=== mjg59_ [~mjg59@cpc2-cmbg5-4-0-cust206.cmbg.cable.ntl.com] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== mjg59_ [mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== rabidbt [~rabidbt@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== doko [doko@dsl-082-082-069-185.arcor-ip.net] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== pitti [~martin@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== pitti [~martin@] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== mjg59 [mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== doko [doko@dsl-082-082-069-185.arcor-ip.net] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== mdz [~mdz@69-167-148-207.vnnyca.adelphia.net] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
mdzCC meeting?05:11
Kamionum, had forgotten about it05:12
Kamionwe don't seem to have any agenda items05:12
=== sabdfl [~mark@host217-37-231-28.in-addr.btopenworld.com] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
mdzanything on the agenda?05:12
sabdflnothing that i saw05:12
mdzagenda on the wiki seems to be empty05:12
sabdflsorry for being late05:12
sabdfli checked this morning and it was just old stuff05:12
Kamiondo we have AOB?05:12
sabdflso made it blank05:12
Kamionany other business (i.e. off-agenda)05:13
sabdflnot from me05:13
mdzI'd like to talk about the maintainer process05:13
sabdflhmm... maybe conference invitations to community members05:13
mdzlack thereof, at the moment05:13
mdzis someone expected to be working on community processes? jdub?05:14
sabdflmdz: do we have a framework for maintainers whohave been appointed?05:14
sabdfli think mako05:14
sabdflhe sms'd me to say his net was busted05:14
sabdflhe's trying to make another plan05:14
sabdfli would really like to get a community team going05:15
sabdflin other words have a few maintainers who are not Canonical folk05:15
mdzwe have a keyring for the archive, and a queue of folks who want to be considered05:15
=== daniels [daniel@fooishbar.org] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflwith full upload capability05:15
mdzthe rest is documentation and procedures05:15
=== pitti [~martin@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== hazmat [~hazmat@c-24-15-10-12.client.comcast.net] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
mdzwhen mako and I talked about this last, we were on the same page as to how it should work05:16
=== ..[topic/#ubuntu-meeting:mdz] : Shotgun Community Council meeting
=== zul [~chuck@zul.developer.gentoo] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== mako2 [~mika@pool-70-18-203-202.ny325.east.verizon.net] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflah, the clocks have gone back, that's why my alarm didn't go05:17
mdzI also think it would be a good idea for someone on the community team to work with the doc team on a "how to get involved" document05:17
=== seb128 [~seb128@ANancy-151-1-9-186.w83-194.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
mdzthe categories I have seen so far are "I have a suggestion for improving Ubuntu", "I have a problem with Ubuntu" and "I want to become an Ubuntu developer"05:18
mdzI wrote a document for the "I have a problem" case which walks through support and bug reporting basics05:18
sabdflthe MaintainerCandidates page has a few people05:18
mako2there is already a participate document05:18
mdzbut i think it would be nice to have a very high-level document about how individuals can relate to the Ubuntu community05:19
mako2mdz: do you think it should be built on top of that?05:19
sabdflare there any there who have strong credentials from existing open source work that would allow us to approve them immediately?05:19
Kamionalso "when you *don't* need to be an Ubuntu developer in order to get your problem fixed"05:19
mdzmako2: possibly, I'm waiting for plone to give it to me so I can see05:19
Kamionthinking of the people who want to join just in order to get some theme added or whatever05:19
sabdflmako2: perhaps that just needs some more specifics05:20
sabdfl"become a maintainer" doesn't tell you where to start05:20
sabdfljust needs a link to the relevant process05:20
