/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2007/10/19/#ubuntu-meeting.txt

=== greeneggsnospam is now known as jsgotangco
=== thomas__ is now known as The-Kernel
=== ubuntusucks is now known as elkkubuntu
=== elkkubuntu is now known as myrttiubuntu
=== myrttiubuntu is now known as ubuntunonaked
=== ubuntunonaked is now known as ubuntunonakedgir
=== ubuntunonakedgir is now known as ubuntuhowfix
=== ubuntuhowfix is now known as howfixhowfixhowf
=== howfixhowfixhowf is now known as howfixbadubuntu
howfixbadubuntuhowfixbadubuntu?07:21
howfixbadubuntuhowfixbadubuntu?07:21
howfixbadubuntuhowfixbadubuntu?07:21
howfixbadubuntuhowfixbadubuntu?07:22
howfixbadubuntuplz?07:22
=== howfixbadubuntu is now known as ubuntushit
gpocentekHobbsee: could you do the same on -motu ? :)07:24
Hobbseegpocentek: for the love of anythign good, use !ops when wanting something from an op, like a kickban.  or /query me07:26
* Hobbsee sees lots of red everywhere, and so has no idea if that's current, or was from hours ago07:26
MithrandirHobbsee: /lastlog -h is nice.07:28
HobbseeMithrandir: that's true, but i tend to read most of it anyway07:28
* Hobbsee needs nalioth's irssi ban script07:29
krautmoin07:37
Hobbseedamned tor07:37
Hobbseeif he comes up anywhere else, call !ops07:37
dholbachHobbsee: #ubuntu-bugs #ubuntu-desktop #ubuntu-mobile07:40
Hobbseedholbach: only has ops in 1, no staffer to kline beyond that08:23
dholbachHobbsee: OK08:37
=== ogra__ is now known as ogra
=== Mez is now known as Mez|Away
=== Mez|Away is now known as Mez
soren@schedule Copenhagen11:42
* soren kicks ubotu11:42
=== Thirsteh` is now known as Thirsteh
=== asac_ is now known as asac
=== Hobbsee is now known as LongPointyStick
dholbachheya12:58
FujitsuEvening.12:58
TheMusoHey folks.12:59
nxvlgood morning12:59
dholbach#startmeeting12:59
MootBotMeeting started at 12:59. The chair is dholbach.12:59
MootBotCommands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]12:59
* TheMuso will do minutes/announcements, if nobody else wants to.12:59
dholbachWelcome to the MOTU Meeting12:59
dholbachthanks a lot TheMuso12:59
dholbachwe have an agenda at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Meetings12:59
dholbachFirst up is persia12:59
dholbach[TOPIC] Hardy Freeze Schedule. Discussion to consider the merits of earlier UVFUniverse and NewPackagesFreezeUniverse to allow greater time for QA for the LTS.13:00
MootBotNew Topic:  Hardy Freeze Schedule. Discussion to consider the merits of earlier UVFUniverse and NewPackagesFreezeUniverse to allow greater time for QA for the LTS.13:00
=== Hobbsee_ is now known as Hobbsee
dholbach[LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardyReleaseSchedule13:00
MootBotLINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardyReleaseSchedule13:00
Hobbseemorning.  now is the meeting?13:00
ScottKHobbsee: Yes.13:00
persiaIn August (specifically the meeting of the 10th), we were discussing the possible freeze schedules for Hardy, in light of it being an LTS release.  We didn't gome to a conclusion, but some ideas were presented, including:13:00
persia1) Not allowing any new packages13:00
persia2) Matching UVF / NPUF with DIF13:01
persia3) Requiring specs for everything13:01
persiaI wanted to revisit this discussion as Hardy is opening, and build some consensus if we wanted to adjust any freeze dates for Universe, so these could be communicated when the official schedule was developed at UDS.13:01
dholbacha shame we don't have slangasek here13:02
dholbachlet's try to get another few release team members13:02
ScottKI'd like to add manage a way to do Universe rebuilds and actually do them.13:02
persiaAh.  Found it.  Previous meeting log:13:02
TheMuso1) I understand the meaning, but I am not for it, only because UbuntuStudio is likely to push new packages in, but at the same time, we will keep them updated.13:02
ScottKon a schedule.13:02
FujitsuScottK: Well, we're reliant on lucas for those.13:02
persia[LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/MOTU/2007081013:02
MootBotLINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/MOTU/2007081013:02
TheMuso2) Agreed.13:03
TheMuso3) Not sure if we need to go that far.13:03
persiaScottK: That sounds really good, and fits well with the idea of earlier freezes for Universe.13:03
ScottKFujitsu: Do they actually get done?  Maybe need one earlier?13:03
FujitsuScottK: We normally have one or two, fairly late.13:03
persiaFujitsu: Did we have one for gutsy?13:03
dholbachOk, what is the problem we want to solve generally?13:03
Fujitsupersia: I believe so, but I don't think bugs were filed.13:03
persiaThe general issue is that if LTS is to be supported, it ought to be fairly QA clean to start: no FTBFS, no unmetdeps, no plain doesn't work, etc.13:04
ScottKdholbach: Have Universe not suck for LTS support.13:04
TheMusopersia: agreed.13:04
persiaFujitsu: Ah.  I didn't hear about it :(13:04
TheMusopersia: me neither13:04
dholbachpersia, ScottK: I could think of other measures to get that done: QA lists announced regularly and early, good efforts coordinated with QA team members, etc13:04
* ScottK adds "and have better communications about it".13:05
dholbachIs that part of the solution?13:05
* Hobbsee ignores the meeting, and plays with red fire13:05
persiadholbach: Those are great measures, sure, and a good thing, but I think they are orthagonal to the question of whether we want to adjust freezes.13:05
dholbachpersia: I think they are solutions to the problem.13:06
* norsetto thinks that if he hears orthogonal again will join Hobbsee13:06
dholbachI'm not directly opposed to introducing freezes earlier, but to me these seem more obvious solutions13:06
ScottKWhere I was leading up to is I think moving New Package Freeze back to Feature Freeze/UVF and doing a rebuild then is a good start to transition for development to fixing.13:06
TheMusodholbach: But it gives us more time to clean up.13:06
dholbachearly rebuilds sounds good13:07
TheMusoAnd get things in deacent shape.13:07
persiadholbach: OK.  I'm just wanting to re-raise the previous discussion, as there seemed to be interest, but no conclusion.  I'm not convinced about freeze dates, but didn't want it to be lost.  Other measures are useful, but separate.13:07
dholbachmore and earlier freezes will put more pressure on the UVF team and I'm sure there will be stuff we want to get in before release13:08
ScottKI thought pitti's thread on revised freezed dates dumped all that into one date anyway?13:08
persiaScottK: As a UVF member from the last cycle, how much more load do you think that would be?13:08
persiaScottK: Pitti proposed that, but it's not represented on the current draft schedule.13:09
ScottKDepends on what we're talkign about.13:09
ScottKIf it's move New package freeze to Feb 14, no big deal.13:09
persiaScottK; Moving UVF earlier = more pressure for UVF13:09
