[09:13] <kraut> moin
[11:37] <coNP> @schedule Budapest
[11:37] <ubotu> Schedule for Europe/Budapest: 24 Aug 14:00: MOTU Team | 27 Aug 17:00: Screencast Team | 28 Aug 17:00: Ubuntu Server Team meeting | 28 Aug 21:00: Technical Board | 29 Aug 22:00: Edubuntu | 03 Sep 15:00: Community Council
[12:20] <kraut> @schedule berlin
[12:20] <ubotu> Schedule for Europe/Berlin: 24 Aug 14:00: MOTU Team | 27 Aug 17:00: Screencast Team | 28 Aug 17:00: Ubuntu Server Team meeting | 28 Aug 21:00: Technical Board | 29 Aug 22:00: Edubuntu | 03 Sep 15:00: Community Council
[12:39] <Hobbsee> @now sydney
[12:39] <ubotu> Current time in Australia/Sydney: August 24 2007, 20:39:38 - Next meeting: MOTU Team in 1 hour 20 minutes
[01:44] <dholbach> MOTU Meeting in ~15 minutes!
[01:44] <coNP> MOTU Q&A session in ~15 minutes! :D
[02:00] <dholbach> welcome everybody to the MOTU meeting!
[02:00] <ScottK> Good morning.
[02:00] <coNP> Good afternoon.
[02:00] <dholbach> is there anybody who'd volunteer driving it?
[02:00] <dholbach> is there anybody who'd volunteer doing minutes?
[02:00] <dholbach> TheMuso: you rock!
[02:00] <dholbach> ScottK: would you mind driving it?
[02:00] <ScottK> Not at all.
[02:00] <dholbach> our agenda is very short today: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Meetings :)
[02:01] <ScottK> Thanks
[02:01] <ScottK> There's only the fixed topics.
[02:01] <ScottK> Does anyone have anything for geneneral MOTU discussion before we start on those?
[02:01] <ScottK> general even
[02:02] <ScottK> OK.  I guess not.
[02:02] <ScottK> Next meeting?
[02:02] <dholbach> in two weeks?
[02:03] <TheMuso> I guess two weeks from now is good.
[02:03] <ScottK> Sounds good.
[02:03] <dholbach> should we try to go for another time next time?
[02:03] <TheMuso> As for the time, what cycle of rotating times are we following?
[02:03] <dholbach> TheMuso: none at the moment if I recall correctly :)
[02:03] <TheMuso> dholbach: I think so.
[02:03] <ScottK> IIRC we've been bumping it +- 12 hours each time.
[02:03] <TheMuso> re a different time next meeting.
[02:03] <dholbach> oh ok
[02:04] <ScottK> So 2 weeks + 12 hours
[02:04] <ScottK> Any objections?
[02:04] <TheMuso> ScottK: If I am right, thats a Saturday, at 0 UTC>
[02:04] <ScottK> Yes.
[02:04] <TheMuso> I don't mind, but I am sure folks in Europe would like to speak up.
[02:04] <dholbach> I will be on a plane at that time
[02:05] <dholbach> but you've showed before, that you can deal easily without me :-)
[02:05] <ScottK> dholbach: Would you like to propose an alternate time?
[02:05] <dholbach> and it'd be fair for US/AU people
[02:05] <dholbach> ah no, I won't be on a plane, but it might be a bit late for me anyway
[02:05] <TheMuso> dholbach: This time is more appropriate for au people than not, as its our evenin
[02:05] <TheMuso> evening
[02:05] <dholbach> I think it's fine having a meeting suited for AU and US people - that's good
[02:05] <TheMuso> sat mroning people are often out and about
[02:06] <ScottK> At least it's up to 3.
[02:06] <TheMuso> but its fine for me
[02:06] <ScottK> Saturday at 0000 UTC it is then.
[02:06] <ScottK> Next hug day....
[02:07] <TheMuso> Well... I am not involved with them.
[02:07] <ScottK> dholbach: Any suggestions?
[02:07] <ScottK> Next Friday is the first day after New Package Freeze.
[02:07] <dholbach> I ponder trying for once to roll it into the 'regular' Hug Day
[02:07] <ScottK> It might be a good time to kick off the focus on bug fixing.
