[00:00] <popey> Technoviking: only if it's associated with positive things
[00:00] <dholbach> thanks mdke and good night
[00:00]  * mdke hugs dholbach 
[00:00] <JanC> sabdfl: I think you should have created a more public & clear explanation about how other service providers could use the "Ubuntu" brand before launching this
[00:00] <sabdfl> thanks all
[00:00]  * dholbach hugs mdke back
[00:00] <sabdfl> JanC: have you read the trademark guidelines?
[00:00] <Technoviking> popey: I believe it will be, and willing to take the chance
[00:00] <sladen> shall we put this off until next fortnight, see what has happened, see whether the situation has defined/refined itself for ease of clarity of knowing which bits we're trying to discuss?
[00:00] <popey> Technoviking: ditto
[00:01] <sabdfl> hugs all round folks. sorry we have to go to bed on an argument ;-)
[00:01] <sabdfl> night
[00:01] <JanC> sabdfl: the trademark guidelines are clear for locoteams
[00:01] <sladen> [ACTION] Raise+review at next meeting
[00:01] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Raise+review at next meeting
[00:01] <nhandler> Will the Team Report issue be deferred as well?
[00:01] <JanC> but not really for commercial use IMHO
[00:01] <elmo> nhandler: I think it'll have to be, sorry
[00:01] <dholbach> nhandler: can you bring it up on the CC mailing list?
[00:01] <elmo> nhandler: we're going on two hours now
[00:01] <JanC> except for "contact Canonical"
[00:01] <sladen> nhandler: make sure it comes up earlier next time
[00:02] <sladen> nhandler: sorry
[00:02] <elmo> and personally, I'd kind of like to go home, especially if this is my last day ;-)
[00:02] <nhandler> dholbach: Sure ting
[00:02] <popey> hah
[00:02]  * dholbach hugs elmo
[00:02] <mako> i'm pretty bothered by the way this all happened. more so than i am bothered with the outcome, actually
[00:02] <dholbach> nhandler: thanks - I'll take a look at it tomorrow
[00:02] <nhandler> dholbach: As a note, I already made the changes for the MC
[00:02] <boredandblogging>  /msg nhandler can you cc me on that email
[00:02] <boredandblogging> bah
[00:02] <nhandler> Yes boredandblogging ;)
[00:02] <nixternal> hahaha
[00:02] <sladen> mako: it is still "happen_ing_" (one hopes)
[00:02] <elmo> mako: in what sense?
[00:02] <JanC> it's not only about companies wanting to provide services, but also about users wanting to know what they can expect!
[00:02] <ibuclaw> /msg boredandblogging !fail
[00:03] <boredandblogging> major fail on my part
[00:03] <Technoviking> later all have to get my son from school
[00:03] <mako> elmo: i feel less a community governance board than a community "tell us what you think we and we'll consider it" board than i did a few hours ago
[00:03] <sladen> mako: Community Focus Group.
[00:03] <mako> which, honestly, makes me feel a little bit like a tool ;)
[00:03] <elmo> mako: for the specific issue of trademarks?
[00:03] <mako> elmo: yes
[00:04] <elmo> mako: honestly, I'm surprised that you're surprised, considering what you did @ Canonical?
[00:04] <mako> elmo: i always thought canonical acted in accordance to its idea of the community and would answer to them
[00:04] <mako> elmo: if they ever diverged
[00:04] <elmo> I think we've always been pretty upfront about the fact that Canonical owns the trademark, and also that we've been using it for commercial services (ours and other peoples) since almost the beginning
[00:04] <gregknicholson> Up 'til now, development by the community has been an important part of the Ubuntu brand (to me). It seems that Ubuntu One doesn't follow this brand value, and so “Ubuntu” no longer signifies “community-developed”.
[00:05] <mako> elmo: i would have been MUCH happier to be outvoted than to be told that it wasn't even something we could vote on
[00:05] <elmo> mako: I don't think it's at all clear that the majority of this council, never mind the community agree with you
[00:05] <mako> elmo: that's plausible. but like i said. i would have been much happier to have been outvoted
[00:05] <sladen> elmo: no, it's surprised me too.  (That the CC appears to have less signficance that presumed, or indeed that the paperwork suggests that it has as the last-point-of-decision)
[00:05] <mako> elmo: i'd rather be on the loosing side of a democratic decision than to be told there's no democracy in a place i thought there was
[00:06] <elmo> sladen: which part are you "no-ing"?
[00:06] <silner> mako, I think Trademark is a very difficult area for Canonical. I can see that very clearly from the outside.
