done it. I'll be doomed. [09:40] <@alefebvr> Action GSA: Advertise this to all project leaders. (Nexus Guide) [09:40] <@alefebvr> Guillaume ? [09:41] We should browse the actions from the begining , isn't it ? :) [09:41] == florentG [89810d5b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.137.129.13.91] has joined #ow2-tc [09:41] <@alefebvr> well, I thought starting with the actions from the last minutes is a good start :-) [09:42] First one is GIT [09:42] "OW2 sends Antelink a list of OW2 projects to be tested (SVN address). They need to know which folder is used to build the release (e.g. trunk, or branch)." [09:42] can we talk more than asking JPS about the script [09:43] It was not assigned, but I thought it was for you Alex ;) [09:43] <@alefebvr> what do you have in mind Christophe? [09:43] <@alefebvr> (GIT) [09:43] yes github is quite popular and really powerful, we should think about opening an organisation in gtihub [09:43] Apache is mirroring their projet in github [09:44] https://github.com/apache [09:44] chamerling: already done: https://github.com/ow2 [09:44] not used, but at least names are reserved :) [09:44] And sine some partners already have their code at github, it will be nice to have [09:44] <@alefebvr> and we have an OW2 account that Ed had opened [09:44] Nice to know @gsauthier [09:45] we have to start thinking about at least mirroring OW2 gitorious with github [09:45] <@alefebvr> I think you are right [09:45] Should we ask companies already using github to link in some way with the ow2 org in github ? [09:45] but IMO github is a really powerfull platform and do we really need gitorious? [09:45] Yes I totally agree my Github [09:45] <@alefebvr> since SlapOS is doing the opposite (mirroring github to gitorious), the idea would be to share their scripts [09:46] <@alefebvr> gitorious.ow2.org was initially created on demand from SlapOS. We have a few projects on it. [09:46] mirroring git repositories is not that hard, just a matter of some fetch/push with cron jobs [09:46] <@alefebvr> the question is: do we need it on OW2 or not? One aspect is "owning" the source code on our infrastructure. [09:47] == mdutoo [~mdutoo@corp-gw.accelance.net] has joined #ow2-tc [09:47] Hi everybody [09:47] is it really important to 'own it' [09:47] sorry for being late [09:47] chamerling: As I understood, we (OW2) need to have the projects source code hosted on our machine [09:47] Hi Marc [09:47] == PetrTuma [c3711310@gateway/web/freenode/ip.195.113.19.16] has joined #ow2-tc [09:47] Hello :) [09:47] <@alefebvr> Hi Petr! [09:47] Hi all [09:47] @gsauthier looks like it is not really the case [09:47] <@alefebvr> We're discussing Gitorious.ow2.org versus github, mirroring [09:47] We just started talking git, gitorious, github and mirroring [09:48] :) [09:48] or in fact we just have to push project releases to OW2 [09:48] <@alefebvr> source code on OW2 : some projects do not have it, but it's a minority [09:48] As we discussed several times, we said that projects must have their release code at OW2 [09:48] <@alefebvr> from the list of mature projects for which I have run Fossology on the source code, only Bonita, ProActive and xWiki do not have their source code on OW2, not even a zip copy [09:49] <@alefebvr> yes, the minimum requirement is a copy of the source code every release [09:49] I think whatever solution we adopt we should homogenize the tools we use [09:49] @alefebvr PetalsLink does not use OW2 SVN since almost 6 months [09:49] @florentG yes [09:50] <@alefebvr> not sure about homogeneizing tools : some projects will use SVN, others GIT [09:50] <@alefebvr> same for but tracking [09:50] <@alefebvr> but -> bug [09:50] No we can not force people to use SVN or GIT [09:51] we just have to define the rules has we did some months ago [09:51] <@alefebvr> so what do we mean by homogenize tools ? [09:51] chamerling: When moving away from CVS, we moved all projects from CVS to SVN ... [09:51] for now publishing the source code of the release seems enough [09:51] @gsauthier yes true [09:51] As a new member, the first difficulty we faced was to identify what tools are officially maintained and what are not [09:52] <@alefebvr> but even publishing the source code of releases is not done today [09:52] But moving from SVN to Git seems a little harder (CVS and SVN are close from a user POV, Git is a DVCS and need some adaptation time) [09:52] <@alefebvr> there has been some progress for the tools: we now have http://www.ow2.org/view/ITInfrastructure/Overview thanks to