CWG meeting 2012-05-28

From OpenStreetMap Foundation


  • Harry Wood
  • Henk Hoff
  • Richard Fairhurst
  • Jonathan Bennett
  • Richard Weait


(03:59:27 PM) JonathanB [] entered the room.
(04:02:53 PM) JonathanB: Evening
(04:02:59 PM) toffehoff: Hello!
(04:03:11 PM) toffehoff: Gosh, it's already past the hour ....
(04:03:28 PM) rweait1: Hi
(04:03:46 PM) RichardF: Evening
(04:03:50 PM) rweait1: Oh how the time flies.
(04:03:58 PM) toffehoff: :-)
(04:04:04 PM) rweait1: no Harry Wood?
(04:04:24 PM) RichardF: accio Harry!
(04:04:24 PM) JonathanB: Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana
(04:04:30 PM) toffehoff: Just wanted to say that myself. Shall we wait for him?
(04:04:44 PM) RichardF: damn, my magical summoning skills didn't work. I'm happy to wait but others may be in more of a hurry
(04:05:15 PM) JonathanB: "No match for harry" -- both correct and philosophical
(04:05:34 PM) rweait1: :-)
(04:07:18 PM) JonathanB: Sorry for not being around recently -- vehicular goings on have somewhat disturbed my weekly routine
(04:07:51 PM) toffehoff: So, what's on the agenda today?
(04:08:59 PM) toffehoff: - Handling general OSM inquiries (addressed to Steve)
(04:09:14 PM) toffehoff: - Rebuild update
(04:09:23 PM) toffehoff: - tomtom?
(04:09:34 PM) toffehoff: - comms protocol/policy
(04:09:41 PM) harry-wood [~sotm11@] entered the room.
(04:09:46 PM) toffehoff: Missing anything?
(04:09:49 PM) toffehoff: Welcome Harry
(04:09:55 PM) harry-wood: Hello
(04:09:59 PM) harry-wood: Sorry I'm late
(04:10:12 PM) toffehoff: Just mentioned the possible items for today (from your earlier email).
(04:10:23 PM) harry-wood: My macbook decided it was 'internet connection sharing' and refused to do anything else
(04:10:43 PM) harry-wood: Cool. Who else is here?
(04:11:10 PM) rweait1: me
(04:11:12 PM) toffehoff: Richard & Richard
(04:11:17 PM) toffehoff: Jonathan
(04:12:01 PM) harry-wood: RichardF I like your TomTom response blog post
(04:12:02 PM) toffehoff: Anyone else in this room want to join in?
(04:12:07 PM) toffehoff: +1
(04:12:27 PM) RichardF: harry-wood: thank you! Pascal Neis has spotted where the mysterious paper referred to by TomTom actually is (becaues he wrote it :) ) and I need to update it with that.
(04:12:28 PM) harry-wood: Also an example of *not* using the voice of the OSMF I suppose
(04:12:41 PM) RichardF: harry-wood: yes, absolutely.
(04:13:08 PM) toffehoff: Also think this was an example of handling things right.
(04:13:18 PM) toffehoff: No need for an official response of OSMF
(04:13:38 PM) harry-wood: yeah I guess not
(04:14:01 PM) toffehoff: But a nice rebuttal from someone within OSM on a personal note.
(04:14:03 PM) RichardF: our community is great. I have every expectation that someone would have countered them, I just stepped up for it this time :)
(04:14:22 PM) JonathanB: RichardF: What did Pascal say about the TomTom piece?
(04:14:59 PM) RichardF: JonathanB: he identified the research paper as this -
(04:15:17 PM) RichardF: read into it and you'll see that TomTom's claim of "misinterpreting forest tracks as roads" is completely wrong
(04:15:53 PM) RichardF: what the paper is saying is that a simple count of the highway=* tag favours OSM over TomTom, because of forest tracks etc.
(04:17:02 PM) toffehoff: Anything we need to do with this?
(04:17:07 PM) RichardF: nope.
(04:17:08 PM) harry-wood: hehe. odd misinterpretation
(04:17:19 PM) harry-wood: OK what's next to talk about?
