[05:05] <cyphase> hey everyone
[05:28] <spayne> hey _null ;)
[05:28] <_null> hey spayne ;)
[08:24] <spayne> hey Mez
[08:25] <Mez> hey
[08:25] <Mez> meeting in 35 mins ?
[08:31] <spayne> Mez: yes
[08:31] <spayne> Mez: i thought i better stay and explain myself
[08:32] <Mez> spayne, only if you're asked to
[08:40] <spayne> Mez: is a TB meeting don't speak until your asked to?
[08:41] <mez_> ususally, unless you have something to say
[08:42] <JanC> spayne: just don't talk when you don't have anything to say about the active topic
[08:42] <spayne> JanC: a good rule of thumb
[08:43] <JanC> and when you want a specific topic to be discussed, make sure it's on the agenda  :)
[08:49] <spayne> hi dholbach
[08:49] <dholbach> hi
[08:53] <ivoks> hi all
[08:53] <spayne> hi again ivoks
[08:53] <pef> hello all
[08:54] <Mez> evening mdz, ogra, \sh
[08:54] <ivoks> evening? :)
[08:54] <spayne> it is evening here in England
[08:54] <spayne> good ol' england :-)
[08:54] <ivoks> here too :)
[08:55] <_null> it's dark and cold outside :/
[08:55] <Mez> oh
[08:55] <Mez> sorry
[08:55] <Mez> my clock was on evening time :D
[08:55] <sivang> hi all
[08:55] <Mez> (england time)
[08:56] <spayne> Mez: where abouts in jolly england are you?
[08:56] <Simira> nowhere? :p
[08:56] <Mez> spayne: I'm in Canada atm
[08:57] <spayne> Mez: you know what i mean
[08:57] <Mez> Birmngham *cringes*
[08:57] <siretart> hi folks
[08:57] <spayne> Newcastle
[08:57] <mdz> Mez: morning
[08:57] <slomo> hi everybody :)
[08:57] <Mez> afternoon mdz :P
[08:58] <ajmitch> hi
[08:59] <Mez> Tue Nov  1 19:59:20 UTC 2005
[08:59] <_null> Tue Nov  1 20:59:37 CET 2005
[08:59] <_null> ;)
[08:59] <sivang> so, TB meeting now?
[08:59] <mdz> we'll be starting in a few minutes when mjg59 arrives
[08:59] <spayne> howdy everyone
[09:01] <sivang> mdz: fine
[09:04] <ivoks> hi, my name is ivoks, and I'm alcocholic
[09:04] <spayne> where did that come from!?!
[09:04] <ivoks> :/
[09:04] <ivoks> wrong channel
[09:04] <ivoks> sorry
[09:05] <ajmitch> 
[09:05] <ivoks> looks like montreal splits :/
[09:05] <ajmitch> yep
[09:05] <Mez> lol
[09:05] <Mez> yeah
[09:05] <Mez> it's dodgy
[09:05] <Mez> afternoon 
[09:05] <ivoks> wb guys
[09:05] <spayne> hi sabdfl
[09:05] <Mez> afternoon Mark!
[09:05] <ajmitch> hi pitti 
[09:05] <pitti> hi ajmitch 
[09:06] <Keybuk> just a quick general warning ... we're having a few network issues at the conference (shock), so it may be bouncy
[09:06] <daniels> Keybuk: it wouldn't be an ubuntu conference without them
[09:06] <Mez> is the ubuntu ESSID back now then?
[09:06] <spacey> its quite unstable
[09:06] <Mez> or are we all just using TELUS still
[09:07] <ajmitch> yes, it's back
[09:07] <Mez> wb Mark
[09:07] <Mez> ah, am still using TELUS... seems more reliable down here
[09:07] <Mez> lol
[09:07] <_null> what is telus? ;)
[09:07] <Mez> unlike up in my room (the reason half the channels now have revolving doors is for me)
[09:08] <spacey> _null: accesspoint at UBZ
[09:08] <_null> ah
[09:08] <N6REJ> *knock knock, may I speak please*
[09:08] <sabdfl> mjg59 will be around shortly, mdz is .. here
[09:08] <Keybuk> *so* summoned
[09:08] <spayne> there you go
[09:08] <mjg59> Hello
[09:08] <sabdfl> greetings from montreal madness
[09:09] <ivoks> hi
[09:09] <sabdfl> one of the things we've discussed here is focusing the TB more on technical issues
[09:10] <sabdfl> so we have some notes from UBZ
[09:10] <dholbach> hi matthew
[09:10] <sabdfl> some things have been decided, others are still up for contributions
[09:10] <sabdfl> should we touch on that stuff before dealing with new dev candidates?
[09:10] <Keybuk> first we should probably welcome and introduce mjg59 ... ? :)
[09:10] <sivang> Mez: I'm using TELUS right now, ubuntu essid still doesn't work for me
[09:10] <mdz> Keybuk: let him catch his breath first
[09:10] <Mez> sivang - #ubz
[09:11] <mdz> sabdfl: let's
[09:11] <sabdfl> ok, keybuk has a point, welcome mjg59!
