17:34:49 <justis> #startmeeting
17:34:50 <Tribot> Meeting started Mon Feb 20 17:34:49 2012 UTC.  The chair is justis. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:34:51 <Tribot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:34:53 <alpo> for may 10, we have ruth suehle on opensource.com
17:35:00 <justis> #chair alpo billf coxn justis
17:35:01 <Tribot> Current chairs: alpo billf coxn justis
17:35:28 <bdmc> as far as the plan, earlier I had been asked about adding some talk about PGP ( GPG ) and more general PKI stuff to a more specific CAcert session.
17:35:35 <alpo> justis: we're chatting with brian mccullough about cacert and when the timing works out
17:36:19 <justis> #topic speaker pipeline
17:36:21 <alpo> bdmc: there was talk of a weekend session... where are we on that?
17:36:29 <bdmc> ( side note: I seem to be getting messages from both trilug and trilug-steering -- how do I cancel that? )
17:36:48 <justis> bdmc: hi :)
17:36:58 <alpo> bdmc: i sent you one message on #trilug
17:37:39 <alpo> if you're on irssi, you can alt-<number> to switch to that window and do "/win close" to close it
17:37:58 <bdmc> Oh, yes.  The weekend ( Saturday ) session is a part of all of this, it is a more formal training session for CAcert Assurers, and the main reason that the CAcert people will be coming.  The current plan is to have it on the Saturday immediately following the TriLUG meeting.
17:38:26 <alpo> the cacert people would come for just saturday? or for the LUG meeting too?
17:38:34 <bdmc> alpo: I am getting everything in the same window.
17:38:52 * alpo does not know what client you are using...
17:38:54 <bdmc> Depending on travel availability, both.
17:39:03 <bdmc> alpo: irssi, sorry
17:39:16 <coxn> 12:38:57 [freenode] CTCP VERSION reply from bdmc: irssi v0.8.15
17:39:46 * snyrk waves to brian
17:39:52 <coxn> bdmc: "/part #trilug"
17:39:57 <coxn> bdmc: without the quotes
17:40:13 <bdmc> alpo: thank you -- it was a bit confusing
17:40:14 <coxn> 12:39:59 -!- bdmc [~bdmc@mail.buadh-brath.com] has left #trilug []
17:40:16 <coxn> that works
17:40:47 <snyrk> sorry for the tardiness... i assume we're learning about CAcert?
17:40:50 <alpo> so your latest plan was to shoot for april 12 and 14 ??
17:41:16 <alpo> snyrk: we're trying to make sure we have 1 and only 1 program scheduled for march, april, may
17:41:22 <snyrk> heh
17:41:25 <bdmc> As another side note, the CAcert people are interested in a meeting with Red Hat people about Root Certificates.
17:41:25 <snyrk> good plan
17:41:37 <justis> #chair alpo billf coxn justis snyrk
17:41:37 <bdmc> alpo: exactly
17:41:38 <Tribot> Current chairs: alpo billf coxn justis snyrk
17:42:05 <alpo> ok... i will contact john riselvato and postpone his talk (since he was not really confirmed yet)
17:42:32 <alpo> and put brian in for april 12
17:42:45 <alpo> where was the 4/14 workshop going to be?
17:42:55 <justis> alpo: please slow down on that decision
17:42:59 <alpo> ok
17:43:18 <justis> remember that we also have Evan Daniel is the pipeline for a 20 minute talk about Freenet
17:43:29 <alpo> ??
17:43:42 <justis> that would pair great with a 20 minute talk from bdmc about CAcert
17:43:53 <alpo> how come none of this is on https://steering.trilug.org/wiki/index.php/UpcomingMeetings ??
17:43:56 <justis> and then either 4 lightning talks about crypto/free speech/privacy/etc
17:44:05 <justis> alpo: because I haven't put it there yet
17:44:06 <billf> Sat April 14 was booked for ipv6 with Kevin Otte
17:44:24 <justis> I emailed the steering list about it last week
17:44:31 <alpo> wheee!