[02:07] <Hobbsee> yes, so all MOTU's please keep (or start) reviewing packages
[02:07] <dholbach> oh, that's good too
[02:07] <ScottK> OK.
[02:08] <dholbach> what do you think about making a selection of say 20 universe bugs and make a triage list like for the normal hug days?
[02:08] <zul> morning
[02:08] <dholbach> as you can see on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20070822 - it has worked REALLY well
[02:08] <ScottK> dholbach: I'd rather focus on fixing rather than triaging.
[02:09] <ScottK> dholbach: Maybe pick a few packages that have got a lot of bugs and recent updates to get the bug backlog cleaned up.
[02:09] <dholbach> ok, we could have a 'fix list' as well
[02:09] <dholbach> ScottK: good idea
[02:09] <dholbach> we should propose that on the list and focus on getting the list ready until next friday
[02:10] <ScottK> As an example (not for next Friday because it won't get out by then) would be democracyplayer/miro.
[02:10] <ScottK> OK.
[02:10] <dholbach> yeah, that's really popular
[02:10] <ScottK> listen is another one.
[02:11] <ScottK> Is there a way to get LP to give me a list of universe packages sorted by the number of open bugs?
[02:11] <ScottK> Nevermind, we can deal with that later.
[02:11] <ScottK> Any objections to Universe hug day next friday?
[02:11] <dholbach> no, none at all
[02:12] <TheMuso> Not from me.
[02:12] <ScottK> REVU day....
[02:12] <TheMuso> Aren't they every MOnday?
[02:12] <dholbach> ScottK: maybe CC brian@canonical.com for that - he wrote a couple of tools using py-lp-bugs
[02:12] <ScottK> I'd say for the next week EVERY day is REVU day.
[02:12] <TheMuso> thats what we decided a few emetings back
[02:12] <dholbach> oh, good thinking
[02:12] <TheMuso> ScottK: GOod idea.
[02:12] <ScottK> dholbach: is that the same person as bdmurray?
[02:13] <Hobbsee> ScottK: i think so
[02:13] <dholbach> ScottK: yes
[02:13] <ScottK> OK.  Up through New Package Freeze, every day is REVU day.  Lets get going .... [fade to uplifting music] 
[02:13] <ScottK> Thanks.
[02:13] <dholbach> rock
[02:14] <dholbach> sorry, need to close the windows, thunderstorm coming up, brb
[02:14] <ScottK> Next Q&A.
[02:14] <TheMuso> ScottK: Well how about we see how this one goes.
[02:14] <ScottK> Fine with me.
[02:14] <ScottK> I don't particularly like the idea of making people think there is a special time for asking questions.
[02:15] <ScottK> I'd rather they thougth they could ask questions any time.
[02:15] <TheMuso> ScottK: Agreed.
[02:16] <ScottK> Of course you may have noticed that in general I'm not a fan of structure and process.
[02:16] <TheMuso> hh
[02:16] <TheMuso> heh
[02:17] <ScottK> dholbach: We'll delegate the next Q&A to you based on how this one goes.
[02:17] <dholbach> I think it's good to have a call for participants and gathering them in a place
[02:17] <ScottK> Does anyone have any other MOTU business/discussion?
[02:17] <dholbach> I'm happy to run them
[02:17] <ScottK> dholbach: When then?
[02:17] <dholbach> in two weeks again?
[02:18] <Hobbsee> ScottK: only how we handle UVF, with native packages, and packages in bzr
[02:18] <dholbach> 12:00 utc is good for me and if somebody did one at 0:00 that'd be awesome
[02:18] <TheMuso> Hobbsee: WOuld you rather have the rest of the UVF team here?
[02:18] <Hobbsee> TheMuso: yeah
[02:18] <zul> im here
[02:18] <zul> kind of but not really awake
[02:18] <ScottK> dholbach: Pick a time that's not the same time as the meeting though.
[02:18] <Hobbsee> i think stevenk has gone walkabout.
[02:18] <Hobbsee> the others of us appear to be here
[02:19] <dholbach> ScottK: 12:00 UTC should be fine then
[02:19] <ScottK> OK.
[02:19] <TheMuso> Hobbsee: What about gpocentek?
[02:19] <TheMuso> Or is he not UVF?
[02:19] <ScottK> soren: You awake?
