Architecture committee/2016-05-25

Agenda timeline

 * Intro
 * Agenda bashing and action item check 21:00 (5 minutes)
 * Last week+this week’s RfC office hour 21:05 (5 minutes)
 * RFC status update
 * RfC inbox triage 21:10 (10 minutes)
 * Shepherd assignments 21:20 (5 minutes)
 * Queue for future RfC office hours 21:25 (5 minutes)
 * Wrapup
 * Other business 21:30 (10 minutes)
 * Next week’s ArchCom agenda 21:40 (10 minutes)

Agenda details/Meeting summary

 * This section equates to the "meeting summary" section in the meeting note template. It's collaboratively edited during the meeting and serves as the official public notes of the meeting.  Attendees: Fill in the important details in this section, but try to keep this concise and NPOV (easy way: use questions).  Put any prep information in this section if appropriate

Intro section

 * 10 minutes (starting 21:00 UTC)


 * Action items
 * RobLa: continue process conversation on-list (not done)
 * Tim (and RobLa): work out frequency of Security WG meetings
 * Last week: Architecture committee/2016-05-18, E170
 * Last week’s RfC office hour
 * E184
 * T102476 - RFC: Requirements for change propagation
 * IRC summary: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T102476#2309821
 * Full log: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E184#2093

RFC status update
20 minutes (starting 21:10 UTC)

Spend roughly 20 minutes ensuring Architecture committee/Status is up-to-date. Checklist of the questions we should answer:
 * Who is chairing the upcoming IRC meeting? RobLa probably should chair this one.
 * New inbox item: T135963 Add support for Content-Security-Policy (CSP) headers in MediaWiki
 * How does the rest of the ArchCom-RfCs board look?
 * Shepherd roundtable:
 * Brion
 * Daniel
 * Gabriel
 * Roan
 * RobLa
 * Tim
 * Timo
 * Do we have anything read to enter "final comment period"?
 * Do we have a robust queue of RFCs to discuss at future IRC discussions?
 * For each upcoming meeting, do we anticipate the RFC moving into "final comment"?
 * What is the most important thing each ArchCom member is shepherding? Anything blocked?  Are responsibilities balanced well?

Other business/planning
20 minutes (starting 21:30 UTC)
 * Continue last week's conversation about ArchCom-RFC speed
 * Does “on track” make sense as a new column, or should we apply more scrutiny to the items “under discussion”?
 * What should we do with the conversations that are "not on track"? More agressively mark them as "stalled"?
 * What does it mean for something to be in the "Backlog" column?
 * Use Conpherence rooms for proto working groups?
 * Security conpherence room still alive (though very restricted membership)
 * Should we suggest a public FESG Conpherence room?
 * What about watchlist collaboration?
 * Software quality working group?


 * Next week's ArchCom

generated from Architecture committee/MeetingNoteTemplate