ScottKIf it's much more than that, it'll get to be painful.13:09
dholbachScottK: should we discuss raising the number of people in the -uvf team?13:10
ScottKI think we also ought to consider mapping out the endgame of the final freeze on more detail.13:10
ScottKdholbach: No, I don't think so.13:10
TheMusoScottK: Seconded.13:10
FujitsuScottK: Yeah, rather than sort of... working it out as we go, a day in advance.13:10
dholbachScottK: what does  mapping out the endgame of the final freeze on more detail  mean?13:10
persiaDoes anyone feel we need more that six weeks between upstream / feature / new freeze and beta?13:10
TheMusopersia: no13:10
TheMusodholbach: As in, when does universe go into hard freeze.13:11
ScottKdholbach: This time I was working with the RM a day or two before to figure out when the last chance to upload for Gutsy would be.13:11
dholbachScottK, TheMuso: ok thanks13:11
ScottKI think it was reasonably well communicated as it happened, so no last minute suprises, but there were last day or two suprsises.13:11
dholbachso the discussion right now is: move NPF from 28.2. to 14.2.?13:12
dholbachdo you think that's going to help a lot with our QA efforts?13:12
ScottKThat's the minimalist solution.13:12
ScottKI think it's a 2 part problem.13:12
ScottKThat's one.13:12
persiaI'm happy with no change or minimal change.  There doesn't seem to be the interest in freeze adjustment there was in August, so perhaps it was only a perceived issue, rather than a real issue.13:12
ScottKPart two is it seemed like there wasn't a big bug fix push until the very end, but of course that's often not visible, so I"m not sure.13:13
dholbachI'm happy to discuss tools and measures to make Universe QA better13:13
persiaScottK: I think part 2 is just us preparing a push plan earlier (and at least me reviewing the RC list prior to beta freeze)13:13
Fujitsudholbach: Is there any timeline for universe rebuilds?13:13
ScottKpersia: I think it might be a good idea to identify some bug fix internal milestones too13:13
dholbachFujitsu: I don't know about it, but I can ask.13:14
ScottKpersia: Along the lines of what you just said.13:14
TheMusoI think we need to pus the RC list more as well.13:14
TheMusopush13:14
persiaScottK: Agreed, but I don't think that's clearly dependent on freeze dates.13:14
ScottKTheMuso: Agreed.13:14
dholbachThere's enough bugs in the bug tracker already - are we merely aiming for ftbfs/unmetdeps?13:14
ScottKpersia: No, more of goals.13:14
persiaTheMuso: Absolutely.  Debcheck as well.13:14
TheMusopersia: Whats debcheck?13:14
ScottKdholbach: If we had none of that at release, that'd be a huge victory.13:14
persiadholbach: No.  More than that, but it's not something we need to decide now, and it's also not something we need to stuff in the bugtracker.13:15
dholbachok, let's try to come to a conclusion on freeze dates before we drift away13:15
persiaTheMuso: http://alt.qeuni.net/~william/debcheck/13:15
TheMusooh that13:15
* Fujitsu should update that for hardy soon.13:15
TheMusoIs it in the TODO?13:16
TheMusoat the least, so its findable?13:16
persiaBased on discussion, for my agenda item, I'd like to hear votes on whether anyone thinks it would be useful to adjust NewPackagesForUniverseFreeze to match UpstreamVersionFreeze.  I didn't hear any other proposals today.13:16
ScottK+113:16
dholbachok, let's vote13:16
TheMusopersia: I'd say yes, as it means we can do more bugfixing.13:16
TheMusoso +113:16
dholbach[VOTE] NPF matching with UVF13:16
MootBotPlease vote on:  NPF matching with UVF.13:16
MootBotPublic votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot13:16
MootBotE.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting13:16
Fujitsu+113:17
MootBot+1 received from Fujitsu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 113:17
persia+113:17
MootBot+1 received from persia. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 213:17
ScottK+113:17
MootBot+1 received from ScottK. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 313:17
nxvl+113:17
MootBot+1 received from nxvl. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 413:17
TheMuso+113:17
MootBot+1 received from TheMuso. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 513:17
geser+113:17
MootBot+1 received from geser. 6 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 613:17
dholbach013:17
Fujitsudholbach: +013:17
dholbach+013:17
MootBotAbstention received from dholbach. 6 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 613:17
dholbachOk, I'll pass this on to the ubuntu-release team13:17
persiadholbach: Thanks.13:17
dholbachso it gets included in the UDS release scheduling session13:17
dholbach[TOPIC] Universe rebuilds13:18
MootBotVote is in progress. Finishing now.13:18
MootBotFinal result is 6 for, 0 against. 1 abstained. Total: 613:18
MootBotNew Topic:  Universe rebuilds13:18
dholbachScottK: do you know who our contacts are for that?13:18
ScottKdholbach: No I don't, but Fujitsu was saying lucas earlier13:18
dholbachOk, I'll make sure to get an answer from IS people on that and report on the list13:19
dholbachit'd be good to have results early13:19
Fujitsudholbach: Thanks, yeah.13:19
geserlucas did the last rebuilds13:19
persiaI'd like to see rebuilds at least after DIF and UVF.13:19
persia(if there are resources)13:19
ScottKSounds good.13:19
FujitsuAnd probably around beta too.13:19
TheMusoagreed.13:19
dholbachiwj's autopkgtest dug up some of them too13:19
ScottKFujitsu: Yes.13:19
dholbachI'm not sure when it runs13:19
persiaFujitsu: That'd be nice, but there's not much time, and 10,000 packages13:19
dholbach[ACTION] dholbach to pass on NPF decision13:20
MootBotACTION received:  dholbach to pass on NPF decision13:20
dholbach[ACTION] dholbach to ask IS people about universe rebuilds13:20
MootBotACTION received:  dholbach to ask IS people about universe rebuilds13:20
ScottKpersia: But if it's the 3rd one it shouldn't turn much up, so the results should be actionable.13:20
dholbachI'll also coordinate that with release managers to get it on the schedule13:20
persiaScottK: True.  Saves me running rebuilds locally :)13:20
FujitsuIf we can keep things sane early on, it'll be easier to manage at the end.13:21
FujitsuSame with the RC bugs.13:21
dholbachcan we move on to Universe QA efforts?13:21
geserwhat should happen (and when) to packages where don't manage to fix the FTBFS?13:21
ScottKIt also saves us chasing Debian FTBFS bugs that don't affect us.13:21
persiaScottK: only to a certain degree: we still need to check dates on dependencies, rebuilds, and bug filing, but it makes it easier.13:21
ScottKgeser: That's a good way to move into removal policy.13:21
dholbach[TOPIC] Universe QA measures for Hardy13:21
MootBotNew Topic:  Universe QA measures for Hardy13:21
Fujitsugeser: Erm, you hit them harder to make it work :P13:21
ScottKdholbach: I'd say be aggressive about removals is one thing.13:22
