Tech Team Meeting 2007-04-13
From the CouchSurfing Wiki, an informal workspace which anyone can edit.
Contents |
Tech Team Conference Call
Friday 13 April 2007 @ 11:30am NZ
Present: Casey (NZ), Walter & co (NL), Callum (NZ), Mattthew (US), Anu (NZ), Cyril (CR) (special credits for Kirsty Sarah for her couch & internet for Anu plus Cyril for calling up Callum to hear his voice Anu 06:30, 13 April 2007 (EDT))
Audio Recording of Meeting:
- user: csdev
- pass: h3r3th1s
This is the first draft of the minutes and may be updated. This draft was proposed by Callum Macdonald immediately after the call on Fri 13 Apr. Please remove / update this notice if you edit this page. Anu filled in some of her notes and further formatted the page for better readability - subsequent edits for any missing key points welcome.
NOTES: A person continues talking until another name followed by a colon appears. A person's name not immediately followed by a colon is somebody saying their name, even if it appears at the start of a line.
A log of the Skype text chat between some members of the call is here.
These notes are awesome - thanks for the hard work, Callum and Anu. I would like to point out that from what I've read of my own comments in the notes, some details are missing. I'll try to fill them in when I have time. Meanwhile, the try to listen to the recording if you can. (Mattthew)
Agenda
(as drafted by Walter & Greg)
- NDA
- Ask around and enumerate everyone's exact current problems with it
- What can realistically be done about it in which timeframe?
- Where do we stand on new developers?
- What about help from outside (example: walter's sys admin friend)?
- Tech team management & organization
- Who is in charge?
- Bugs found
- Code maintenance
- Informing the community/leadership team (is there any?)
- What kind of management structure do we need/want?
- Choosing to participate is voluntary, after that there needs to be some obligatory stuff
- Why is nothing being done on performance and why does noone know?
- Idea to feature process?
- Who is in charge?
Call
--- Call Starts ---
Casey: My agenda points are:
- Open Source
- NDA
- How decisions are made
Let's go back to the CouchSurfing Mission
Casey: People participate for many reasons:
- like to work with other couchsurfers
- possibilities for future convergence of many internet trends
- mission for intercultural understanding
When we face questions, we should return to the mission.
Mission is a little vague, making the world a better place, my understanding is more specific, helping people to:
- Save money
- Feel safer while travelling
- Gain human connection worldwide
- Feel accepted in other cultures
Status quo: Future ideas vs. back to basics (not forgetting the core mission of intercultural understanding & getting people on couches)
Walter: Three nodding heads here about going back to basics
Anu: Nodding head.
Announcements
Casey: I would like to make some announcements.
Question was asked, who is in charge? I originally asked Kasper to lead the tech team. Joe took over that role. Joe has now left to travel for a month, Kasper most likely until Northern summer. Joe is no longer involved in server admin. We need a new tech team leader.
There's also the problem of tech team having no presentation among the Admins (besides Casey who held the post until recently). I've spoken with Chris Burley. He was previously the liaison between the Admins and the Tech Team. I've asked him to take on the role of Tech Team Leader.
The Admin structure is being replaced by a Leadership Circle. The Admin structure pre-dates the crash, and grew organically as people got involved.
There is no plan to sell the code.
We are filing for 501c3 status practically tomorrow. These laws are designed so that anyone cannot benefit individually from a company. Since getting this status involves agreeing to function a certain way (US laws for companies being fairly stringent) it is important to form the necessary structures within CS to get it going.
Callum: Do we have a target date when the Leadership Circle will be in place?
Casey: I wanted to have it in place weeks ago. I think we need it immediately.
We will include a list of requirements to be on the leadership team - forming these policies is necessary before the Leadership Circle can be made "official". It will most be starting with the following: actively involved people able to contribute on a regular basis, in combination with the ambassador structure.
--- Casey breaks up ---
Does anyone have any questions?
Anu: Does Chris have enough time to fulfill this role right now.
