21:03 #spi: < bdale> *GAVEL* 21:03 #spi: < bdale> [item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in the Public Interest board of director's meeting, which is now called to order. 21:03 #spi: < bdale> Today's agenda can be found on the web at: http://www.spi-inc.org/meetings/agendas/2013/2013-07-11/ 21:03 #spi: < bdale> [item 2, Roll Call] 21:03 #spi: < bdale> Board members, please state your name for the record. As we have nine board members, quorum for today's meeting is six. 21:03 #spi: < bdale> Guests (including board advisors), please /msg your names to Noodles if you wish your attendance to be recorded in the minutes of this meeting. 21:03 #spi: < Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert 21:03 #spi: < linuxpoet> Joshua Drake 21:03 #spi: < Solver> Robert Brockway 21:03 #spi: < schultmc> Michael Schultheiss 21:04 #SPI: < Noodles> Jonathan McDowell 21:04 #spi: < Ganneff> zobel: 21:04 #SPI: < Noodles> + bdale. 21:04 #spi: < bdale> Bdale Garbee 21:04 #spi: < bdale> sorry 21:04 #spi: < Clint> Clint Adams 21:04 #spi: < zobel> Martin Zobel-Helas 21:04 #SPI: < Noodles> We've had regrets from Hydroxide. 21:05 #spi: < bdale> ok 21:05 #spi: < bdale> [item 3, President's Report] 21:05 #spi: < bdale> As many of you already know, my home was destroyed by the fires in Black Forest, Colorado, last month. We are making progress, and are in an apartment we will use while 21:05 #spi: < bdale> rebuilding our home, etc. This has inevitably distracted me from many things including SPI business for several weeks, and will continue to do so for several more. 21:05 #spi: < bdale> Thank you to everyone for your expressions of support and encouragement, we will continue to post updates at http://gag.com. 21:06 #spi: < bdale> [item 4, Treasurer's Report] 21:06 #spi: < bdale> Michael? 21:06 #spi: < linuxpoet> blink, I am sorry to hear that 21:06 #spi: < schultmc> standard report is in the agenda. I've received a formal quote of $439/mo for bookkeeping services from Human Bookkeeping in massachusetts 21:07 #spi: < linuxpoet> schultmc: that seems reasonable 21:07 #spi: < schultmc> I'm answering some final questions from foster results in metro indianapolis and hope to have a quote from them shortly 21:07 #spi: < linuxpoet> schultmc: that is about what my CPA charges us 21:07 #spi: < bdale> I haven't been keeping up with email, is there more detail about the book keeping search there? 21:07 #spi: < schultmc> linuxpoet: thanks - it's good to have comparison data 21:07 #spi: < schultmc> bdale: we discussed it briefly at the last meeting - there's a summary in the meeting minutes 21:08 #spi: < bdale> ok, thanks 21:08 #spi: < bdale> anything else? 21:08 #spi: < linuxpoet> I have something for #4 21:08 #spi: < schultmc> not from me 21:08 #spi: * zobel would like to add some bookkeeping stuff 21:08 #spi: < bdale> linuxpoet: ? 21:08 #spi: * linuxpoet defers to zobel as mine is not in the same context 21:09 #spi: < bdale> zobel: go 21:09 #spi: < zobel> i have identified (hopefully) all debian bookings from january 2010 until march 2012 21:09 #spi: < zobel> i have done so with paper/pencil 21:09 #spi: < zobel> i am currently adding it to git. 21:09 #spi: < Solver> well done zobel. thanks for your hard work on this. 21:09 #spi: < bdale> ouch, sounds like a lot of work .. but awesome job! 21:09 #spi: < zobel> i hope i will be done by weekend. 21:09 #spi: * linuxpoet notes that we all need to send zobel beer or whiskey, his choice 21:10 #spi: < zobel> if schultmc adds the bank documents, i can go with Solver over the rest of 2012. 21:10 #spi: < zobel> 21:10 #spi: < Solver> definitely 21:10 #spi: < Solver> thanks 21:10 #spi: < linuxpoet> bdale: may I proceed? 21:10 #spi: < Solver> i'd like to clarify one thing 21:10 #spi: < linuxpoet> oh 21:10 #spi: < bdale> Solver: go 21:11 #spi: < Solver> zobel went back to identified expenses, etc, by project 21:11 #spi: < Solver> now that we are using RT, are we tagging expenses? 21:11 #spi: < bdale> good question. I don't know. 21:11 #spi: < Solver> ie, if i understand it correctly, we should be sable to identify the projects an expense is related to easily now 21:11 #spi: < Solver> *able 21:12 #spi: < zobel> ah, yes, those bookings are not only debian. Solver, thanks for noticing. 