[03:31] <juliux> @schedule berlin
[03:31] <Ubugtu> Schedule for Europe/Berlin: 22 Jan 21:00: MOTU | 24 Jan 13:00: Edubuntu | 25 Jan 17:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 30 Jan 21:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 21:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 23:00: Xubuntu
[03:32] <Hobbsee> @schedule sydney
[03:32] <Ubugtu> Schedule for Australia/Sydney: 23 Jan 07:00: MOTU | 24 Jan 23:00: Edubuntu | 26 Jan 03:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 31 Jan 07:00: Technical Board | 01 Feb 07:00: Edubuntu | 01 Feb 09:00: Xubuntu
[03:32] <Hobbsee> argh...i forgot about that meeting....
[03:33] <Mithrandir> aka "penguin with a webcam"
[03:33] <Hobbsee> argh!  not a webcam!!!
[03:33] <Mithrandir> it's cute.
[03:34] <Hobbsee> hehe :)
[04:04] <gnomefreak> @schedule new_york
[04:04] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/New_York: 22 Jan 15:00: MOTU | 24 Jan 07:00: Edubuntu | 25 Jan 11:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 30 Jan 15:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 15:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 17:00: Xubuntu
[05:59] <Toadstool> @schedule los_angeles
[05:59] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Los_Angeles: 22 Jan 12:00: MOTU | 24 Jan 04:00: Edubuntu | 25 Jan 08:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 30 Jan 12:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 12:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 14:00: Xubuntu
[08:39] <sharms> @schedule detroit
[08:39] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Detroit: 22 Jan 15:00: MOTU | 24 Jan 07:00: Edubuntu | 25 Jan 11:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 30 Jan 15:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 15:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 17:00: Xubuntu
[09:03] <sistpoty> hi folks
[09:03] <sistpoty> anyone here for motu-meeting?
[09:03] <LaserJock> hi sistpoty
[09:03] <sistpoty> hi LaserJock
[09:04] <ajmitch> maybe
[09:04] <LaserJock> so... who's running the show today?
[09:04] <ajmitch> you are
[09:04] <ajmitch> or sistpoty
[09:04] <ajmitch> there only seems to be a couple of people here
[09:04] <sistpoty> I'd prefer if LaserJock would do it ;)
[09:04] <sistpoty> (am just about eating dinner *g*)
[09:05] <Adri2000> hi everybody
[09:05] <sistpoty> hi Adri2000
[09:05] <sharms> I am here for motu
[09:06] <lionel> hi all
[09:07] <LaserJock> well, I'll have to leave in less then an hour so we need to get with it
[09:07] <Adri2000> sharms: to apply for ubuntu-dev membership?
[09:07] <LaserJock> the agenda is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Meetings
[09:08] <Adri2000> sharms: if so, it's the wrong meeting ;) currently ubuntu-devs are approved by the TB, and soon by the MC
[09:08] <sharms> Adri2000: Just to listen
[09:08] <ajmitch> ok, SRU process
[09:08] <LaserJock> tsmithe: well, eventiall MOTU Council will do that too
[09:08] <ajmitch> sistpoty: you have the floor, let's get moving
[09:08] <Adri2000> sharms: ah, ok, fine then :)
[09:08] <sistpoty> has everybody followed the mails to -motu and read https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Processes/SRURedone?
[09:08] <sistpoty> if not, please do so ;)
[09:09] <sistpoty> well... imo it takes way too much time until a update even hits proposed...
[09:09] <sistpoty> on the wiki-page, I've tried to make some proposals what can be fixed
[09:10] <sistpoty> but it might be a good thing if somebody *not* from the sru-team would make comments as well (as it's sometime hard to see problems if you're involved on one end)
[09:10] <sistpoty> so anyone some idea how to improve the sru-process?
