On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Brian Granger <
elli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Would you post these to the Google Group?
Possibly, I would _prefer_ to have a better archiving medium where
only this is available, but I don't see any harm in posting that on
the google group. The _advantage_ of building that on a separate
platform is that it can be built progressively and in collaboration
with each other.
> I think having team leaders responsible
> for summarizing their meetings like this would also be helpful.
It would be nice to have leader _involved_, but making them
responsible would be (IMHO) too much strain on them as they can be
unavailable, travelling. I would prefer to have the responsibility
that this get done on the leader but have a regular involvement on a
day-to-day basis from individuals. I even think that having a rough
outline before each meeting would be helpful to shorten the meetings
and make them more useful.
The question remain do we do 2 summaries per week (same days as
meetings) or one ?
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Thomas Kluyver <
tak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think a summary of the meetings would be useful.
>
> On a related note, I'd like to propose that we organise the Hackpad notes
> (and consequently the meeting format) around parts of the project, rather
> than around individuals. I.e. rather than the notes saying 'Thomas Kluyver:
> foo, bar', I'd like to see 'IPython kernel: baz, qux'. And it's fine to
> leave components out if there's no particular update on that area. I think
> this would make the meetings a more useful exchange of information, both for
> the people in the meeting and anyone looking at the notes later.
I think from a _practical_ perspective, as people fill in things
during the meeting it might be hard.
But for the summary, yes definitively.
Also instead of arguing how it should be let's do something like Carol did:
https://github.com/willingc/jhub-week/issues/1
--
M