dholbachso what's on our list apart from FTBFSes and unmetdeps?13:22
ScottKExpunging ancient cruft before release.13:22
TheMusoDeskto pfiles13:22
TheMusodesktop files even13:22
dholbachI'm wary about desktop files13:22
persiaIs there anything special or new for Hardy?  If we have rebuilds, and advertise debcheck, RCbugs, automated FTBFS list, and the like, won't we be in good shape?13:22
dholbachseb128: ^ (desktop files)13:23
ScottKWe managed to get openssl097 killed finally only on Monday before release.13:23
persiaTheMuso: What about .desktop files?13:23
seb128dholbach: thanks, reading13:23
dholbachpersia: people want menu entries for packages they install13:23
TheMusodholbach was asking what else for Q13:23
TheMusoQA and they come up a lot in bugs13:23
persiaScottK: That's entirely my fault: I need to read my mail more.13:23
seb128stop adding desktop files until there is a proper way to translate those13:23
ScottKpersia: But the key thing is we killed it.13:23
seb128there is a rosetta spec about that13:23
TheMusoI don't think its important, but thought it was worth mentioning13:23
FujitsuDo we have a policy at all about removals?13:23
persiadholbach: Ah.  Yes.  I don't really consider that a QA issue, given the contention between poor translations & coverage.13:24
TheMusoseb128: Makes sense.13:24
dholbachok good13:24
dholbachthanks seb128 :)13:24
dholbachok, who will work on getting regular lists of things like unmetdeps? how do we maintain them?13:24
Fujitsuseb128: Has it been around for the requisite 2 years yet?13:24
ScottKFujitsu: I think the defacto removal policy is file a bug if a package annoys you enough.13:24
Fujitsudholbach: unmetdeps is done by debcheck.13:24
seb128Fujitsu: I don't understand your "requisite 2 years"13:25
dholbachFujitsu: so the list is actively updated and we can work from using it?13:25
persiaseb128: Is implementation in rosetta planned during the Hardy cycle?13:25
Fujitsudholbach: Updated every six hours.13:25
dholbachFujitsu: care to add to MOTU/TODO?13:25
Fujitsudholbach: Sure.13:25
dholbachgood13:25
seb128persia: no idea, but I would doubt of it, rosetta doesn't move really quickly13:25
persiaseb128: That's about what I thought.13:25
dholbachone thing I'd really like to see for hardy is: more bugs tagged as bitesize and packaging13:25
dholbachwe really want to have huge lists we can show to new contributors to get working on them13:26
Fujitsuseb128: Just noting that LP moves slower than a glacier often.13:26
* TheMuso tends to fix such bugs if he comes accross them.13:26
dholbachdoes anybody have an idea, how we can get more of our universe bugs fixed?13:26
persiadholbach: I don't see that as a useful QA thing.  It's a good way to feed contributors, but there's heaps of bugs that got tagged, but not fixed for gutsy, which just indicates that people use tagging as a proxy for actually doing the work,.13:26
TheMusopersia: Hense my just fixing them.13:27
persiaTheMuso: Right.13:27
Hobbseedholbach: of course, it's hard to do QA when people keep requesting billions of new packages into the archive, or updated versions, just because they can13:27
dholbachI have lots of people who ask me which tasks they can start working on13:27
dholbachand lots of those easy bugs GOT fixed13:27
dholbachHobbsee: those are not bitesize tasks13:27
dholbachor often enough are not13:28
TheMusoI generally trawl bug lists if I have time. So if thats the case, they get fixed.13:28
persiadholbach: For getting more bugs closed, there are two main things: firstly better coordination with the bug team, and secondly more focus on actually reviewing packages completely before uploading, rather than just fixing a bug.13:28
Hobbseedholbach: sorry, related to earlier, with the NPF13:28
dholbachHobbsee: ah ok13:28
dholbachpersia: how would you like to see the coordination happening? whom to talk to? what do you expect of the team?13:28
Fujitsupersia: What do you mean by reviewing packages completely?13:29
dholbachFujitsu: reviewing the bugs of a package you're about to upload13:29
dholbachthe desktop team does that a lot13:29
ScottKdholbach: I'd suggest, in terms of actual work getting done, it's as, if not more, important to look into why MOTUs become less active and seeing what can be done to get ones that have gone inactive back.13:29
dholbach(at least looking at 'fix committed' bugs of the package, that have patches attached)13:29
persiadholbach: That's the issue.  I don't know.  I don't have the feeling that MOTU and bugsquad are working closely to close things, but I don't know how to fix that.  I do think tagging is best done by bugsquad (including MOTUs wearing a bugsquad hat)13:29
Fujitsudholbach: Right, everybody should be doing that.13:30
TheMusoScottK: aye13:30
TheMusoBut mostly its life getting in the way13:30
dholbachScottK: market research on inactive MOTUs is a good idea, but I feel we need  easy todo list items for new contributors to reach out to people who are not MOTUs yet too13:30
persiaFujitsu: Right.  Lots of people don't.  I read all my changelogs, and often see three updates by three different people in three days, all for simple things.13:30
dholbachpersia: so you think that something like universe bug days would be a good measure?13:30
ScottKdholbach: I've noticed a lot of experience contributors drop off.13:30
persiadholbach: Recruiting is good, but not really a QA topic, no?  New contributors need to learn, and the orphan packages are not always the best place.13:31
dholbachI'm just saying that as we work on universe bugs (not all universe packages are orphaned ones), we should make sure to keep the list of easy and manageable tasks for new contributors growing13:32
persiadholbach: Universe bug days only work if someone runs them, and we've had no volunteers for all of Gutsy.  That might change, but I'd rather see someone who wants to tackle interaction with bugsquad come up with a solution, rather than imposing one.13:32
dholbachI think that's already going to help (as one part of the puzzle)13:32
ScottKdholbach: I don't think getting the easy bugs fixed is our major problem.  It's the hard one.13:32
dholbachpersia: maybe we should discuss this on the bugsquad lists, if we can come up with some ideas for it13:32
ScottKone/ones13:33
persiaAs one part.  Not having lots of people reach for the MOTU bar, get it, and look for another challenge is the other side of the coin.13:33
dholbachScottK: right, I said it's one part of the puzzle13:33
persiadholbach: Perhaps.  I don't yet have enough ideas to feed such a discussion well.13:33
dholbachright13:33
ScottKI just think it's an incredibly small one.13:33
dholbachit'll get them involved, but OK, let's leave the tagging discussion out for now13:33
dholbachany more measures we can think of13:34
dholbach?13:34
ScottKAgressive removal policy13:34
dholbachwe've had problems with that before and it should be discussed on ubuntu-devel@13:34
