=== emgent is now known as enJoy === enJoy is now known as emgent === emgent is now known as enJoy === enJoy is now known as emgent === emgent is now known as enjoy === greeneggsnospam is now known as jsgotangco === enjoy is now known as enJoy === enJoy is now known as emgent === Varka_ is now known as Varka === asac_ is now known as asac === \sh_away is now known as \sh === johnc4511-laptop is now known as johnc4510-laptop === \sh is now known as \sh_away === WikiMan is now known as MatthewV === \sh_away is now known as \sh === mc44_ is now known as mc44 === mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch === never|mobi is now known as neversfelde|mobi === mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell [14:59] @schedule montreal [14:59] Schedule for America/Montreal: 13 Feb 08:00: Education Team | 13 Feb 16:00: Server Team | 13 Feb 17:30: Forum Council | 14 Feb 09:00: Desktop Team | 14 Feb 23:00: MOTU | 19 Feb 20:00: TriLoCo-Midwest === ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 12 Feb 20:00 UTC: Technical Board | 13 Feb 13:00 UTC: Education Team | 13 Feb 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 13 Feb 22:30 UTC: Forum Council | 14 Feb 14:00 UTC: Desktop Team | 15 Feb 04:00 UTC: MOTU === \sh is now known as \sh_away === ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 12 Feb 20:00 UTC: Technical Board | 13 Feb 13:00 UTC: Education Team | 13 Feb 19:00 UTC: Platform Team | 13 Feb 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 13 Feb 22:30 UTC: Forum Council | 14 Feb 14:00 UTC: Desktop Team === \sh_away is now known as \sh [19:37] @schedule chicago [19:37] Schedule for America/Chicago: 12 Feb 14:00: Technical Board | 13 Feb 07:00: Education Team | 13 Feb 13:00: Platform Team | 13 Feb 15:00: Server Team | 13 Feb 16:30: Forum Council | 14 Feb 08:00: Desktop Team [19:45] nixternal: hmm, where is that schedule set? the platform team meeting appears to be offset by 12h [19:46] the Fridge [19:46] slangasek: 13 Feb @ 01:00 UTC then? I will fix it for you [19:46] nixternal: should be 0700UTC, which is 0100 in America/Chicago [19:47] derr [19:47] I forgot I did Chicago :) [19:47] @schedule [19:47] Schedule for Etc/UTC: 12 Feb 20:00: Technical Board | 13 Feb 13:00: Education Team | 13 Feb 19:00: Platform Team | 13 Feb 21:00: Server Team | 13 Feb 22:30: Forum Council | 14 Feb 14:00: Desktop Team [19:47] I wonder why they did 21:00 [19:47] * nixternal checks fridge mail [19:48] It is weekly from 07:00 to 08:00 <-- Colin had it right, whoever added it to the fridge had it wrong [19:48] fixing now [19:48] fixed [19:49] cheers === ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Current meeting: Technical Board Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 13 Feb 13:00 UTC: Education Team | 13 Feb 19:00 UTC: Platform Team | 13 Feb 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 13 Feb 22:30 UTC: Forum Council | 14 Feb 14:00 UTC: Desktop Team [19:51] @schedule Paris [19:51] Schedule for Europe/Paris: Current meeting: Technical Board 13 Feb 14:00: Education Team | 13 Feb 20:00: Platform Team | 13 Feb 22:00: Server Team | 13 Feb 23:30: Forum Council | 14 Feb 15:00: Desktop Team === ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Current meeting: Technical Board Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 13 Feb 07:00 UTC: Platform Team | 13 Feb 13:00 UTC: Education Team | 13 Feb 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 13 Feb 22:30 UTC: Forum Council | 14 Feb 14:00 UTC: Desktop Team [19:56] Keybuk,mjg59: ping === cropalat_ is now known as cropalat [19:57] mdz: 乓 [19:58] I got a response rate of exactly 0% from my nag email [19:58] I've sent an SMS to sabdfl [19:58] mdz: lies [19:59] From: Scott James Remnant [19:59] To: Matt Zimmerman [19:59] Cc: Mark Shuttleworth , Matthew Garrett [19:59] Subject: Re: Tech board next week [19:59] Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 12:43:01 +0000 [19:59] Hi [20:00] Keybuk: I stand corrected [20:00] TheMuso: are you here? [20:00] mdz: Indeed I am. [20:00] ScottK,ScottK2: you? [20:00] Yes [20:01] lool? [20:01] Yup [20:01] mathiaz? [20:01] o/ [20:01] rtg? [20:01] yo [20:01] this will be a long meeting [20:02] thanks for coming [20:02] we are waiting on sabdfl [20:02] that's ok, I brought the crumpets, butter and toaster upstairs [20:02] Keybuk: lol [20:03] just phoned sabdfl, he swears he'll be here shortly [20:03] #startmeeting [20:03] Meeting started at 20:03. The chair is