=== elmo [~james@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
Kamion(is there any way we can get rid of those daft "/document_view" bits on the end of all the wiki URLs? the URLs work fine without them)05:20
mdzonce the process is documented :-)05:20
=== mako2 apologizes if he gets disconnected.. i have the laptop halfway out the kitchen window and (am getting up to 30 seconds of lag)
sabdflis there anyone on there that we would feel comfortable approving right away?05:21
mdzmako2: I'm thinking that it should have some very simple bullet points which link to more detailed documents05:21
mdzmako2: each aimed at a use case which already exists05:21
mdzso that a user who comes to the page who already knows what they want, can find the relevant interface05:22
KamionMatthias Urlichs is a competent Debian guy, IIRC05:22
mako2mdz: i'm happy to help with that05:22
sabdfli would be happy to approve some of the guys who have made great doc contributions already05:22
mako2Kamion: yes, we've been chatting a little bit offlist as wel05:22
KamionThibaut VARENE is the ia64 guy and should be straightforward to approve05:22
mdzhis name is familiar, but I can't vouch personally05:22
sabdflas long as they agree just to work on package documentation05:22
danielslamont can vouch for thibaut, IIRC05:23
mako2Kamion: he maintains some non-trivial python packages05:23
mako2python-docutils (RST)05:23
mdzelmo: do we have a public upload queue?05:23
mako2i can also vouch for thibaut05:23
mako2i was his AM in Debian so i've already gone through NM with him once05:23
Kamionoh, he's the gnutls/gcrypt maintainer05:23
elmomdz: no - we're waiting on zope 3's ftpd getting fixed - I've just pinged SteveA about it05:23
Kamion$ grep-available -nsPackage 'Matthias Urlichs' | wc -l05:23
=== mdz blinks
sabdflthat would be a yes then05:24
elmoyeah, smurf's competent IMO05:24
Kamion(quantity not implying quality or anything, but :-))05:24
=== plovs [~plovs@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflKamion: why do I always find myself agreeing with you when you point out that sort of thing?05:25
KamionI'm just such an agreeable guy05:25
sabdflerm. but i'm not.05:25
mdzbecause of his sneaky tendency to be correct05:25
mako2yeah, but he also maintains some touch ones05:25
sabdflah. yes, that05:25
mako2i've been working with him this week on preparing the new upstream release of python-docutils05:25
sabdflok, let's take these one at a time, maybe that would be better05:25
sabdflwe still need a proper process for guys we don't know already05:25
sabdflmako2, can we leave the process documentation in your hands, deliverable for the next cc meeting?05:26
sabdfland mdz, can we handle both techboard and cc approvals today, do you have your tech board handy?05:26
mako2mdz: help me outline and check it,eh?05:27
mdzhm, I'll see05:27
mdzmako2: definitely05:27
sabdflok: thibaut varene, opinions?05:27
mako2i was his am in debian05:28
sabdflalready discussed?05:28
mdz(prodded Keybuk)05:28
mako2i passed him there with glowing recommendations and i would do it again here :)05:28
mdzsabdfl: mako and lamont both say good things, I've chatted with him and found him sane05:28
sabdflhow do we want to do this, require all cc members to say aye or nay?05:28
Kamionhe's been sane when I've talked to him too; thibaut ack05:28
sabdflok, thibaut is in05:29
=== Keybuk [scott@descent.netsplit.com] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflfrom a cc perspective, mdz, you make the call for tech board05:29
sabdflhiya scott05:29
sabdflsivan green05:29
sabdflhe's been very "present"05:29
Kamionsabdfl: I think requiring CC unanimity would be good until we have a clearer procedure05:29
=== fabbione [~fabbione@port49.ds1-van.adsl.cybercity.dk] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdfllot's of enthusiasm on the doc front05:29
mako2sivan has been working mostly on doc stuff up until now but is interested in working with a mentor towards other types of stuff05:30
sabdflnot much experience i don't think05:30
sabdfla candidate for the full process?05:30
pittiI talk with him very often; he seems eager, but did not finish much up to now05:30