[09:11] <LaserJock> well, the biggest problem, IMO, is how many people it has to pass
[09:11] <ajmitch> whoever is last to approve the package (in the SRU team) should upload it
[09:11] <LaserJock> ajmitch: +1
[09:11] <ajmitch> rather than it being approved & sitting there
[09:11] <sistpoty> ajmitch: if the last person is crimsun, we are already doing it that way ;)
[09:11] <ajmitch> good
[09:11] <LaserJock> we get delayed everytime it goes from  1 queue to another
[09:11] <ajmitch> but it doesn't always happen
[09:11] <ajmitch> eg libnss-ldap
[09:12] <sistpoty> ajmitch: so you propose to also upload stuff that have a motu as assignee?
[09:12] <ajmitch> yes
[09:12] <sistpoty> ah
[09:12] <ajmitch> it reduces delays
[09:12] <ajmitch> the person approving will already have the source there to look at
[09:12] <ajmitch> so uploading won't be a burden
[09:12] <LaserJock> I think as far as MOTU, having the last motu-sru voter upload and having a good system for displaying what's in -proposed
[09:13] <LaserJock> the biggest delay has been ubuntu-archive
[09:13] <sistpoty> LaserJock: yes
[09:13] <LaserJock> but that's not really in our control too much and sounds like it's getting worked on
[09:13] <sistpoty> LaserJock: FWIW Mithrandir is open to suggestions about reducing the checks ubuntu-archive is doing
[09:13] <sistpoty> would that be an option?
[09:14] <LaserJock> I think it would be good
[09:14] <LaserJock> I think he should basically just check versioning
[09:14] <LaserJock> and even that shouldn't be too bad if it goes through 3 motu-sru
[09:14] <sistpoty> +1 here as well, at least for -proposed
[09:15] <LaserJock> like I said in my email, getting into -proposed should be super easy
[09:15] <sistpoty> ok... any other opinions what we should improve for sru?
[09:15] <sistpoty> any objections to LaserJock proposal?
[09:16] <sistpoty> ok, if noone cries out loud, I'd call that a decision ;)
[09:16] <LaserJock> ;-)
[09:16] <ajmitch> good
[09:16] <ajmitch> NEXT!
[09:17] <sistpoty> release schedules... me again
[09:17] <LaserJock> Release schedules (sistpoty)
[09:17] <ajmitch> can we decide on this now?
[09:17] <ajmitch> we have feature freeze on the 8th, what does this mean for universe?
[09:17] <ajmitch> last time we had universe upstream version freeze at beta freeze (iirc)
[09:18] <sistpoty> ajmitch: imo we should decide now... we're overdue to get them listed on feistyreleaseschedule
[09:18] <ajmitch> and no new packages at feature freeze
[09:18] <ajmitch> which meant everything on REVU had to be in by FF
[09:18] <sistpoty> there was one mail from crimsun with pretty good proposals for dates... I'll look that one up
[09:18] <LaserJock> ok, dholbach's original proposal was keeping UVF same as Main and FF one week after Main FF
[09:18] <ajmitch> LaserJock: that can't be right
[09:19] <ajmitch> UVF is on the same day as feature freeze
[09:19] <ajmitch> I didn't think we'd have such an early UVF
[09:19] <LaserJock> well, I swear UVF and FF weren't the same day but that's what the wiki page says
[09:20] <ajmitch> right
[09:20] <ajmitch> for edgy, we had UVF & no new packages at beta freeze
[09:20] <LaserJock> March 15th in this case
[09:20] <ajmitch> we also had an active UVF team that could do approvals
[09:20] <sistpoty> ah... found the mail: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/2006-December/001103.html
[09:20] <ajmitch> which needs to be sorted
[09:21] <LaserJock> I seriously think it depends on how hard the freeze is going to be
[09:21] <LaserJock> in Edgy we had to get approval for *every* upload after Beta Freeze didn't we?
[09:22] <sistpoty> that would slowed us down pretty much, right?
[09:22] <LaserJock> yeah
[09:23] <LaserJock> if we are going to have that hard of a freeze I'd like to delay it
[09:23] <LaserJock> if UVF and FF mean just that I'm fine
[09:23] <LaserJock> but if UVF/FF effectively cut off any more development I'm not so fine
[09:23] <sistpoty> well... for UVF it might be good to know what debian is/will be doing... ajmitch?