mdz. [20:03] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [20:03] [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda [20:03] LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda [20:03] mdz: he swears that he'll be here, or he swore and said he'd be here? :) [20:03] Keybuk: more whinged than swore [20:04] we'd best get started without him if we're going to get anywhere [20:04] [topic] ubuntu-core-dev application from Luke Yelavich: [WWW] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000713.html [20:04] New Topic: ubuntu-core-dev application from Luke Yelavich: [WWW] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000713.html [20:06] TheMuso: what do you see as the biggest problem right now for a derivative like Ubuntu Studio which does all of its work within the existing Ubuntu structure? [20:06] TheMuso: are any of your sponsors here to participate in the discussion? [20:06] mdz: Unfortunately, not that I know of. [20:06] evening all [20:06] TheMuso: that's ok, they all sent feedback to the list [20:07] [agreed] sabdfl is late [20:07] AGREED received: sabdfl is late [20:07] mootbot passed the turing test, i see [20:07] agenda? [20:08] Keybuk: Being able to adjust some settings that were originally designed to only be set for one use, and one use only. A good example is the GNOME sound scheme. Currently, this is set via some files in /etc.sound/events in several files, and not in gconf like one would expect. [20:08] We need to dpkg-divert the originals to place new ones to set our own sound scheme. [20:08] Then there is setting different settings in /etc/security/limits.conf for realtime priority for the audio group, however we've largely gotten around that one. [20:09] TheMuso: you dpkg-divert conffiles? :-o [20:09] sabdfl: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda [20:09] lool: (I pasted scrollback to sabdfl in /query) [20:09] mdz: Unfortunately, we have to. I wrote up a spec for UDSs, but it wasn't considered. I do not like it at all. [20:09] mdz: Ah, thanks; I was about to do this next [20:09] TheMuso: you're aware that doing so is not supported and does not always work correctly in upgrades? [20:10] TheMuso: which spec? [20:10] Mithrandir: Yes I am. [20:10] mdz: derivative-sound-schemes I *think* it is, I'd have to check to be sure. [20:11] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DerivCustomSoundThemes [20:11] thats the one [20:13] TheMuso: were you involved in any other open source projects prior to Ubuntu? [20:14] mdz: Yes, I was. I used to maintain a package repository of Audio/Multimedia packages for Slackware, and was involved with an attempt at standardizing Slackware 3rd party packaging, before that fell through. I was also on the fringes of the GNOME Accessibility project, as a user, and tester. [20:14] TheMuso: what brought you here from slackware? [20:15] mdz: The packaging system for a start, and the fact that I recently had bought a new notebook, which took ages to configure for every install. This got frustrating, however the real breaker for me was attempting to set up cups on my server one day... [20:15] I had to crank up the debug log to max to find shared libraries were missing, which were X libs. [20:16] Since Slackware doesn't track dependencies. [20:16] ... [20:16] TheMuso: you joined MOTU about a year ago. from your point of view, how has the project changed since then? what's better, what's worse? [20:17] MOTU seems to be expanding quite a bit, which is great. There are so many packages that need attending to, its impossible to get to them all. [20:18] TheMuso: do you think it would be helpful to let folks manage a single set of packages, or do you think it's better to look for generalists in MOTU? [20:18] However, I fear we the MOTUs may get overun with contributors, and may not be able to handle them all. I.e we will have to spend our time sponsoring all the time, which may put some MOTUs off very quickly. [20:18] I am also concerned about the quality of some MOTUs work. We as a community are doing our best to address this however. [20:19] sabdfl: I think generalists are best, as then everybody gets experience with different packaging styles etc, which willhopefully produce higher quality work fro mthe MOTU. [20:19] We are potentially working on software for millions of people, and we have to get it right. [20:20] TheMuso: most of those packages, of course, come from Debian. what kind of tending do they need in order to fit well into Ubuntu? [20:22] mdz: For a start, there