mako2he's been in contact with me directly several times a week about a number of things05:30
mdzmako and I talked a bit, and I think the full process can very nearly be condensed to a single bullet point05:30
mdzthe key is that we can trust them to know their own limits05:30
mako2i gather that sivan would be happy with the fully process05:30
pittiI think so, too05:31
sabdflmdz: can you turn that into something a little less existential?05:31
mdzif we can be confident that someone will ask before entering unknown waters05:31
pittibut he should finish at least a small coding project before he starts the full process, right?05:31
Kamionsivan definitely isn't an experienced developer; I'd be happy for him to work with a mentor to bring him up to speed, but I also think he is inclined to ask people rather than storm ahead05:31
mdzand not touch things that they aren't entirely confident about05:31
KeybukI've certainly not got any objections, have seen him around and he seems willing to help05:31
mako2sabdfl: so we pass him saying "you are a doc guy until we prove you can safely work beyon that. ubuntu is not the place to learn and experiment and make beginners mistakes"05:31
pittiKamion: for my taste he even asks too much05:31
Kamionpitti: I wasn't going to say that :-)05:32
mdzhe's definitely enthusiastic; I can't say I know a thing about his technical interests or skills05:32
sabdflmako2: i'm hesitant to pass him on the basis of enthusiasm alone05:32
Kamionpitti: (yes, it can be annoying; it's better than the other way round though)05:32
pittiKamion: but I do, he asks me all the time on every day05:32
pittiKamion: I agree05:32
Kamionoh, he has done some security work with you hasn't he?05:32
pittiAs a matter of fact I already am a kind of mentor for him05:32
Kamionpitti: how much has he actually done on the security front?05:32
sabdflwithout wanting to rehash the previous process discussion, we did say that we would expect candidates to collect a list of real contributions made05:32
mdzKamion: he helped with the Warty security review05:32
pittiKamion: so far he helped with rewieving the 2002 DSAs, but nothing else (that I know of)05:33
mako2pitti: he's done documentation work05:33
pittimako2: sure, but I cannot evaluate that05:33
Kamionhas the doc work he's done been reviewed?05:33
mdzdoesn't the maintainercandidates page ask them to submit a resume?05:33
mako2i think sabdfl is correct.. lets have sivan work with pitti, myself, and whoever else05:33
mako2Kamion: no, but i can review the doc work for hte next meeting05:33
pittihe often asks me to assign some taks to him, but so far he did not finish anything05:33
mdzhe did: http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/SivanGreen05:33
sabdflwe should only fast-track people who we really know and have no doubt about05:34
pittiI would not want to fast-track him05:34
mdzsabdfl: agreed05:34
pittiI will happily bring him through some sort of NM process05:34
sabdflif it takes him two or three months, it's worth it for him and for us05:34
mako2pitti: that would be great :)05:34
pittihe seems eager to do the process, though05:34
pittimako2: I have some experience as AM, 05:34
mako2pitti: well, this will be a little different but we can discuss that outside of the meeting :)05:35
pittimako2: but as I understood, the process should be shorter05:35
pittimako2: ack05:35
sabdflpitti: just long enough for you to be confident in him, and in your relationship with him05:35
mako2pitti: i'd like to do a better job of documenting the process so we work together to sort do a self-documentating process :)05:35
pittisabdfl: I can check his technical skills (and help him with that), but not necessarily the doc stuff05:35
sabdflpitti: that's ok05:35
mako2i can overview the doc stuff.. i follow their process/work05:36
pittisabdfl: okay, I'll do it05:36
sabdflhe should be able to point to a list of doc contributions if that's his pitch05:36
sabdflok, next05:36
pittisabdfl: but I will give him some real-world tasks rather than the theoretical Debian NM quesion05:36
pittisabdfl: s/quesion/questions/05:36
sabdflmattias uhrlichs, smurf05:36
Kamionsabdfl: aye05:36
sabdflpitti: fine05:36
sabdflKamion: thanks05:36