persiaSo, in summary, for QA, we'll focus on debcheck, RC bugs, and whole-package-maintenance.  We'll agressively remove cruft, and do a couple whole-archive rebuild runs.13:34
dholbachyou always have people among the 8 million ubuntu users who still use the package you'Re removing13:34
ScottKEarly look at transistions and seeing what can be done to accelerate them.13:34
dholbachall sounds good, yes13:34
dholbachcan we transform some of them into action items?13:35
ScottKIn the openssl097 case we only finished the transition because I accidentally noticed it was almost done.13:35
persiadholbach: There are lots of packages that are safe to remove with some investigation.  Old versions of libraries with 10 packages that need porting, debmake, etc.13:35
dholbachScottK: nice :)13:35
ScottKWe need a sustained look at that kind of thing.13:35
geserScottK: I guess the archive admins won't be happpy to review the removed packages again for hardy+1 when they get synced again13:35
persiaScottK: Back in Just we ported 7 or 8 packages that hadn't been recompiled since Dapper :)13:35
ScottKgeser: They can blacklist them.13:35
persias/Just/June/13:35
ScottKpersia: One of which is about to be subject to a removal request13:36
persiageser: The blacklist persists across cycles13:36
geserScottK: so you want to remove packages for ever because we didn't fix a ftbfs?13:36
dholbachstill, I'd like to have something like guidelines for removal discussed, "agressive removal" does not sound very inviting13:36
ScottKgeser: I didn't say what the agressive removal policy should be.  Just that we should have one.13:36
ScottKdholbach: Agreed, it needs to be defined.13:37
* persia proposes "oldlibs review & porting" in place of "agressive removal"13:37
dholbachwho wants to start the discussion on ubuntu-devel?13:37
ScottKOne other issue is supporting Dapper --> Gutsy upgrades.13:37
persiaI don't think it needs ubuntu-devel discussion, except perhaps for leaf apps.  Most of the good targets are infrastructure, and not contentious.13:37
persiaScottK: Dapper -> Gutsy?  Dapper -> Hardy?13:38
dholbachpersia: not for every package, but for something policy-like13:38
ScottKThere are things that may need to be done with replaces/conflicts that we wouldn't normally think of13:38
ScottKGutsy/Hardy yes13:38
dholbachScottK: mvo will run test upgrades and file bugs for them13:38
Fujitsudholbach: On universe too?13:38
dholbachFujitsu: yes, AFAIK13:38
FujitsuOK.13:38
ScottKdholbach: When will he start?13:38
persiadholbach: Do we need a policy?  If people have time, getting rid of oldlibs, etc. seems to be in line with NBS stuff.13:38
dholbachwho will talk to him about that?13:38
dholbachpersia: still, "agressive removal" should be defined somewhere13:39
ScottKdholbach: Agreed and probably not right now.13:39
dholbachScottK: I think it runs in the datacenter every now and then13:39
* persia doesn't really like the term "aggressive removal" anyway.13:39
dholbachok, so who will talk to mvo about that?13:39
dholbachwho will start the removal discussion?13:39
ScottKpersia: Pick one.13:39
ScottKdholbach: I'll conspire with StevenK and try to come up with something to start the removal discussion.13:40
dholbachScottK: thanks13:40
dholbach[ACTION] ScottK to start discussion about removal policy together with ScottK13:40
MootBotACTION received:  ScottK to start discussion about removal policy together with ScottK13:40
ajmitch:)13:40
dholbachoops13:40
ScottKHeh.13:40
ScottKAt least coordination will be easy.13:40
dholbachwell the other S*K :)13:40
dholbachlalala13:41
dholbachok, I'll talk to mvo13:41
dholbach[ACTION] dholbach to talk to mvo about upgrade tests including Universe13:41
MootBotACTION received:  dholbach to talk to mvo about upgrade tests including Universe13:41
* ajmitch will sit back on a beach & relax13:41
dholbachanything else before we move on?13:41
TheMusodholbach: Is there going to be anything at UDS to do with MOTU? i.e do you have any specs planned?13:41
ScottKajmitch is one of the people dholbach should work on remotivating.13:41
persiaajmitch: I thought you were going to update & revise the RC buglist?13:41
dholbach[TOPIC] UDS Specs13:41
MootBotNew Topic:  UDS Specs13:41
dholbachScottK: Ok, I'll try my best. :-)13:41
ajmitchpersia: that too13:42
ScottKWho is going?13:42
* TheMuso is.13:42
persia\o/13:42
ajmitchScottK: I'm a lost cause, sorry13:42
* ScottK will be there Sunday/Monday (probably)13:42
dholbachsistpoty and siretart, superm1 are13:42
seb128dholbach: you will make mvo cry ;-)13:42
TheMusoAnd at least one hopeful will also be there.13:42
TheMusoI'm mentoring him.13:42
dholbachand a couple of others I can't remember right now13:42
siretartsorry?13:42
dholbachsiretart: you'll be at UDS13:42
siretartyes! :)13:42
dholbachthings I wanted to do at UDS are:13:43
siretartand you can't imagine how much I'm looking forward to that13:43
dholbachreview bzr best practices13:43
dholbachrevisit packaging guide on the wiki13:43
ScottKdholbach: How does that relate to MOTU?13:43
dholbachrevisit ubuntu process docs on the wiki13:43
ScottKThe bzr thing?13:43
dholbachScottK: it concerns ubuntu developers in general13:44
* ScottK isn't sure how.13:44
geserScottK: I guess for packaging with bzr13:44
dholbachexactly13:44
* proppy wonders how expensive is paris-boston13:44
* Hobbsee is not going to UDS13:45
ajmitchproppy: cheaper than flying from NZ13:45
* norsetto tells proppy that the flight is nothing compared to the hotel .....13:45
dholbachany other business before we move on to fixed items?13:45
dholbachok, next meeting time?13:46
persia+344 hours13:46
ScottKdholbach: Was that your personal list or list of stuff you think it MOTU related?13:46
dholbachpersia: erm? :)13:46
TheMusopersia: smart alec.13:46
persiaFri, November 2nd, 20:00 UTC13:47
geserisn't that during UDS?13:47
persiaTheMuso: It was handy from the 10th August meeting :)13:47
dholbachScottK: oh, also revisit motu processes and see if we have any bottlenecks we should try to fix13:47
persiageser: Yes.13:47
ajmitchgeser: that's happened before13:47
TheMusogeser: yes13:47
TheMusothat will be interesting for those of us at UDS.13:47
TheMusoWe may not be able to attend.13:47
TheMusodepending on the goings on at the time.13:48
dholbachright13:48
persiaAh.  Right.  0:00 UTC?  4:00 UTC?13:48
dholbachmaybe we should defer the discussion to the mailing list?13:48
dholbachand ask who would come to the meeting anyway (UDS or not)?13:48
persiaI think we should schedule for a time convenient from UDS that doesn't conflict with the sessions.13:49
persia(on Friday)13:49
dholbach20:00 UTC would be what? 16:00 local?13:49
ScottKdholbach: Yes13:49
TheMusodholbach: I agree. Chances are we'll be so exhausted that we won't want to attend.13:49
persiaSomething like that.  Maybe a little later?13:49
TheMusodholbach: Yes. 00 is also out of the question.13:49