Jeremy [09:53] <@alefebvr> @florentG but I agree we need a startup guide explaining it all, and also what we can get from the Forge, whom to contact, etc etc [09:53] @alefebvr good work from Jeremy but we also need to say which tools are recommended ;) [09:53] <@alefebvr> would it be OK to keep both options, SVN and GIT [09:53] <@alefebvr> ? [09:53] OK for me to keep both, some partners are not ready to move [09:53] Git being recommended over SVN? [09:53] @alefebvr By homogenize I mean same portal, same bug tracking...even if under the hood we used svn, git... [09:54] == alefebvr [~alefebvr@freeway.rd.francetelecom.com] has left #ow2-tc ["Leaving"] [09:55] @alefebvr - core dumped :) [09:56] == alefebvr [~alefebvr@freeway.rd.francetelecom.com] has joined #ow2-tc [09:56] == mode/#ow2-tc [+o alefebvr] by ChanServ [09:56] Alex just said me that he clicked on the wrong button… But [09:56] I remember that Alex shared with me some slides, some time ago. It was a kind of getting started for project [09:56] <@alefebvr> yes, never got any feedback from those slides :-) [09:56] Which ones [09:56] <@alefebvr> I should send them to everybody, but the slides do not list the tools [09:56] Maybe it's time to share them on the list, or better have them on the wiki for collaborative editing [09:56] <@alefebvr> I sent them just to Guillaume and management office for comments [09:56] +1 [09:57] <@alefebvr> I'll put them on the website as a start [09:57] sorry, what is the conclusion for github? Do we put this topic on active discussion on the mailing list to get feedback? [09:57] <@alefebvr> a googledoc might prove to be the easiest for transforming slides into something that everybody can edit [09:58] Well, the information that people get from OW2 pages is at http://www.ow2.org/view/ITInfrastructure/Overview ... not very helpful ? [09:58] <@alefebvr> not very helpful -> needs an introduction text [09:58] chamerling: +1 [09:59] @gsauthier "Maybe it's time to share them on the list" [09:59] <@alefebvr> what are the questions about github? [09:59] chamerling: You start the mail thread ? [09:59] @gsauthier yes [09:59] <@alefebvr> I see : [09:59] <@alefebvr> 1. GIT versus SVN, do we keep both [09:59] Maybe, rather than creating new slides, put the information on the page that people are likely to browse ? [09:59] <@alefebvr> 2. gitorious.ow2.org versus github, do we keep both, and if yes how do we mirror [10:00] PetrTuma: +1, Wiki pages format are easier to browse [10:00] @alefebvr On 1, I'd prefer both :) call me lazy :) [10:00] github or not, the question has also some marketing impacts ? [10:00] @alefebvr question 1 : we need to keep both [10:00] florentG : I agtee [10:00] @florentG yes, I think github is the place to be, [10:00] <@alefebvr> for 1 and 2, we seem to agree that we should keep both [10:01] and +1 for documenting it on the wiki [10:02] <@alefebvr> and I'll share the generic slides too (which do not talk about the tools in detail, but more like a guide for newcomers about what is an open source OW2 projects, and the resources in general) [10:02] <@alefebvr> Back to action items: the one about Antelink and giving them a list of projects [10:02] <@alefebvr> Yes, Guillaume, it is for me. [10:03] <@alefebvr> As information, Antelink has been given information about our maven repo, but I need to get back to them for a status on where they are up to. [10:03] Do they already have some project's URL ? [10:04] Minutes said that JASMINe and Nuxeo [10:04] <@alefebvr> they had done a test for Bonita a while ago http://demo-bonita.antelink.com/#cooker but I haven't heard from them since [10:04] were candidates [10:04] <@alefebvr> I'll get in touch with them [10:05] ok thanks [10:05] <@alefebvr> and post all information in the TC list [10:05] <@alefebvr> Sonar : did we get any info from Patrice ? [10:06] no [10:06] <@alefebvr> What should we do next with Sonar, Guillaume? [10:06] We have to review the Sonar profile that patrice created [10:07] Because it will be the proposed default for OW2 projects [10:07] <@alefebvr> on the TC mailing list? [10:07] <@alefebvr> (I mean, should we launch the review on the TC mailing list) [10:08] notice that this will not be the OW2 style, only a sensible default if project do not have any rules [10:08] <@alefebvr> and the project can alternatively publish its own rules, right? [10:08] If Patrice say that his ruleset will not change much, it's ok to launch the review on TC [10:08] == florentG_ [89810d5b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.137.129.13.91] has