[09:25] <ajmitch> sistpoty: hah
[09:25] <ajmitch> funny
[09:25] <ajmitch> "etch will release"
[09:25] <ajmitch> no firm dates yet, I heard rumours of mid-feb
[09:26] <LaserJock> it seems like etch will be too late for us to re-merge all the new upstreams that are likely to hit unstable
[09:26] <sistpoty> ajmitch: oh, nice... we should put UVF definitely before the release of etch
[09:26] <ajmitch> LaserJock: no, we did *not* need approval for every upload after beta freeze, but after RC
[09:26] <LaserJock> ah RC
[09:26] <ajmitch> it was only for a week or two
[09:26] <ajmitch> not 5-6 weeks
[09:27] <LaserJock> well, it was when I was going to upload some bug fixes I think
[09:27] <sistpoty> ok, let's go over the unique dates... UVF
[09:28] <LaserJock> I think we should keep UVF with Main
[09:28] <sistpoty> is Feb 8 okay, sooner or later?
[09:28] <sistpoty> anyone else?
[09:28] <tsmithe> yay! my birthday
[09:28] <ajmitch> we need to freeze some time
[09:28] <LaserJock> ajmitch: what you prefer?
[09:28] <sistpoty> hehe
[09:29] <LaserJock> we need to get merges done and out the door
[09:29] <ajmitch> yes
[09:29] <ajmitch> it just means approval for everything new after that
[09:29] <ajmitch> & also clearing up REVU by the 8th
[09:29] <LaserJock> yes
[09:29] <LaserJock> no
[09:29] <LaserJock> that's FF
[09:29] <sistpoty> ajmitch: nope... UVF != FF
[09:29] <LaserJock> I propose FF be later
[09:29] <sistpoty> LaserJock: same here
[09:29] <LaserJock> UVF same to get merges done and get sort of settled in
[09:29] <LaserJock> and be consistent with Main
[09:30] <LaserJock> before etch release
[09:30] <LaserJock> but once merges are done and out of the way
[09:30] <LaserJock> hit REVU and get all the new crack in
[09:30] <ajmitch> it'll give us a few weeks to work on bugs
[09:30] <geser> UVF = no new upstream version (only with approval) but new revisions don't need an approval?
[09:30] <sistpoty> geser: only new upstream versions
[09:30] <LaserJock> yes, "upstream" in this case is upstream upstream
[09:31] <sistpoty> *g*
[09:31] <LaserJock> new Debian revisions are ok
[09:31] <sistpoty> ok... let's vote so that we can move on
[09:31] <sistpoty> Feb 8?
[09:31] <sistpoty> +1
[09:31] <LaserJock> +1
[09:31] <sistpoty> (please clearly vote with -1 if you are against it)
[09:31] <geser> for FF or UVF?
[09:32] <LaserJock> UVF
[09:32] <sistpoty> geser: UVF
[09:32] <geser> +1
[09:32] <sistpoty> 3
[09:32] <sistpoty> 2
[09:32] <sistpoty> 1
[09:32] <sistpoty> ok, accepted
[09:32] <sistpoty> next: FF
[09:33] <sistpoty> FF: march 1st? sooner or later?
[09:33] <ajmitch> sooner
[09:33] <sistpoty> ajmitch: name a date please ;=
[09:33] <sistpoty> )
[09:33] <LaserJock> really?
[09:33] <ajmitch> feb 22
[09:34] <ajmitch> UVF+2 weeks
[09:34] <ajmitch> depends on how much time you want people to spend reviewing vs bug fixing
[09:34] <sistpoty> if we do one or two revu sprints during that time, might be ok
[09:34] <LaserJock> yeah
[09:34] <LaserJock> that's what I was just thinking
[09:34] <sistpoty> hehe
[09:34] <ajmitch> and announce it well
[09:34] <LaserJock> yes
[09:34] <ajmitch> so that people know there's a deadline
[09:35] <bddebian> sistpoty: :)
[09:35] <sistpoty> ok, votes please for feb 22
[09:35] <sistpoty> FF
[09:35] <sistpoty> +1 here
[09:35] <ajmitch> so you'd have 1 month from now until universe FF
[09:35] <LaserJock> +1
[09:35] <ajmitch> +1
[09:35] <geser> +1
[09:35] <LaserJock> that gives us 3 weeks after FF before Beta Freeze
[09:36] <ajmitch> hopefully people don't yell too loudly for us deciding on dates ;)
[09:36] <sistpoty> ok... 3
[09:36] <sistpoty> 2
[09:36] <sistpoty> 1
[09:36] <ajmitch> LaserJock: you think that's too long?