dholbachI think that'll be the time the event closes13:50
TheMusoUTC that is13:50
ajmitchpersia: later would not work13:50
dholbachnot sure if that makes much sense :-/13:50
TheMusodholbach: IT does to me.13:50
ajmitchonce UDS is wrapped up, everyone goes out & gets drunk13:50
* ScottK would say push it a week.13:50
ajmitchfrom what I've heard, at least :)13:50
TheMusoScottK: Aye, I'm enclined to agree.13:50
* persia defers13:50
TheMusoLet us get back, and recover. :)13:51
FujitsuScottK: Agreed.13:51
persia9th November.  What time?13:51
dholbachI can't promise I can make it there, because I'll be at another conference, but that should be fine13:51
dholbach13:00 UTC? (same time)13:52
TheMusothis was at 12:0013:52
persia(This started 12;00 UTC)13:52
TheMusoAnd afaik the mentoring meeting starts soon13:52
dholbachright, 12:00 UTC seems to be a good time for a bunch of us, it seems13:53
* persia likes shifting times for people in other timezones, but finds 12:00 very convenient.13:53
* geser can't before 14 UTC13:53
persia20:00?13:53
TheMusoI could do 20:0013:53
persia(before that is too early here)13:53
dholbach(regarding the next agenda item: I'll figure something out regarding the Q&A sessions)13:53
dholbachoops13:54
geser20 UTC WFM13:54
FujitsuTheMuso: We'll be in AEDT by then, won't we?13:54
persiaI thought Open Week would handle the Q&A session bits.13:54
TheMusoFujitsu: Yes indeed.13:54
persiaFujitsu: Should be.13:54
FujitsuSo not too bad.13:54
TheMuso7AM13:54
dholbachpersia: right - just for the week after that13:54
persiaAnyone bad for 9th November, 20:00 UTC?13:54
FujitsuYeah.13:54
dholbachsounds good13:55
* ajmitch might even turn up13:55
* persia proposes first REVU days as 6th November13:56
* ajmitch should sleep now, really13:56
persiaUmm.  5th (Monday)13:56
TheMusopersia: SOunds good.13:56
TheMusoMind you, I get back that day, so I will probably be rather out to it.13:56
persiaTheMuso: Understood.  I just can't imagine anyone wants to REVU at UDS, and the archive won't open much earlier.13:57
TheMusooh of course13:57
* TheMuso will likely do merges in any spare time he has at UDS anyway. :p13:57
ScottKOne QA idea I just had is to mention that New packages can be backported to get early user exposure when there's still time to fix them.13:57
TheMusoScottK: I like that.13:58
* Fujitsu notes we have some 500 merges at this point.13:58
persiaScottK: Could you expand a little (not that there's really time)13:58
ScottKThe backport is easy since there is absolutely no regression risk.13:58
TheMusoScottK: I guess more help on the backports team would be desirable if thats the case?13:58
* persia celebrates only 500 merges13:58
dholbachok, let's move all the other discussions to #ubuntu-motu13:58
ScottKTheMuso: Definitely13:58
dholbachwho will announce the dates on the mailing list?13:58
Fujitsudholbach: Sounds good.13:58
TheMusook will do minutes and announcements and have them out in next 48 hours or so13:58
dholbachthanks a lot TheMuso13:59
dholbach#endmeeting13:59
MootBotMeeting finished at 13:59.13:59
dholbachThanks everybody13:59
TheMusonp13:59
persiaThanks dholbach for chairing13:59
dholbachlogs available at: http://kryten.incognitus.net/mootbot/meetings/13:59
dholbachshall we have a 5 minutes break before the next meeting?13:59
dholbachnorsetto: ?13:59
TheMusosounds good13:59
norsettodholbach: sure13:59
dholbachgreat13:59
dholbachsee you in 513:59
dholbachOK14:05
dholbachWelcome everybody to the MOTU Mentoring meeting14:05
dholbach#startmeeting14:05
MootBotMeeting started at 14:05. The chair is dholbach.14:05
MootBotCommands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]14:05
dholbachwe're all here to discuss the future of the project that is described here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Mentoring14:06
dholbachthe aim of the project is to help getting one on one time with experienced developers to new contributors who just start to contribute14:06
dholbachby no means is this supposed the definite and only way to help new contributors14:07
dholbachit's meant to be a framework to help getting most out of that one on one time14:07
* TheMuso is likely to only be around for another 20 mins or so.14:07
dholbachnorsetto: was that OK as an introduction?14:07
dholbachnorsetto: you had a few proposals or ideas to present14:07
norsettodholbach: you doing great :-)14:08
norsettofirst of all, I think we should make the point on the actual situation14:08
* persia also has a proposal, for later14:08
dholbach[LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Mentoring14:08
MootBotLINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Mentoring14:08
norsettowe have quite a number of participants, and the number is increasing faster and faster14:09
norsettohowever, as a member of the reception, the feedback we have is very poor14:09
norsettoits very difficult to judge how many contributors are still active , to start with14:10
TheMusoFrom me at least, theres practically nothing to give, as my apprentices have a lot of real life stuff atm, so don't have a lot of time for MOTU.14:10
TheMusoBut are doing bits here and there.14:10
bluekujahi all14:10
norsettothemuso: but this is the point, perhaps you could do more with other contributors, as of now we know that you are fully occupied with your contributors and don't consider you for new ones14:11
TheMusonorsetto: Well, I am actually thinking of offering one or two more slots.14:12
TheMusoAnd my guys have already got a little experience.14:12
TheMusoNot ready to move on without me, but certainly have done their fair share of bits.14:12
norsettoanyhow, to make the point of the situation, we have 26 contributors now, adn 33 slots overall14:13
dholbachTheMuso: you raise an interesting point: when is the point where they can "move on on their own"14:13
* persia asks to interject my proposal in response to that question14:13
dholbachwhat should the objective of the mentor be14:13
dholbachpersia: fire away14:13
TheMusoI think its when the mentor thinks they are.14:13
persiaCurrently, we assign a contributor to a MOTU, and occasionally query both to see how the relationship is progressing.  I think it would be good to split this into two separate arrangements.14:13
persiaThe first would be for brand new people, and the mentor would help them decide what they want to do, how to get information to do it, and help develop a road plan for packaging-based Ubuntu membership.14:13
persiaThe second would be for established contributors who wish to become MOTU, and would involve suggestions on the preparation of their application, assistance in developing a roadmap for concentrations of interest, and help / recommendations to collect sponsors that match those interests.14:13
persiaIdeally, I think the two mentors should be different individuals, and different from primary sponsors, but that may not be appropriate if the interests of the two are closely aligned.14:13