17:44:59 <bdmc> oops.  I missed the one with Kevin.  That is also a topic of interest to me.
17:45:03 <justis> anyhow, the "either" to my previous clause is that we get a 3rd speaker for a 20 min talk
17:45:15 <alpo> ok, i see the 4/14 IPv6 appointment... at "peak10??"
17:45:25 <snyrk> did we confirm the location yet?
17:45:37 <snyrk> otherwise, i imagine kevin is pretty flexible as long as it's before ipv6 day
17:45:40 <alpo> i don't think so
17:46:04 <justis> alpo: if you're going to harass me about https://steering.trilug.org/wiki/index.php/UpcomingMeetings, then I am going to ask you why we are 15 mins into talking about something that isn't even on https://steering.trilug.org/wiki/index.php/Steering_committee_meeting_agenda
17:46:07 <billf> ipv6 workshop was going to be at SplatSpace, unless we found somewhere else
17:46:24 <justis> oh, I see it now, nvm
17:46:30 <alpo> :-)
17:46:31 <billf> None of this was announced, so we can flex it around if CACert fits better
17:46:39 <justis> it wasn't there yesterday, before the 24 hour cutoff
17:46:53 * alpo smells beaurocracy
17:47:03 <billf> probably want more of a classroom style facility for CACert training
17:47:59 <justis> billf: more classroom style than SplatSpace? We can rearrange the tables to look like a classroom.
17:48:07 <justis> we can also probably get space at NCSU
17:48:47 <justis> alpo: that bureaucracy you smell is supposed to make these meetings get closer to 30 mins instead of 90 mins
17:48:48 <alpo> is there a rush on the cacert stuff?
17:49:13 <alpo> since we current havespeakers "penciled in" for 3/8, 4/12, 4/14 and 5/10
17:50:23 <justis> I do not think there is a rush on CACert, but I would like to see it get into the pipeline soon.
17:50:53 <justis> I also would prefer for it to be a 20 minute talk, paired with Evan Daniel and with something else crypto/privacy/free speech/anonymity
17:51:04 <coxn> WOOO! I regained access to my CAcert account!
17:51:05 <justis> since the "real" stuff is supposed to happen at a Saturday workshop
17:51:11 <coxn> (sorry for the interruption)
17:51:36 <alpo> i see... the combo talk... bdmc: would this be too short for a meaningful talk ?
17:51:42 <justis> the 20 min talk about CACert at TriLUG is basically an informational preso for the laymen and a sales pitch to the future assurers
17:51:56 <snyrk> justis: i'm for the 20-30 minute split talk, but not so much a fan of also throwing in lightning talks (which i think you had suggested)
17:52:56 <justis> snyrk: Ok. I'll convince you of its merit some other time. For now, let's just keep the "2-3 talks in one night" format on the table.
17:53:39 <snyrk> just to be clear, i'm for a less monolithic format... just not quite so much packed in
17:53:50 <justis> bdmc: would 20 mins be enough to get people excited about a Saturday workshop?
17:54:04 <bdmc> sorry, I was staying out.
17:54:07 <alpo> this sounds like we might be planning a 3-way for June 14th??
17:54:35 <alpo> (and MakerFaire is June 16th)
17:54:36 <justis> bdmc: Understood, but we would at least like your opinion on whether 20 mins is useful :)
17:54:49 <justis> hrm
17:55:10 <bdmc> Since we have done this before, at other meetings, that sounds about right.  We would ( have discussed ) also having an Assurance Party afterwards.
17:55:45 <alpo> as in at Bada Wings?  after a meeting?
17:56:13 <snyrk> what does such a party entail?
17:56:17 <bdmc> especially since others would be providing the PKI and PGP parts -- Bada, not likely, although possible -- no, I was talking about what we have done before
17:56:36 <alpo> before = "at the LUG meeting"
17:56:38 * snyrk really does need to go to a talk on CAcert =)
17:57:11 <bdmc> snyrk: people sitting at table examining documents and signing forms.