Casey: Chris said yes, he has the time between now and fall when he begins school.
Anu: Chris should ideally become more involved in day to day tech team functionality.
Casey: Chris will be on the next call.
Callum: I guess my question is do we have a target date for the policies.
Casey: I would like them done yesterday, or within two weeks. Other leaders want them to take as long as they take. My intention is to finish these as soon as possible (mention of week or two at the most). The policies can be resolved quickly.
The NDA, which involves lawyers, will take longer.
Callum: So right now there is no tangible date when this will be confirmed. Is that correct?
Casey: Yes, that is correct. I aim to complete this process before leaving New Zealand (end of April).
Open source
Casey: The next topic is the question of Open Source.
My best interpretation of the question is that opening the source will allow more developers to become involved. This would be the upside. The downside is safety. Can we open the source and make it safe? There are different views on this.
Personally, when I look at the mission, what's the biggest member concern? Is it safe? Safety is core. Without safety CouchSurfing.com would not exist.
I cannot take the risk of opening the source as it would reduce safety.
I'd like to re-iterate that CS is goverened by non profit laws. Nobody will sell the code.
Casey: I agree, but I don't think at this time that we can do that.
Cyril: What about opening some parts of the code that deal with non-critical features? Parts that have been security audited.
Casey: That could be possible. Core libs should not be opened. I think we should focus on creating an API for external applications to plug in to CouchSurfing.
Cyril: Parts that have been security audited?
Casey: Possibly, yes, but this requires resources.
Anu: I believe we had/have an API system used back in montreal.
Casey: I want to answer definitively on the Open Source question.
Walter: It seems that only non-open-source people are on this call. I'm glad you made this decision and put your foot down.
Casey: We will have another call. I wanted to have this call as soon as possible.
Cyril: I have a question about the recording. Once we finalise the recording, how can we distribute it. I can place it on my personal server and password protect it.
Casey: I think that's ok.
Mattthew: I think a key question is not just about the security of the code, but the stability of the organisation. Open Source can lead to branching, which requires a different organisation structure. This makes opening the source a significant step and leads to the view that we should hold until the organisation and the code is more stable.
Casey: Yes. Although we are young, we have 200'000 members to report to.
Callum: I feel that the key question is not how / when we open the source, but that we agree with the principle of open source code.
Casey: I'm not sure I can answer on the principle of open source code. I think the principles are dependent on people.
Callum: And very importantly, that developers can choose the licence under which their code is supplied.
Casey: That is a great question, and a complicated one. Mattthew perhaps you can help here. There are issues with multi-licenced code. When people contribute changes, it gets more complicated.
Anu: Is there any way we could restart working on the API and allow e.g. ride share etc use that?
Casey: Absolutely. I think this is a great option and CouchSurfing can provide server space for applications that plug in to the API.
Callum Macdonald: My suggestion is that people contribute their code, but retain the ownership of it
Casey: This is difficult to administrate. How is ownership identified, if multiple people work on a single page for example.
Mattthew: This comes under the topic of NDA.
Callum: Agreed.
NDA
--- hold music ---
Callum joins the call.
Casey: Callum, do you have any questions so far?
Callum: My questions really come under the topic of the NDA.
Casey: I'd like to give a bit of history to the NDA. About 1 year ago I was working in Hawaii. The concern was to protect CouchSurfers, their data and the organisation. An NDA is standard practice. I went online and found an agreement that looked applicable.
Then we went to the Montreal Collective and concerns were raised - whereas some people were indifferent to NDA and just wanted to be able to volunteer, others had issues because of personal ethics standpoint or possible incompatibility with their professional involvement elsewhere. I understand that and I could understand feeling similarly. I said my intention is to have a better NDA that addresses peoples concerns.
Some people have the impression that it might affect their lives in some way. In talking with lawyers, I don't think it affects your ability to work online. Regardless, the NDA needs to be replaced. It needs to cover international law.
Cyril: Recording resumed.
Casey: In getting back to the mission, I have to ensure CouchSurfing is protected. It would be irresponsible of me to take risks.