=== hno73 [~Henrik@henrik.gotadsl.co.uk] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
mdzperhaps it is sufficient to get N confirms, rather than tally votes from everyone?05:37
elmosabdfl: for smurf?  aye05:37
mako2i already nodded earlier05:37
sabdflsmurf is approved from cc05:38
mako2mdz: only 4 people :)05:38
sabdfloliver grawert?05:39
Kamionbit of a lack of technical resume there05:39
mdzhe's been active on -devel05:40
mako2mdz: what is his nick?05:40
sabdflnot known enough for me to like fast-tracking05:40
mdzmako2: not sure, I meant the mailing list05:40
danielsi believe his nick is ogra05:40
mdzah, he's active on #ubuntu as well, then05:40
mako2yeah, i've seen his messages but i'm with sabdfl here05:41
mdzsabdfl: agreed05:41
sabdflok, full process05:41
sabdflalexander poslavsky has been excellent on the wiki05:41
mdzAlexander Poslavsky is a doc team guy, very active05:42
sabdflperhaps a doc candidate?05:42
=== mako2 nods
Kamionwhat's our general rule on doc team <=> maintainership?05:42
mdzwhat does that mean?05:42
sabdflKamion: i think doc team members should have full commit capability05:43
Kamionmdz: what sabdfl just said. :-)05:43
Kamionsabdfl: ok05:43
sabdfli think we said maintainers would also be able to push out a release05:43
Kamionplovs is fine with me, I think he's earned his stripes up to now05:44
sabdflbut in the absence of HCT, would we prefer to err on the side of allowing or disallowing uploads by doc team members?05:44
mdzsabdfl: commits to the package archive?05:44
mdzsabdfl: disallowing05:44
sabdfli'd fall on the other side :-)05:44
mdzmost of them have neither interest in packaging, nor a GPG key05:44
fabbionei agree with mdz05:44
sabdflperhaps we could have a tighter policy post-freeze?05:44
sabdflempowering is better, if someone trips up pre-freeze it's unlikely to be a disaster05:44
mako2i'd prefer to not have two classes of maintainers05:44
sabdflmako2: we did already agree that though05:45
sabdflcontributor - sends patches05:45
sabdflcommitter - can commit to the arch branches05:45
sabdflmaintainer - can trigger the release05:45
mako2i was taking about maintainers05:45
sabdflin the absence of the arch infrastructure i'd prefer to use social structures to enforce "doc only" maintainership05:46
sabdflif someone uploads something thats out of line, that's a social issue05:46
sabdflwhich we can quickly sort out05:46
mdzthere are more issues apart from uploading things out of line05:46
mako2it's hard enough to get people to do the not-so-sexy documentation thing.. full fledged maintainership, whatever that is05:46
mako2sound good to me05:46
mdza new maintainer means a new key in the keyring, which needs to be properly signed and protected05:46
sabdflright, so we have to have confidence in the person's gpg security knowledge05:47
mdzdo the doc guys even want that responsibility?05:47
mako2mdz: i guess we should ask05:47
sabdflwhat's the worst case?05:47
mdzworst case is http://www.google.com/?q=secring.gpg05:47
fabbionethat reminds me of... thom?05:48
mdzer, http://www.google.com/search?q=secring.gpg05:48
sabdflwhy would a maintainer be able to change the keyring?05:49
elmosabdfl: they can't - but if their key is insecure, then our packages are vulnerable05:49
mako2sabdfl: no, he's afraid they'll put their keyring somewhere whehere peopl can google it and download it05:49
mdzmako2: well, I said that's the worst case :-)05:50
Kamionthat's an outside risk, but it's an example of general key management incompetence, which in its general form is common05:50
mdzelmo: yeah, that one05:50
mdzwhoever justin pryzby is, we wouldn't want his key in our keyring05:51
mako2ok, so the danger is not that we can't trust the nm candidates, it's our job to make sure we can05:51
mako2the danger is that we can't trust everyone who has their key :)05:52
Keybukyeah, anyone who manages to expose a private key like that should be shot05:52
=== Keybuk tickles thom playfully
mdzmako2: the question is whether we need to force people through that process in order to be an official documentation person05:52
sabdfli think it's reasonable to establish gpg practice understanding05:52
sabdflif that's a key requirement05:52