[09:11] <sabdfl> great to have you here
[09:11] <sivang> welcome mjg59 :)
[09:11] <mjg59> Good to be here :)
[09:11] <sabdfl> lot's of excitement here at montreal, the processes seem to have settled down so it all seems surprisingly relaxed and un-chaotic
[09:12] <spayne> mjg59: ;-)
[09:12] <Mez> sabdfl: for now
[09:12] <sabdfl> lots of good focused discussion in the first two days
[09:12] <sabdfl> let's see if those scheduling algorithms hold up tonight as we get into some of hte medium and lower priority discussions
[09:12] <sabdfl> anyhow, let's start by covering some of the high priority items that have been on the agenda here
[09:12] <sabdfl> mdz: UbuntuExpress?
[09:13] <sivang> and those that have been decided as well
[09:13] <mdz> we've taken a decision to implement a live-CD-based installer for dapper
[09:13] <mdz> working title "Ubuntu Express"
[09:13] <mdz> technical details are at https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-express
[09:13] <ogra> what about the exisitng app that claimed thaqt name ? 
[09:14] <mdz> and the spec linked from there will be updated to reflect ongoing discussion
[09:14] <mdz> ogra: that implementation was an attempt to create what we want here
[09:14] <ogra> yes, an attempt ..
[09:14] <mdz> so with any luck it will form the basis for this implementation
[09:14] <mdz> we'll cross that bridge when we come to it
[09:15] <mjg59> mdz: Is this supposed to be the default installer, or merely an option?
[09:15] <mdz> mjg59: an excellent question
[09:15] <Kamion> ogra: we've already decided to base our implementation on the Guadalinex one if at all possible; if you have further questions, please ask me about them here rather than in the TB meeting
[09:15] <ogra> Kamion, yup
[09:16] <mdz> mjg59: we hope to be able to use it as our front-line installer
[09:16] <mjg59> mdz: Is this likely to increase install time?
[09:16] <mdz> mjg59: it is likely to dramatically decrease installation time
[09:16] <mjg59> mdz: Ok, if that's the assumption then excellent
[09:17] <ogra> mjg59, and it entertains you while installing :)
[09:17] <Keybuk> other specs are focussing on massively increasing the boot speed of the live cd
[09:17] <mdz> it will be copying a preinstalled filesystem rather than building one out of .debs
[09:17] <mjg59> mdz: My main concern would be about skew between the d-i based installer that'll presumably still be necessary for server-level hardware and the graphical installer
[09:20] <Kamion> mjg59: I'm going to be doing my best to minimise duplication between d-i and UE; that's the major problem with the current implementation
[09:20] <Kamion> (we're having network problems here, hence why sabdfl and mdz dropped off)
 it will be limited in flexibility
 but the advantages for the common case are dazzling
 the existing installer will be retained for other use cases
 we've also discussed the toolchain plan for the dapper cycle
[09:21] <Kamion> mjg59: my intent at the moment is to reuse some of the architecture from oem-config, which was all about calling installer bits from a real system
 where we'll be rather conservative and limit ourselves to point releases of the primary components
 specifically, gcc 4.0.x
 and hopefully dropping 3.3
[09:21] <sabdfl> dropping 3.4 too if we can, depending on glibc and kernel for PPC64
[09:21] <sabdfl> also, NOT shooting for 4.1
[09:22] <sabdfl> since the main argument is java, and the people who care all seem to install the non-free bits anyway
[09:22] <sabdfl> ok
[09:22] <sabdfl> migrations to launchpad
[09:22] <sabdfl> we had a great demo of malone today
[09:22] <sabdfl> plan is to migrate all open bugs
[09:22] <sabdfl> you can see a preview at staging.ubuntu.com
[09:22] <Mez> sabdfl: apart from the big "oops"
[09:23] <sabdfl> https://staging.ubuntu.com/distros/ubuntu/+bug/4658
[09:23] <sabdfl> Mez: iz gtk burrg
[09:23] <mjg59> Is there any plan to move to supporting nx-based systems?
[09:24] <sabdfl> seb128: with both hands ;-)
[09:24] <sabdfl> mjg59: fabian is here
[09:24] <seb128> :)
[09:24] <sabdfl> and lobbying furiously for that
[09:24] <mjg59> sabdfl: Heh. I meant No execute rather than the slimline X.
[09:25] <sabdfl> tollef has some concerns that i need to pass on to omachines
[09:25] <sabdfl> mjg59: aha :-)
[09:25] <sabdfl> mjg59: dapper + 1
[09:25] <Kamion> mjg59: what support are we missing for those?
[09:25] <sabdfl> hmm... is that the stack protection?
[09:25] <mjg59> Ok, so we have our toolchain goals fairly well set
[09:25] <mdz> sabdfl: yes
[09:25] <sabdfl> ok, elmo was saying dapper + 1 
[09:25] <sabdfl> firt rebuild with GCC 4.1, then rebuild again with stack protection
[09:25] <mjg59> Kamion: I was under the impression that it's basically rebuilding the entire archive with the right compiler options, but I couldn't swear to that
[09:26] <elmo> NX is hardware assisted SSP, and is slightly different
[09:26] <sabdfl> early in the dapper + 1 cycle
[09:26] <sabdfl> elmo: go ahead
[09:26] <mdz> sabdfl: when we're breaking everything else
[09:26] <mjg59> Most new hardware is shipping with nx support
[09:26] <sabdfl> mdz: furiously and for infinite justice
[09:26] <tseng> elmo: NX isnt really SSP at all
[09:26] <tseng> but i wont get into that
[09:26] <sabdfl> ok, that's a topic for the toolchain bof. elmo, can we put NX stuff into Dapper at all?