seems to be a push to add .desktop files to packages that have GUIs, but aren't in the menus. These are being done, and are being sent back up to Debian. There is also init scripts that need altering to work around /var/run as a tmpfs. Again, being sent back to Debian. [20:22] Then there are kernel module source packages, that may have to be changed to work with our kernels. [20:24] There is of course, times when changes to Ubuntu packages are not meant for debian, such as firefox/xulrunner stuff. [20:24] I haven't seen the details of those, but I do know about them. [20:25] * LaserJock notes that there are ~ 4k Ubuntu versioned source packages in Universe, 700+ of which are not in Debian, just for reference [20:25] TheMuso: what would be your top three list of things you'd like to change about the way ubuntu is structured, run, or organised? [20:26] TheMuso: do you have any ideas for how we might make that process more efficient, to make it easier for MOTU to work with many packages? [20:26] I'm badly lagged [20:27] sabdfl: Good question. To be honest, I haven't given it much thought, as I personally am happy with the way things are, however I personally feel there should be more in the way of ensuring prospecitve MOTUs can show what they know WRT packaging. For example, I don't think as a whole, we know enough about shared libraries, and how to package them properly. I won't deny being in the same boat. [20:27] thanks. other candidates might want to prep answers to that question, too [20:28] i wonder how we could rigorously test MOTU skills without building NM, or requiring folks to have gone through NM [20:29] mdz: Try and encourage inactive MOTUs back to help, and if possible, stagger the amount of newcomers, so that the existing newcomers have a chance to get their skills up, and become a MOTU. I haven't given it a lot of thought, as I am not sure what could be done without upsetting a part of the system somewhere. [20:29] people need to "learn on the job" at /some stage/. Debian sets that perhaps a little too far off; I don't think Ubuntu loses enourmously if somebody has stuck out MOTU for a while [20:31] sladen: Yes, but not if there is little time remaining to get an important fix in, and you're the only one who can do it, but don't know how, and don't do it properly. [20:33] was that only me, or a freenode problem? [20:33] No problem here. [20:33] level3 appears to be having issues === mdz_ is now known as mdz [20:34] last thing I saw was i wonder how we could rigorously... [20:34] some sort of glitch in the matrix === txwikinger2 is now known as txwikinger [20:35] ScottK2: I would call it challenging me. I'm enjoying this. [20:35] ugh wrong one [20:35] mootbot has it all: http://kryten.incognitus.net/mootbot/meetings/ubuntu-meeting.log.20080212_2003.html [20:35] mdz: Try and encourage inactive MOTUs back to help, and if possible, stagger the amount of newcomers, so that the existing newcomers have a chance to get their skills up, and become a MOTU. I haven't given it a lot of thought, as I am not sure what could be done without upsetting a part of the system somewhere. [20:35] TheMuso: should we up the ante? ;-) [20:35] keescook: thanks [20:35] sabdfl: Perhaps, but certainly we don't want to make things too discouraging. [20:36] So its a balance. [20:36] TheMuso: that wasn't exactly my question; we'll always be limited by the number of people involved in the project, and so are always interested in finding ways to help them work better [20:38] I just got an SMS from Keybuk, apparently he's affected by the network outage [20:38] mdz: Re-reading it then, I don't really have any ideas at this point. I thought the team idea would work, but from what I've read, it hasn't. [20:38] mjg59: are you still here? [20:38] Keybuk_: welcome back. http://kryten.incognitus.net/mootbot/meetings/ubuntu-meeting.log.20080212_2003.html [20:39] TheMuso: sorry about all this, but it's obviously beyond our control [20:39] mdz: Understandable. [20:39] I am [20:40] mjg59,Keybuk_,sabdfl: I think we need to call a vote and move on. any further questions for TheMuso? [20:40] none from me [20:40] assuming I'm here :) [20:40] everyone had a chance to review the links? [20:40] Keybuk_: you are [20:40] I have [20:40] sabdfl: ping? === Keybuk_ is now known as Keybuk [20:41] now we've lost sabdfl [20:41] it's like whack-a-mole [20:43] yay [20:43] where are we? [20:43] mjg59,Keybuk_,sabdfl: I think we need to call a vote and move on. any further questions