[09:36] <sistpoty> done...
[09:36] <ajmitch> hm ok
[09:36] <LaserJock> ajmitch: no, I'm thinking we will need time for QA and upgrade testing
[09:36] <LaserJock> we should try to be pretty locked down *before* Beta
[09:36] <ajmitch> we've done badly on that in the past
[09:37] <sistpoty> ajmitch: the dates should have been decided on the list a long time ago... but these things never work without MC ;)
[09:37] <ajmitch> hence the QA topic coming up :)
[09:37] <ajmitch> sistpoty: of course
[09:37] <ajmitch> sistpoty: easier to ask forgiveness than permission ;)
[09:37] <sistpoty> hehe
[09:37] <LaserJock> sistpoty: can you please edit the release schedule so we can get those "written in stone"?
[09:37] <geser> is universe freeze on beta freeze?
[09:37] <ajmitch> geser: no
[09:37] <sistpoty> LaserJock: will do after the meeting ;)
[09:37] <LaserJock> geser: there is no universe freeze
[09:38] <ajmitch> none decided yet, anyway
[09:38] <sistpoty> universe freeze used to be FF + UVF combined
[09:38] <geser> LaserJock: in edgy we had one
[09:38] <ajmitch> the hard freeze didn't work so well for edgy
[09:38] <ajmitch> noone uploaded bug fixes
[09:38] <LaserJock> geser: as sistpoty said Universe Freeze was just FF+UVF
[09:38] <LaserJock> geser: it was done because the Edgy cycle was short
[09:38] <geser> so we can upload fixes till feisty release?
[09:39] <LaserJock> we have no freeze for fixes
[09:39] <LaserJock> as far as I can see
[09:39] <ajmitch> until the buildds & upload queue is set to manual
[09:39] <ajmitch> which is a couple of days before release
[09:39] <sistpoty> yes...
[09:39] <sistpoty> any more discussion needed for freeze dates? did I miss s.th.?
[09:40] <LaserJock> I don't think so, we just needed to rubber stamp it
[09:40] <sistpoty> ok, then let's move one, agreed?
[09:40] <LaserJock> can I inject a quick meeting item?
[09:40] <sistpoty> LaserJock: sure
[09:40] <LaserJock> At the end of last week I had a talk with kiko (LP dev)
[09:41] <LaserJock> and he expressed a desire for MOTU to have better representation with LP
[09:41] <LaserJock> and to work on making sure LP meets the MOTU's needs
[09:41] <LaserJock> to do this he wanted a MOTU representitive to work with the LP devs
[09:42] <LaserJock> to help prioritize bugs
[09:42] <LaserJock> and get feedback from MOTU and turn it into specific and concrete bug reports that they can work on
[09:42] <ajmitch> (bugs in the launchpad code, not universe bugs)
[09:42] <LaserJock> yes
[09:42] <LaserJock> sorry
[09:43] <sistpoty> sounds great :)
[09:43] <LaserJock> so, if there aren't any objections, I will take on this role
[09:43] <sistpoty> hehe, I just wanted to propose you, LaserJock ;)
[09:43] <sistpoty> +1
[09:43] <ajmitch> thanks for volunteering :)
[09:43] <LaserJock> and will probably be meeting with the LP team (in some fashion) on a weekly basis
[09:43] <sistpoty> great!
