<@UF63BUA3A> said he has some meeting conflicts. C...
# core
s
@Stefano Bonicatti said he has some meeting conflicts. Consensus in today’s meeting is that we should move the meeting to accommodate. Maybe before or after by 30min?
s
If there is a preference, I would prefer 30min before
s
Thanks for the thought. The meeting that conflicts with this might change to a biweekly one or so eventually; but at the same time I don't know if it will be the same day as osquery ^^'. But also if you want to go through with this, 30mins later would be the one ok for me, otherwise it will also conflict with another meeting I have (although that doesn't always run for the full duration).
And I mean for completeness if we shift the cadence to a different Tuesday (as in like next week or in 3 weeks), that normally is a day with no other meeting (bar this new weekly conflicting meeting)
but at that point it might break everyone else, so eh
s
I can’t tell if you’re suggesting we swap weeks, or saying that’s no better
s
To say this differently, currently this Tuesday and every two weeks, I'm occupied from 12:00 Eastern time to 13:30 (which might also run slightly longer sometime). In between there there's a meeting that might not always run as long, so 30mins earlier might be "ok", but otherwise I could miss the first 15 mins of the office hours. Moreover the 13:00, to 13:30 meeting could change cadence, but I don't know on which week it will land. All the Tuesdays of the other weeks I'm empty (except now for this weekly meeting, which I'm not sure which week will end up when and if it will slow down).
So "I think" that swapping weeks could help with making it earlier, and avoiding any overlaps, hopefully for a while at least, since that's normally open.
By the way, the colliding meeting has been moved 30 mins earlier, so no overlap with office hours
s
Good. Because we forgot to reschedule.
But I think we’re all ammenable to finding a time that works