[02:19] <Hobbsee> TheMuso: didnt think he was
[02:19] <ScottK> He's not.
[02:19] <Hobbsee> ScottK: he  just ponged, so yes
[02:19] <TheMuso> ah
[02:19] <ScottK> OK.
[02:19] <TheMuso> dunno where I got that idea.
[02:20] <ScottK> Hobbsee: "How we handle UVF"
[02:20] <ScottK> Over to you....
[02:20] <Hobbsee> right
[02:20] <soren> ScottK: Sure am.
[02:20] <Hobbsee> obviously, UVF is so that we can keep universe's quality up
[02:21] <ScottK> I thought it was so I could get more bug mail.
[02:21] <TheMuso> heh
[02:21] <Hobbsee> ideally, we'd approve everything that people file.
[02:21] <gpocentek> hello
[02:21] <ScottK> Ideally everything people file would be worth approving.
[02:21] <ScottK> Agreed.
[02:21] <Hobbsee> therefore, it's the MOTU's responsibility to actually judge what is good to file, and what isnt.
[02:21] <Hobbsee> so please, all MOTU's, think before filing.
[02:22] <TheMuso> s/c
[02:22] <TheMuso> ugh
[02:22] <Hobbsee> to our hopefuls, please also think before filing, although we wont yell at you so badly if you dont.
[02:22] <Hobbsee> the question is, how do we want to handle things like new bzr revisions, and/or new native packages?
[02:23] <soren> Hobbsee: New packages are fine.
[02:23] <ScottK> For packages that only affect other distros (like ubuntustudio or mythbuntu) I say given them a blanket waiver.
[02:23] <soren> Hobbsee: At least for another week, iirc.
[02:23] <Hobbsee> er, new native package revisions
[02:23] <gpocentek> TheMuso: I'm not in the uvf team
[02:23] <Hobbsee> ScottK: yes, that sounds sane
[02:23] <TheMuso> gpocentek: SO I found out. Sorry for the confusion.
[02:24] <gpocentek> np
[02:24] <_MMA_> Man. Im gonna need a log.
[02:24] <ScottK> If they want to break something that's their business.
[02:24] <zul> for those who dont know the motu team is Hobbsee, soren, stevenk, scottk, and me
[02:24] <soren> For new bzr revisions, it's difficult to say anything in general. If it's minor bugfixes or minor new features, no problem. If it's potentially disruptive, it needs to be more closely evalueated.
[02:24] <TheMuso> For UbuntuStudio's case, its seed updates, artwork and settings updates. Thats all.
[02:25] <ScottK> Any objections to blanket wavier for native packages that only affect derivatives?
[02:25] <_MMA_> Ant the art we should be able to update until Ubuntu's artwork deadline.
[02:25] <_MMA_> *And
[02:25] <ScottK> zul, soren?
[02:25] <Hobbsee> also, do we want to require that all UVFe's go through the sponsorship process first (a MOTU ack), before they hit the UVFe queue?
[02:25] <zul> ScottK: isnt he?
[02:26] <ScottK> Hobbsee: That's a good one.
[02:26] <Hobbsee> ideally, we'd get rid of a set "motu-uvf" team for gutsy+1, and have all motu's acting as a sanity filter
[02:26] <soren> Oh, if derivatives want to break their own stuff, let them. No problems here.
[02:26] <Hobbsee> that's one of my master dreams, and plans.
[02:26] <ScottK> zul: StevenK is on the team, but not here.
[02:26] <Hobbsee> ScottK: he just joined.
[02:26] <StevenK> Sure I am.
[02:26] <ScottK> Ah.
[02:26] <Hobbsee> because that will stop things being blocked so much
[02:26] <ScottK> StevenK too then.
[02:26] <coNP> Sorry, ScottK, what do you mean by "Any objections to blanket wavier for native packages that only affect derivatives?"
[02:26] <ScottK> Hobbsee: But blocking is kind of the point.
[02:27] <ScottK> con
[02:27] <Hobbsee> coNP: ie, the people who want to upload ubuntustudio stuff can, as it wont affect the rest of the archive.
[02:27] <ScottK> what Hobbsee said....
[02:27] <coNP> Thanks Hobbsee, ScottK.
[02:27] <TheMuso> SO it all goes through me.