persiaThe idea being it's much easier to determine when someone is ready to move forward, and slot rotation happens faster (albeit for two classes of slots)14:14
=== ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Current meeting: MOTU Mentoring Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 23 Oct 15:00 UTC: Server Team | 23 Oct 16:00 UTC: Kernel Team | 30 Oct 16:00 UTC: Kernel Team | 08 Nov 15:00 UTC: Community Development Team
norsettopersia: the first mentor you are talking about, how many MOTU do you think will be willing to do that?14:15
TheMusoI would be.14:15
dholbachme too14:15
fernandopersia, sound like a motu graduation (level)? motu01 is a newest on motu progress? motu02 is a pre-motu?14:16
dholbachI get lots of mails asking for more information etc anyway :)14:16
persianorsetto: I think a lot of the people interested in sponsoring and mentoring would be happy to help someone move from basic patching through becoming an active contributor.  For those I was assigned, all made that transition, but none are ready to go further yet (although one is likely to try during Hardy)14:16
norsettopersia: the key is this: "help someone move from basic patching through becoming an active contributor"14:16
persiafernando: I'm rather thinking that the first represents help becoming a Contributor, if people need pointers to the docs, process guidance, etc.  The second is MOTU.14:16
norsetto99% of the request we get are: "Hey, I want to help, give ve a mentor"14:17
dholbachpersia has a point: I believe we lose many contributors between (what persia describes as) stage 1 and 214:17
persianorsetto: Sure.  I just think there's a time gap, where people are contributing, and still need support from #ubuntu-motu and motu-mentors@, but don't need a dedicated mentor.14:17
TheMusodholbach: agreed.14:17
huatspersia: may be, it is possible to merge yo contributors idea with the membership one ?14:17
dholbachhuats: can you explain?14:18
persiahuats: I like to think that mentoring would help people who wished to do packaging contributions to become members if they were not already members, but I don't want to impose a hard like.14:18
persias/like/link/14:18
huatsI mean, the first stage that persia  exposed, can be seen as the membership acceptance...14:18
huatspersia: it was just a suggestion that identify clearly the various stage with something already exists...14:19
persiahuats: Right.  That's the basic idea.  People want to help.  Someone gives them a hand, introduces them around, and helps put together a plan to become a member.  At this point, they work at their own pace until they want more.  Moving straight to MOTU quickly isn't for everyone.14:19
huatsthe downside of the "merge" is that someone who is a member, is not necesseraly someone interested in packaging...14:20
norsettoperhaps we should change the name of the program then, its not MOTU mentoring we are talking about14:21
dholbachI think we'd only want to deal with people who express an interest in packaging or development work, or am I wrong?14:21
persiahuats: Right.  That's why I don't want a hard link.  More that membership consists of lots of things, but packaging is one way to achieve it.  A mentor can help there, but the member is usually capable at that point to move forward.  Some time later, that person is ready to start becoming MOTU.14:21
persiadholbach: I completely agree that we should limit to packaging/development.14:21
TheMuso+114:22
bluekujadholbach, I totally agree14:22
persianorsetto: I like the name:  it's still MOTUs being the mentors, and about packaging/development.  It's just that there are two learning phases involved.14:22
huatsdholbach: I totally agree too (+0.5 as I am just neither a member or a MOTU, just a MOTU hopefull)14:22
persiaFirst "How can I help".  Second "I'm interested in problem foo, and want a generalised solution, but without upload, I can't do it.  How can I get upload rights?"14:22
dholbachhuats: you will be soon enough :-)))14:22
huatsBut it is true, that for instance my self, I always like to figure out whereI stand... and everyone likes to see a progression...14:23
norsettoI must admit, I really don't see what the first phase has to do with packaging (even though I can see its merits)14:23
dholbachcan we try to define objectives for those two stages? to define the role of the mentor?14:23
huatsso the various stages can be a way to see that progression... Once you are after stage one, you have achieved something....14:24
norsettoits definetively something that the majority of the users are looking for14:24
bluekujadholbach, would be nice to know which results should a mentor have after a mentoring period of work14:24
persianorsetto: I was initially given three people to mentor.  None of them were familiar with any of our tools or processes.  They now are.  One is working on things, and plans to become a MOTU in the future.  It was all packaging/bugfix stuff, but neither they nor I think they should have unreviewed upload yet.14:24
dholbachbluekuja: and the mentoree :)14:24
bluekujadholbach, exactly :)14:25
persiabluekuja: Exactly.14:25
dholbachat the moment the separation of those stages is a bit undistinguished and nebulous to me14:25
norsettopersia: so, that would be like a 101 course? An introduction?14:26
persiadholbach: Stage 0: wants to help.  Stage 1: can do things, but wants / needs review & support.  Stage 2: MOTU14:26
dholbachok, where's the thin line between 0 and 1?14:26
persianorsetto: Currently, my mentees needed a 101 course, and now there's a holding pattern.  Soon, they'll need definitions for becoming MOTU.14:27
TheMusoSorry to run guys, but I must be off. Hope the rest of this meeting works out.14:27
dholbachthanks TheMuso, have a great rest of the day14:27
persiadholbach: Um.  Let me try again.  Stage 1 is the transition between someone who wants to help and someone who can help.  Stage 2 is the transition between someone who is helping and MOTU14:27
norsettothx TheMuso14:27
TheMusodholbach: Thanks. Its straight to bed for me. :p14:27
fernandomaybe motus can "increase" points to new motu candidates (after XXX points it get motu). objectives don't sound good for me. a motu can help more with package instead devel.14:27
dholbachTheMuso: sleep tight :)14:27
TheMusowill do. :)14:27
huatsTheMuso: sleep well14:27
persiafernando: I don't think it's about points.  More about trust and ability.14:28
fernandolike a motu karma14:28
dholbach. o O { for example fernando should be a MOTU :-) }14:28
huatspersia: I tend to agree with you...14:28
bluekujadholbach, norsetto: one more thing. What are the requirements to ask for a mentor? I mean I wish to contribute but I've never tried to package anything. Can I ask to get a mentor assigned? or I have to read some guides/HOWTOs before?14:28