[09:43] <LaserJock> I've started trawling through Malone bugs
[09:43] <LaserJock> looking at bugs that seem important to MOTU
[09:44] <LaserJock> and in fact I found a few of our long standing complaints are long standing bugs in Malone
[09:44] <bddebian> Yeah :-(
[09:44] <LaserJock> I will probably be using a special tag to mark certain bugs as MOTU priorities
[09:45] <Adri2000> the ability to target a bug for a release (for a SRU) in malone, currently only core-devs can do that
[09:45] <sistpoty> LaserJock: I'll have some things of LP as well... I'll write you a mail
[09:45] <LaserJock> so, if you have things that need to be fixed in LP (for MOTU work) please let me know
[09:45] <sistpoty> Adri2000: yep... would be really handy to get that fixed, at least for -sru / motu-swat
[09:46] <LaserJock> once I get things worked out with the LP guys I'll write an email to -motu explaining things further
[09:46] <LaserJock> but I really want to thank kiko for reaching out to MOTU
[09:46] <sistpoty> yay!
[09:46] <LaserJock> this was a really good idea on his part
[09:46] <somerville32> :)
[09:46] <LaserJock> and has commited to giving MOTU what it needs if possible
[09:46] <bddebian> Do we already have a policy on what really makes good candidates for backports?
[09:47] <LaserJock> anyway, that's it from me on that topic
[09:47] <ajmitch> bddebian: add it to the meeting agenda :)
[09:47] <LaserJock> and I have to run to try to convince 300 undergrads to by goggles from me ;-) I'll be back in ~15 min
[09:47] <ajmitch> bye :)
[09:47] <sistpoty> LaserJock: cya motu-lp-coordinator ;)
[09:48] <bddebian> Heh, later LaserJock
[09:48] <sistpoty> ajmitch: how about doing it now?
[09:48] <ajmitch> ok, first up, we suck at QA
[09:48] <ajmitch> edgy was a shambles
[09:48] <ajmitch> we need to fix this
[09:49] <ajmitch> one reason I wanted an early freeze date, so that we have plenty of time for fixing bugs
[09:50] <ajmitch> I want us to have weekly targets of  things to do (unmet deps, critical bugs, etc), which will require some coordination with the bug squad
[09:50] <sistpoty> sounds great
[09:50] <ajmitch> and I also want to try & get a list of bugs that are fixed in debian by new upstream versions that we don't have in ubuntu
[09:50] <ajmitch> since we find out a few weeks after release about RC bugs that missed out on UVF by a day or so
[09:51] <ajmitch> we've had the autoimporter shut off for so long that there may be many of these
[09:51] <ajmitch> any other suggestions for what we need to do to make feisty universe better?
[09:51] <sistpoty> hm... I even needed to file sync requests for two security bugs
[09:51] <geser> we need also check for CVE fixed in unstable
[09:51] <ajmitch> yep
[09:52] <ajmitch> I can trawl the debian BTS via the LDAP gateway
[09:52] <ajmitch> but I need to get the version info on the debian bugs
[09:52] <sistpoty> ajmitch: cool
[09:53] <ajmitch> so, getting a list of packages that are older than in debian, getting a list of closed bugs, seeing what bugs were fixed in those versions we don't have
[09:53] <sistpoty> ajmitch: will you take leadership for universe-qa?
[09:53] <ajmitch> who wants to try & do some weekly task lists (council job, i know)
[09:53] <ajmitch> sure
[09:53] <sistpoty> ajmitch: cool, would be awesome
[09:53] <sistpoty> hehe
[09:54] <ajmitch> give me suggestions of what we need to fix
[09:54] <ajmitch> & how we do testing (upgrade & install testing, etc)
[09:55] <sistpoty> ajmitch: imo the most important thing is to try to motivate people to follow at least *some* task lists, instead of everybody working on something different
[09:55] <ajmitch> yep
[09:55] <sistpoty> which I guess will be the hardest part as well ;)
[09:55] <ajmitch> heh
[09:55] <geser> we should also check that packages build on all archs
[09:56] <ajmitch> that should come under full archive rebuild testing
[09:56] <sistpoty> ajmitch: will that be done this time?