[09:27] <sabdfl> otherwise, dapper itself is now well defined
[09:27] <mjg59> NX support is very buzzword compliant and Intel will love you forever
[09:27] <sabdfl> elmo: ?
[09:27] <Kamion> I seem to remember fixing a grub bug about two releases ago that was due to NX support having kicked in
[09:27] <Mithrandir> uh, we don't have any of the NX stuff there already?  Why did Kamion spend a few days chasing a weird grub bug where it tried to trampoline off some malloced pages (iirc), then?
[09:27] <elmo> sabdfl: AFAIK it is already in
[09:27] <sabdfl> ok, cool
[09:28] <sabdfl> so, the last big thing so far is moving the archive to lp
[09:28] <trulux> hi
[09:28] <sabdfl> daniel (kinnison) will present his stuff tomorrow
[09:28] <mjg59> Ok, if we have it then it's obviously not a concern :)
[09:28] <sabdfl> we are running test imports and there are still bugs
[09:28] <sabdfl> mjg59: best let intel know so they can love us forever :-)
[09:28] <Mithrandir> mjg59: we have had a bug caused by it at least. :-P
[09:29] <mdz> tseng: stack execution versus overwrites on the stack, related in that often both are used in common exploit scenarios
[09:29] <trulux> mdz: anything going on around security stuff?
[09:29] <mjg59> Ok. So it sounds like our basic infrastructural Dapper stuff is fairly well defined.
[09:29] <sabdfl> at some stage in the next few weeks, we will transition to LP for the upload / queue / build management
[09:29] <sabdfl> expect bumps, but the sooner we hit them the better
[09:29] <sabdfl> and that's a wrap of the news headlines from montreal
[09:29] <mdz> trulux: low-hanging fruit only for dapper; we shouldn't deploy anything too aggressive
[09:30] <trulux> mdz: I agree
[09:30] <mjg59> sabdfl: Ok, that all sounds fairly reasonable.
[09:30] <sivang> sabdfl: is it in a better shape then before one week?
[09:30] <trulux> mdz: SELinux user-land support would make it into dapper AFAIK
[09:30] <mjg59> Do we have a well defined idea of what low hanging fruit is yet?
[09:30] <sabdfl> mjg59: RIGID AND BORING! except for UbuntuExpress
[09:31] <sabdfl> we also had the first of a series of desktop tweaking sessions
[09:31] <sabdfl> gdm, panel, and menus are all coming under scrutiny
[09:31] <mdz> argu^Wdiscussions about desktop tweaks
[09:31] <mjg59> But as a baseline, we're looking at Gnome 2.14 + ancilliary benefits, right?
[09:31] <sabdfl> we will land proposed tweaks sooner for maximum feedback pre-freeze
[09:31] <sabdfl> mjg59: yes
[09:32] <mdz> mjg59: 2.14 + shiny artwork + various UI sorts of projects
[09:32] <mjg59> Ok. Are there any Dapper restrictions on Universe, or is it business as usual there?
[09:33] <mdz> mjg59: we haven't in the past, and so far there hasn't been a proposal to change that
[09:33] <sabdfl> motu will likely have the same upstream version freeze
[09:33] <mdz> nor any obvious meltdowns as a result
[09:33] <sabdfl> mdz: this time we should make universe UVF explicit
[09:33] <ajmitch> mjg59: the understanding was that we'll have a definite UVF
[09:33] <mdz> sabdfl: to what end?
[09:33] <sabdfl> the issue in the past has been MOTU's wanting newer stuff that affects dependencies in main
[09:33] <sabdfl> best we all rush to UVF together
[09:33] <\sh> sabdfl: actually it would be nice with an add of two weeks 
[09:33] <tseng> or the motu still struggling to finish major transitions in hoary/breezy
[09:33] <dholbach> yes
[09:33] <ivoks> \sh: +
[09:33] <ajmitch> I think ogra's proposal is for UVF, and 2 weeks for other NEW packages
[09:34] <mjg59> Ok. So it sounds like we have a pretty good idea what the default situation in Dapper is going to be, with a small set of exceptions
[09:34] <mdz> we've always stopped the automatic sync for universe at the same time
[09:34] <mdz> and that's sensible still
[09:34] <ajmitch> yes
[09:34] <mjg59> Was a decision reached about Dapper kernel policy?
[09:34] <ajmitch> we need time in universe to make things sane
[09:34] <sabdfl> 2.6.15, i believe
[09:34] <sabdfl> same version for desktop and server, with different patch sets
[09:34] <mdz> mjg59: https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-roadmap-dapper
[09:35] <sabdfl> ok, any other comments on UBZ?
[09:35] <Keybuk> any questions from the floor?