for TheMuso? [20:43] everyone had a chance to review the links? [20:43] sabdfl: and then noticed you were offline [20:44] this is reminding me of an intarwebs 2.0 version of "who's on first?" [20:44] +1 on TheMuso from me [20:44] what's the mootbot voting magic incancation? [20:44] sudo mdz [VOTE] TheMuso for core-dev [20:45] * lool :) [20:45] [vote] ubuntu-core-dev application from Luke Yelavich: [WWW] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000713.html [20:45] Please vote on: ubuntu-core-dev application from Luke Yelavich: [WWW] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000713.html. [20:45] Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to MootBot [20:45] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [20:45] oh good, MootBot didn't get confused [20:45] +1 [20:45] +1 received from mdz. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [20:45] +1 [20:45] +1 received from mjg59. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [20:46] +1 from me [20:46] +1 received from Keybuk. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [20:46] ...and sabdfl prevoted [20:46] #endvote [20:46] that never works [20:46] mdz: [endvote] does work [20:46] [endvote] [20:46] Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3 [20:46] nixternal: thanks [20:46] np [20:46] TheMuso: welcome! [20:46] congrats TheMuso! [20:46] Thanks folks. I really really appreciate it! [20:47] [topic] ubuntu-core-dev application from Scott Kitterman: [WWW] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000776.html [20:47] New Topic: ubuntu-core-dev application from Scott Kitterman: [WWW] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000776.html [20:47] TheMuso: Congrats [20:47] [link] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000776.html [20:47] LINK received: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000776.html [20:47] <\sh> congrats TheMuso well done :) [20:47] welcome, TheMuso [20:47] Since I applied, Riddell has sponsored a number of Main uploads for me too. [20:48] He can't be here now, but earlier today said: " ScottK: but "I advocate ScottK for core-dev, he's very reliable for backports and motu activity and has done some important merges in main"" [20:48] I can vouge on that paste from #kubuntu-devel earlier [20:48] ScottK: how robust is amavis these days? [20:49] sabdfl: It's security record is VERY good. It is Weitse Venema's preferred way to integrate spam/virus stuff into Postfix and that speaks volumes. [20:50] well [20:50] indeed [20:50] I read the code once [20:50] but I feel much better now [20:51] would you suggest that amavis would be a good idea as a standard part of the ubuntu server mail stack? [20:51] Yes. [20:51] That's why I did ~a dozen MIRs to get it promoted. [20:52] what other features do you think would make for a killer mail stack? [20:52] Once you get to far out there are many many options. [20:52] and it's hard to generalize. [20:52] ScottK: there's been some muttering lately about the overhead of the MIR process. what do you think about it? do you think it could be streamlined while preserving the original goal? [20:52] I think that the mail server tasksel is pretty new. [20:52] mdz: It's painful, but I don't know a better way. [20:53] It does ensure someone is doing some research. [20:53] ScottK: what's painful about it? [20:53] Even for a simple perl module it takes ~ 30 minutes to an hour per package. [20:53] As I said earlier, amavisd-new took about a dozen MIRs because of dependencies. [20:54] ScottK: which parts of it are most time consuming? [20:54] So it adds up. [20:54] Researching security history is probably the longest, but also most important. [20:54] committing maintenance for more packages is something we need to do very carefully (hi keescook), but if we can make the diligence easier, I'm interested [20:54] Since packages can be named many different things ... [20:55] I don't have any great ideas. One advantage of the current process is someone has to really want it. [20:55] ScottK: what about SRU? [20:55] If a project has a real champion, odds are it's a better idea. [20:56] I've only done a very few in Main. In Universe I think we have a good balance now. [20:56] My biggest concern is it seems too inviting for end users to run with *-proposed enabled. [20:56] That's almost never a good idea. [20:56] I think it would be a plus if more people ran with -proposed [20:57] since those packages would see more testing before going to -updates [20:57] I