joined #ow2-tc [10:08] == florentG [89810d5b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.137.129.13.91] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] [10:09] alefebvr: yes [10:09] <@alefebvr> good [10:09] <@alefebvr> Next on the list of actions was NexusGuide [10:09] I'll probe Patrice for news, and start the review if OK [10:09] <@alefebvr> See http://www.ow2.org/view/ITInfrastructure/NexusGuide and GSA' mail from 5 May 2011. [10:09] <@alefebvr> Action GSA: Advertise this to all project leaders. [10:11] <@alefebvr> @gsauthier houhou? [10:11] the NexusGuide is for projects moving to our nexus as release repository [10:11] All other info related to Nexus usage should be found on Sonatype's site [10:12] <@alefebvr> I mean, should we close the action? has it been advertised to all project leaders? [10:12] No, only TC knows this for the moment [10:12] But we don't agree on some kind of migration path [10:13] I want to close the old repository at some point in time [10:13] <@alefebvr> you mean we need to describe a migration path? [10:13] at least we should say that old repo will be closed on XXX and we will help projects to move to the new infra [10:14] Did we agree on a date ? september/october ? [10:15] start the migration on september, ends on end of october [10:15] <@alefebvr> OK [10:15] <@alefebvr> so that's our migration path, then !! [10:15] OK [10:16] I'll do the notification mail then [10:16] <@alefebvr> Next item was to publicize maven.antelink.com mirror to project leaders and TC. I guess that's for me to do. [10:16] <@alefebvr> (just a info to circulate) [10:16] <@alefebvr> next item was XWiki 2.7 for projects -> but I don't see JC yet [10:17] <@alefebvr> let's ask Jeremy when he comes today, or on the mailing list [10:17] <@alefebvr> Any news from this migration for JASMINe, JOnAS and EasyBeans ? [10:17] <@alefebvr> @fbenoit @gsauthier ? [10:18] alefebvr: Sorry, I checked if JC was in his office, but he's not :'( [10:19] <@alefebvr> he's not a morning guy ;-) [10:19] No particular news on this from JC. AFAIU, migration is mostly controlled, but the questions we noted on the last TC are still answerless [10:20] <@alefebvr> OK [10:20] I take this action [10:20] <@alefebvr> do you have a URL of the new site? [10:20] <@alefebvr> for the projects? [10:21] Ex: http://jonas.projects.ow2.org/ [10:21] We lost all the style, but content is here [10:22] <@alefebvr> OK, so let's get back directly to Jeremy on this [10:23] M2net now ? [10:23] <@alefebvr> since Ed cannot join us today about the hackerthon, next is status on new projects [10:24] <@alefebvr> m2net -> just re-launched Fran?ois Exertier about it [10:24] <@alefebvr> snmp4cloud -> I have relaunched several times the submitter by mail without any answer [10:24] <@alefebvr> I should see them next week (CompatibleOne meeting), and I'll ask him directly [10:24] ok [10:25] <@alefebvr> at the moment there is some code in the C1 (= CompatibleOne) sandbox on the OW2 Forge [10:25] <@alefebvr> same for talking to JP Smets about mentoring SlapOS and submitting ERP5 -> will talk to him directly on Tuesday [10:26] <@alefebvr> and next is for @gsauthier the OW2 utility toolkit project ! [10:27] "the OW2 utility toolkit project" this one is a good candidate for git ;) [10:31] Sorry for the delay [10:31] I completed the proposal form on my side, just need a little more work on then I'll publish it [10:32] And yes we target Git [10:32] So far, this move has been planned at some point during this summer [10:32] <@alefebvr> good [10:33] <@alefebvr> what about the OW2 Specification project @gsauthier ? [10:34] the same, proposal in progress [10:34] But i also need to write a mail on TC (just like the one for utils) explaining what it is, and who may contribute [10:37] <@alefebvr> yes [10:37] <@alefebvr> The next item was about the TC web page, and the form for submission which you @gsauthier have started to migrate as an xwiki form/application [10:38] <@alefebvr> can you tell us about the status of the form so far? should we open it for review by the TC? [10:38] Yes, in fact the proposals I have in my pockets depends on the new project proposal form we made [10:39] Bascally, it's just a form (nicer and more usable than the old forge one) to publish project's proposal [10:39] <@alefebvr> OK. Is there a URL for this form to share? [10:39] <@alefebvr> "just a form" -> with some minor consistency update (the Forge form contains some obsolete description) [10:40] We're still working