[09:35] <elmo> ARE WE THERE YET?
[09:35] <mdz> it's not as cold as all that
[09:35] <Keybuk> esp. those not able to atttend
[09:35] <sabdfl> Treenaks is taking video footage of the lightning talks and presentations, to be published asap
[09:35] <ivoks> nice
[09:36] <sabdfl> ogg rocks
[09:36] <sabdfl> ok, let's move along
[09:36] <tseng> mdz: you opened a spec for beagle integration, can we cross that bridge later, or you would like a spec this week or defer?
[09:36] <mdz> tseng: our current notion is to defer it as risky
[09:36] <tseng> mdz: id agree, as it stands
[09:36] <tseng> fair enough
[09:36] <mjg59> sabdfl: Is there going to be a mail to u-devel describing the Dapper situation?
[09:37] <mdz> mjg59: are you volunteering to summarize? ;-)
[09:37] <mjg59> I'd tend to think of Beagle as sufficient for main, if not necessarily desktop or ship
[09:37] <sabdfl> mjg59: good idea, we should announce each approved spec
[09:37] <mjg59> mdz: Oh christ no
[09:37] <Mez> Movies: http://foodfight.org/movies/Ubuntu%20Fanpeople/
[09:37] <sabdfl> yesterday we agreed to have a -devel-announce
[09:37] <sabdfl> reply to -devel
[09:37] <ajmitch> mjg59: beagle still has its issues at times
[09:37] <ajmitch> far less than before
[09:37] <sabdfl> and we will announce approved specs there... .approvers of the world take note
[09:38] <mdz> ...especially the ones not attending
[09:38] <Kamion> one announcement per spec seems too high-traffic; perhaps we can batch it, one message per day
[09:38] <mjg59> mdz: As long as I don't have to write 20,000 lines of powermanagementconfig code, I approve
[09:38] <Kamion> otherwise we're going to turn off all our potential subscribers before we even get started
[09:39] <mdz> mjg59: we do need your input on the power management config spec
[09:39] <mjg59> mdz: sure, no problem
[09:39] <mdz> Kamion: sounds reasonable to me
[09:39] <Keybuk> Kamion: we can do the mail at the end of the daily approver meeting while at the conf
[09:39] <mdz> mjg59: lots of good discussion in that area but needs some technical guidance
[09:39] <Keybuk> if someone can bread-roll jdub and get him to click the "create list" button
[09:39] <mjg59> Sessions using gobby on public addresses = win
[09:39] <sabdfl> ok, are we ready to look at new devs?
[09:40] <Kamion> Keybuk: right
[09:40] <sivang> mjg59: it's so sweet :)
[09:40] <mjg59> (If I could repeat that - SESSIONS USING GOBBY ON PUBLIC ADDRESSES = WIN)
[09:40] <sabdfl> do we have a public address?
[09:40] <Mithrandir> somebody should write a gobby server which we could run in the DC or something.
[09:40] <Mithrandir> like, headless.
[09:40] <Kamion> somebody should fix gobby so it doesn't crash all the time :P
[09:41] <mjg59> A gobby metaserver would be ideal
[09:41] <mdz> right, so developer candidates
[09:41] <mjg59> But being able to give input into specs drafting while not being there makes the process a good deal better
[09:41] <mjg59> But yes, developer candidates
[09:41] <mdz> two people have applied since the last meeting
[09:41] <sabdfl> anybody here applied for motu?
[09:41] <mdz> for core-dev
[09:41] <mdz> https://launchpad.net/people/aaron-bitchx and https://launchpad.net/people/siretart
[09:42] <dholbach> mdz: siretart did for main
[09:42] <Keybuk> https://launchpad.net/people/siretart
[09:42] <siretart> but wifi is... unreliable ;)
[09:42] <pef> sabdfl: yes, I applied for MOTU
[09:42] <Kamion> dholbach: the TB has a convenient list in LP
[09:42] <sabdfl> for motu, it's six new applicants
[09:42] <Keybuk> https://launchpad.net/people/aaron-bitchx
[09:42] <Keybuk> bah, mdz beat me :p
[09:42] <mjg59> aaron-bitchx doesn't appear to have a wiki page
[09:42] <mjg59> He also doesn't appear to be here, unless I'm mistaken?
[09:42] <dholbach> Kamion: yes, i was aware of that :)
[09:43] <mdz> mjg59: I also have no idea who they are
[09:43] <tseng> mjg59: nor is he a member of any launchpad teams
[09:43] <Keybuk> mjg59: also not an ubuntite, or member, etc.
[09:43] <Keybuk> Is "Farias" here?
[09:43] <mjg59> Ok. Can we drop them until we have some idea who they are?
[09:43] <ivoks> that guy was once in #ubuntu-motu
[09:43] <ivoks> asking what he can do
[09:43] <mdz> question: should we explicitly decline candidates who propose themselves apparently at random and don't contact anyone?
[09:43] <\sh> I think only siretart is well known now :)
[09:43] <ivoks> afaik, he didn't move any fruther...