think for more technical users, yes. [20:57] right, I mean members of the community, rather than casual users [20:57] We had a bad svn upload to proposed that got a large number of bug reports from people that I don't think had any business running proposed. [20:57] Yes. Agreed. [20:58] That's the source of my concern (my experience triaging that issue and answering the reports). [20:58] ScottK: what do you think Ubuntu Server is most lacking compared to more established server distros? [20:58] apart from, well, history :-) [20:58] My experience is primarily in mail servers. [20:58] In that area, I believe we are in pretty good shape overall. [20:59] We just need to mature the tasksel over time. [20:59] Postfix is one of the reasons I picked Ubuntu. [20:59] Running the same core on server and desktop is another. [20:59] ScottK: what sort of shape is our backport community process in at the moment? [21:00] It's pretty good. [21:00] We need more testers with more experience, but that will likely always be the case. [21:00] We will need more core-dev involvement (or relax the source backports rule) as Dapper continues to age. [21:01] ScottK: it seems that some enthusiasts want more of a "rolling release" rather than the stable releases we provide [21:01] Yes. I like the way we do it with. [21:01] do you think that's practical? is it really what they want, or would they be disappointed with the inevitable breakage? [21:01] I don't think it's practical. There's a balance and I think ours is pretty good. [21:02] You can run a stable foundation and pull needed new features from backports is a good combination. [21:02] do we get many requests from end users for backports? [21:02] Yes. That's where most of them come from. [21:02] or is it mostly those involved with the project who make the decisions? === arualavi_ is now known as arualavi [21:03] Lots of users asking, some of them testing, and then a few of us deciding. [21:03] I also think backports can provide some essential infrastructure for long term support of thing. [21:03] does the backports team look after security vulnerabilities which affect those packages? [21:03] We try to. [21:04] how do you find out about them? does the security team notify you? [21:04] It's much like universe in that respect. [21:04] I read the USNs. [21:04] There are packages I watch after (clamav in particular). [21:04] it seems things could slip through the cracks if they don't affect a released version [21:05] but I don't know how common that is, perhaps keescook would [21:05] Yes. That's quite true. [21:05] mjg59,Keybuk,sabdfl: further questions? [21:05] none from me [21:05] * jdstrand would like to point out that ScottK is very timely with his clamav updates [21:05] as far as backports? We haven't tended to track it. [21:05] nothing from me, thanks ScottK [21:05] * jdstrand is not core-dev yet (for the record) [21:05] [vote] ubuntu-core-dev application from Scott Kitterman [21:05] Please vote on: ubuntu-core-dev application from Scott Kitterman. [21:05] Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to MootBot [21:05] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [21:05] +1 [21:05] +1 received from mdz. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [21:05] +1 [21:05] +1 received from sabdfl. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [21:06] +1 [21:06] +1 received from Keybuk. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [21:06] I think we may have lost mjg59 [21:06] no time to lose [21:06] [endvote] [21:06] Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3 [21:06] ScottK: welcome! [21:06] ScottK: Congrats! [21:06] mdz: Thanks [21:07] TheMuso: Too. [21:07] [topic] ubuntu-core-dev application from Loic Minier [21:07] New Topic: ubuntu-core-dev application from Loic Minier [21:07] [link] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000817.html [21:07] LINK received: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000817.html [21:07] sabdfl: http://paste.debian.net/49057 [21:07] Séb sent this after Daniel's recommendation: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-January/000822.html [21:08] <\sh> ScottK, well done buddy :) congrats :) [21:08] Séb is by far my biggest sponsor [21:08] Thanks [21:08] BTW, TheMuso + ScottK: congrats :) [21:08] lool: Thanks. [21:09] lool: Thanks [21:09] Wurgh. Sorry about that, back now. [21:09] lool: you were involved in Debian for some time before Ubuntu. if you could make just one suggestion to all Debian developers