(04:17:37 PM) harry-wood: rweait1 was raising the issue of Steve's email
(04:18:11 PM) harry-wood: what did Steve have to say about it? He's willing to redirect his old email address somewhere?
(04:18:43 PM) rweait1: I've heard nothing from SteveC on the matter.
(04:18:46 PM) toffehoff: I'm not sure he wants that. At least: I wouldn't want that....
(04:18:49 PM) JonathanB: An auto response would probably be a better way of dealing with it.
(04:18:59 PM) toffehoff: if it was my email address.
(04:19:17 PM) RichardF: Steve seems fine with manually forwarding stuff anyway AIUI, it's just how we deal with it.
(04:19:23 PM) toffehoff: Can we set up a general e-mailaddress where Steve can forward all these questions to?
(04:19:30 PM) RichardF: toffehoff: exactly.
(04:19:44 PM) JonathanB:
(04:19:54 PM) RichardF: I wonder if we should have something similar for the queries that come in to - try and encourage people to use (or info, or whatever) instead.
(04:20:03 PM) rweait1: My thought is that Steve must NOT be happy with it if he is forwarding email to others to handle.
(04:20:19 PM) RichardF: rweait1: happy with forwarding it, not happy with answering it - there's a difference.
(04:20:40 PM) RichardF: (the board@ stuff makes me laugh. If I have a problem with my gas bill, do I ask to sort it out?)
(04:20:45 PM) rweait1: Some don't get forwarded promptly. I can't see that as optimal.
(04:20:50 PM) RichardF: sure.
(04:21:10 PM) RichardF: though if people want their messages to be answered promptly, they should put the 30s in to find the right e-mail address.
(04:21:52 PM) toffehoff: So, can we decide on an e-mail address and where it is going to?
(04:22:02 PM) JonathanB: Do we have any idea where people are finding Steve's address?
(04:22:06 PM) rweait1: Anything to do on this before Steve offers an opinion?
(04:22:33 PM) harry-wood: I suppose we want the emails to reach somebody clued-in on the OSMF (board and CWG and management type people) but not a public mailing list because that would be counter to what the sender expects
(04:22:37 PM) RichardF: toffehoff: do we want something like OTRS to deal with the queries?
(04:23:09 PM) harry-wood: Oh yeah. DWG have such a system set up right?
(04:23:16 PM) harry-wood: Don't know anything about it
(04:23:17 PM) toffehoff: It might be a good idea. At least something we can track things: which inquiries have been answered and such.
(04:23:18 PM) RichardF: harry-wood: yeah, I've had people send legal queries to (which goes to me) before; I've forwarded the query to the list because I assume that's what they wanted, given that they were mailing the list owner; and they've subsequently gone ballistic.
(04:23:37 PM) harry-wood: hmmm :-/
(04:24:08 PM) toffehoff: Maybe they wanted it forwarded to legal@osmf
(04:24:18 PM) JonathanB: Well, people shouldn't expect to have personal, exclusive access to any part of OSM
(04:24:30 PM) RichardF: toffehoff: I think they thought I was OSM's paid legal counsel or something...
(04:25:03 PM) toffehoff: Maybe then a general template text reply on what their options are.
(04:25:17 PM) harry-wood1 [~sotm11@] entered the room.
(04:26:10 PM) toffehoff: ... so they can decide themselves where to place the question.
(04:26:51 PM) toffehoff: So, back to the original question.
(04:27:44 PM) toffehoff: We can set up a special mail box and rotate the task of answering them.
(04:28:06 PM) toffehoff: ... and figure out a mail-tracking system in the meantime.
(04:28:17 PM) RichardF: toffehoff: the way you've answered board@ questions works well - anyone who feels free can jump in and answer, as long as they cc: board@ so that others know it's been answered.
(04:28:20 PM) RichardF: no need to set up a rota.
(04:28:48 PM) toffehoff: OK, but I also want to be able to forward some questions to legal@ for example.
(04:29:08 PM) RichardF: sure.
(04:29:08 PM) harry-wood1: Well that would be one response
(04:29:09 PM) toffehoff: then still ... what to do with questions send to steve only.
(04:29:26 PM) RichardF: let's have the enquiries mailbox for now, and Steve can forward stuff there if he wants.
(04:29:28 PM) toffehoff: Where can he send them to?