[09:56] <ajmitch> I hope so
[09:56] <ajmitch> I'll find out
[09:57] <geser> maybe we could ask the same person who did it the last time
[09:57] <sistpoty> ajmitch: iirc lucas did archive rebuilds for unstable, didn't he? maybe he could set s.th. up for feisty as well? (if we cannot do it officially)
[09:57] <ajmitch> yes, he did
[09:57] <ajmitch> imbrandon can probably do some with his new toys
[09:58] <geser> but this time with enough time for fixes
[09:58] <sistpoty> great
[09:58] <sistpoty> we should also try to fix as many unmet deps as possible... many sru's are due to unmet deps
[09:59] <sistpoty> (with really easy fixes!)
[09:59] <keescook> I'd love to get involved in some full rebuilds too; I'd like to test some toolchain changes at some point (separate from the feisty release stuff, obviously)
[09:59] <geser> what about packages that failed building on upload but build now?
[09:59] <ajmitch> geser: certainly, I was filing a few bugs with fabbione after a full rebuild on sparc
[09:59] <ajmitch> geser: we get the admins to give them back to the buildds
[09:59] <ajmitch> keescook: excellent
[10:00] <sistpoty> ajmitch: is there a procedure to do the give-back? (my pings to lamont don't seem to have any impact)
[10:00] <ajmitch> sistpoty: lamont hasn't done that for ages
[10:00] <lamont`> ajmitch: well, I can now... but yeah
[10:00] <ajmitch> unless he's been helping out recently
[10:00] <geser> sistpoty: ask Mithrandir for give-backs
[10:00] <ajmitch> hey lamont` :)
[10:00] <sistpoty> hi lamont
[10:01] <bddebian> heh
[10:01] <geser> ajmitch: exists a list of those packages that need a look (because it failed building)?
[10:01] <ajmitch> geser: there should be, if not, we'll get one
[10:01] <ajmitch> mails are sent out on build failures now as well
[10:01] <ajmitch> & we can officially beg the LP guys now
[10:02] <ajmitch> anything else for QA that we need to cover now?
[10:02] <persia> I'd like to see removal of all NBS in universe.  Some install and fail for known reasons.
[10:02] <ajmitch> we also need someone to do minutes of the meeting, please
[10:03] <pochu> @schedule
[10:03] <Ubugtu> Schedule for Etc/UTC: Current meeting: MOTU | 24 Jan 12:00: Edubuntu | 25 Jan 16:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 30 Jan 20:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 20:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 22:00: Xubuntu
[10:03] <sistpoty> I can do the minutes...
[10:03] <ajmitch> persia: there's probably a lot we could cull from universe because they won't work without a lot of effort
[10:03] <ajmitch> sistpoty: thanks
[10:04] <ajmitch> this topic has sort of covered the needed todo lists as well
[10:04] <sistpoty> ok
[10:04] <ajmitch> unmet deps, bugs fixed in debian, critical/important bugs on malone, etc
[10:04] <ajmitch> sistpoty: you want to talk about translations soon?
[10:05] <sistpoty> erm... anyone got a clue about translations?
[10:05] <ajmitch> nope
[10:05] <sistpoty> I actually only set it as topic, since we got a mail on -motu
[10:05] <ajmitch> we'd need to talk to carlos
[10:06] <sid> @schedule New_York
[10:06] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/New_York: Current meeting: MOTU | 24 Jan 07:00: Edubuntu | 25 Jan 11:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 30 Jan 15:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 15:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 17:00: Xubuntu
[10:06] <sistpoty> ok, then let's defer the item... anyone volunteering to contact carlos about it?
[10:07] <ajmitch> then it's MOTU school
[10:07] <persia> I lurked on a conversation between seb128 and carlos.  Translations was related to a spec that was rejected, and needs revision (although I can't find the URL now).
[10:07] <ajmitch> we've been wanting to revive this for awhile, but it takes a reasonable about of time
[10:08] <ajmitch> persia: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/language-packs-for-universe ?