regarding Ubuntu, and to all Ubuntu developers regarding Debian, what would they be? [21:10] lool: put another way, what do you think we understand least about one another? [21:10] thanks lool [21:10] I would suggest Debian Developers to steal more from Ubuntu; Ubuntu has many processes which can be envied, notably the "Spec" / blueprint concept which is running really nicely, but patches could also be taken more frequently [21:10] odd choice of paste service, under the circumstances :-) [21:11] To Ubuntu developers, I would like to suggest working hand in hand with Debian on all non-distinguishing topics; I think we can share most of our technical base, and would like distros to work more effectively together [21:12] lool: do you think it would help to work on some standard way of making technical decisions together? [21:12] do you have a suggestion how/on what? [21:12] mdz: Hmm, reading how you refined your question, I think many Debian folks see Ubuntu as a competitor or an enemy instead of a different offer for end users [21:13] it's all too easy to bring something up on a mailing list, get little or no response (or only dissent) and get stalled [21:13] it's important to us that we always keep moving and don't get blocked [21:13] mdz: I think it would help to take technical decisions, especially wide ranging ones or deep reaching ones together; the DEP concept floating around at the moment lets me think Debian folks see how the concept was successful with many groups [21:14] so while we would like for Debian and Ubuntu to stay aligned, we need some agility as well [21:14] Perhaps this will be ground on which to base cross-distros proposals [21:14] sabdfl: I tried to paste on ubuntu.com first, but it failed wrapping the text [21:14] sabdfl: You can note that down as an Ubuntu infrastructure improvement ;) [21:15] Keybuk: I'm sorry, which point(s) was your question aimed at? [21:15] lool: how to work hand-in-hand and what kind of topics? [21:16] mdz: I can only agree that Ubuntu was right at organizing itself to be able to differ on all topics; I mean to take the choice of having the possibility to change the whole distro instead of -- say -- try to work in Debian directly; I agree independance in decision making and technical changes is key [21:17] Keybuk: It's quite a large topic, but I can see some topics where convergence seems natural between the two distros: toolchain, or QA for example [21:17] These topics can be handled in many ways similarly for the two distros, and folks do share and exchange on these fronts [21:17] lool: it's easy to say we should work together on technical directions, but as mdz points out, there's no clarity on what that actually means, and how you keep moving forward on an idea [21:18] do you have specific suggestions in that regard? [21:18] On other topics, such as the kernel for example, there's no alignment at all [21:18] for example, if we want to consider moving to SMART as a default package manager, what would be the right process or venue to agree that with debian as opposed to simply executing it in ubuntu? [21:19] don't panic anybody, this is a thought experiment ;-) [21:20] I didn't think through as to what would moving to SMART imply; this is certainly a very long term discussion for which I'd try to gather interest in the Debian community first, perhaps explaining the concepts of SMART at Debconfs and proposing to mentor work on SMART [21:20] But I think there are more places where Debian and Ubuntu can truly share forces, such as packaging of base library which often carry little patching be it in Debian or Ubuntu [21:21] I like the idea of presenting more at debconf [21:21] we can't wait until debconf to make decisions, of course, but it would help to keep debian informed of what we're doing [21:21] It's kind of the software supermarket concept which has been frowned upon, but as I see it it could be applied to e.g. libraries or infrastructure packages [21:21] lool: DebConf*s* implies a multi-year process [21:22] sabdfl: SMART implies a multi-year process as I see it :) [21:22] realistically, moving to a new package manager framework probably is a multi-year process... [21:22] * lool fives mdz [21:23] mjg59: questions? [21:24] lool: What do you think of the Debian enhancement proposal work [21:24] ? [21:24] (I may have the precise name here wrong0 [21:24] ) [21:24] mjg59: mdz: I think it would help to take technical decisions, especially wide ranging ones or deep reaching ones