[09:44] <mdz> we don't currently have the ability to provide a reason, I don't think
[09:44] <ajmitch> mdz: it cuts down on noise
[09:44] <mjg59> mdz: I'm inclined to suggest that they be non-prejudicially rejected
[09:44] <mjg59> But making that clear may involve facilities we don't have
[09:44] <sabdfl> we don't currently have a way just to make those requests disappear
[09:44] <mjg59> I think this is a problem to solve in the future, though
[09:44] <siretart> they obviously fail to prove to know how the process of becoming developer works
[09:44] <sabdfl> so, going systematically
[09:44] <mjg59> Shall we move on to siretart?
[09:45] <Keybuk> sabdfl: could we have a "decline with a reason" button? :p
[09:45] <mdz> Keybuk: I smell a spec
[09:45] <trulux> hey pitti 
[09:45] <mjg59> In siretart's faviour, he's here and I recognise the name :)
[09:45] <siretart> hi pitti ;)
[09:45] <sabdfl> Keybuk: sure. nudge salgado or land it yourself :-)
[09:45] <siretart> :)
[09:45] <mdz> mjg59: he's also *here*
[09:45] <ajmitch> he also lent me a laptop, so he has my vote :)
[09:45] <sabdfl> siretart: what areas of main are you particularly interested in working on?
[09:46] <siretart> sabdfl: I'm currently concentrating on q/a, especially this revu stuff
[09:46] <siretart> sabdfl: I intend to help in processing merges in main and general bugfixing
[09:46] <tseng> dholbach-lite :)
[09:47] <dholbach> tseng: come on :)
[09:47] <ajmitch> tseng: noone can compete with the dholbach 
[09:47] <siretart> hrhr
[09:47] <magnon> aww.
[09:48] <sabdfl> can some of the motu comment on siretarts current coding, package management, upload approach?
[09:49] <dholbach> i'd be quite happy with siretart in main. he was both reliable in being active and his solutions themselves. he didnt just grab the low-hanging fruits and he has a good overview of what's going on.
[09:49] <tseng> siretart doesnt really have his head stuck in the packaging level (altough he is no slouch at that)
[09:49] <Mez> dholbach has just put into words exactly what I was thinking
[09:49] <dholbach> and he's been a central part of MOTU in the last 8 months? 9 months?
[09:49] <tseng> he is an expert at management also
[09:49] <mjg59> I'd also say that siretart was entirely competent doing laptop testing
[09:49] <tseng> and created REVU in one of the biggest boosts to motu productivity
[09:50] <Mez> and revu2/revu3 is looking good
[09:50] <ogra_> dholbach, so he's about to be born into main ? :)
[09:51] <sabdfl> siretart: who would you discuss a low-level upload with?
[09:51] <sabdfl> can you give some examples of package that you consider a high-risk upload?
[09:52] <siretart> sabdfl: I'd say it depends, because I'd consider  low level to be potential critical
[09:52] <siretart> the key packages are packages with large reverse dependencies
[09:53] <siretart> obviously this includes packages like libc or kernel, which I'd never touch without having someone working on it reviewed (that means my patch to that looked at)
[09:53] <sabdfl> siretart: did you make much of a contribution to any of the recent universe transitions?
[09:53] <sabdfl> dholbach: can you comment on that?
[09:53] <siretart> so especially library packages are critical, gnome has a lot of them ;)
[09:54] <sabdfl> siretart: do you run kde on any machines?
[09:54] <siretart> sabdfl: I think I've done a fair amount of cxx transition uploads
[09:54] <mdz> siretart: it's crucial that core developers be able to assess the risk of their changes before uploading, and seek advice if appropriate
[09:54] <siretart> mdz: absolutly. 
[09:54] <mdz> siretart: can you explain how you would go about making those judgements?
[09:55] <siretart> mdz: this is such a general question. I'd go to the changelog, look at the people who worked on it, and asses which other package a diff could affect
[09:56] <dholbach> sabdfl: he worked on the merges and on ghc6 and the unmet depedencies we tracked down
[09:56] <siretart> obviously this affects both reverse depends and reverse build depends in many cases
[09:56] <mdz> siretart: yes, it is very general.  feel free to use specific examples to explain your reasoning
[09:58] <mdz> siretart: for example, a situation where you would go ahead with a change, and one where you would decide to wait until you had more information or review
[09:59] <siretart> sabdfl: I don't run kde on my machines, so I'd rather don't touch kde packages without being absolutly sure that I wont break anything. But installing kde on my private machine and testing kde is also no problem to me
[09:59] <siretart> mdz: I
[09:59] <siretart> argl
[09:59] <Mez> argl ?
[09:59] <siretart> mistyped
[10:00] <siretart> I'd go on with and upload without notifying anyone else if I can really reprodoce the bug/problem and can testify that the bug is gone with that
[10:01] <siretart> obviously there can be bad side effects, I'm aware of that and try to avoid that
[10:01] <siretart> but there are also in main many easy bugs that can be fixed
[10:01] <siretart> think of merges in packages like diveintopython
[10:01] <siretart> or documentation packages. they don't have risk to break the whole system
[10:02] <mdz> all the same, they are not without risk.  a broken diveintopython package will cause the desktop install to fail, and would delay a milestone or even a release
[10:02] <siretart> err, in that case the package would be really broken such as in uninstallable
[10:03] <siretart> I think I've proven that I can check others not to produce such packages
[10:03] <siretart> so I'd consider myself competent enough to do such checks on myself
[10:03] <sabdfl> siretart: how would you check to see if the -desktop archive is currently installable?
