Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2022 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi Simon,

as you may know I do fully agree that there should be much more transparency and that there is no need to keep private who voted on what except in some very rare cases.

It's probably no secret that I'm not happy at all about the whole budgeting process. I voted on the general idea of the budget but not to confirm the specific items as I agree we need to define a budget I think the methods used to get stuff in the ranking has room for improvement.

I find it very odd that the same people that propose tenders are also in the board voting for them in the budget and then they end up bidding for them. This is something that we should change very quickly and this should affect the current budget down the line even if we approve a rough idea of spending.

I would also say that the project nad tenders approved for the budget 2022 should be published in full, with relative costing, so that all can see how much we plan to spend on each items allowing the community to let us know if they agree with those items and costing.

I tried to find the spreadsheet with the votes from the members of the ESC to see how the ranking has been done but it seems like it's a "secret", as you like to say, as it hasn't yet been shared with the board.

The costing issue seems to be recognised by the commercial contributors represented in the ESC which finds it too expensive to provide detailed quotes for the tenders they'll bid on so it seems like we have a budget that doesn't really represent reality:

https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2021-November/088035.html

I also think it's a bit unfair that only 2 commercial contributors are fully aware of the expected cost of a tender, as they proposed it, while potential external bidders that have no representatives in the ESC or the board won't know what to expect in terms of reward for their efforts. So or we make those very rough idea of costing available to all or we use the in-house developers to give us an rough ideas of what we should spend, I guess as rough as the one we are getting from the commercial contributors, and we don't disclose the budgeted cost for each item to members of the ESC/Board.

To conclude I welcome your call for more transparency and please do ask for more if things are not clear.

Ciao

Paolo




On 01/04/2022 11:30, Simon Phipps wrote:
Super, thanks for adding that header to the minutes - it helps enormously with understanding who is involved in decisions! Would it be possible to get this information with every secret item that is made public from now on please?

Cheers

Simon

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 10:04 AM Florian Effenberger <floeff@documentfoundation.org> wrote:

    Hello Andreas, Hello Simon,

    Andreas Mantke wrote on 01.04.22 at 09:52:

    > I'm not Simon, but I'm curious why your answer contains no
    information
    > about the participants of this private part of the meeting.
    Maybe this
    > is not a top secret thing and you could add this information here.

    here's the list of participants:

    Session chair: Thorsten Behrens
    Keeper of the minutes: Florian Effenberger

    In the meeting:
         Board Members - Thorsten, Cor, Laszlo, Kendy, Paolo, Emiliano
         Board Deputy Members - Ayhan, Gabor, Gabriel
         Team - Florian

    Representation: Gabor for Caolan

    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.

    Florian

-- Florian Effenberger, Executive Director (Geschäftsführer)
    Tel: +49 30 5557992-50 | Mail: floeff@documentfoundation.org
    The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
    Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
    Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint

-- To unsubscribe e-mail to:
    board-discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org
    <mailto:board-discuss%2Bunsubscribe@documentfoundation.org>
    Problems?
    https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
    Posting guidelines + more:
    https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
    List archive:
    https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
    Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy



--
*Simon Phipps*
/Office:/+1 (415) 683-7660 /or/ +44 (238) 098 7027
/Signal/Mobile/:  +44 774 776 2816/
/


--
Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details:https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Context


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.