together; the DEP concept floating around at the moment lets me think Debian folks see how the concept was successful with many groups [21:24] (I think that was referring to the same thing anyway) [21:24] Ah, ok, that does cover it [21:24] I did mention DEP shortly, and I think it's great Debian realized how useful such a process is [21:25] I'm not familiar with what's been discussed; is there a document which explains it? [21:25] Perhaps when it's around for a little while we will have some cross-distros proposals which will be declined as specs and deps at the same time [21:25] mdz: I think there is; as a result from the Extramadura discussions there were some links floating around [21:25] lool: declined? [21:26] defined, perhaps? :-) [21:26] Err expressed or defined; sorry, a Frenchism [21:26] that sounded uncharacteristically pessimistic, I thought [21:26] http://dep.debian.net http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2008/01/msg00045.html [21:26] LINK received: http://dep.debian.net http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2008/01/msg00045.html [21:26] thanks [21:26] mdz: see also http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep0 [21:27] Keybuk,sabdfl,mjg59: any further questions for lool? [21:27] none here, thanks [21:27] none from me [21:27] geser: thanks [21:27] I'm god [21:27] Sigh. [21:27] This keyboard is vexing me. [21:27] I'm good. Not god. [21:27] [vote] ubuntu-core-dev application from Loic Minier [21:27] Please vote on: ubuntu-core-dev application from Loic Minier. [21:27] Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to MootBot [21:27] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [21:27] +1 [21:27] +1 received from mdz. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [21:27] +1 [21:27] +1 received from mjg59. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 === juliux_ is now known as juliux [21:27] I feel that I should abstain, since lool reports to me [21:27] Private +1 vote received. 3 for, 0 against, 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [21:28] sabdfl: was that you? [21:28] heh. private vote was me. [21:28] I hadn't noticed that feature before. apologies. [21:28] keescook: not a very good time to experiment with it [21:29] mdz: yup, sorry. [21:29] sabdfl: vote? [21:29] (there needs to be a way to define the "voting pool") [21:29] I suppose we could moderate the channel temporarily [21:30] so long as nobody gets clever and privmsg's it ;-) [21:30] we're not a large enough group to worry, surely? === \sh is now known as \sh_away === ubotu changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Calendar: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/event | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ | 13 Feb 07:00 UTC: Platform Team | 13 Feb 13:00 UTC: Education Team | 13 Feb 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 13 Feb 22:30 UTC: Forum Council | 14 Feb 14:00 UTC: Desktop Team | 15 Feb 04:00 UTC: MOTU [21:30] Keybuk: it's been confused in the past, when someone is overenthusiastic [21:31] mjg59: if your keyboard vexes you, surely you should smite it? [21:31] It's an option [21:31] Keybuk: (+0 abstains, I believe) [21:32] I count 2 for, 0 against, 1 abstain, and sabdfl's vote pending [21:32] going to time out in a moment and consider it a vote among the 3 of us [21:32] [endvote] [21:32] Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3 [21:33] [agreed] correction: 2 for, 0 against, 1 abstained. Total: 2 [21:33] AGREED received: correction: 2 for, 0 against, 1 abstained. Total: 2 [21:33] mdz: oh, you were telling me *how* to do it [21:33] heh [21:33] lool: congratulations [21:33] I was still hunting in the docs [21:33] mdz: Thanks [21:33] +1 [21:33] lool: congrats [21:33] lool: congrats. [21:33] Thanks! [21:33] well deserved [21:34] Wow, that fast [21:34] [topic] ubuntu-core-dev application from Mathias Gug [21:34] New Topic: ubuntu-core-dev application from Mathias Gug [21:34] mathiaz: still with us? [21:34] yes [21:34] lool: Congratulations [21:34] we're moving westward from here, so it shouldn't be so late for the remaining folks [21:35] [link] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-February/000855.html [21:35] LINK received: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2008-February/000855.html [21:36] mathiaz: could you answer the question i posed to TheMuso, about a top 3 list of things you'd like to see improved in the way ubuntu is structured, run or organised? [21:37]