[10:04] <siretart> debootstrap and apt-get install ubuntu-desktop?
[10:04] <siretart> on private repo with my 'testpackage; installed
[10:04] <sabdfl> siretart: that would work, yes, there's a daily report though
[10:04] <sabdfl> most dev's check it regularly
[10:04] <siretart> yeah, but only after I uploaded it
[10:05] <siretart> I thought this question would be about checking if an upload would break it
[10:05] <mdz> siretart: what other tools and methods do you use to test a package before uploading it?
[10:06] <siretart> mdz: pbuilder, and sbuild obviously, but I also find piuparts quite useful
[10:06] <siretart> for mass rebuilds, I find sbuild more convinient
[10:07] <Keybuk> how do you check whether you've made any of the common mistakes in your package?
[10:08] <siretart> I configured my debuild setup to run both linda and lintian by default, this catches to MOST common mistakes
[10:10] <mdz> siretart: and what was Keybuk's previous hair colour?
[10:10] <Keybuk> in a few of your uploads, you've actually converted the packaging system used (to dpatch in a few, and cdbs in another) to apply relatively minor changes -- could you explain your reasoning for doing so?
[10:10] <sabdfl> which hair?
[10:10] <siretart> mdz: I think brown ;)
[10:10] <sabdfl> how about a final round of questions, then a "yes" or "defer" vote?
[10:10] <mdz> I'm finished
[10:11] <mjg59> I think Scott's question is a good one - converting between build systems increases the skew against Debian, which makes contributing patches back more difficult
[10:11] <siretart> Keybuk: I'd consider that now as a mstake. I had the misassumption that this would actually faciliate the work for the DD. after reading some discussion, like joeys rants about motus excessivly using dpatch, I'd rather agree to him
[10:12] <mdz> ok, calling for votes then
[10:12] <siretart> Keybuk: I'm about to process merges to packages I borked myself and undo that change, because debdiff is the state of the art tool for now :/
[10:12] <mjg59> siretart: If you're willing to evangelise in that respect, I'm entirely in favour
[10:12] <sabdfl> +1 from me, on the basis that i think he's touched a wide variety of packages in generally constructive ways
[10:13] <dholbach> it was a misconception among the whole motu crew, to be honest - we discussed this in the last motu-meeting
[10:13] <mjg59> +1 from me - I think he shows a good understanding of the issues involved, and is willing to accept that certain techical decisions were mistakes (which puts him ahead of many :) )
[10:13] <Keybuk> indeed
[10:13] <Keybuk> +1 from me
[10:14] <mdz> +1, reflecting general thoughtfulness of process and judgement
[10:14] <dholbach> YAY
[10:14] <mdz> siretart: congratulations and welcome
[10:14] <sabdfl> so
[10:14] <sabdfl> congratulations siretart
[10:14] <siretart> YAY! Thanks you all! :)
[10:14] <dholbach> excellent :)
[10:14] <sabdfl> and welcome (further) aboard :-)
[10:14] <Mez> quite funny
[10:14] <mjg59> UniverseCandidates?
[10:14] <ivoks> siretart: nice! :)
[10:14] <mjg59> (or whatever it's called)
[10:14] <dholbach> mjg59: ? :)
[10:15] <ogra_> congrats siretart :)
[10:15] <mdz> mjg59: https://launchpad.net/people/ubuntu-dev/+members
[10:15] <sabdfl> are there any MOTU candidates here?
[10:15] <dholbach> mjg59: that's the wiki page for users suggesting new software for ubuntu universe :)
[10:15] <ajmitch> sabdfl: bmonty_laptop is here for a change
[10:15] <\sh> siretart: rock...u have to pay the drinks tonight ,-)
[10:15] <bmonty_laptop> hey guys, sorry I'm late, but can you still consider my MOTU application?
[10:15] <ajmitch> siretart: well done :)
[10:15] <slomo> siretart: congrats :)
[10:15] <sabdfl> dholbach: new tb member's duty is to filter those and predict which ones elmo will bump to multiverse ;-)
[10:15] <JaneW> siretart: congratulations
[10:15] <Keybuk> https://launchpad.net/people/hestonbonapart, https://launchpad.net/people/ryoma-nagare, https://launchpad.net/people/loic, https://launchpad.net/people/changjiang98, https://launchpad.net/people/thisdyingdream
[10:16] <sabdfl> bmonty_laptop: are you in the list keybuk posted?
