Working Group Minutes/EWG 2012-01-02


IRC nick Real name
apmon Kai Krueger
zere Matt Amos


  • Draft budget / plan for 2012 document was discussed.
  • Short review of feedback from Top Ten Tasks wiki pages and blog post.


18:07 < zere> apologies, but i don't have the last meeting minutes ready :-( double minutes next meeting.
18:07 < apmon> Do you have a vague memory if anything interesting happened? I wasn't there last time
18:08 < zere> we were discussing options for EWG F2Fs
18:09 < zere> and costs for helping out with international developer events.
18:12 < apmon> Is there an agenda for today?
18:13 < zere> the consensus, such as it was, seemed to be that an EWG F2F would be difficult - if it's before SOTM then it'll be difficult for some people to get to, if it's not then it'll still be difficult for people to get to ;-)
18:13 < zere> i guess we should be discussing the 2012 plan, given it's due in 2 days ;-)
18:16 < zere> apmon: ummm... did you get the email i sent yesterday? i was going to paste some in here, but i can't find it in my outbox... maybe i managed not to send it...
18:16 < apmon> I got it
18:17 < zere> oh, good. wonder why it's not in my sent items.
18:19 < zere> so the first item on the plan is to complete the current top ten tasks. do we think that's a reasonable goal? is the budget (2 grand for awards and 3 for potential contracting work) reasonable?
18:22 < apmon> imho it should be a reasonable goal.
18:22 < apmon> Non of the tasks are super complex. So they should be well doable
18:22 < apmon> Assuming someone can find to motivation to do them...
18:23 < zere> yes, i agree.
18:25 < apmon> budget wise, I think it will be hard to predict
18:25 < zere> yeah, it rather depends on what we can motivate people to do without needing to resort to that, expensive, option.
18:27 < zere> i reckoned it might be about 2-3 weeks of time. but then again, it depends on the complexity and delicacy of the task.
18:28 < apmon> It probably also depends on what other development things pop up
18:28 < apmon> e.g. site redesign and license change
18:30 < zere> indeed. which brings us on to the second item. it's much like the first, but i thought it was worth enumerating separately because it's much more time-constrained than the TTTs.
18:30 < zere> do you think it's worth adding another item to the plan related to the license change? is there anything specific that needs doing and/or isn't already being done?
18:31 < apmon> The scripts that actually delete the database contents aren't written yet?
18:31 < apmon> Or are some of the stuff woodpeck has done usable for the official change over?
18:34 < zere> i don't know. i think the precondition for that would be a well-understood and LWG-approved set of rules ;-)
18:36 < apmon> Yes, that would also help... :-)
18:37 < apmon> At least woodpeck seems to assume that the process will only be semi automatic
18:37 < apmon> in which case the human interface to special case stuff would need to be written
18:37 < zere> reckon it's worth adding a paragraph saying something about supporting development of the actual database change code?
18:38 < apmon> As someone will need to write it, it probably is worth mentioning it in the plan
18:39 < zere> the action there is to support it, but what about the budget? do we need anything or is that something we can plan to support ourselves?
18:39 -!- migurski [] has joined #osm-ewg
18:41 < apmon> Not sure how much motivation developers have to work on this kind of code
18:41 < apmon> Probably depends a bit on how the stand with respect to the overall idea of changing the license
18:42 < zere> i don't think it's much code, really. the hard part is having a consistent set of rules as to what is and what isn't going in.
18:45 < zere> ok. i'll add something small.
18:45 < zere> i don't think there was anything else on the planning front. does anyone have AoB they'd like to discuss?
18:46 < apmon> Has there been any comments or feedback to the TTT announcement?
18:47 < zere> there was one about clickable POIs
18:49 < zere> hmm... the wiki discussion about the TTTs seems to be a bit old too - is it the done thing to mark comments about the old version of the page in some way?
18:54 < apmon> Can they just be deleted, or moved to an "archive" page?
18:55 < zere> i dunno. it's probably not the done thing to delete comments is it? but moving them might be a good idea.
19:06 < zere> ok... if there's nothing else...?
19:08 < zere> thanks to everyone for coming. see you next week :-)