[02:27] <Hobbsee> ScottK: the point is, the MOTU's (hopefully) wont file for things that dont deserve a UVFe, and the MOTU's will tell the hopefuls that it does not fit the freeze requirements
[02:27] <Hobbsee> er, if it does not
[02:27] <StevenK> The ubuntustudio stuff in question are just meta-packages?
[02:28] <TheMuso> StevenK: metapackages, settings for UbuntuStudio desktop layout/artwork, and artwork itself.
[02:28] <Hobbsee> ScottK: and that we can check what the MOTU's are acking, because they'll still go thru motu-uvf for this cycle.
[02:28] <TheMuso> so very very little architecture specific code
[02:28] <Hobbsee> ScottK: and advise them of unwise decisions
[02:28] <ScottK> Right.
[02:29] <StevenK> The thing is, I'm not happy doing a blanket for native packages, since that covers a multitude of sins.
[02:29] <Hobbsee> as you'll note, we seem to have a different group of -uvf people each time, so theoretically, any MOTU's should be competent at it.
[02:29] <Hobbsee> StevenK: i think that'll be up to the filers, and then our, discression.
[02:29] <StevenK> However, I'm happy for a blanket ubuntustudio metapackages/settings/etc exception.
[02:30] <Hobbsee> StevenK: [22:24]  <soren> For new bzr revisions, it's difficult to say anything in general. If it's minor bugfixes or minor new features, no problem. If it's potentially disruptive, it needs to be more closely evalueated.
[02:30] <ScottK> StevenK: Agreed.  Just for native packages for derivatives.  Mythbuntu too?
[02:30] <Hobbsee> ScottK: yes, mythbuntu, ubuntu studio, xubuntu too, i would expect.
[02:30] <StevenK> Sounds fine to me.
[02:30] <TheMuso> Hobbsee: xubuntu is main
[02:30] <ScottK> OK.
[02:30] <Hobbsee> TheMuso: this is true, btu i'm suspecting they still have the odd package in universe tha tpeople use
[02:30] <StevenK> I'm not certain about having to get UVFe's sponsored, though.
[02:31] <Hobbsee> StevenK: as in, the sponsoring done first, not afterwards?
[02:31] <ScottK> Hobbsee: So far the UVFe rate isn't to bad.  How about we leave it for now.
[02:32] <StevenK> ScottK: +1
[02:32] <zul> i would like to see a debdiff as well or am i just crazy?
[02:32] <Hobbsee> ScottK: OK.  i'd appreciate it if the people could think about it too
[02:32] <ScottK> zul: debdiff for a new upstream version will likely be painful to read.
[02:32] <Hobbsee> zul: diffstat may be of more use, there
[02:32] <ScottK> Diff of the debian dirs might be useful.
[02:33] <Hobbsee> ScottK: we can probably request that stuff as appropriate?
[02:33] <ScottK> Agreed.
[02:33] <StevenK> A diff of debian would be useless in my opinion.
[02:34] <ScottK> OK.
[02:34] <StevenK> A changelog entry is the minimum
[02:34] <ScottK> Definitely.
[02:34] <ScottK> Of course we've already approved a UVFe for a package with the changelog entry "rewrote the entire package".
[02:35] <Hobbsee> yeah, well.
[02:35] <Hobbsee> that would be a pain to support the old version
[02:35] <ScottK> I wouldn't approve that now, but it was just a day or two after the freeze.
[02:36] <ScottK> Any other opinions on that?
[02:36] <zul> if it affects a spec then I woudlnt have a problem with it
[02:36] <zul> if not we would have to be very very very careful
[02:37] <StevenK> ScottK: Agreed
[02:37] <Hobbsee> ScottK: oh, so *that's* why my script isnt working.
[02:37] <Hobbsee> it tries to unsub motu-uvf, not unassign.
[02:38] <TheMuso> Ok, just to make it clear for minutes, and to save me reading tons of log, what has been decided?
[02:38] <ScottK> 1.  motu-uvf should be subscribed, not assigned on bugs.
[02:39] <ScottK> 2.  Blanket UVFe for ubuntustudio/mythbuntu/xubuntu (if any) only packages.
[02:39] <coNP> ScottK: does it mean that you should unassign yourself before?
[02:39] <ScottK> coNP: You are welcome to assign yourself to any bugs you want to be assigned to.