mdzthat is definitely a key requirement; it's the basis for our trust05:53
mako2i think a keyring of maintainers is a Good Thing for reasons other than uploading packages05:53
mako2voting, etc05:53
elmoyeah, but we should probably have a separate keyring for uploaders05:54
sabdflthe doc guys will need to be briefed and tested05:54
mako2the documentation are not writing advertisemennet copy.. they're writing technical documentation.. they should be able to figure out how to use gpg and get some key safety :)05:54
sabdflelmo: why have a separate keyring?05:54
danielselmo: one for voters/et al, one for people who can upload05:54
danielssabdfl: ^^05:54
danielssabdfl: so not everyone can upload libc605:54
mdzdo we actually have any process in mind where we would hold a vote of the entire project?05:55
sabdfl*cough* voting *cough*05:55
=== sabdfl wonders who ever considered democracy in these hallowed halls
Kamionmdz: cc/tb reelection05:55
mdzKamion: those are appointed positions, no?05:55
elmosabdfl: usual reasons: damage limitation, layered security, etc. - if the doc guys don't actually need their keyring, except once every two years or vote or something, they're much less likely to apply as-good-as-we-would-like security practices to their GPG key05:55
sabdflKamion is (again) correct05:55
mako2call it consensus or just identifying yourself :)05:55
=== mvo_ [~egon@suprimo-161.ping.de] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflelmo: but the doc guys are definitely going to be committing to the codebase, and that will require gpg keys05:56
sabdflonce we have bazaar flying, with hct05:56
Kamionmdz: hm, there was talk of having them confirmed by plebiscite of maintainers to start with05:56
=== mako [mako@micha.hampshire.edu] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflyes, nominated y me, confirmed by a plebiscite (!)05:57
=== mako network is revived
elmosabdfl: sure - but until we get there, I think we need separate keys.  and not all derivatives will be using upload-via-arch in any event, so we're going to have to deal with managing multiple "upload" keyrings anyways from an archive POV05:57
Kamionsabdfl: (plebiscite is such a good word I just had to use it)05:57
sabdflbut the question is whether we want to allow a doc person to upload packages05:57
elmosabdfl: <fascist-that-I-am>no.  if they upload packages, they're by definition not a doc person</>05:58
mdzif they meet the criteria, sure05:58
makowhat about documentation packages? :)05:58
sabdfli think someone who understands gpg, and who has agreed not to touch code, should be allowed to do so05:58
mdzsomeone who understands gpg, and knows their limits05:59
sabdflif they break the social agreement, we have a problem that can be solved simply05:59
=== mako nods
sabdflperhaps we can switch modes post-freeze05:59
sabdflto minimise the risk of an accidental stuffup05:59
sabdflso the policy is "looser till freeze"05:59
sabdflall of this is just till we get bazaar / hct06:00
mdzit is?06:00
mdzit seems like we have the same issues with baz/hct06:00
sabdflbut we can distinguish between commit and upload06:01
sabdflwhereas now we cant06:01
mdzbut without someone reviewing the changes, they're pretty much equivalent06:01
sabdflthe additional review is a disincentive to contribution06:01
sabdflbeing able to upload is a big motivator06:01
sabdflinstant gratification06:01
mdzI'm not really worried about folks who are comfortable working with gpg having commit access to write docs06:02
sabdfli really think we should acknowledge the doc team's contribution with maintainer status06:02
mdzwhat I object to is making their official status contingent on gpg usage06:02
mdzthey should at least be able to decline that piece, and still be officially recognized06:02
sabdflso they can still vote06:02
sabdflbut not have to deal with gpg06:02
sabdflthat's fine by me06:02
sabdflit's at their option06:03
sabdflelmo, can you live with this?06:03
sabdflseparate keyring for voting, contains additional keys of maintainers who choose not to upload06:03
mdzthere's no need to require gpg for voting, since they should be able to do it by logging into the website or similar06:03