with Olivier (OW2 web site manager) that is much more into webdesign than me to improve that page [10:40] <@alefebvr> Also note that OW2 will migrate its current xwiki version soon [10:40] <@alefebvr> to 2.7.2 [10:41] alefebvr: I think we should advertise who Olivier is and what he do in OW2 for the TC [10:41] <@alefebvr> YES [10:41] <@alefebvr> OW2 has very recently hired a new webmaster, Olivier Lizounat [10:41] <@alefebvr> he is part of the Management Office [10:41] == florentG_ [89810d5b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.137.129.13.91] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] [10:42] <@alefebvr> we will benefit from the xwiki support to 1) migrate to 2.7.2 and 2) train Olivier on xwiki [10:42] <@alefebvr> he is located in the Paris area [10:42] <@alefebvr> I'll send a message to the TC for welcoming him [10:43] ok thanks [10:44] So, when we will finish that new form, I'll publish the URL to the TC to "officialize" it [10:44] And right after, I'll push my proposals ;) [10:44] <@alefebvr> OK, good [10:45] <@alefebvr> Next item is the TC mailing list cleanup ;-) [10:45] <@alefebvr> Guillaume and I should plan to spend an hour reviewing the list [10:45] <@alefebvr> there is also the question of rules, which we need to formalize (see last minutes of the TC) [10:46] Will this be our background task for this summer ? [10:46] <@alefebvr> I'll be around until July 20. [10:46] August 25 for me ... [10:47] <@alefebvr> no holidays? [10:47] <@alefebvr> ;-) [10:47] after others ... :) [10:48] Are we done for actions points review ? [10:48] <@alefebvr> YES [10:49] <@alefebvr> just a reminder about the proposed agenda [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - review of the action items from last meeting [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - project lifecycle update (new projects, project status change, mentors) [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - update on the project xwiki migration [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - SQuAT update (Antelink, Fossology, Qualipso, TSRR) [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - SONAR rules status [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - update on new projects/ideas of projects (OW2 specs, OW2 toolkit project, Kerneos, ...) [10:49] <@alefebvr> > - update on the TC webpages (incl. form for submitting projects) [10:49] <@alefebvr> I believe we've done the 1st three points [10:49] mentoring for SLapOS? [10:50] <@alefebvr> -> will talk to JP Smets on Tuesday [10:50] <@alefebvr> we've also talked about all the other points except SQuAT [10:50] <@alefebvr> and Kerneos ? [10:53] A message on the list about this mentoring [10:54] <@alefebvr> In the mean time, which SQuAT update: [10:55] <@alefebvr> - Antelink we've talked about. They should be running the release cooker on all mature projects, plus volunteer incubator projects. [10:55] <@alefebvr> I need to get back to Antelink for an update of where they are up to. [10:56] <@alefebvr> - Qualipso: EasyBeans is pilot project for running the OMM evaluation http://www.qualipso.org/omm-champion [10:56] <@alefebvr> We need to find some time (another background summer task) to fill in the evaluation. [10:56] nice tools [10:57] <@alefebvr> - Fossology : I have run Fossology on almost all mature OW2 projects. Results on http://www.qualipso.org/omm-champion [10:57] <@alefebvr> sorry, on http://www.ow2.org/view/About/SQuATFossology [10:57] <@alefebvr> the link is also on all project dashboards [10:57] <@alefebvr> next step is to try to automate it a bit more... [10:57] Kerneos: I know that a project proposal was started some time ago [10:58] <@alefebvr> - no news from TSRR (Trustie) -> I'm in touch with Trustie about this [10:58] Kerneos: Do you want some kind of explanation mail about what is Kerneos ? [10:58] <@alefebvr> just the status so far (it was mentioned in the minutes) [10:58] <@alefebvr> but maybe we should wait for the project proposal? [10:59] as you prefer [11:00] <@alefebvr> no, no, up to you guys : if you consider it is worth discussing it before the proposal, please do so [11:00] <@alefebvr> but the discussion can also take place following the proposal. Whatever is easiest. [11:01] ok [11:01] <@alefebvr> other discussion items anybody? [11:01] i'm not sure of the current status of Kerneos, v2 is ongoing development and we'll have more to show during this summer [11:02] Some comments about the IP clearance discussion started by Clement on TC ? [11:02] <@alefebvr> Cl?ment? Marc? Alice? Christophe? Petr? Florent? [11:02] <@alefebvr> IP clearance: hard problem [11:02] @alefebvr no [11:02] There seems to be enough in the TODO list already :) [11:03] clement's just coming into the chat [11:04] <@alefebvr> IP clearance: I think the issue raised was about 1) controlling the commits, and then 2) analysis of dependencies, licence compatibility, etc [11:04] <@alefebvr> there seem to have been some problem of "uncontrolled" commits ? [11:04] licence compatibility is really difficult, yes [11:05] alefebvr: yeah, There have been a discussion about a possible chameleon contribution (an eclipse plugin for iPOJO) [11:06] <@alefebvr> about licence compatibility, Fossology can help track licences of source files [11:06] <@alefebvr> however, for imported libraries, it does not [11:06] <@alefebvr> I can ask the HP Fossology guys about this point [11:06] @alefebvr but fossology does not check compatibility, right? [11:06] <@alefebvr> other option is BlackDuck if you have millions of euros [11:07] <@alefebvr> Fossology discovers all licences, but does not check compatibility per se [11:07] <@alefebvr> there is a project in the OW2 code base, OSLC v3, which complements Fossology and does some compatibility analysis, but I'm not sure about the status of the project (Uni Helsinki project) [11:07] == cescoffier [d4e01e42@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.224.30.66] has joined #ow2-tc [11:07] (Clément's nearly here...) [11:07] hello [11:07] <@alefebvr> hi [11:08] sorry, was in another meeting before [11:08] <@alefebvr> no problem [11:08] <@alefebvr> we're talking about your message about IP clearance [11:08] <@alefebvr> 2 aspects: checking licence compatibility, and "uncontrolled" commits [11:08] Yes, Alice briefed me briefly [11:09] <@alefebvr> about licence compatibility, I was saying Fossology discovers all licences, but does not check compatibility per se [11:09] <@alefebvr> there is a project in the OW2 code base, OSLC v3, which complements Fossology and does some compatibility analysis, but I'm not sure about the status of this project [11:10] well there is 2 aspects here: [11:10] being clean in term of license : not using incompatible components [11:10] <@alefebvr> this is the hard one [11:10] being cleared in term of code : the code is not copied from anywhere [11:10] I think the first point is achievable [11:11] <@alefebvr> it is achievable provided that you know all licences of imported libraries [11:11] the second one is a dream, and can just be fixed by hundreds of lawyer / attorney [11:11] being cleared in terms of code : OW2 do not have any CLA ... [11:11] <@alefebvr> :-) [11:11] <@alefebvr> CLA ? [11:12] Contributor License Agreement [11:12] <@alefebvr> nope [11:12] <@alefebvr> we have discussed it in the past though [11:12] CLA is an apache agreement saying that your the AUTHOR of the code you give to the foundation [11:12] A paper you signed before becoming a committer where you say that contributed code is your own creation ... [11:12] <@alefebvr> I can try to archeologize with Cedric [11:12] <@alefebvr> we don't have that, OW2 does not own the code, the copyright remains that of the projects [11:13] So it's up to the projects to setup their own CLA ? [11:13] gsauthier: I doubt of the strict legality of this agreement in France, because your code belongs to your company [11:13] If they want to do proper IP clearance ? [11:13] <@alefebvr> however, law applies: 1) "le droit d'auteur est inali?nable" = authors should always be mentioned [11:13] (but this is completely ignored, and all Apache committer just sign it...) [11:13] <@alefebvr> 2) whoever owns (copyright) the code is up to a discussion [11:14] <@alefebvr> France Telecom legal department does a nice introduction of IP and open source [11:15] <@alefebvr> I could try to get their slides/presentation and see whether I can share them [11:15] Anyway, the Apache CLA says that you gives your IP to Apache for your contributions, but is it mandatory for any CLA ? Maybe it could be sufficent to have a CLA that states that your code contribution are IP clean ? [11:15] <@alefebvr> but it is NOT simple (like anything that has to deal with lawyers) [11:15] :) [11:16] <@alefebvr> "your code contribution are IP clean" -> yes, we should work on something like this [11:16] <@alefebvr> however, IP clean may mean several things [11:16] That also means that projects could not anymore add anyone as committer ... [11:16] <@alefebvr> 1. the committer has been asked by his