--- Casey recaps for Cyril ---
Callum, you said you may have future issues with the NDA. My key aim was to protect CouchSurfing as much as possible, but I'm not a lawyer. I chose what I felt was the most relevant boiler-plate document. It doesn't mean that CouchSurfing has ulterior motives, it's simply a boiler plate NDA.
Joe introduced an NDA. A Boston lawyer introduced a more stringent NDA. Matt Watley designed an NDA. Somebody else may have designed another NDA. There were complaints with all of these.
In talking with lawyers, it's not always possible to do what we would like to and still protect CouchSurfing. It's not only developers who sign the NDA, it's also all the Admins and Safety Team members.
--- Delay, Anu said Callum is offline ---
Mattthew would you like to provide some input here.
Mattthew*: I haven't had a chance to speak with a laywer, but that will happen. I have researched the NDA, specifically Matt Watley's NDA.
Callum mentioned co-ownership. Co-ownership of code creates economic responsibilities which CouchSurfing might not be able to fulfill. One avenue I explored, what if CouchSurfing owns the invention but gives the developer a non-exclusive license to use it. But in practical application, the developer will be working with existing code and with other developers so it becomes grey who gets this license. Do you get a license to an idea you just added something to? CouchSurfing would have the legal responsibility to document and figure out the grey area. That's an time overhead we can't afford. I practical application, it's impossible to have this split ownership. But remember, your code is not given-up to some for-profit corporation. It's a donation to a non-profit you believe in. (edited by --Mattthew 21:58, 13 April 2007 (EDT))
Casey: I agree. Donating code is like donating money. That's what I did in starting CouchSurfing.
Callum: So CS has the ability to do what it wants with my code, but I can also use it wherever I like outwith CS.
Casey: CouchSurfing can't do what it likes with the code, it is legally bound by its mission statement. Any contributions are guaranteed to be used in line with that mission.
Cyril Graze: isn't the mission somewhat vague?
Casey: Yes, and I think that will be tightened up. My feeling is that our mission is "to create a path to inter-cultural understanding".
The mission will still be in line with this, but more specific. More focused on how we achieve the goals.
Callum: Is anyone familiar with the MySQL licence [12:56:32] … I believe that's the model that would suit us MySQL releases their software under a private licence, but contributors also own the code
Casey: My understanding is that you give MySQL an unlimited licence to use your code. They sell it to some people, and give it to other people. This causes problems where people contribute to existing code.
Callum: That is what I'm suggesting. If I write 1 line of code, I can use that code elsewhere. [13:03:55] … I own the patch files, nothing else
Casey: I don't know.
What if you change one line of code.
Anu: We made a decision as to page ownership. Does that relate?
Casey: My guess is that people don't care about one line of code.
Callum: Under the current NDA if I write code, that code becomes the sole property of CS [13:06:29] … My suggestion is that the NDA allows me to write code, contribute it, and still use it externally
Casey: The challenge is to define who owns what in a shared ownership situation. Callum: So can we agree on a general principle of the NDA, and then move forward to how we define "contribution" and so on?
Casey: Perhaps we can.
Mattthew: My understanding of the current NDA is to allow the organization to prosper.
(later via skype chat: Mattthew: Callum phrased it better than I did. I should have said that the purpose of the NDA is to allow the CouchSurfing mission to prosper. --Mattthew 21:58, 13 April 2007 (EDT))
Casey: Agreed, we have a mission and we have members safety.
If somebody plans to write some code and plans to use it elsewhere, they should consider not providing it to CouchSurfing. The idea is to provide an API.
Cyril Graze: however any code provided will be based on the previous framework of CS, including its DB... so how do we distinguish the code uniqueness when it's derived from previous work? (i meant for current code in the main CS modules) however your response regarding the API is good
If people want to claim IP over parts of the code, how do we define that, given that code is based on previous work.
Casey: I think that's the core question. Multiple people edit pages.