21:12 #spi: < Solver> this hopefully avoiding this ever happening again :) 21:12 #spi: < schultmc> i've been putting tickets in the proper queue but haven't filled out all of the fields in RT - I can go back and do so 21:12 #spi: < bdale> sounds like a good idea 21:12 #spi: < Ganneff> .oO(thats what those fields are there for (or can be added if more is needed) ) :) 21:12 #spi: < zobel> schultmc: my format is quite easy and plain text in the git. 21:13 #spi: < bdale> cool 21:13 #spi: < bdale> zobel: thanks again for your work on this 21:13 #spi: < bdale> linuxpoet: go 21:13 #spi: < linuxpoet> ok 21:13 #spi: < linuxpoet> So, at the current rate we are going hit half a mil by the end of the year. The IRS doesn't like it when non-profit expenses don't have a reasonable expenditure rate against donations 21:14 #spi: < linuxpoet> We need to get some people to spend some money 21:14 #spi: < linuxpoet> Debian, LibreOffice, OpenBio, PostgreSQL (I can get us spending money), Tux4Kids are all very obvious points of interest 21:14 #spi: < linuxpoet> Arch, Haskell, FreeDesktop etc.. are others 21:15 #spi: < bdale> as the number of associated projects grows, my personal tolerance for the balance growing is somewhat moderated .. but your point is well taken 21:15 #spi: < zobel> we are about to do that. 21:15 #spi: < Ganneff> debian does spend money... 21:15 #spi: < Ganneff> also, debconf should take off some of it too 21:15 #spi: < linuxpoet> bdale: I would argue that the number of projects means that we have to be more diligent not less 21:15 #spi: < bdale> said tolerance because there are many parallel buckets each of which isn't huge .. but which in aggregate may get us more attention than we want 21:15 #spi: < linuxpoet> Ganneff: I didn't include Debconf in my list because I know it comes and goes 21:15 #spi: < linuxpoet> Ganneff: however, Debian itself has a huge cache of money right now 21:15 #spi: < bdale> linuxpoet: yes, I understand your point 21:16 #spi: < Ganneff> linuxpoet: i know. 21:16 #spi: < bdale> linuxpoet: some of which has recently been allocated by the DPL, but your point remains valid 21:16 #spi: < zobel> linuxpoet: and debian will need to buy hardware the next month, but that is off-topic here. 21:16 #spi: < Ganneff> nah, its not, not as a point for this. 21:16 #spi: * Hydroxide surfaces - Jimmy Kaplowitz 21:16 #spi: < zobel> months. 21:17 #spi: < linuxpoet> anyway, I think it would be good if someone from the board started gently nudging, I am willing if I have contact info (is the liasons@ list still valid?) and if I have some point of measure... e.g; "The treasurer would like to see a 30% increase in expenses, hoarding cash doesn't look good" 21:17 #SPI: < Noodles> projects@ I think? 21:18 #spi: < Ganneff> we have the projects list 21:18 #spi: < schultmc> spi-projects@lists.spi-inc.org is valid 21:18 #spi: < Hydroxide> it would probably help to have concrete links about what the downside of excessive cash is 21:18 #spi: < Hydroxide> in such an email 21:18 #spi: < Hydroxide> to authoritative-ish external sources 21:18 #spi: < linuxpoet> Does the treasurer want to handle this or would he like to delegate? 21:18 #spi: < Hydroxide> also, we could suggest to projects that have more than they can foresee needing that they stop accepting donations until that changes 21:18 #spi: < linuxpoet> Hydroxide: I think that is a non-starter 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> (not pre-judging which projects that would be) 21:19 #spi: < linuxpoet> "that" being not accepting donations 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> linuxpoet: at least one of our projects doesn't accept donations 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> linuxpoet: because they have no need for them 21:19 #spi: < Ganneff> yeah, but forever 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> at least monitary 21:19 #spi: < Ganneff> and not just as a short term thing 21:19 #spi: < Ganneff> way different. 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> no, temporarily until they have a need for it 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> it's a suggestion, not a ban 21:19 #spi: < Hydroxide> oh I see what you meant - you meant OFTC 21:20 #spi: * schultmc can contact the projects list 21:20 #spi: < Hydroxide> if OFTC had a sudden need for monetary donations, such as a lawsuit, it probably would solicit funds 21:20 #spi: < bdale> yep 21:20 #spi: < bdale> ok, linuxpoet has made a good point. we obviously have Debian folks here who will act. how should we communicate to other projects with large balances? 