[10:08] <sistpoty> hm... maybe it might make sense to do short (as in very short) lessons prior to a new task (e.g. unmet deps) being the current one
[10:09] <ajmitch> sistpoty: probably a good idea, and link to the school session on the task lists
[10:09] <sistpoty> yes
[10:09] <persia> ajmitch: Yep, that's it.  The rejection was due to the volume and conflicts due to translations upstream vs. translations locally.
[10:10] <ajmitch> so we just need a call for volunteers for school sessions, and we can go for it ;)
[10:10] <ajmitch> sistpoty: great, that was the last topic, we can go home ;)
[10:10] <sistpoty> ajmitch: date of next motu-meeting?
[10:10] <sistpoty> do we want to decide now or defer to mailing list?
[10:11] <LaserJock> for what? next meeting?
[10:11] <sistpoty> LaserJock: yes
[10:11] <ajmitch> now + 3 weeks, exact date to be decided on list?
[10:11] <LaserJock> I think we should at least have a proposal right now
[10:11] <LaserJock> I think it should be the week after the MOTU Council get's finalized
[10:11] <ajmitch> make it a regular thing
[10:11] <ajmitch> LaserJock: hah
[10:11] <ajmitch> haha
[10:11] <ajmitch> sorry
[10:11] <sistpoty> +3 weeks sounds good
[10:11] <LaserJock> I can dream can't I? ;-)
[10:12] <sistpoty> maybe we should rotate the time to cover different tz's?
[10:12] <ajmitch> sistpoty: good idea
[10:12] <ajmitch> sistpoty: a meeting every 3-4 weeks could be a good thing
[10:12] <sistpoty> ajmitch: agreed
[10:12] <ajmitch> let people bring up their complaints
[10:12] <LaserJock> yes
[10:12] <LaserJock> I think if we have regular reports as well it will help
[10:13] <ajmitch> yep
[10:13] <LaserJock> getting people going is what we need right now
[10:13] <sistpoty> wed, Feb 14?
[10:13] <sistpoty> let's say 8.00 UTC?
[10:13] <ajmitch> sistpoty: sure, 1 week before FF
[10:14] <sistpoty> ok, anyone against that date?
[10:14] <ajmitch> I think I'll be finished at practice at about 7:30UTC :)
[10:14] <ajmitch> ah sorry, that's wednesday, i have nothing on that day
[10:14] <sistpoty> hehe... and I need to get up early (before noon)
[10:14] <ajmitch> unless I get back to archery practice :)
[10:14] <zul> .exut
[10:14] <LaserJock> well, that's midnight for me, but better than 10:00UTC
[10:14] <ajmitch> LaserJock: alright
[10:15] <LaserJock> we should rotate times
[10:15] <ajmitch> no objections?
[10:15] <sistpoty> no
[10:15] <LaserJock> I guess, with as many people as we have
[10:15] <LaserJock> not from me
[10:15] <ajmitch> great
[10:15] <LaserJock> we can hash it out on the ML if it doesn't work for people
[10:15] <sistpoty> ok, then thanks everyone for the meeting...
[10:15] <ajmitch> it is decided
[10:15] <LaserJock> I just think it's better to have a propasal, then work from there
[10:16] <ajmitch> thanks sistpoty for getting it running
[10:16] <sistpoty> np
[10:16] <ajmitch> & LaserJock
[10:16] <sistpoty> t'was small but very productive imo :)
[10:16] <LaserJock> sistpoty: thank you a lot for getting things going
[10:16] <LaserJock> and the REVU Reports are great
[10:16] <sistpoty> LaserJock: no problem... if I were that good with my thesis as well *g*
[10:16] <LaserJock> I meant, SRU Reports
[10:17] <sistpoty> oh, anyone got a clean log? kvirc unfortunately always has the colors in the log (or I'm to stupid to turn it off *g*)
[10:17] <LaserJock> sistpoty: I hear you dude, I've got a lot of research waiting for me
[10:17] <ajmitch> yay, I can get back to doing work now
[10:17] <sistpoty> hehe
[10:17] <sistpoty> *g*
[10:18] <ajmitch> back later
[10:18] <sistpoty> cya ajmitch