(04:29:36 PM) RichardF: or or whatever we decide upon.
(04:30:01 PM) toffehoff: Cool. Is it a separate mailbox or a forwarder?
(04:30:27 PM) RichardF: forward to for now?
(04:30:38 PM) JonathanB: Works for me
(04:31:16 PM) toffehoff: Cool. Do we have an internal protocol on who is answering e-mail. Before some people get multiple responses.
(04:31:26 PM) harry-wood1: maybe we could make another outlook group 'enquiries' and ask everyone from the other WGs if theyd like to help by being on that list
(04:31:36 PM) harry-wood1: (so it's not just us)
(04:31:41 PM) harry-wood left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 480 seconds).
(04:31:48 PM) RichardF: toffehoff: I wouldn't worry too much about that. If someone gets two responses they've had extra value :)
(04:32:18 PM) toffehoff: :-)
(04:32:39 PM) toffehoff: How much time do we give ourselves for an initial reponse?
(04:33:19 PM) toffehoff: (in case everybody is waiting for the other to respond)
(04:33:32 PM) harry-wood1: Well we can aim to respond within 24 hours I would've thought
(04:33:57 PM) JonathanB: Maybe have a combination auto-response and forward?
(04:34:14 PM) JonathanB: Auto-response detailing what should happen and how long it's likely to take?
(04:34:24 PM) toffehoff: The initial response could of course also be that we forward the question to someone else.
(04:34:53 PM) RichardF: "Thanks for your enquiry. This mailbox is answered by volunteers who will aim to answer your question as soon as possible. However, if you'd like to use our interactive help site, please visit , where you can also search through previously asked questions."
(04:35:05 PM) JonathanB: +1
(04:35:44 PM) harry-wood1: Yeah I think we need to basically discourage use of this channel as much as possible, because it's a pain :-)
(04:36:04 PM) RichardF: yep.
(04:36:13 PM) toffehoff: Looks good for starters. See how it will turn out. Can tweak it later if needed.
(04:36:18 PM) JonathanB: True, but some people struggle with the idea of there not being a central place to email
(04:36:43 PM) harry-wood1: yep. Some people just lurrve to send an email to a person
(04:37:01 PM) toffehoff: So,
(04:37:07 PM) RichardF: I'm good with that.
(04:37:09 PM) JonathanB: Fine by me
(04:37:17 PM) harry-wood1: so how do we set this up? toffehoff you an create an outlook group? Can you create that email inbox too?
(04:37:25 PM) RichardF: we use Outlook?
(04:37:25 PM) toffehoff: Who is going to do the magic work?
(04:37:36 PM) toffehoff: I only have access to
(04:37:40 PM) toffehoff: not
(04:37:54 PM) harry-wood1: aha. do we need to ask the sysadmins to do it?
(04:38:01 PM) JonathanB: Either Grant or Tom will have the magic keys
(04:38:40 PM) toffehoff: Harry, you're going to ask them?
(04:38:48 PM) harry-wood1: ok then :-)
(04:38:52 PM) toffehoff: Thanks!
(04:39:23 PM) toffehoff: ... and we may have to ping Steve after this has been set up.
(04:40:09 PM) toffehoff: Next?
(04:40:11 PM) RichardF: all of this is a reminder that I need to talk to Grant about next steps in getting the blogs combined.
(04:40:27 PM) RichardF: I won't be able to do anything for the next week and a half (final WW deadline, then holiday) but do remind me afterwards :)
(04:40:57 PM) toffehoff: You don't have a magical todo list somewhere?
(04:41:01 PM) toffehoff: :-)
(04:41:24 PM) RichardF: that sort of thing comes under the big heading of "sorting my life out now I'm going freelance" :)
(04:42:00 PM) toffehoff: Looks like we're trading places.
(04:42:13 PM) RichardF: heh - you're going full-time?
(04:42:20 PM) toffehoff: About to go from freelance to a full-time job.
(04:42:26 PM) RichardF: what will you be doing?
(04:42:26 PM) toffehoff: :-)
(04:42:47 PM) toffehoff: product management for a CDN (content delivery network)
(04:42:54 PM) RichardF: congratulations :)
(04:43:22 PM) toffehoff: Not much to do with maps. Everything to do with video-streaming, video-on-demand, live streaming and such.