* fernando is a newbie14:29
bluekujadholbach, norsetto: In my opinion, ppl should have a small base of work before asking for a mentor14:29
dholbachbluekuja: I generally ask people to play with the tools a bit (like in MOTU/Recipes) and ask them for ideas what they'd like to work on14:29
bluekujadholbach, nice starting point14:29
norsettobluekuja: thats a crucial point to me, because we are now asking ppl to show some bug work they have done14:30
bluekujanorsetto, great. I think a mentoree should start doing something alone before asking for an official mentor14:30
norsettobluekuja: exactly becuase its too easy now; you just pop in, hey nice, ask for a mentor and then forget about it14:30
persiaAh.  If we're asking to show work done, then I think there needs to be a new place, where brand new people can get basic help.  Someone to do personal one on one review of the first few debdiffs, and help understand the basic processes.14:30
bluekujapersia, I agree with you here14:31
norsettopersia: I'm not against one-on-one, its just that the amount of manpower required is too much14:31
bluekujapersia, there should be someone who starts reviewing first debdiffs/packages14:31
dholbachyes and asking for a mentor is asking for effort done by others (mailing information out, finding easy tasks, etc)14:32
norsettopersia, bluekuja: which is what the u-u-s is doing14:32
bluekujaand then move the contributor to a mentor14:32
BugMaNif i can do an opinion, stage 0 and stage 1 must have to different "mentoring program"14:32
persianorsetto: I think that's because we've defined it too broadly.  I've been basically inactive with my mentees aside from casual email since June, but neither of the two who haven't disappeared are ready yet.  I've been moonlighting with senior contributors who want to become MOTU, but that doesn't help your paperwork.14:32
persiaBugMaN: Do we need a separate program?  That sounds like administration overhead to me (although if we've volunteers, I'm not opposed)14:33
norsettopersia: its not paperwork, is distributing the manpower where there is need14:33
norsettopersia: there is a tremendous waste right now14:33
BugMaNpersia: not separate, but one thing is study how make packaging and one is make few bitesize bug14:33
persianorsetto: u-u-s isn't a good place to start.  How do people learn about U-U-S?  Without that bridge, we don't get enough in the pipeline.14:34
huatsJust a side opinion, I think it is better to call them : stage1 and stage2... it is more appealing than 0 and 1...14:34
dholbachlet's think a bit about getting people from stage 0 to stage 1 - I think it's good to assign mentors after first contributions14:34
persianorsetto: I agree about the waste.14:34
norsettopersia: do we have to force feed wiki pages in their throats? Thats what I'm doing most of the time, pointing wiki pages to people14:34
dholbachis it enough to mention the sponsorshipprocess, the bitesize bugs and the motu recipes?14:35
persianorsetto: Depends on the person.  For all those I took personally, we discussed things, and built understanding.  The wiki was part of that, but knowing which pages to read, and getting a second opinion on understanding was more important.14:35
norsettodholbach: the problem is that the majority of ppl just don't read14:35
huatsI do think that without that 1-on-1 relathionship it is quite hard to start....14:36
persiadholbach: That's emphatically not enough.  That doesn't help people who are willing, but not yet able.14:36
dholbachpersia: what can we improve?14:36
norsettodholbach: we can write as much as we want, we can't force ppl to read, and many just don't14:36
bluekujadholbach, yes, should be clear that a contributor have to start with something like bitesize bugs (MOTU/Recipes) and then ask for a mentor. So would be nice to have that as necessary requisite14:36
dholbach(I agree with persia.)14:36
huatsnorsetto: you did a tremendous work with myself with the flightgear bug... way beyond what you should have.... but I am still there....14:36
norsettohuats: what you mean you still there?14:37
persiadholbach: I think we need two stages.  One to get people involved and to have a basic understanding, and a second later to help them develop a plan for long-term contribution.14:37
huatsnorsetto: I mean I haven't quit...14:37
dholbachis there something we can do to streamline that process?14:37
huatsnorsetto: thanks to your patience, advices....14:37
norsettohuats: I didn't manage to scare you off eh? ;-)14:37
=== mvo_ is now known as mvo
huatsnorsetto: well, you almost did when you metionned that you know my place, but not yet :-)14:38
persiadholbach: norsetto: highvoltage: could you share a little about the current workflow for registration?  I'm curious how separating stages might interface with that.14:38
norsettopersia: highvoltage is not here, he had a personal matter to attend unfortunately14:39
dholbachpersia: people ask "can I get a mentor?" we ask them "what would you like to work on? did you read ....?", they reply and we assign somebody who might fit14:39
persianorsetto: Ah.  nick present, so gets included :)14:39
norsettopersia: well, he mentioned using his mobile :-)14:39
dholbachnorsetto seems to have started for first contributions already14:39
persiadholbach: Thanks.  That sounds like too much work to me.14:39
norsettopersia: it is, but the problem is really a lot of people asking without a real interest14:40
norsettopersia; just because they can14:41
persiaFor a two-stage approach, I'd suggest looking at the LP page for the querant, and if they are already contributing, send them to a Mentor with a note that they're active.  If they aren't, send them to a Mentor with a note that they are new.  Expect the MOTU to help them with guidance, but introduce to the team for help with actual work.14:41
norsettopersia: let me repeat .... 99% of the requesters have not done anything ... nothing14:42
persianorsetto: If I was assigned someone, and that person didn't respond to emails / IRC for a bit, I'd notify you that the person disappeared.  I expect other mentors would do the same.  Why not share the workload?14:42
huatsmay be it could be a good starting point that people interested in stage0 have to start with bug where someone has offer to mentor on that bug....14:42
persianorsetto: That's fine.  None of the mentees I was initially assigned had done anything :)14:42
persiahuats: True, but I think it usually takes 3-5 bugs to feel comfortable.14:43
norsettopersia: I can't name names, but the feedback we are geeting is really poor, in some cases non-existant14:43
BugMaNpersia: but set time limit to do something?14:43
persianorsetto: Ah.  That's not ideal :(14:43
huatsso may be the first stage could be start with 1 bug with a mentor attached to this bug, and than a couple more with a mentor around....14:43