=== mako happy with that
sabdflalso true06:03
elmosabdfl: yeah, if we can discourage gpg key use when it's not necessary, I'm all for it06:04
mdzwhat it sounds like we're moving toward is an official contributor status06:04
mdzthat's someone who can't commit, but participates, and they have a voice06:04
sabdflexcept that the "can't commit" is at their option, thus far06:04
mdzin oxford, we said that the contributor (with baz/hct) could be anyone06:04
mdzthat it didn't require official status06:05
sabdflonly because bazaar will allow branching so easily06:05
mdzbut a contributor could be someone with a vote06:05
sabdflok, this is a new idea06:05
sabdflbut a nice one06:05
mdzdistinguishing them from the rest of the planet, community-wise06:05
sabdflparticularly for doc team, and community support people06:06
sabdflguys who make a huge contribution06:06
sabdfland in due course we'll have industrial karma to give clear indications of who gets that voice06:06
makoi still am not too hot on the idea of having contributors and maintainers be different06:07
makoi think it sets up a hierarchy with the doc people apparently being lower06:07
makoit doesn't bother me if they haev a gpg key, or not.. it's the political and social distinction that i'm most worried about06:07
mdzit's a meaningful infrastructural distinction, though06:08
mdzand reflects the way the community actually works06:08
mdzthat's how we arrived at it in oxford06:08
makoyes, but we also said at oxford that doc people should be able to be full maintainers :)06:08
mdzsure, they should be able to be06:08
sabdflmako: this is nothing to stop a doc guy from being a maintainer06:08
sabdflit's a new idea, afaict06:09
sabdflso, to summarise, mdz shout if i have it wrong06:09
sabdflwe develop the concept of the "voting community"06:09
sabdflthis includes maintainers and people who are also given a vote because of a significant contribution in some other field06:10
mdzwe already established a hierarchy of contributor -> committer -> maintainer -> ..., with "committer" being the point at which strong authentication is required06:10
sabdflmaintainership means "can trigger or upload a package release"06:10
sabdflcommitter means "can commit to a package"06:11
sabdflmdz: would you see the voters as being all committers then?06:11
sabdfli'm not so sure about that06:11
mdzsabdfl: what I proposed in this meeting was that contributors be able to vote06:12
mdzwhich provides an official, voting status which doesn't require strong authentication06:12
sabdflthe only example we have of voting is confirmation of appointments to tech and community boards06:12
mdzand gives a useful home for contributors who aren't ready/willing to accept the responsibility of commit access06:12
sabdflid like those voters to be limited to substantial contributors06:12
mdzbut who are valued members of the community who should have a voice06:12
sabdfli agree "substantial contribution" doesn't only mean code, and uploads06:13
sabdflbut it is still different from "have sent in a few patches"06:13
mdzI would think that anyone who makes regular, high-quality contributions would naturally become a committer06:13
sabdflthats not what we were discussing though06:14
mdzso if what we want is for only substantial contributors to be able to vote, I think that would be committers06:14
sabdfli was trying to follow up on your thought that "voters" need not equal "maintainers"06:14
sabdfli'm not even comfortable with that06:14
sabdflbecause we might ultimately have committers with fairly narrow commit rights06:15
sabdfldepending on how good we can get hct06:15
sabdflwe might, for example, give upstream guys all commit rights in the packages that they upstream code lives in06:15
sabdflim not sure that should give them a say in who sits on your tech board06:15
sabdflvs, say, a doc guy who has put in a lot of work on the wiki and website06:16
=== mako nods
mdzwhat the website currently says is "a vote amongst the maintainers"06:16
mdzI guess if that's the sort of thing we will be voting on, then yes, it should be more exclusive06:16