17:57:38 <bdmc> in some ways similar to a PHP key-signing party
17:57:47 <bdmc> ( PHP == PGP )
17:57:51 <justis> bdmc: would that be more effective *after* the training session for assurers?
17:57:59 <snyrk> bdmc: well, when you put it that way... sign me up
17:58:40 <bdmc> No, this is to help new people or non-assurers become Assured, prior to the advanced training
17:59:00 <alpo> we seem to have conflicting requriements... 20min talk for the LUG, but we need a verification party with some time and space
17:59:38 <alpo> our last CAcert meeting was about 20min talk + a lot of socializing afterwards while folks got assured
18:00:07 <bdmc> I agree -- it depends on your wish for the duration of the "presentation" part of the meeting  If it is the full 1.5+ hours, then yes, it wouldn't work.
18:00:35 <snyrk> what is your ideal format?
18:00:44 <alpo> but it sounds like the topic of "cacert" in general could fill en entire meeting
18:01:03 <alpo> although most of that meeting time would be informal mingling
18:01:23 <alpo> and that format conflicts with the 3-way
18:01:26 <justis> ok
18:01:34 <snyrk> is the end result of the intro talk that most people will want to participate?
18:01:35 <justis> I didn't get that until now
18:01:39 <bdmc> CAcert as covering PKI, certificates and CAcert. -- half the meeting time?
18:01:58 <alpo> (I *like* the 3-way for cacert + freenet + somethingelselikePGP)
18:02:06 <justis> Our last CAcert meeting was around 3 years ago, right?
18:02:34 <bdmc> I was thinking it was more recent, but time flys by.  You could be right.
18:02:35 <alpo> 2009-02-12
18:02:43 <bdmc> wow
18:02:52 <justis> :)
18:02:55 <billf> do people need to generate their keys before the party ?
18:02:57 <justis> time does fly
18:03:35 <bdmc> No, but they need to become members ( of the site ), either before or very shortly afterward.
18:04:08 <bdmc> billf: there aren't keys as such, involved
18:04:18 <justis> Did anyone actually use CAcert after the meeting?
18:04:30 <alpo> i used it for some web certs
18:04:39 <alpo> but then had better luck with StartSSL
18:04:45 <bdmc> I do also, also e-mail certification
18:04:48 <alpo> since they are included in more browsers than cacert
18:04:56 <justis> ok
18:05:27 <bdmc> that is part of what we are trying to solve.  the "old boys club" is not welcoming to an open source solution.
18:05:32 <justis> I like CAcert in principle, but I feel like we need more than an assuring party to make it a going concern within the LUG
18:06:31 <justis> bdmc: I get what you're saying and I think it's more about decentralized models vs. liability/indemnity concerns
18:06:45 <justis> corporations have no idea who to sue in a decentralized model
18:06:46 <coxn> that was part of why bdmc brought up the aside of the CAcert people meeting with the Red Hat people
18:06:55 <justis> :D
18:07:23 <bdmc> I agree, Justis.  We bring this up every few years, but there is nothing really to keep it in people's minds.
18:07:26 <justis> where do the CAcert folks like?
18:07:33 <alpo> bdmc: have you considered getting a table at maker faire? (would that even make sense?) -- then we could schedule a cacert+freenet+pgp talk on 6/14, 2 days before MF
18:07:38 <snyrk> once again, i start to feel the average triluger needs a solid introduction and time to ask questions about the tech/idea
18:09:07 <alpo> maybe maker faire would not be the right venue... but a lot of triluggers will happen to be there
18:09:18 <justis> alpo: I will add it to the UpcomingMeetings page in a minute, but we're supposed to have an open source hardware talk soon. So far, we have 20 min talks from Jeff Crews about 3D CNC and Barry about USRP / GNU Radio. That would be a perfect fit in May or June, because of proximity to MakerFaire.
