Revise Telco minutes and update scheduling poll link

Updated meeting minutes with details on release, PR discussions, and voting processes. Added a link to the poll for scheduling the next telco.

Author: sanbrock

source/content/Telco_20251118.md

@@ -23,14 +23,62 @@ Agenda
 Present
 -------
 
-SB, - MarkusK, LukasP (FAIRmat)
+SB, AB, HB, BW, PC, RB, FdA, CZ, ZM, HG, FS - MarkusK, LukasP (FAIRmat)
 
-Minutes
+Minutes  
 -------
+- Release v2025.11
+    - PC: release went fine, quite some definitions are still left in contributed
+    - MK: drafting the NeXus paper is also in its finish.
+    - LP: NeXus Ontology needs to be also updated
+    - AB: our release cycle should also include the update of the ontology
+    - PC: CI/CD could be added to generate/update the ontology automatically
+    - Some PRs still needs to be merged and a patched release could include them
+    - LP: can we release only regularly (e.g. once per year)
+    - AB/BW: No, we could release at any time. RO should be also asked.
+- PRs:
+    - NXparameter - PR #1560
+        - MK: CI/CD was failing which required an Attribute ‘model’ to be moved to be a Field because ‘model was also defined as a Field. (Sphinx script handles Attribute names and Field names under the same namespaces)
+        - CP: this fix is problematic, because it can always happen that a Field has the same name as an Attribute or a filename matches an Attribute name pattern (e.g. nameType partial). Rather, the sphinx script needs to be fixed.
+        - MK volunteered to make a separate issue on this.
+        - AB: model could be removed from the base class and can be defined by whoever needs it.
+        - SB: let us check it also with RO as it was his PR.
+    - Voting process and NXgoniometer - PR #1561
+        - Vote did not pass, and a cleaner voting process may be needed.
+        - AB: a possibility is: to define a 1 week commenting time, and then start a 1 week vote where no more comments are expected.
+        - BW: specifically this PR could handle conventions differently. More discussion could be useful.
+        - FdA: why not stay as now, voting starts, but comments could come in still
+        - AB: this does not solve the process issue
+        - HB: Let us go back to definitions and agree on: What is NeXus?
+        - AB: 1) self-descriptive machine-readable standard? 2) community agreement? - In general (2) for App Defs, and more towards (1) for base classes.
+        - BW: process may not be wrong, but more discussion is needed.
+        - LP: while 1+1 is an option, actual experience shows that long-planned/discussed topics are still bringing issues to reviewers.
+        - AB: Contributed definitions could/should be considered as a discussion period.
+        - LP: Especially when a PRs is brought up to bring it to the standard.
+        - AB: Let us make a suggestion for improving the constitution. What about 1+1w?
+        - PC: 1w is enough for comments
+        - BW: it would not make any difference
+        - SB: a) it works already like this. b) 1w would not be long enough for actual vote
+        - AB: actually, we did make modifications as a result of comments and merged not what the vote actually started on.
+        - MK: we may not need to try stop commenting, but voting should be considered seriously; 1w is too short for vote.
+        - BW: instead of 1+1w, let us call for comments and suggest a specific date for starting a vote.
+        - SB: allow shortening the vote time if the vote is already certain.
+        - HG: not everyone can follow all PRs and  check if it really fits to local beamline needs. Not to vote, “Obstain” or “No” : not always clear what to do.  
+        - AB: more and more obtains are arriving. It is normal. We should all add opinions together. We can do it actually by voting.
+        - HB: we need a strong agreement on the constitution and it shall be followed, or alternative processes could be proposed.
+        - AB: consensus was and shall always be a priority.
+        - RO: if comments make it obvious voting could be cancelled.
+        - FdA: good to note that obstaining is not the same as simply not voting.
+        - AB: No, obtaining is an important contribution.
+        - HG: Thank you for the clarifications. it is convincing.
+        - BW: a failing vote and restarting is a vote is actually is the same
+        - RO: important to understand well the value of Obstaining compared to simply not voting.
+    - Remaining PRs moved to milestone ‘’NXDL 2026’ and reviewed if they can go to a patch release ‘NXDL 2026.01’ by Jan 9, 2026.
+
 
 
 Dec Telco
 ---------
-Please help to choose the date by responding to [the poll](XXX) by XXX.
+Please help to choose the date by responding to [the poll](https://doodle.com/group-poll/participate/avJ3GlVa) by Nov 28.
 
 We are planning to hold the telco in the regular slot of UTC 15:00. Check your local time to avoid scheduling surprises!