| IRC nick
|| Real name
|| Richard Fairhurst
|| Tom Hughes
|| Matt Amos
- EWG face-to-face meetings
- Discussed co-location with SOTM, but several members have limited time / money budgets for travel.
- Discussed providing assistance for those wanting to travel to SOTM.
- Supporting hack weekends internationally - discussed whether a fund could help ease the cost of providing food/beverages at these events.
18:00 < RichardF> hello happy EWGers
18:00 < zere> minutes of the last meeting: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/EWG_20
11-12-12 let me know if there's anything in there needs changing
18:00 < zere> following on from last meeting, we were discussing the budget and had got up to the F2F cos
18:02 < TomH> ...then Steve spent it all ;-)
18:07 < zere> well, this is for 2012 and the management team to have a good idea of how much is needed ov
er the year. they can adjust the budgets to match what can be expected in income.
18:08 < zere> so i guess costs for a F2F depend on whether there will be an event that most of us will be
18:08 < RichardF> kind of depends where SOTM will be!
18:08 < zere> personally, i intend to try and get to both SOTM and SOTM-EU, but since neither have venues
announced it does make travel planning a little tricky.
18:10 < zere> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Of_The_Map_2012/Call_for_venues#Bids
18:10 < zere> looks like portugal (in which case we probably wouldn't get a separate SOTM-EU), or tokyo, or cuba.
18:11 < zere> tokyo and cuba would involve significant travel costs for all of the members of this WG.
18:12 * RichardF nods.
18:14 < zere> so we have multiple options: 1) provide funds for those less able to travel to SOTM, 2) arrange our own F2F meeting, separate from SOTM(-EU)
18:15 < zere> that's not very "multiple", but i ran out of suggestions. what do you think?
18:16 < RichardF> if we were to do 1; should we simply request of the SOTM organisers that "would-be developer" is a supporting criterion for scholarships/grants?
18:17 < zere> depends on what the reason for the "would-be developer" not attending otherwise is...
18:18 < zere> presumably we'd also have to contribute to the scholarship pot in the same way that HOT did for the scholarships this past year?
18:18 < zere> or, rather, it seems kinda unfair not to.
18:19 < RichardF> well, if it all comes out of OSMF money...
18:23 < zere> so... assuming the most expensive case, travel to tokyo, how many of us would be going? TomH? RichardF?
18:24 < TomH> I can't see myself wanting to go all that way just for a weekend
18:24 < TomH> which would mean it would depend on if I could find a way of making it part of something larger
18:25 < RichardF> I pretty certainly won't go to SOTM if it's outside the EU, I'm afraid, and even if it were in the EU I couldn't promise
18:26 < zere> how about pnorman and stevensn1?
18:26 < zere> i know apmon doesn't have a huge travel budget either.
18:27 < zere> he made it to SOTM this year because it was particularly favourably located for him :-)
18:31 < zere> so... i'll just make up a sensible looking number, then.
18:31 < zere> last item: support fund for hack weekends.
18:32 < zere> here in london they cost next to nothing because the facilities are provided. so what do we want to do to support them happening elsewhere?
18:32 < zere> providing for the facilities would be good, but can get terribly expensive. and i have no idea how expensive ;-)
18:33 < RichardF> hm. likewise, no idea. should we say that we are prepared to support up to 10 hack weekends with up to $100 each?
18:35 < zere> the food for the last hack weekend cost about 60 gbp.
18:35 < zere> costs will vary by location, i guess. but $100 seems about right
18:38 < zere> ok. that's sorted then?
18:40 < RichardF> sounds good to me!
18:41 < zere> shall i take what we've discussed over the past 4 meetings and put it into a short document for review?
18:41 < RichardF> if you're willing, that'd be great.
18:41 < zere> hmm... next meeting would be the 26th... is anyone going to be able to attend?
18:41 < RichardF> nope :)
18:42 < zere> yeah, figures...
18:43 < zere> shall we re-arrange, or skip that one?
18:43 < TomH> I won't be around for sure
18:43 < zere> the reason i ask is that the next management meeting (for which the document is intended) will be the 28th.
18:43 < RichardF> if you need to punt it around for review we could do that by e-mail
18:44 < zere> in order to review it before the management meeting we'll all need time machines. i'll add that to the budget :-P
18:45 < RichardF> can you use the time machine to go forward to 31st March and tell me whether 80n accepts the CTs, please, so I don't have to faff with remapping his stuff otherwise ;)
18:45 < zere> yes, ok. will do the review by email. skip the 26th meeting and meet again on the 2nd of Jan?
18:46 < RichardF> for me 2nd Jan is still likely to be problematic, but I'm sure EWG can survive without me :)
18:46 < zere> we'll muddle through ;-)
18:47 < zere> guess this meeting was a little light... any other business?
18:51 < RichardF> none from me
18:57 -!- jgon6 [~email@example.com] has joined #osm-ewg
18:58 < zere> ok. if that's everything then thanks to everyone for coming. see you next time :-)