makoall we need to figure out is how we are going to identify contributions that are meaningful and then recognize those with status. the detail of who can committ where and where seems like it might be a technical detail we don't need to take on fully06:17
sabdflthat's the only process we have that involves a vote06:17
sabdflfor the moment, i think the best plan is to make the big contributors maintainers06:17
sabdfland have them agree not to touch code06:17
sabdflso for the moment it's fairly binary06:18
mdzand the issue I raised with that is that it places a fairly strong technical burden on them, i.e. key management06:18
sabdfl(oh, and they can agree not to upload at all)06:18
sabdflbut they still kep their vote06:18
=== mako agrees with sabdfl
sabdfllater on, when we have better tools both for objective review of community participation, and code control, we can tune it06:18
mdzso the proposed solution to that issue is to allow them to voluntarily decline commit privileges on their way to becoming a maintainer?06:19
sabdflif we had doubts, i suppose we could offer maintainership explicitly without upload capability06:19
=== sivang [~dannyh@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
makosivang: hey there06:20
sabdflbut i would prefer that we simply test gpg knowledge, and if it's ok, let them have the option not to be in the upload keyring06:20
sabdflsivang: you'll want to read the logs of this meeting06:20
makomdz: that sounds reasonable06:20
makosivang: i can bring you up to speed aftewards as well06:20
sivangsabdfl : so I've heared :)06:20
sabdflit's a simple way to get started06:20
pittimako, sabdfl: I already told him the short-short version06:21
sabdflcan i hear back from elmo, mako, kamion on this:06:21
sabdfl - we'll allow maintainers not to be in the upload keyring if they don't really need to be06:22
sabdfl - we'll approve some non-code contributors as maintainers, so they have a vote where it counts06:22
sabdfl - when we have hct / bazaar we can fine tune these06:22
elmoworks for me06:23
makothat sounds fine06:23
Kamionok by me06:23
sivangmako : thanks06:23
sabdflon that basis, i think hornbeck and alexander poslavsky and enrico would be candidates for maintainership06:24
=== sivang regrets for missing the CC meeting. seems some really cool thing been decided.
sabdflanyone want to weigh in on those three?06:25
KamionEnrico's a reasonable Debian developer, he might not be limited to just docs06:26
=== mako nods
Kamionbut those three are certainly fine AFAIAC06:26
KamionEnrico's not on MaintainerCandidates?06:27
sabdflhe's the doc team secretary06:27
sabdflseems sane to offer him the upload option, and a vote06:27
makoyeah, absolutely06:28
sabdflcan we move through the list quite quickly now?06:28
makofine with me06:28
sabdfllet's just focus on establishing if there are people we know well enough to ack immediately06:28
sabdflothers can go through the process06:28
sabdflsaravanan reju?06:29
makodon't know..06:29
sabdflok, full process06:29
sabdfljohn levin06:29
sabdfli don't know him06:29
sabdflanyone in favour?06:30
mdzdoc team guy06:30
KamionI've seen him around, but process I think06:30
makoi know him from traffic on the doc list and such06:30
sabdflok, full process06:30
sabdflmartin krafft?06:30
makohe seems to be active but definitely a doc guy06:30
sabdflfull process06:30
sabdfl Darren Critchley06:30
makofull process06:30
sabdfl David Walker06:30
mdztalked to him, process06:30
sabdflMarco Bonetti06:31
=== mako nods
sabdflnods what?06:31
makothat was to the last comment06:31
sabdfl Luke Yelavich06:31
makomarco: i think i've met him but am not familiar with his contributions06:31
Kamionhe's the accessibility guy, Jeff's been talking to him I think?06:31
makoluke: i don't know luke except a little bit of mailing list ubuntu stff06:31
sabdfli don't know luke06:31
Kamionprocess, though06:31
sabdfl Diego Andrs Asenjo06:31
sabdflChristoph Haas06:32
KamionChristoph> process, but would expect him to get through quickly06:32
=== mako doesn
mako't know either06:32
mdzwho will have responsibility for notifying anyone who just became a maintainer?06:32
Kamionhe's the mentors.debian.net guy06:32
sabdfli'll send them a mail06:32
sabdflso let's be clear, i have:06:33