18:09:33 <justis> alpo: maybe RARSfest :D
18:11:56 <alpo> RARSfest = April 7th
18:12:35 <justis> bdmc: do you think that a table at RARSfest would attract interest?
18:13:01 <justis> we might be trying too hard here, idk
18:13:12 <alpo> (note that our april meeting is 5 days AFTER rarsfest)
18:14:01 <coxn> hey we seem to be losing steam, here
18:14:09 <coxn> I've got to be out of here in the next 10 minutes
18:14:12 <bdmc> possibly -- I have been out of the ham community ( at least actively ) for a while, so I don't really know what would interest them at that event
18:14:22 <coxn> do we need to make any action items or come to any conclusions?
18:14:29 <coxn> or move on to other agenda items?
18:14:32 <alpo> i think the problem is that we have items on our calendar that are loosely committed, and an enthusiastic presenter who is not on the calendar at all
18:14:54 <coxn> bdmc: we should probably do a phone call at some point and I can get your help in getting fully back up to speed on CAcert now that I have my account access back
18:15:15 <alpo> possibly several enthusiastic presenters (barry, evan, jeff)
18:15:51 <bdmc> I would be happy to do so. We could exchange e-mail first, or leave my number here.
18:15:58 <coxn> bdmc: no phone here
18:16:02 <coxn> bdmc: this is logged publicly
18:16:22 <bdmc> which is why I suggested e-mail.
18:16:28 <coxn> perfect; will do
18:16:35 * alpo thought that the actions were published bu the text was not
18:16:42 * justis updated a few things on https://steering.trilug.org/wiki/index.php/UpcomingMeetings
18:16:47 <coxn> alpo: full transcript is linked
18:16:57 <justis> coxn: I don't see you think this meeting is losing steam, but you are welcome to take care of your day job.
18:17:16 <justis> s/don't see you think/don't see how you think/
18:17:27 <coxn> fair enough. maybe it was just a lul
18:17:47 <coxn> err. lull
18:18:12 <alpo> i hope we did not run off billf
18:18:45 <justis> alpo: he probably got asked for something at work
18:19:34 <justis> IIRC, he was also very enthusiastic about having a locked in agenda at https://steering.trilug.org/wiki/index.php/Steering_committee_meeting_agenda
18:19:37 <billf> i'm here, just bewildered
18:20:23 <billf> deep debugging u-boot code at work via jtag
18:20:32 <justis> we need to get these SC meetings back into tame territory. I think they're a burden on most of us and they are not the most efficient use of our time. I do think they're productive, but they could stand to be way more efficient.
18:20:36 <justis> billf: ooooh, fun
18:21:51 <alpo> it looks like our immediate calendar is full enough that the debate over cacert vs 3-way and where to hold our workshop might all be premature, could be addressed later
18:22:31 <alpo> if john riselvato is still planning to do the april meeting, then we are booked up until june
18:23:55 <coxn> I have to bow out.
18:24:06 <coxn> thanks all for putting in the time so that we can have good meetings
18:24:10 * alpo 's bladder is about to call "time" on the meeting
18:24:14 <coxn> I appreciate everybody's energy and commitment
18:24:33 <bdmc> thank you for the invitation
18:24:48 <alpo> thanks for helping us clarify some points
18:26:04 <justis> Ok. First, please know that I am fighting off a cold and in a bad mood. I apologize for being grumpy.
18:26:16 <justis> Next, I apologize for being 4 mins late.
18:26:47 <justis> Why was Brian's assumption that he was presenting a full talk in March allowed to co-opt our entire SC meeting hour?
18:26:49 <billf> justis: you're cool, we understand.  I have a cold too.
18:27:01 <justis> billf: Thanks. I hope your cold passes quickly.
18:27:20 <alpo> main items on the agenda were "fill the pipeline"
18:27:22 <justis> I was *soooo* tired on Saturday and curious whether it showed when I was presenting.