(04:43:46 PM) RichardF: I can see that. Personally I'd go mad if my job (freelance or full-time) was entirely maps...
(04:43:47 PM) JonathanB: begin with :)
(04:43:50 PM) toffehoff: Think it's worth the step to to full-time again.
(04:44:18 PM) harry-wood1: All sorts going on. Did you see Andy got organised with a website for his tile services
(04:44:38 PM) toffehoff: cool!
(04:45:15 PM) toffehoff: 15 minutes to go.
(04:45:17 PM) harry-wood1: Proffesionalisationalismaptastic
(04:45:18 PM) RichardF: hey, good.
(04:46:19 PM) harry-wood1: So henk was making some edits to the communications protocol doc
(04:46:35 PM) harry-wood1: are widening the scope henk?
(04:46:37 PM) toffehoff: Maybe "some" is an understatement....
(04:47:06 PM) JonathanB: Ah -- can someone give me access as please -- I don't use my OSM email address with Google.
(04:47:09 PM) toffehoff: Not intended to widening the scope.
(04:47:20 PM) toffehoff: Will do.
(04:47:26 PM) harry-wood1: we dont want to write the bible on all things communcation
(04:47:31 PM) toffehoff: done
(04:47:52 PM) JonathanB: ta
(04:47:56 PM) toffehoff: Oh, no. It was more intended to shorten things.
(04:49:07 PM) toffehoff: Anyone else not having access?
(04:49:26 PM) harry-wood1: OK. I'm going to read through and comment by email later I guess. Anything discuss now?
(04:49:33 PM) toffehoff: Gave everyone on communication@ access.
(04:49:43 PM) toffehoff: Yeah, lot's of comments.
(04:49:58 PM) toffehoff: Please give feedback. I might also be wrong sometimes ;-)
(04:51:21 PM) harry-wood1: Other topics for today?
(04:52:01 PM) toffehoff: mackerski: any idea when rebuild is ready>
(04:52:02 PM) toffehoff: ?
(04:53:05 PM) harry-wood1: Well I chatted to Matt about it directly
(04:53:24 PM) toffehoff: Any uplifting news?
(04:54:01 PM) harry-wood1: had a little BBQ yesterday. It was fun, but didn't help matt get on with the coding work :-)
(04:54:15 PM) harry-wood1: He said he feels like it's nearly there
(04:54:15 PM) toffehoff: So the message on rebuild is the latest?
(04:54:26 PM) rweait1: Who wants to just get the details and post them Wednesday? no need to go over this here, and in LWG, ...
(04:54:28 PM) harry-wood1: (but he also says he keeps thinking that)
(04:55:01 PM) harry-wood1: I'm happy to do it again if you want. Do people expect it to be wednesday?
(04:55:18 PM) rweait1: Yes, it's been Wednesdays on Rebuild@
(04:55:28 PM) harry-wood1: ok. but that
(04:55:30 PM) rweait1: And, "please and thank you."  :-)
(04:55:41 PM) toffehoff: :-)
(04:55:42 PM) harry-wood1: s not many days after this mornings update
(04:56:13 PM) rweait1: true. But last Wednesday was late.
(04:56:23 PM) toffehoff: Maybe move it to Friday this time.
(04:56:37 PM) toffehoff: and get back on Wednesday next week.
(04:56:38 PM) harry-wood1: Yup. My fault. As I say I wanted to report something better than zero changes
(04:56:57 PM) rweait1: Whatever you decide, perhaps let rebuild know, because that was to be the channel for weekly updates.
(04:57:16 PM) rweait1: "even if there is nothing to report."  :-)
(04:57:43 PM) rweait1: where,"nothing" might just mean nothing substantial.
(04:57:57 PM) harry-wood1: Ok well I'll try to do something wednesday then
(04:58:11 PM) rweait1: Thank you.
(04:58:15 PM) harry-wood1: Guys I have to go. Food awaits.
(04:58:22 PM) rweait1: Cheers.
(04:58:23 PM) toffehoff: Enjoy!
(04:58:24 PM) harry-wood1: Same time next week?
(04:58:37 PM) harry-wood1: can somebody else paste the IRC log in.