Cyril: I didn't mean in that way. If I create a new page, in its entirety, it is still based on CouchSurfing code.
Casey: Right, that's the key challenge. The cleanest way to do this is to use the API.
Example. If somebody wrote an authentication module and then released that under an open source licence. This could cause security issues for CouchSurfing.
Anu: Action points for later then: WHO will work on providing the API? joe&kasper who i believe being most familiar with it are both travelling now. John, maybe, since it seems to suit his views? anyone else willing?
Casey: I think the only person who has worked on the API up to now is myself.
Walter Heck: isn't john quitting? it seems like that from his message in the NDA thread?
Casey: I spoke with John.
Anu: Cyril has lost connection.
Casey: Let's wait for him to reconnect to record.
--- recording starts again ---
Callum: Shall we continue the NDA discussion via email when we can have more people involved? I think Kasper and Joe would like to be involved for example.
Casey: Yes and no. I don't have the time to go on and on with emails. I'd like to continue this discussion as far as possible today.
I think people will continue this discussion by email. I can't guarantee I will be able to respond to all of the emails. I want to avoid a situation where we have a time period and then have an ultimatum.
Mattthew*: I've seen two themes with discussion of the problems with the NDA. First, that CouchSurfing's mission is all about sharing so we should also be sharing our inventions and our code with the world. As discussed, we're now defining our mission more specifically than just sharing. So, while sharing the code might be something we want to do down the line, but for now closed-source serves our mission better. Second theme: there's a perception of an us vs. them - such as an inner core and then all the other volunteers who the NDA disenfranchises from the work that they've created. I want to point out that the NDA will apply to everyone who volunteers for CouchSurfing or has access to sensitive data. So we're all in the same boat and under the same restriction to gift our contributions to CouchSurfing the organization. If down the line, we decide to go open source, then we'll need to look at the NDA again. (* re-transcribed by --Mattthew 21:44, 13 April 2007 (EDT))
Casey: Shall we continue this now, or should
Anu: Would it help to have one NDA for developers and one for other volunteers.
Casey: I think if there is a difference in the way they work, it could be possible. I don't think there is a great difference at the moment. This might lead to complication as to how information is shared, for example in the military with different clearance levels (secret, top secret, etc).
Anu:
--- Anu breaking up ---
If reading the current NDA to the letter, I can't for example share information about bugs and new feature development with people who haven't signed the NDA (so have in fact broken the agreement many times over the past 9 months). As I find these conversation fruitful I'd like to continue however shouldn't be doing so if abiding by the US law.
Mattthew: I think Anu said that she'd like to be able to share her work with people who have not signed the NDA.
Casey: Anything that's private can be discussed with the people within the organisation. Anything that's public (the bugzilla for example), can be discussed with anyone.
--- Callum joins the call ---
It sounds like we need a policy on this.
Does anyone else have anything to add. We'll have another call on Tuesday.
Callum: My suggestion is that we agree on the aims of the NDA today.
Casey: Does anyone have any comments on that?
Cyril: I agree that the NDA should focus on safety and security of members and the organisation. That should be the focus more than the value of the code or the relationship between developers.
Casey: Walter, did you miss a bunch of this call?
Walter: Nope.
Casey: Anyone else?
Cyril: If I could make it a bit broader. It should serve to promote the organisation of CouchSurfing.
Callum: For me the focus is on the goals, not the organisation.
Casey: I'd like to write down what you're saying, can you repeat?
Callum: Re-iteration. For example, if a sister project was setup which was to integrate with CouchSurfing whereby searches could be performed across all sites. That serves the aims, but not the organisation. Where is our focus.
Casey: To guarantee that the mission is served, including the safety and security aspects, having a strong NDA gives members confidence in the organisation. It also ensures volunteers take their contributions seriously. That's one of the aims of the NDA.
Callum: My core question is which is more important, the organisation of CouchSurfing Inc or
Casey: Without the organisation, we cannot serve the goals. They are intertwined.
Callum: CouchSurfing versus SofaSurfing.