[10:16] <pef> sabdfl: I'm loic 
[10:16] <mdz> before we consider MOTU candidates, I'd like to make a proposal regarding core candidates
[10:16] <tseng> he is https://launchpad.net/people/bmontgom
[10:17] <Keybuk> mdz: ok
[10:17] <bmonty_laptop> sabdfl: no
[10:17] <sabdfl> bmonty_laptop: ok, go ahead and propose yourself for the ubuntu-dev team
[10:17] <mdz> specifically, that we only consider candidates who have already participated in MOTU, unless there is an explicit consensus to fast-track someone where we have first-hand working knowledge
[10:18] <bmonty_laptop> sabdfl: I think I already have, but let me check
[10:18] <sabdfl> +1 from me on that, with exceptions for DD's and other highly qualified folks
[10:18] <Mez> mdz: I thought that was the case anywya
[10:18] <mjg59> mdz: I think that should be stated explicitly, yes
[10:18] <mdz> Mez: it's been implicit
[10:18] <sabdfl> Mez: not explicit yet
[10:18] <mdz> mjg59: this would allow us to clean out the list of ubuntu-core-dev candidates in launchpad
[10:18] <ogra_> Mithrandir, in fact i'm just about to upload the latest gnome-screensaver to dapper
[10:19] <ogra_> whoops ECHAN
[10:19] <Keybuk> yeah, +1 it's been pretty much an implicit so far
[10:19] <mjg59> Unless there are pressing reasons for an exception, it ought to be expected that core developers are already engaged in development
[10:19] <mdz> ok, agreed then 
[10:19] <mdz> sabdfl is cleaning out the list accordingly
[10:19] <bmonty_laptop> sabdfl: lanchpad says I am already proposed and waiting for approval
[10:19] <mdz> I think there are enough paths to MOTU that anyone seeking to get involved won't have trouble finding their way
[10:20] <mjg59> Ok, cool.
[10:20] <bmonty_laptop> mdz: I'd agree with that
[10:20] <mjg59> MOTU people?
[10:20] <tseng> we actively pull people in whenever possible
[10:20] <mjg59> Do we have anyone other than pef?
[10:20] <tseng> where there is interest.
[10:20] <sabdfl> bmonty_laptop: ok, see you now
[10:20] <Keybuk> bmonty_laptop: did you not show up at the previous meeting?
[10:21] <bmonty_laptop> Keybuk: no, the last meeting occurs during my work hours
[10:21] <bmonty_laptop> and I have no IRC access at work
[10:22] <Keybuk> should we also start explicitly only approving for MOTU those people who are already Ubuntu Members?
[10:22] <Keybuk> that's easy to check with launchpad now, we've only not done it so far because the CC held the list and we didn't
[10:24] <mdz> I would like to avoid a lockstep process where people need to show up for multiple meetings during different weeks just to go through the process
[10:24] <mdz> any ideas for how we can simplify it?
[10:24] <bmonty_laptop> mdz: why the requirement for the irc meeting?
[10:24] <Mez> mdz: if they get MOTU - then they're automatically a member ?
[10:24] <tseng> most MOTUs worthy of approval can be vouched for by one of us
[10:24] <Mez> (make MOTU a member of members)
[10:25] <tseng> and already made a meeting for member status
[10:25] <sabdfl> i think we can let the TB approve membership directly
[10:25] <tseng> approved by CC members
[10:25] <sabdfl> in fact, i thought that was the PreHoaryPositionThatStayed
[10:26] <tseng> hm we have been implicitly implying membership all along ime
[10:26] <tseng> uh
[10:26] <tseng> implicitly requiring...
[10:26] <tseng> prehoary process was just a quick 3 votes at TB for maintainership
[10:27] <sabdfl> ok
[10:27] <sabdfl> the discussion rounf the table here is...
[10:27] <sabdfl> i'm proposing that we make the TB-can-give-membership thing formal
[10:27] <mdz> if developership implies membership, we need to be more rigorous about having developers go through the other bits of the membership process
[10:27] <sabdfl> and i'll put this on the CC agenda now
[10:27] <mdz> such as signing the CoC
[10:27] <mdz> sabdfl: agreed, should be discussed with CC
[10:27] <sabdfl> in fact, i'd like to propose that the forums guys can grant membership
[10:28] <tseng> could you be more specific with "the forums guys"?
[10:28] <sabdfl> on the basis that membership is all about a "substantial contribution", and they are in a better position to judge that for forum participants
[10:28] <sabdfl> elmo: ^^ PANIC
[10:28] <Keybuk> sabdfl: I can't hear any screams ...
[10:28] <tseng> i am panicing for him!
[10:28] <Seveas> sabdfl, so let the forum guys vouch for them at the CC meetings
[10:29] <mdz> sabdfl: I think we should defer this to the CC meeting
[10:29] <mdz> especially for the sake of those who are staying up late to be considered for MOTU
[10:31] <Keybuk> ok, can we hear from our MOTU on bmonty and pef ?
[10:31] <Keybuk> have they been working with you so far, and if so, do you think they're ready?
[10:32] <tseng> i sponsored bmonty on a significant number of rebuilds to clear unmet deps
[10:32] <tseng> i think he moved onto to higher fruit after that, anyone else?
[10:32] <Riddell> pef has been doing great stuff for KDE packages
[10:33] <Riddell> he's been packaging faster than I can review but his pacakges are all good quality so far
[10:33] <LaserJock> can a MOTU wannabe say something?