sabdflthibault varene06:33
sabdflalexander pos06:33
sabdfljohn hornbeck06:33
sabdflmathias urlichs06:33
sabdflthat's it06:33
sabdfli'll send an email to -devel06:34
sabdfland to them06:34
mdzyou mentioned enrico zini earlier06:34
sabdflyes, enrico too, but since he didn't put himself on the page i'll check with him first06:34
makosounds good06:34
sabdflare we done on the appointments front?06:34
sabdfllet's talk about community member sponsorship to the conf06:35
sabdfli think we can sponsor 10 people for travel and board, and 10 for board in each week, separately06:35
sabdflso a total of 30 people06:36
sabdfl10 get travel and board if they are willing to come for a full week06:36
sabdfl20 more get a week of board covered, if they want to get themselves there06:36
=== silbs [~sbsm0084@host217-37-231-28.in-addr.btopenworld.com] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflwe have an internal wiki page, for internal nominations06:37
sabdflbut i think we should also ask community members who are keen to sign up somewhere06:38
mdzthere is a page in the public wiki for that06:38
makomdz: sort of06:38
=== lulu [~lu@host217-37-231-28.in-addr.btopenworld.com] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
sabdflok, has a mail gone to the lists inviting people to sign up?06:38
mdzI believe the announcement of the conference included a bit about that06:38
silbsyes, an email annoucement went out06:38
sabdflok, let's announce the sponsorship separately06:39
sabdflwe have already approved quite a few06:39
sabdflmako, will you coordinate that email with silbs?06:39
makoyeah, i sent the mail06:39
makosabdfl: yes sure06:40
sabdflthat email didn't say (a) where to sign up and (b) that we have some sponsorship available06:40
makosabdfl: where to sign up for sponsorship?06:40
sabdflmako: yes06:41
sabdflmaybe also link to the mail archive from the web site home page conference headline06:41
sabdflso people see ont he home page that sponsorship is available06:41
sabdflKamion, elmo, mako: any other business?06:41
elmonot from me06:42
sabdflmdz, guests?06:42
sabdflok, take that as a no06:43
silbson sponsorship - will nominees and decisions be public?06:43
sabdflthanks everybody06:43
sabdfli'm easy, i think it would be a good idea to send a mail saying who we were sponsoring06:43
silbsokay. We need to make sure it is fair - a deadline for signing up so it isn't just a first come, first serve, etc.06:44
silbsI'll work it with Mako06:44
sabdflthanks everybody06:44
sabdflworkrave time06:44
sabdflmeeting closed06:44
=== sabdfl [~mark@host217-37-231-28.in-addr.btopenworld.com] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== lulu [~lu@host217-37-231-28.in-addr.btopenworld.com] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== smurfix [~smurfix@smurfix.developer.debian] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== fabbione [~fabbione@port49.ds1-van.adsl.cybercity.dk] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== hno73 [~Henrik@henrik.gotadsl.co.uk] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== Keybuk [scott@descent.netsplit.com] has left #ubuntu-meeting ["Leaving"]
=== silbs [~sbsm0084@host217-37-231-28.in-addr.btopenworld.com] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== zul [~chuck@zul.developer.gentoo] has left #ubuntu-meeting ["Leaving"]
=== pitti [~martin@] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== sivang [~dannyh@] has left #ubuntu-meeting ["Leaving"]
=== seb128_ [~seb128@ANancy-151-1-17-243.w83-194.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== elmo [~james@] has left #ubuntu-meeting ["Leaving"]
=== daniels [daniel@fooishbar.org] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== cenerentola [~cenerento@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
cenerentolahi there10:43
=== pitti [~martin@] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
=== pitti [~martin@] has left #ubuntu-meeting []
=== mvo|hockey [~egon@suprimo-161.ping.de] has joined #ubuntu-meeting
cenerentolahi there11:14
=== hazmat [~hazmat@c-24-15-10-12.client.comcast.net] has left #ubuntu-meeting ["Leaving"]

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!