 Okay, well, while those guys putts around figuring out minute references and those sorts of things, let me welcome those of you who are here in person to the first weirdly strange attempt upon the SPI board meeting. I don't think this has ever actually happened before. Our normal process is to meet on a monthly basis via IRC, and we are strangely apparently no more adapted doing this in person. So let me see if I can do the three handed not drop my notebook on the fourth end here. And it's a little typing based game I've always got to do. Part of what I try to do before the meetings get started is to get this sort of transformation of our agenda into the typing based stuff so that we don't have to spend a lot of time waiting to make fun of what's been typing. I'm going to put my laptop on the table and put everything in front of the projector. I see, I'm blocking that. That was black for black. That was black for black. Okay, so yes, let's all put our names down for the record, I guess. All here, so maybe those of us who are here in person should just say our names. David and Jimmy Capilas. Neil and Kevin. Michael Shulferas. Ian Jackson. Yes, please stop delaying. No, no, no. Just record our nicks. Just tell me about profile. Yes, okay, so I want to thank all of you for coming in person to help us make this as an easy response. Okay, so have we got any written suggestions? We don't have anyone other than Josh on the channel. Joey. That's right. Joey's hand records. Hang on, hang on. Okay. Again, this idea actually just got lost in the last few minutes. BDL Cardi. Okay, so let's proceed. Every once in a while there is something interesting to report, and the attempt that we try to make is to have reports delivered to the forward meeting so that they can be included in our agenda and people can think about what's being said and focus the time that's going to be in our questions and answer the next thing we'll try to tackle today. Thank you. Okay, so pretty first report. We'll see if Josh hasn't been there yet. He did not send one. I love this part of the presentation. As you asked. I think what I suggest is we're going to go through as much as we can. So while we're waiting for Josh to see if there's something he wants to report to us, what I suggest for those of you who are here in person is that we will try to get through our agenda and process and then we will certainly hang around and be happy to continue the informal conversations about SPI and anything that we'd like to talk about afterwards. We had a really productive off yesterday. I guess this could qualify as a president's report. I was very pleased by the interest that folks are expressing. So once we get through the agenda, we'll be happy to shift out of official board meeting. We'll make this more open conversation. Okay. Josh says he wants to talk about electing a new treasurer sooner rather than later. Does he only need that? Beautiful. He's choosing to assume not. No, not on the agenda. Okay, good. Okay. Basically, nothing really... Be careful. Stop doing that. Nothing to report. Can I ask a question, Neil? There was that resolution that we passed that was a bit controversial about timings of various things before meetings and it requested you to make a timetable and, you know, push it to practice. And I don't seem to have seen anything from you along these lines. It did involve asking, for example, an announcement in advance. Asking people for things by particular baits and not notice that. Okay. If you need any help, I'll be quite happy to write anything up for you. Don't touch that. Okay. Last meeting, just before the meeting, we had a report sent to the board from the SPI trade mark committee thanks to MJ over there. Has everyone read it? Okay. It's sent to the board. Brief summary, there's a complaint about winner EDB's use of the Debian Official Use logo. It became clear that the logo license had a word omitted and copied from the resolution passed onto the website. Their use of the logo was arguably valid. Thanks to Joseph Rodding for pointing out the details of collecting the webpage. There was Dries Beiter, who is the registrant of the Drupal trade mark in Benelook. He is application to extend the trade mark to the ESWIS refused because Transparent Technology Inc. have registered the mark. Drupal Association has promised to help protect the trade marks, but there's been no board decision by the board. Last action was by Greg, who requested sign to the documents by fax. Thanks, I do remember that I was confused by the title of this thing. So I guess the question I have is, what's expected of us at this juncture? What I thought I remembered, so I guess I'm trying to understand what we're doing on the agenda. Is this just general information? I think it's just letting us know what's going on, which we should approve of. People sending us stuff for our information that we don't have to do anything about. I think the right answer is I'll thank the committee for