21:20 #spi: * bdale will talk to Eben about the Freedombox Foundation funds 21:20 #spi: < bdale> the wifi here sucks .. 21:20 #spi: < Hydroxide> so it's temporary until it has a need too :) 21:20 #spi: < Solver> Personally I'd be very much against suggesting project refusing donations 21:20 #spi: < Hydroxide> okay, I'm fine with not suggesting that if it's a minority view 21:20 #spi: < linuxpoet> Solver: yeah that is a total non-starter, imo :) 21:20 #spi: < bdale> I think telling projects to not accept donations is a non-starter, better to help them understand they need to spend some 21:21 #spi: < bdale> fwiw, my net connection here is very laggy, sorry if I seem to come and go 21:21 #spi: < linuxpoet> a very simple argument is spending money to make money. That applies to non-profits too. People want to see that their money is being used in a good way, if they see that, donations will go up. 21:21 #spi: < bdale> ok, so I tried asking who is going to do what .. I'll talk to Eben about the Freedombox balance .. who is doing what overwise? 21:22 #spi: < Hydroxide> at some point outside the meeting I'd like people to explain to me why it's a non-starter, but not during the meeting, it's not worth taking up meeting time :) 21:22 #spi: < schultmc> bdale: as I understood it, freedombox was applying for its own 501(c)(3) and their association with us was temporary 21:22 #spi: < linuxpoet> Hydroxide: happy to talk about it after the meeting 21:22 #spi: < bdale> schultmc: that was the idea, until 501(c)3 grants kind of dried up 21:23 #spi: < bdale> not sure of current status, but we're about to spend money and it might as well be from the SPI bucket 21:23 #spi: < Clint> seems to me like the IRS is getting worse right now 21:23 #spi: < bdale> I won't argue that 21:23 #spi: < bdale> ok, any other commitments to express, or should we move on? 21:24 #spi: < Ganneff> .oO(while this is the AGM, please dont make it a (felt) year long meeting :) ) 21:24 #spi: < bdale> [item 5, Secretary's report] 21:24 #spi: < bdale> Jonathan? 21:25 #SPI: < Noodles> The main thing from me is that nominations for the board election are currently open (closing at the end of Saturday 13th). We've 4 positions open and I've currently received 3 nominations. 21:25 #spi: < bdale> Noodles: you got mine? I'm in a weird email location now. 21:25 #SPI: < Noodles> I did. 21:25 #spi: < bdale> thanks 21:25 #spi: < Ganneff> so zobel, bdale and me right now. 21:25 #spi: < bdale> so we need to shake the trees? 21:25 #SPI: < Noodles> I also note, for the record, that I haven't prepared an annual report. I never got the pieces I needed for last years to be complete. 21:25 #spi: < Ganneff> should get an outsider up. 21:26 #SPI: < Noodles> However that's not an excuse so I expect to try and put something rough together over the next month. 21:26 #spi: < bdale> Noodles: poke me and I promise I'll give you president's comments this year. honest. 21:26 #SPI: < Noodles> I will probably also call last years "done" and put the PDF on the site (the .tex is already there). 21:26 #spi: < bdale> good plan 21:27 #spi: < Solver> Sounds good. a small report is better than no report. 21:27 #spi: < bdale> so, any action required on the nominations status? 21:27 #SPI: < Noodles> Anyone who wants to stand should email me (secretary@) asap. 21:27 #spi: < bdale> I'd like to see > 4 nominations so we have an actual election 21:27 #SPI: < Noodles> If I don't get any more, no election. If I get more I'll put them all up on the site on the 14th. 21:28 #spi: < bdale> ok, thanks 21:28 #spi: < bdale> anything else? 21:28 #spi: < Hydroxide> and if you don't get any more, we have a vacancy, even 21:28 #SPI: < Noodles> I'll put them all up anyway I guess, but I'm doing them all at the same time either way. 21:28 #SPI: < Noodles> Nothing else from me. 21:28 #spi: < bdale> [item 6, Outstanding minutes] 21:28 #spi: < bdale> Jonathan, I believe we have last month's to vote on today? 21:28 #SPI: < Noodles> One set. 21:28 #SPI: < Noodles> Voting started, 9 people (ganneff,linuxpoet,solver,schultmc,noodles,bdale,clint,zobel,hydroxide) allowed to vote on Minutes for 13th June 2013 board meeting. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now. 21:29 #SPI: < Noodles> !vote yes 21:29 #spi: < linuxpoet> Wait 21:29 #spi: < Clint> !vote yes 21:29 #spi: < Ganneff> !vote abstain 21:29 #spi: < bdale> !vote abstain 21:29 #spi: < Solver> !vote yes 21:29 #spi: < zobel> !vote abstain 21:29 #spi: < schultmc> !vote yes 21:29 #spi: < linuxpoet> !vote yes 21:29 #spi: < linuxpoet> sorry, that isn't the vote I have a concern on 21:29 #spi: < linuxpoet> it is the next one 21:29 #spi: < bdale> ok 21:29 #SPI: < Noodles> Hydroxide? 21:29 #spi: < bdale> good, as we're not known for being good at waiting .. ;-) 21:30 #spi: < Hydroxide> got distracted 21:30 #spi: < Hydroxide> !vote abstain 21:30 #spi: < Hydroxide> because I haven't had the chance to read them 21:30 #SPI: < Noodles> Current voting results for "Minutes for 13th June 2013 board meeting": Yes: 5, No: 0, Abstain: 4, Missing: 0 () 21:30 #SPI: < Noodles> Voting for "Minutes for 13th June 2013 board meeting" closed. 21:30 #spi: < bdale> [item 7, Items up for discussion] 21:31 #spi: < bdale> [item 7.1, Resolution 2013-06-30.jmd.1 (Swathanthra Malayalam Computingas an associated project)) 21:31 #spi: < bdale> Joshua, is this yours? 21:31 #spi: < linuxpoet> SI 21:31 #spi: < linuxpoet> eRR YES 21:31 #spi: < linuxpoet> sigh, caps lock 21:31 #spi: < linuxpoet> Sorry. May I proceed? 21:31 #spi: < bdale> no worries .. proceed, please 21:31 #spi: < linuxpoet> The resolution does not state in anyway how approving this resolution is somehow beneficial to SPI or that it is in line with our bylaws 21:31 #spi: < linuxpoet> As it stands, it looks like a money funnel 21:32 #spi: < bdale> I don't know the organization at all, fwiw 21:32 #SPI: < Noodles> I wasn't aware of them before they contacted us. The resolution doesn't differ materially from what we've used for other associated projects. 21:33 #spi: < Solver> Their website reports GPLv3 licensing and that they have been accepted for GSoC. I have not independently verified these statements. 21:33 #spi: < bdale> I'm not negative about them, I've just been distracted and haven't researched them myself. I therefore plan to abstain from any vote on this resolution today. 21:33 #SPI: < Noodles> They have an Indian non-profit, they have a nongnu project page, they're on github, and I'm fairly sure I saw confirmation of their GSoC status from a site that wasn't theres. 21:33 #spi: < schultmc> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/google/gsoc2013/smc 21:33 #spi: < Hydroxide> complete list of accepted GSoC projects: http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/program/accepted_orgs/google/gsoc2013 21:33 #SPI: < Noodles> s/theres/theirs/ 21:33 #spi: < linuxpoet> Noodles: our other projects are a bit more obvious in nature but that also doesn't make them right. I have (in case it wasn't obvious from my previous concern) taken interest in the fact that we are starting to become a larger NP which means more scrutiny 21:34 #spi: < bdale> linuxpoet: is your concern that we don't know, or just that the resolution doesn't state? 21:34 #SPI: < Noodles> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/google/gsoc2013/smc 21:34 #spi: < linuxpoet> bdale: It is a documentation concern. If we amend the resolution just to state something about them adhering to our mission and why we think so, I would be fine with it 21:34 #spi: < Solver> Noodles: thanks 21:34 #spi: < Hydroxide> linuxpoet: it probably means we shouldn't take a haphazard approach to oversight either - i.e. disrupting ordinary business operations should be done based on lawyer advice of what we have to do to comply 21:34 #spi: < Clint> i believe we were advised by legal counsel a while back that we should be more explicit about the mission, indeed 21:35 #spi: < Hydroxide> but, yes, being explicit about the mission is good 21:35 #spi: < bdale> linuxpoet: you put the resolution forward? If so, I'd be happy for you to either amend now or retract to amend for a vote next month? 21:35 #SPI: < Noodles> I put the resolution forward. 21:35 #spi: < bdale> oh, sorry 21:35 #SPI: < Noodles> It had sat around with no one commenting on it. 21:35 #spi: < bdale> failing initials to nick conversions... /o\ 21:35 #spi: < bdale> ok 21:36 #SPI: < Noodles> Just because you make that easy for us. :P 21:36 #spi: < Solver> I have no concerns about their FOSS credentials based on what I'm seeing. 