[02:39] <ScottK> Just don't assigne motu-uvf.
[02:39] <ScottK> assign even.
[02:40] <ScottK> 3.  People asking for UVFe's please don't be stupid.
[02:40] <ScottK> Feel free to reword that last one.
[02:40] <ScottK> I think that's it.
[02:40] <coNP> ScottK: okay, just asking because it is similar to the UUS / UMS procedure, where you are supposed to unsubscribe yourself.
[02:40] <ScottK> Anything else?
[02:41] <coNP> I have another question, maybe not a very good one, but can we ask the archive admins to do the approved UVFe syncs ASAP? I think it is quite crucial to let these packages as many testing as possible...
[02:41] <ScottK> With, but for a UVFe you have further action after it's approved, so it's different.
[02:41] <ScottK> coNP: If it's needed for a particular special reason, yes, but generally no.
[02:41] <ScottK> You have to trust them to have a reasonable work priority for all the stuff they do.
[02:41] <geser> what think the other members from the motu-uvf team about updated native packages (new version): do every change need an UVFe?
[02:42] <ScottK> None of them are fully dedicated to archive admin.
[02:42] <ScottK> OK.
[02:42] <geser> I've talked with Hobbsee about it in #ubuntu-motu and she was ok that small changes (around < 30 lines) don't need an UVFe
[02:42] <Hobbsee> geser: i was proposing that, yes
[02:43] <ScottK> I think the rule for other native packages should be don't do something risky, ask if you are unsure.  If you break something and don't fix it, well send Mithrandir to your house to eat you.
[02:43] <ScottK> Or something like that.
[02:43] <Mithrandir> mm
[02:43] <Mithrandir> brains
[02:43] <Mithrandir> :-)
[02:44] <Hobbsee> Mithrandir: dont get too excited.
[02:44] <Hobbsee> heh, oh dear.
[02:45] <Hobbsee> ScottK: sounds sane.
[02:45] <TheMuso> d/c
[02:45] <TheMuso> argh
[02:45] <Hobbsee> popey: hm?
[02:45] <popey> :D
[02:45] <zul> Hobbsee is what happens to you when you doo too much
[02:46] <ScottK> Any more UVF issues/questions?
[02:46] <Hobbsee> oh right, is htat what the problem is?
[02:46] <Hobbsee> ScottK: can i have a psychic pony?
[02:46] <TheMuso> heh
[02:47] <TheMuso> heh
[02:47] <ScottK> Hobbsee: If they pony were psychic it would know to run and be uncachable.
[02:47] <TheMuso> haha
[02:47] <highvoltage> when is the next motu-council meeting?
[02:47] <highvoltage> (assuming there is such a thing :) )
[02:47] <Hobbsee> highvoltage: i think it's by email.
[02:47] <TheMuso> highvoltage: MC never meets.
[02:48] <Hobbsee> dholbach: what do you want to do about new people for the MC?
[02:48] <TheMuso> Hobbsee: Good question.
[02:48] <Hobbsee> as sistpoty has resigned.
[02:48] <TheMuso> And I have a feeling crimsun is also likely to
[02:48] <dholbach> Hobbsee: I expected a question from sabdfl or somebody of the TB to be honest
[02:48] <dholbach> Hobbsee: I'll make sure to get an answer on that quickly
[02:48] <Hobbsee> dholbach: OK, cool.
[02:49] <highvoltage> Hobbsee, TheMuso: aaah
[02:49] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Are you through your list then?
[02:49] <Hobbsee> ScottK: i think so
[02:49] <ScottK> OK.
[02:49] <TheMuso> Hobbsee: Better check. :p
[02:49] <ScottK> Anyone else with stuff for the MOTU meeting?
[02:50] <ScottK> Going once
[02:50] <ScottK> Going twice
[02:50] <ScottK> Meeting adjourned.
[02:50] <dholbach> thanks a lot ScottK
[02:50] <ScottK> Thanks everyone for coming.
[02:50] <dholbach> thanks a lot TheMuso
[02:51] <TheMuso> And same with announcements.
[02:51] <Hobbsee> so of course, now jono shows up...
[02:51] <TheMuso> heh
[02:51] <TheMuso> Well I'm outa this chan.
[02:52] <jono> I am not here, currently in a meeting
[02:52] <Hobbsee> ah