norsettohuats: thats a good point, I think we should push MOTUs to mentor bugs. now that we can14:44
persiaBugMaN: That sounds good.  Perhaps a fairly short default period, with a request to registration required for extension?14:44
norsettooh well, I did it even if I wasn't a MOTU14:44
huatspersia: the first stage should not be a "long" one.... It could be seen as a way that people express their interest and familiarize with the tools/procedures....14:45
persiaI'd even recommend senior contributors to mentor bugs, if they know a solution, but are working on other things / don't have time.14:45
norsettopersia: definetively14:46
persiahuats: Right.  I think most interested contributors could be conversant in a couple weeks.14:46
persiahuats: Further, I'd suggest the second stage need not be much longer - more consisting of making sure the person has an agenda for contributions, and knows the right people with whom to coordinate for implementation.14:46
dholbachpersia: who would set the agenda? I've been asked more times than I can count "what can I do now?"14:47
persianorsetto: Such a split should give you more slots (because of higher turnover), reducing your pain, but I'm not looking at your queue.14:47
norsettoits still not clear to me the practical side of the implementation14:47
persiadholbach: I've been asked that a lot.  Generally I encourage the contributor to decide that.  Usually the process involves a couple weeks, and looking at what needs doing, combined with personal interests.14:48
huatsdholbach: may be the generalization of the weeklyTODO can help ?14:48
huatsto fix the agenda I mean...14:48
dholbachhuats: we use something like that for MOTU already14:49
norsettohuats: thats definetively needed, dholbach is quite aware of that14:49
persiaFor example, I often suggest collaboration with one of the specialised teams (-desktop, -server, -studio, etc.), combined with a specialisation on something (security, debian collaboration, QA, etc.)14:49
dholbachhttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/TODO/Weekly14:49
huatsnorsetto: I know he is aware....14:49
huatsdholbach: I was meaning to get this kind of TODO for newcomers....14:50
norsettohuats: this is what we give to newcomers14:50
dholbachhuats: it already contains bitesize and packaging tasks14:50
huatsoh14:50
huatsoups14:50
huatsI opened it after writing that ...14:51
norsettoback to the two stage approach, how do you guys think it should be implemented, in practice?14:51
norsettodo we have to expand the role of the Reception? Do we need to have two different lists of mentors/contributors? This seems like increasing the overhead....14:53
persianorsetto: I'd suggest pushing prospective mentees to mentors on an as-available slot basis, and making clear the short-term goals for the relationship.  Some mentors may ask for mentees with for the second stage only, and some for only the first stage, depending on their own interests.14:53
persiastage determination could be determined from # of sponsored uploads.  <5 is first stage, >30 is second stage.  In between should be referred to #ubuntu-motu and motu-mentors@14:54
persia(for arbitratry values of 5 and 30)14:55
norsettopersia: I don't mind the idea, I'm just worried about the availability of people to be mentors for the first stage, its already very difficult for the second14:55
huatsso if I follow your idea, someone with more than 30 has finished his second stage ?14:55
huatsbut after that it is MOTUship ?14:55
dholbachI will have to leave in 3 minutes14:56
persianorsetto: I don't think all the current mentees are really second-stage material.  I especially think the discussion on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Mentoring encourages first-stage applicants.14:56
norsettopersia, huats: to me, its more a question of the mentor deciding14:56
dholbachwhere do we go from here?14:56
huatsFrom my point of view and like you mention, MOTUship is not a quantity stuff....14:56
persiahuats: For arbitrary "30".  It's not a fixed number.  It's really a matter of whether the person is willing to make the committment to maintain universe, and take on the additional responsibilities.14:57
norsettodholbach: we can adjourn here, and continue on another occasion, the discussion is interesting14:57
dholbachit's great14:57
dholbachit'd benefit from somebody listing the ideas we had during it14:57
huatsit is really a great discussion I think14:57
dholbachshall we have another meeting or do this on the motu mentoring list or on the wiki?14:58
norsettoI'm pretty neutral on any of the 314:58
dholbachhm14:58
norsettoperhaps less so on the wiki14:58
persiaI think informal discussion for some time, followed by another meeting to verify consensus would be ideal.14:59
dholbachok, let's try to sum up the ideas on http://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Mentoring/Future before we do anything else14:59
* persia is not fond of using the wiki for initial draft thoughts14:59
norsettopersia: yes, I think we should make a summary and submit it to motu-mentors14:59
dholbachI just think it'd be good to aggregate the ideas in a better place than a meeting log15:00
persianorsetto: Completely agreed.  Do you want to do minutes?15:00
dholbach#endmeeting15:00
MootBotMeeting finished at 15:00.15:00
dholbach Logs available at http://kryten.incognitus.net/mootbot/meetings/15:00
persiadholbach: I agree, but think the mailing list is more appropriate for draft thoughts: people search the wiki.15:00
huatsdholbach, persia  and norsetto  thanks for this various very interesting ideas....15:00
dholbachyeah, thanks everybody15:01
dholbachpersia: ok, that's good too15:01
norsettook, lets go to the classroom :-)15:01
norsettopersia: can we do it double handed?15:01
persianorsetto: Sure.  Catch me in about 90 minutes?15:01
norsettopersia: perhaps you can draft something, I'll have a look, and then we send it?15:02
huatsnorsetto: classroom ?15:02
huatsI forgot that too ?15:02
norsettohuats: #ubuntu-classroom15:02
persianorsetto: Sounds good.  I'll try to get something out tonight, but it may be morning.15:02
dholbachyou guys rock15:02
* persia points to #ubuntu-motu for further discussion on mentoring for interested parties:15:02
* dholbach hugs y'all15:02
norsettopersia: sure, no need to hurry, lets do something proper15:02
huatsI've seen daniel announces in -motu for th QA15:02
=== allee_ is now known as allee
=== Hobbsee_ is now known as Hobbsee
=== ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 23 Oct 15:00 UTC: Server Team | 23 Oct 16:00 UTC: Kernel Team | 30 Oct 16:00 UTC: Kernel Team | 08 Nov 15:00 UTC: Community Development Team
=== zul_ is now known as zul
=== luka74 is now known as Lure
=== Mez is now known as Mez|Away
=== pochu_ is now known as pochu__
=== pochu__ is now known as pochu___
=== mc44_ is now known as mc44

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