21:36 #spi: < bdale> so I think the point about improving our resolution text template to include a mission connection is good. I'm ambivalent about it in this particular case, except that since I'm not prepared to support the resolution today, if time isn't a big issue then maybe updating for next month is a good plan? 21:36 #spi: < linuxpoet> I would suggest a renumbering and something like 3. The Swathanthra Malayalam Computing project is an Indian Non Profit seeking to receive United States 501c3 recognition for its work in "insert" 21:37 #spi: < Clint> is it seeking that? 21:37 #spi: < bdale> if there's no time constraint, and it sounds like there isn't, I'd rather not word-smith in this meeting 21:37 #spi: < Solver> but the project is applying, not the foreign non-profit (AFAIK) 21:37 #SPI: < Noodles> Yes, it's the project. 21:38 #spi: < bdale> can we take this offline, update the specific resolution and the template, and vote on this next month? 21:38 #spi: < linuxpoet> Clint: that was my understanding but Noodles would know better 21:38 #spi: < linuxpoet> bdale: I would second that 21:38 #spi: < Clint> when do the gsoc payments happen? 21:38 #spi: < bdale> Noodles: make sense to you? 21:38 #SPI: < Noodles> AFAICT it's similar to the Debian situation. The project has an Indian non-profit that serves their needs there, and wants SPI to cover the US/RoW potentally. 21:38 #spi: < bdale> that makes sense 21:38 #SPI: < Noodles> I'm happy to set it aside, though I think they would like us to help them with GSoC as a matter of priority. 21:38 #spi: < Solver> can we accept GSoC payments provisionally? 21:39 #spi: < bdale> ok .. would a vote next month mess that up? we've accepted payments provisionally in the past. 21:39 #SPI: < Noodles> We can do an email vote if time is sensitive. 21:39 #spi: < bdale> jberkus must not be on channel? 21:40 #spi: < linuxpoet> Solver: we can accept the payments but the problem is, if we turn them down, we have a problem 21:40 #spi: < bdale> ok, I propose we table this until next month, and Noodles can call for an email vote if there's going to be a problem. any objection? 21:40 #spi: < zobel> can we have an indication who would prefer to set thise aside for one month and do email vote if it gets urgent? 21:40 #spi: < linuxpoet> bdale: no objection 21:40 #spi: < linuxpoet> zobel: I am fine with an email vote (thinks they should all be emails votes) 21:40 #spi: < Solver> no objections 21:40 #spi: < Hydroxide> I'm fine with that 21:40 #SPI: < Noodles> WFM. 21:40 #spi: < bdale> Noodles: make it so, then, and I'll move on 21:41 #spi: < zobel> WFM. 21:41 #spi: < Hydroxide> linuxpoet: it seems like nobody objects to them, but we want to fix the wording. I'm therefore not too concerned about that 21:41 #spi: < bdale> [item 8, Any other business] 21:41 #spi: < bdale> Since this is our AGM, do any board and/or contributing members have other items for discussion they would like to address briefly? 21:41 #spi: < bdale> I will mention in passing that my request for an SPI BOF at Debconf has been granted, so please, any board members present please plan to join me for that session. 21:41 #spi: < Ganneff> i will join by irc, if possible 21:42 #SPI: < Noodles> Likewise. 21:42 #spi: < Hydroxide> linuxpoet: also, email votes require unanimity under NY state law, with 100% of board members voting yes (i.e. all 9). in-meeting votes don't. so it's more of a pain. 21:42 #spi: < Hydroxide> I will be there in person 21:42 #spi: < linuxpoet> Hydroxide: same with Oregon (PgUS), I am used to it 21:42 #spi: < Hydroxide> assuming it doesn't conflict with a session I'm participating in for work-related reasons 21:42 #spi: < bdale> any other items? 21:43 #spi: < linuxpoet> none 21:43 #spi: < bdale> Ok, my apologies for the late start today... 21:43 #spi: < bdale> [item 9, Next board meeting] 21:43 #spi: < bdale> Our next regularly-scheduled monthly meeting would be 8 August 2013, 20:00 UTC. 21:43 #spi: < bdale> Any strong objections? 21:43 #spi: < Ganneff> SHOULD work 21:43 #spi: < zobel> WFM 21:43 #spi: < Solver> np 21:43 #spi: * schultmc will be in training that week and unavailable 21:43 #spi: < bdale> I don't fly until the 9th, so works for me 21:44 #spi: < bdale> Ok, thank you to everyone present for participating today. 21:44 #spi: < bdale> *GAVEL*