delivering the report. It's in the agenda. It's on the webpage, but it wasn't sent out. Maybe I missed it being sent out. On the agenda webpage, at the end, the report is included. Which maybe this wasn't sent to? SPI Board. SPI Board originally, yes. Maybe we can include it in a minute. I was going to say, things in the agenda tend to be in minutes over for two hours. So nothing else we need to deal with here. Okay. I'm going to get another one, buddy. Do I? Oh, I'll start it with it. You know, they truly are seeing it most often. I'm going to report that we've got four sets of minutes to approve this one. The first set is October 4th, 2005. We've passed this set of minutes. Yeah, I'm happy with that. And the second, so... We're not starting. Two thousand minutes. Two thousand, yeah. Those in favour? Okay. I don't think that Josh is in the meeting. I'm sorry to have to do this to him. But you can't participate. You can participate by telephone. Yes, but he's not participating by telephone, so he can't hear what we're saying. Right. On the other hand, the minutes that we're asking him to approve were published in the entirety. In advance of the meeting, so it was kind of the same opportunity to review what we have. It seems that the question that could be posed was whether... Does he object? The question could be posed as to whether there's any comments he would object to. He wasn't on the board at the time of the meeting. That's an interesting point, since he wasn't on the board. At the time of the meeting, he seemed to be expected to abstain from anything. Should we abstain if we were a guest at a meeting? So if you were present at the meeting and had an opinion about whether the minutes are accurate, I think you were entitled to vote. Maybe. Even if you were not on the board at the time. It looks like Josh agrees that he would abstain in any case. I think that gracefully finesses that little issue. Okay. So what's our result in that meeting? Four of your two, right? Four of three. Four of three. Four of three. Four of three. Okay, great. Thank you. What's next? Next set is October the 18th, 2005. I moved you approved seven minutes. What was your favour? The meeting. The meeting. Yeah. Next set, November the 15th, 2005. Move. Thank you. Favour? I have to understand that was amazing. Yeah. Four of three. Right. We're going to ignore the December ones because there's a lack of resolutions in that. So we'll bring that up. I have a question. I raised about the 13th. I assume we'll defer that to our next meeting. Yeah. And might we expect May 18th, 2007 by our next meeting as well? Yeah, can I take it? Yeah. Marvellous. Thank you very much. The May 18th ones are those logs at the log. Yeah. Okay, so we're not going to do that yet. Right. Thank you. That's all from our coming minutes. Okay, so I believe this qualifies as informational tonight. But Neil, do you want to give us a quick summary of what this agenda item is? Okay. Brief summary, a while back, the then DPL, AJ here, requested that we re-license the Debian logos to the Open News logo and the Official News logo will both be re-licensed under MIT license. And additionally, that SPI should enforce the Open News logo as an exclusive trademark. And any enforcement should be limited to ensuring that the trademark remains available to refer to and promote Debian. The Official News logo will be continued to be enforced, with it only being authorized where its products or services is officially related to Debian. So on an official CD image, T-shirt promoting Debian, DD's business card, et cetera, in case of a doubt, leader of Debian.org should be contacted. There was additional feedback from Greg, who's our lawyer, saying that there may be issues with re-licensing the actual textual representation of the word Debian, because that may imply that we don't want to enforce the trademark of Debian. So there's an additional little paragraph saying that the license only applies to the Graphicals World and the Graphicals World and the bottle. It doesn't apply to the actual textual representation. I'm waiting for an OK backpacks of that before I nail that to next to various places and make sure that's re-opened. Hopefully, since Sam's here this week, we can run a little bit to make sure that it's taken care of. I guess he's not the next one. He's also here to be on. Yeah. Let me source the word summary text. OK, a while back, for those who may not be aware, we had a discussion on localSource.org, which happened on the board mailing list. There was some concerns raised, so we posted an inbox to the private mail business that wrote up a summary of the discussion. Just waiting for approval from Bida, Brandon, Ian, and Joey for that before I could publish it. So it's just a reminder again to say, please say OK. Well, we won't be approved just publishing the whole inbox. Approving, so there is a summary, but we decided, apparently, that the summary shouldn't be released until each of the board members