18:27:25 <billf> item 1 on the agenda :-)
18:27:46 <justis> item 1 was video recordings
18:27:53 <billf> :-) oops
18:28:10 <billf> I have a flip cam now too
18:28:11 <justis> item 2 was Adam Drew to present in March
18:28:15 <justis> billf: sweet!
18:29:07 * alpo just wanted to make sure we had not goofed with bigger-picture planning, asking cacert people to show up, talking cacert before a workshop, etc
18:29:34 <alpo> and there seemed to be some "who's driving the bus" going on... wanted to iron that out
18:29:56 <justis> Anyhow, my current goal regarding the agenda is to move long discussions back to steering@trilug.org. The weekly meeting should be for confirming what we discussed and for nominating the next week's agenda.
18:30:06 <billf> I was asking coxn before the meeting, what he and brian had been discussing
18:30:16 <justis> alpo: were the CAcert people planning to come to town in March?
18:30:33 <alpo> i have no idea... i wanted to get bdmc to comment on that
18:30:52 <justis> Ok. I think that would be better suited for email.
18:31:03 <justis> It could possibly be suited for a separately scheduled IRC meeting
18:31:36 <billf> I tried to get info from coxn last week via email, so when he showed up here, I asked directly
18:31:40 <alpo> as it stands, i think all of the agenda items have been touched on, with video just being lightly touched
18:32:05 <billf> so, do we want to rewind and start at 1 ?
18:32:16 <justis> yeah, I think the speaker pipeline has filled and we're searching for the pressure relief valves :p
18:32:17 * alpo doesn't - work calls
18:32:40 <justis> alpo: That's fine. We can defer it til next week and/or discuss via email.
18:32:50 <justis> alpo: What's your opinion of reigning in the agenda?
18:33:03 <justis> I want everyone who attends to have a clear picture of how long the meeting should take.
18:33:16 <alpo> i tend to be more effective at IRC and less on email, since emails come in dribs and drabs, IRC all at once
18:33:17 <justis> and I really think we should be able to get the average meeting down to 30 mins.
18:33:32 <alpo> IRC is more of a "discussion"... but i appreciate it's also a time sink
18:33:32 <snyrk> it's rather important to have someone referreeing the meeting then
18:33:57 <justis> snyrk: define referee
18:34:00 <snyrk> we don't self police well enough, as has been proven
18:34:08 <justis> snyrk: That's what I'm trying to change.
18:34:14 <alpo> so i do appreciate the effort to steer the IRC meetings, trim down
18:34:19 <justis> ok
18:34:37 <snyrk> someone to call the agenda items, pull things back on topic, and push toward an action item (or resolution)
18:34:58 <justis> fwiw, we've gotten firmer about this at SplatSpace recently. We run our meetings by rules called "MIBS 2"
18:35:14 <alpo> in person or on IRC ?
18:35:28 <justis> snyrk: I will assume that role when I am present for the IRC meetings
18:35:33 <justis> alpo: in person
18:35:50 <justis> alpo: but I think it would map well to IRC
18:36:28 <justis> the gist of MIBS 2 is that long discussion happens elsewhere and that meetings are for confirming consensus
18:36:28 <snyrk> justis: thank you for volunteering, i believe we'll all benefit
18:36:38 <justis> snyrk: thanks :)
18:36:40 <alpo> yes, thank you for bringing some order to our meetings :-)
18:36:45 <justis> order, order!
18:36:50 * snyrk orders up
18:36:51 * justis smacks the gavel
18:36:58 <snyrk> wow, he's good
18:37:33 * alpo now has 20 minutes to pretend that he has written a white paper for $work
18:37:51 <justis> Ok. So, let's defer the video discussion to next week. Let's also discuss it on steering@trilug.org in the meantime, to hopefully make it a quick consent item.
18:38:10 <justis> alpo: just give them the whitest paper they've ever seen
18:38:21 <snyrk> justis: can you send your preferred link to the meeting process?
18:38:22 <justis> #endmeeting