[10:33] <mdz> LaserJock: if you have first-hand information to share, certainly
[10:33] <tseng> LaserJock: if its relevaant to the topic at hand, of course
[10:33] <Riddell> pef as been helping keep packages up to date too which is cool
[10:34] <dholbach> i reviewed quite a bunch of pef's packages, he really does a good job on packaging stuff and recently got involved in fixing universe bugs in malone
[10:35] <tseng> (yay for turns)
[10:35] <LaserJock> bmonty has helped me a lot learning to package and is one of the reasons I like to contribute to Ubuntu. He is friendly and professional and gives good advice.
[10:35] <Riddell> oh yes, pef has been going through some kubuntu bugs, which is very welcome
[10:36] <slomo> i reviewed some of pef's packages too... all of them were fine except sometimes small mistakes that could be simple fixed :)
[10:36] <mdz> tseng: Keybuk is attempting parallel candidate processing
[10:36] <dholbach> bmonty worked together with bddebian in the hard times of merges/unmet-deps and they both ruled breezy-changes in that time. unfortunately i didnt work much with him, because i was busy with my thesis
[10:36] <Keybuk> pef: what kind of things will you be doing in universe?
[10:37] <Riddell> tseng: why?
[10:37] <tseng> mdz: an interesting tactic
[10:37] <pef> Keybuk: fixing bugs and package applications, especially kde stuff
[10:38] <Mez> +1 for kde stuff :D
[10:39] <pef> Keybuk: and help new motus, review their packages like motus are doing for me
[10:39] <Keybuk> just looked though pef's uploads, he gets a +1 from me, lots of good work there and think he'll be doing some good work for kubuntu
[10:40] <mdz> +1 for pef based on feedback from his peers
[10:40] <mjg59> +1 - I'm happy with the feedback
[10:41] <sabdfl> +1 from me too, with extra interest on the Kubuntu front
[10:41] <sabdfl> welcome aboard!
[10:41] <mdz> pef: congratulations to you
[10:41] <Keybuk> bmonty: looks like you're doing some good work, but I'd personally like to see you work a little more closely with the MOTU and come back and apply again in a later meeting
[10:42] <bmonty_laptop> Keybuk: work more closely in what way?
[10:42] <pef> thank you all :]  I'm really proud being a motu :)
[10:42] <Mez> congrats pef: welcome to the team
[10:42] <mdz> bmonty_laptop: if there are others on the MOTU team who have worked more closely with you, we would like to hear from them
[10:42] <mdz> bmonty_laptop: perhaps bddebian?
[10:42] <sabdfl> bmonty: don't be discouraged, but i would agree with keybuk and say i look forward to seeing you here again in a month or two, with some more packaging experience
[10:42] <dholbach> pef: excellent work! well done
[10:43] <pef> dholbach: thank you for being present here
[10:43] <Keybuk> bmonty_laptop: carry on how you're going, work on some more different kinds of packages across the archive and work with a few different members of the MOTU team
[10:43] <pef> Riddell: thank you too :)
[10:43] <dholbach> pef: de rien
[10:44] <mjg59> bmonty_laptop: (For what it's worth, it took around a year from me applying to Debian to being able to upload anything)
[10:45] <Riddell> pef: you're cool, keep up the kubuntu help!
[10:45] <bmonty_laptop> k, I'll keep working at it
[10:45] <mjg59> bmonty_laptop: So please don't be discouraged :)
[10:45] <Keybuk> bmonty_laptop: definitely, please do!
[10:45] <mdz> bmonty_laptop: we appreciate your interest and efforts so far
[10:46] <bmonty_laptop> hey guys, this is discouraging, but I was having fun working on breezy and I'll continue to what I find fun with dapper
[10:46] <daniels> bmonty_laptop: (took me 3.5 years to get upload privileges in Debian.)
[10:47] <Amaranth> daniels: Those guys are nuts then. :)
[10:47] <tseng> Amaranth: not really, he was busy trolling them.
[10:47] <Keybuk> Amaranth: he was very very very 14
[10:47] <Amaranth> Ah, this explains much.
[10:49] <mjg59> So, anything else on the agenda?
[10:49] <mdz> one last item
[10:49] <mdz> we have a new mailing list, ubuntu-devel-announce@lists.ubuntu.com
[10:49] <mdz> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-announce
[10:49] <mdz> to separate announcement posts from the increasing traffic on ubuntu-devel
[10:49] <mjg59> +1
[10:49] <mdz> everyone subscribe, kthxbye
[10:49] <mjg59> Excellent
[10:49] <mdz> any other business?
[10:50] <Keybuk> developers will be using that to announce big changes, and keep everyone in touch with what's happening
[10:50] <mjg59> I suggest that we encourage people at UDZ to enjoy Montreal while they can
[10:50] <mdz> likewise for those at UBZ
[10:50] <daniels> and those in Montral
[10:50] <Keybuk> now, where's the whiskey?
[10:50] <ivoks> heh and what about others, still in europe? :)
[10:50] <mdz> right
[10:51] <mdz> meeting adjourned
[10:51] <mdz> thanks everyone for your participation
[10:51] <tseng> thanks mdz 
[10:51] <mjg59> And the whisky
[10:51] <dholbach> thank you
[10:51] <mjg59> Excellent. See you soon.
[10:51] <pef> thank you !
[10:51] <ivoks> thnx