whose opinions are represented in the summary are happy with it. And that means that those board members have to go and chuddle check that the summary in the inbox agreed, which involves rereading one of those devious bails in the inbox. Much better if we just published the summary without saying that it was necessarily something that all the board agreed with. But unfortunately, we are where we are. And I guess I get to go read something. OK, so nothing else about that other than a gentle pride. Thanks for... So Neil, this is something that we're talking about. This little pinnacle on Tim, is that you? Yes. OK, so I'm very pleased that you're here. Who wants to summarize the history? I guess I could try it, but... So this is a project that was approved and associated SPI project, which I had some infrastructure difficulties and sort of fell off the face of the earth for a while. And so when we were doing a sort of a refresh and a ping of our associated projects to make sure that we're all still around and doing good pre and open source software stuff, they couldn't be found. And so if I recall correctly, we had a resolution out of all of this unique to this project that for a moment was covering various things, the things that were added. They in fact were disassociated and wanted to write what the wording of the resolution was exactly. Have you found it Neil? If our goal today is to re-associate them, which I have no problem with, then I move that we... By the way, I think the... Before you move... OK, sure, that's fine. As far as the history, I think we... I don't think we did some sort of omnibus resolution regarding lots of projects. I think it was just open battles in Communicado. Oh, someone found it. In case you're on to ILC perhaps. Yep, I've got it. There you go. It's a very short resolution. In fact, I'd be happy to read it if you'd like. This was from November 21st of 2006. And from the name of... So this was a Josh Berkes motion for removal of open vests as it was associated with the project. Whereas the open vests project site www.openvests.org is down and has been for three weeks. Two attempts to reach the project with which it failed and three SPIs not holding any assets for open vests to our knowledge. We received any donations for open vests over a year. The SPI Board resolved that the project was moved as a removal of an associated project. It was just about that simple. So somebody else did not review Josh? Yeah, how about somebody just pointing out to Josh that they reappeared and that's what's going on. So, Tim, do you want to add anything to that? I gather the request is that we consider reassociating on that. Essentially it was a program of communication of which I'd like to apologize. There are several infrastructure programs and you and I have to get on with us. Moreover, we want to get on with you when you come on the occasion with your child to get on with you. I think the programming ain't much good, but yes, we'd like to complete the same thing that's behind it. Can I ask, I mean, not only in terms of telling you what you should have done, but to help us, what method did you try to get in touch with us? There was an email sent back in April that was actually a specific request about the April 5th project to allow time to board, which meant a lot of response to board. April of this year? April 2006, I believe. April 2000. That was our last attempt to communication with you. That was with regards to developer coordinator changing. We asked you to confirm that it's the case. This resolution here is in November 2006. Yes, that was our last need to contact you as far as we were concerned. Did we now have any contact details for somebody at OpenVast that's not a single point of failure? I believe so, yes. The constitution on OpenVast.org has been updated with my non-OpenVast details and also Robert's non-OpenVast details. This is actually a Gmail address, so let's have a Google look at that. In addition, I can provide additional contacts to the board, whilst they won't be in a position to sign up. They will be in a position to respond to tapers. Essentially, we've moved our infrastructure to manage service for one of the member companies within the OpenVast group, I suppose. They actually have support staff there to fix system failures. That kind of thing. They will be in a position to respond if a member starts. I'd like to mention that I dug out the previous resolution about OpenVast and edited it slightly and posted it to SBR General. As 2008.06.18.iwj.1. You wrote the firebacks? Yeah, I wrote 2005 in it. But it will be 2007, obviously. And obviously, that should be amended with Tim Browns and Robert Berkowitz's email addresses as for this web page. Berkowitz. I can read it out, but it's one of these associated project resolutions, so it's a bit... It's got two paragraph threes as well. Great work, yeah. Whereas OpenVast, the other two of the OpenVast developers would like, three OpenVast have resolved the