Casey: Which would be best to promote the aims of inter-cultural understanding.
Callum: it sounds like you say aims over goals
Casey: It's hard to answer that. We're trying to promote our way of solving this goals. In that example, is this organisation taking resources away from CouchSurfing and so reducing intercultural understanding, or doing it in a good way to promote intercultural understanding. I think that's a question for the Leadership Circle.
Walter: The new NDA would apply to people outside the US. I take it seriously but not in a legal way.
Callum: Can somebody fill in on the Skype chat.
Communication and transparency
To summarise the discussion, there is an existing privacy policy.
Greg: There seems to have been some communication failures between different parts of the organisations. With Chris Burley coming on board, is there a plan to improve communications? How will the communication work between Chris and the rest of the organisation?
Casey: About the Admin team. Several people wanted to speak their minds freely. The creation of the Leadership Circle is to provide for the longevity of CouchSurfing.
Yes, there are plans to improve communication - it does need to be transparent, and this will happen in the leadership circle. If the situation goes unchanged beyond a month or two I'll be disappointed.
Greg: I think we should draw up guidelines as to what information should be public or private, and what that means. Communicating on groups for example.
Casey: I think one aspect will be minutes of Leadership Circle meetings. Certain aspects would need to be removed from the minutes if it relates to member safety and so on.
Anu: There is a need for the Privacy Policy to happen. If minutes of the Tech Team meetings are made public, would that breach the NDA?
Casey: This policy will help to answer questions like that. I can't answer that right now.
Anu: To keep the conspiracy theories at bay, the policy would help the rest of the community to understand why safety/security/etc concerned parts were excluded from the minutes. This would also help the NDA-signed people by making it clearer what can be discussed freely with the rest of the community.
Mattthew: I have started a document that defines what should be transparent about the organisation. Transparency guidelines.
--- Casey steps away ---
--- Casey comes back ---
Cyril Graze: can we talk a little about how people become admins,ambassadors, etc...? is this a democratic process?
Anu: there's an application process & people in charge of approving the applications, Promitheus is in charge of the whole process and has a few helpers.
Mattthew Brauer: Ambassadors process is defined and already on the website. Ambassador levels system
Casey: We are now splitting the Administrative roles and the Leadership roles within the organisation.
Feature development
Walter: Choosing to participate is voluntary, after that there needs to be some obligatory stuff.
I'm working with Morgan on a document focused on improving performance.
When I became a developer somebody told me, choose a project and work on it. I think this should be more structured, people should be focused on what needs to be done.
Casey: I think that responsibility lies with Chris, the tech team leader. Initially in Montreal with getting other people involved in the tech team, the focus was on getting things done, any work was progress. Now we need to improve that. I hope Chris will provide this.
Chris will join the leadership team. He's probably the last person to be invited to the leadership team without a process in place.
--- Casey recaps for the recording ---
--- Invitation for closing comments ---
Closing comments
Walter: I think this has been a great call. I think it's been easy because we're all on the same page. It will be especially more interesting as we have this same conversation with people that don't necessarily agree on all of this. We should give people a chance to catch up on the discussion and then plan the next call.
--- All Agreed ---
Casey: Let's shoot for one week's time, probably 2.5 hours earlier.
Walter: That would not work for me, I can't do this during a working week.
Casey: Let's finalise the time on the google group.
Anu: Good call. I agree we're on the same page. Looking forward, with apprehension towards Joe and Kasper being in on the next call. I look forward to Chris being involved (as this will help coordinating our efforts). For the next couple of weeks anytime NZ awake-hours timing will work.
Callum: I feel that we haven't reached any clear decisions or movements forward. I will try to outline some clear decision questions for the next meeting.
Greg: agree on getting all on the same page. good call for that reason!
Casey: I think hearing each other's voices has been good. I think this has been a good call and has helped to bring people together.
Callum: Minutes will be posted within 50 minutes of the end of this call.
Casey: Thanks for being on. The recording is great.
--- Call Ends ---
