Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2021 Archives by date, by thread · List index

The Document Foundation
Board of Directors Meeting 2021-12-03
Meeting Minutes

Date: 2021-12-03
Location: Jitsi

Session chair: Lothar Becker
Keeper of the minutes: Stephan Ficht

In the meeting:
   Board - Lothar Becker, Thorsten Behrens, Emiliano Vavassori, Michael
Meeks, Cor Nouws
   Board Deputies - Paolo Vecchi, Nicolas Christener
   Membership Committee -
   Membership Committee Deputies - Shinji Enoki, Uwe Altmann
   Community - Jan Holešovský, Aron Budea
   Team - Florian Effenberger, Stephan Ficht, Sophie Gautier

Representation: Nicolas for Franklin, Paolo for Daniel

Chairman of the Board is in the meeting. One of the Chairman or Deputy
Chairman is required to be present or represented for having a quorate call.

The Board of Directors at time of the call consists of 7 seat holders
without deputies. In order to be quorate, the call needs to have 1/2 of
the Board of Directors members, which gives 4. A total of 7 Board of
Directors members are attending or represented in the call.

The board waives all formal statutory requirements, or requirements in
the foundations articles, or other requirements regarding form and
invitation, time limits, and for the topics discussed in this meeting.

The meeting is quorate and invitation happened in time. From now on,
motions can be passed with the agreement of a simple majority of those
remaining present. The majority threshold is currently 4.

The meeting commences 13:02 Berlin time.

Public Part

1. Q&A: Answering questions from the community (all, 10 minutes)
    Rationale: Provide an opportunity for the community to ask questions
to the board and about TDF
    + great sessions for presentation of BoD candidates (Kendy)
       + Sophie thought perhaps these could be organized for
         running board too twice per year
       + something like FOSDEM / LibOCon - an hour of questions
       + why not use Q&A as part of public part? (Kendy)
          + feedback is 10 minutes is not enough for harder questions
          + perhaps more time can be dedicated
       + should discuss with the MC (Sophie)
          + good that they organize it
          + important to get in touch with the community
       + action to clarify with the MC (Lothar)
          + at LibOCon - we have a session like this before closing.
          + perhaps should get a more prominent place
       + point - probably one hour is too short (Emiliano)
          + MC organised - two hours; perhaps that's enough to start
            discussing but difficult
          + good to have discussion in different timezones - to get
            different members of the community to speak
       + love two hour calls - but would like to read a transcript (Michael)
          + agreed by speakers.
    + bring these ideas to the MC (Lothar)
       + Emiliano volunteered to do this.
    + sessions were recorded (Kendy)
       + two of them - one of them somehow failed; transcript might be
good too
       + might be worth considering interleaving it with FOSDEM & LibOCon
          + seemed like people were more open asking hard Q's when it was
            a bit more anonymous - rather than at LibOCon
          + which is good.
AI Emiliano: Contact MC to propose a much more detailed plan for these

2. Information&Plan: Suggestion of an "attic" status of LOOL repository,
input from subgroup, ESC inquiry (Thorsten, Emiliano, all 10min)
    Rationale: Status/Follow on of the action item, timeline for
decision making on that
     + should be sth on the board-discuss list (Lothar)
     + have a proposal ready? (Thorsten)
        + more or less, we worked on that (Emiliano)
           + something to discuss with more people; that's fine
           + if we want to can publish the draft
        + strongly suggest we do that (Thorsten)
           + where I stand, I'm happy with state of the draft
           + would like to hear input.
           + hopefully can turn around by E-mail vote
        + more or less the same plan (Emiliano)
          + will go to board-discuss list asking for feedback
          + if no major things to change will go through voting
     + can be done on discuss, or members list (Emiliano)
        + perhaps members is better?
     + topic was discussed in public in the past stick there (Florian)
        + discussion & agenda items in public
        + default to public
        + agree (Thorsten)
           + default is that, if need for privacy - keep it on BoD list
           + don't think there is anything problematic there
           + lets get it out & get it moving?
           + who should send it?
             + Thorsten do it tonight unless Emiliano beats him to it
    + will it start a big discussion mid-election? (Michael)
       + if there is a danger of controversy postpone by a week? (Thorsten)
          + all candidates may take part in that (Lothar)
          + during elections - may be people who have already voted
            + depending on how it goes may reflect.
       + will publish on the 14th after election closes (Emiliano)
          + Thorsten take care of this (Lothar)

3. Information&Plan: Scheduling dates of BoD meetings until end of term
(Lothar, all 5min)
    Rationale: Planing for end of year and until next board term, FOSDEM
    + more/longer meetings at FOSDEM? (Lothar)
    + not scheduled yet, but should do - wait until election is over
       + lets give people a bit of planning time
    + usually scheduled dates - Dec 17th, invitation is out
       + this is the official meeting of the year
       + next is Dec 31st - can skip that
       + next is Jan 14th
       + next is Jan 28th - handle this with FOSDEM
    + prefer scheduling longer meetings with gaps (Thorsten)
       + new board being seated not too far from then
       + get FOSDEM meetings closer to Feb when new board is seated
          + then we cna have 28th
    + FOSDEM is Feb 5-6th (Emiliano)
       + keep either Jan 28th or 14th
       + if cancelling Dec 31st, have Jan 7th and 21st? (Kendy)
          + Kendy meant to shift the complete schedule in Jan one week
before, so that FOSDEM is in the normal biweekly rythm, but that is not
possible for me, I cannot guarantee to be available at the 7th of
January (Lothar)
          + not possible for me but ok for others? (Lothar)
    + We meet Dec 17th, take Jan 14th, Jan 28th (Lothar)
       + Feb 11th also scheduled - last one - for handover
       + support that
    + suggest not having a FOSDEM meeting (Thorsten)
       + instead look for mid-Feb, new board on Feb 18th - Friday
       + could have something around that weekend.
       + new board already who can decide things with old board around
          + up-side: new board can already decide & find the rhythm
          + one meeting not two or three
       + fine not to have same time as FOSDEM when people are blocked
    + fine until the 14th Jan
    + define schedule of BoD meetings Dec 17th (Lothar)

4. Budget
    Rationale: Preparation of formal meeting on December 17
    + preliminary version next week (Florian)

Public meeting ends at 13:22 Berlin time.

Private Part

5. Bug bounty (Florian)
    Rationale: Last-minute item to talk about the planned bug bounty.
    Reason why in private: Legal/contractual bits.

Private meeting ends at 13:55 Berlin time.

Lothar Becker (Session chair)
Stephan Ficht (Keeper of the minutes)

Stephan Ficht, Administrative Assistant
Tel: +49 30 5557992-64 | Mail:
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details:

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.