problems and previously caused them to be uncontactable. Three, second instance. OpenVast has formally invited four currently Tim Browns, Sean Baumann and Robert Berkowitz are recognised by SBR as the Authoritarian Decision Makers for OpenVast. Actually, this isn't correct, is it? Because you have a constitution now, do you? That's actually the constitution that's found in the previous... Right. Well, we'll refer to this constitution then. I'll write up a new one in the next few minutes. Could we just move to recent, the 2006 November resolution in a very new way? We could do, but... It sounds like Ian would also like to capture the new contact information in the process, so whether we could, in fact, have a very simple resolution suggesting that, you know, send and update our records from their constitution. What do you think, Ian, about the... Yeah, I'd like to get the full details in the resolution, because that way we're going to have this problem again because we'll be able to look it up on our web page. Well, I've got a list of contact stuff for the associated... I keep a list of contact details for the associated projects. Anyway, but if we want to wait for the resolution, then that's fine as well. Right, so I've now got currently Tim Brown e-mail address, Sean Bowman and Robert Berkowitz e-mail address are recognised. There's a lot of SPI's in there. It makes for an open-vast point. The open-vast constitution is currently found at your app. What it's due is we know it's kind of lost. There you go. That should be arriving on SPI General Sortly or... Right, and for the benefit of people whose e-mail isn't working, there's the your app. I'm bringing this page to you now. Right, so does anybody have any... Do you want a chance to read that and tell me what's wrong with it? It's baited, yeah. A whole resolution, I mean. It's not a problem. It's great. It'd be better to... We could also just... We don't have to have... We can just speak it into the microphone. We can just speak a two-set motion to the microphone and then have it be tried later. Is that... Thank you. Well, it's in now. Should we have a comment on it? Should we just post on it? Excuse me. Are we having these resolutions discussed on SPI Private or General before writing on them? No. Oh, what? This is the wrong... We wanted to... You want version two, you want version one. And it's still the wrong money text. I know. That suggests we need the central desk meeting so that we can give them every shift. Yeah. Okay, let's believe it tonight. So I'll give them every shift. Yeah. Okay, well, I thank both for the email and for being here. And I hope that without too much further delay, we can get this all closed up on having decided once before that this was a suitable project. Let's put this into the project. Don't die now, please. Can you die now, please? Yeah, okay. All right. So when is our next meeting going to be? July 1st and... Yeah. July 1st. Yeah. That's... Yeah. Oh, if you go for the training. Sunday. Yeah, that is like it. We're still in Europe at that time. I would decide before I leave here whether I need to request for regrets or not. Shall we set the... July 4th meeting as well? It's probably going to be at the end of the meeting. Isn't that possible? It's not the third of the election, and it's the last of the election. And that's what the third one is? Well, the third focus is for them the reactions. For them the elections, right? Yeah. Just a minute. With any word. Okay. So, Neil, do you want to rattle out the reiterate of the election schedule since we approach here? We have our annual meeting on 1st July, which also... On that day also the nominations for election to the board open. There's currently six positions available on the board with myself, Josh, and I'm still remaining. Everyone else is up for a re-election if they don't understand. So that runs from the 1st of July to 13th of July. I'll send out more details on exactly how to say I'll understand in the next coming days. From the 15th of July to the 28th of July, voting starts. If you're a contributing member before the 15th of July, then you get to vote. More details will be sent out then. 29th of July is also published. At, I assume, 1900 UTC there's all member elections where the board meet up and the new board meet up. The old board can go along if they really want. And the new board decides who's the officers for the next year. Okay, thank you much. So this is normally the part of the meeting where I close the meeting since we're in this unusual state of being in person with a crowd. Are there any other items of business for the board while we're here? Okay, this silence is deafening. So, thanks to everyone for being present. Officially, the board meeting is now closed and we'll be happy to hang around if anyone has questions they would like to ask, not necessarily on the rotten fruit that's right. No one's saying anything but I don't see. I've got it. Take a couple. Take a couple. Right, okay.