company to keep the company copyright. This may or may not be acceptable by the project [11:16] yes, before accepting a contributions, the contributors must state that the code is IP Clean [11:17] <@alefebvr> 2. the committer is OK to abandon copyright, in which case this should indeed be said [11:17] then the license have to be checked [11:17] Hey,project fixes the rules, if company do not want them they not contribute [11:17] <@alefebvr> @gsauthier : not that simple. It depends on the project, the interest of the company, etc [11:18] Is IP cleanness a SQuAT goal ? [11:18] <@alefebvr> the company may be interested in a fix, even though they don't own the copyright (example of a company who uses MySQL and needs a fix, but does not care about owning the code) [11:18] <@alefebvr> IP cleanness could be part of SQuAT, I agree [11:19] <@alefebvr> I think we could also ask Cedric Carbone about their practice with Talend and community code, same with Boniat [11:19] <@alefebvr> Bonita [11:19] For patches coming through JIRA, in Apache you have to check a box where you say that you abandon your copyright to apache foundation [11:19] but that's different than becoming a commiter [11:20] <@alefebvr> (I have to go, I let Guillaume lead the rest of the TC. Sorry and bye for now) [11:20] By Alex [11:21] I'm not sure that we can setlle this for all OW2 projects since they are many different parties and goals and companies ... [11:21] But maybe we can have explanations on IP, a possible CLA that projects could re-use, ... [11:21] == sfermigier [~sfermigie@LPuteaux-156-14-100-219.w80-12.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #ow2-tc [11:22] Hi Stephane [11:22] Maybe that could be initiated with the Help of the lawyer's presentation alex was talking about ? [11:23] yes [11:24] Some kind of guide for projects that takes care of copyright, IP cleanness [11:25] == alefebvr [~alefebvr@freeway.rd.francetelecom.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] [11:25] Then, it's up to each project to set up their own strategy [11:25] yes, especially because the usage of each project is different [11:26] ok [11:26] are we done with this IP point ? any comments, ... [11:27] no comments, next? [11:28] Hmm I think we're done with the agenda [11:28] Can we try to see when next TC will takes place ? [11:28] let's try [11:29] As July/August are calm monthes, I don't expect a lot of news [11:30] I will be off between August 25 and September 16 [11:30] mide september? [11:30] mid [11:31] So around 20 August ? or around 20 September, or Early September, without me [11:31] end of september is in 3 months... [11:31] is there any preference in the audience ? [11:31] yep, kind of too far [11:31] we can do a short meeting around 20 august [11:31] August 20 is fine for me [11:31] to see what's new [11:32] sorry not on saturday [11:32] ;) [11:32] OK, I'll propose a poll with different dates [11:33] ok nice [11:33] So far, i have theses action points: [11:33] ALE: Share getting started slides (wiki pages) CHA: Gitorious/GitHub discussion on TC ALE: Antelink status GSA: Sonar rules (check with patrice and launch TC review) GSA: Maven Repository notification and migration to project leaders GSA: XWiki project's migration status GSA: Project proposal completion (TC notification) GSA: Publish OW2 Spec and Util proposals GSA: TC explanation mail for Spec ALE: SlapOS mentoring (C1 Meeting) ALE: welcoming Olivier in TC ALE/GSA: TC Cleanup GSA/ALE: Initiate IP/Copyright [11:33] ... copy/paste not so readable :) ... [11:34] Anyway, i'll post them along with the minutes. [11:34] Any other subjects to discuss ? [11:35] I must say that I'm proud of us, for the first time we respected the timeframe :) [11:36] == cescoffier [d4e01e42@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.224.30.66] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] [11:36] == amurphy [d4e01e42@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.224.30.66] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] [11:36] OK, Thank you all for attending [11:36] Nice, let's continue discussions on the mailing list [11:36] thanks Guillaume [11:36] Yep [11:37] Bye all [11:37] == chamerling [~Adium@AMontpellier-554-1-38-92.w86-202.abo.wanadoo.fr] has left #ow2-tc [] [11:38] == PetrTuma [c3711310@gateway/web/freenode/ip.195.113.19.16] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [13:06] == sfermigier [~sfermigie@LPuteaux-156-14-100-219.w80-12.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Quit: Leaving...]