[00:06] <elmo> mako: well, a) this isn't technically a democracy, the whole 'sabdfl' thing, b) let's be careful to frame this in the  context of the trademark specifically
[00:06] <mako> silner: i understand. i helped craft the trademark guidelines and answered trademark@canonical.com for a job for a while
[00:06] <JanC> mako: sabdfl's nickname already says that there is no democracy  ;)
[00:06] <elmo> mako: nothing's changed outside of that, I hope you'll agree?
[00:07] <elmo> (I'd argue nothing's change with the trademark, but I understand that this may be new information to some people)
[00:07] <mako> JanC: sabdfl gets to veto all cc members
[00:07] <JanC> (which doesn't mean I agree with and/or follow all decisions made ;) )
[00:07] <mako> elmo: sure, i think that's right
[00:07] <sladen> elmo: can you prhase the question more specifically?
[00:08] <elmo> sladen: "< sladen> elmo: no, it's surprised me too."
[00:08] <elmo> sladen: what's the "no" refer to?
[00:08] <silner> I had always assumed, again from the outsider viewpoint, that the Trademark was the company's, not the community's?
[00:08] <mako> elmo: but if the ubuntu communit governance system doesn't even get to decide what ubuntu is and isn't....
[00:09] <mako> elmo: even if it's "just the trademark" it's a pretty big deal IMHO
[00:09] <sladen> elmo: the percieved irrelevance of the CC on this issue
[00:09] <elmo> nobody's said the CC is irrelevant
[00:09] <mako> silner: legally, it always has been
[00:09] <elmo> there's a huge difference between 'not having total control' and 'being irrelevant'
[00:09] <dholbach> and it doesn't do all the things the CC did justice
[00:10] <mako> silner: but canonical could take a position that it's going to put decisoins about the ubuntu mark ultimately in the community's domain
[00:10] <elmo> the CC is hugely important; and FWIW I agree, it would have been nice to bring this to the CC first
[00:10] <mako> it's like fedora early on. the fedora governance would get overruled by red hat over issues (often legal issues)
[00:10] <elmo> people were saying earlier, they were surprised people didn't predict this
[00:10] <JanC> like I said, it would have been much easier if there were guidelines about what is an appropriate ubuntu-branded service
[00:10] <mako> and it basically left a real sour taste in people's moth
[00:10] <mako> mouth even :)
[00:10] <elmo> FWIW, (although I'm not involved in U1), I was honestly surprised by the reaction
[00:10] <JanC> and we can still define such guidelines...
[00:11] <mako> JanC: so i think this should and will happen in any case
[00:11] <elmo> so although it's easy to say in retrospect, "the CC should have been consulted", I can also honestly say that I think us (CC) not having been consulted was a genunine mistake rather than deliberate
[00:11] <mako> elmo: sure, but the cc being told that their opinion ultimately didn't matter was a bigger one
[00:11] <silner> mako, it's odd in one way cos I would have thought, commercially, Canonical would have wanted to push the company name, rather than the Ubuntu Brand?
[00:11] <Vantrax> elmo Sabdfl admitted that last CC meeting when I raised that
[00:11] <JanC> elmo: I can see how that could be a mistake  ;)
[00:12] <sladen> elmo: interesting.  I could see it was going to be a hot potatoe (perhaps the first LWN comments that appeared immediatley).  I avoided forming an opinion until after the previous CC meeting had finished
[00:13] <elmo> mako: it's not that it doesn't matter
[00:13] <elmo> mako: it's that the CC doesn't own the trademark
[00:13] <elmo> mako: that doesn't mean Canonical doesn't value the CC's opinion
[00:13] <mako> elmo: i'm not happy with "we listen to the you when we either don't care or you agree with us"
[00:13] <mako> that's simply not governance
[00:13] <elmo> mako: and if everyone on the CC was saying 'this is a terrible idea', I'm absolutely sure it would have an effect
[00:13] <sladen> elmo: I see the platform being clearly good.  A confusion comes from the infrastructure authority (railway parlance) also running the train services built on it.
[00:13] <mako> elmo: we didn't even have an option of voting
[00:13] <elmo> but the reality is, when this first started it was 2 saying that, vs. 4 not
[00:14] <sladen> elmo: the platform should be for the clear benefit of Ubuntu, and have a name that matches
[00:14] <mako> elmo: sabdfl said he had made up his mind
[00:14] <JanC> let's say it like this: if anybody would have asked me, I would have warned about the problems people have with this...
[00:14] <JanC> and I'm sure several other people here knew that
[00:14] <sladen> elmo: for the services running running on the platform, it shoulld be open to all, and they're shouldn't all also be called Network Rail
[00:14] <bodhi_zazen> The UFBT meeting is moving to #ubutnuforums-beginners :)
[00:14] <mako> elmo: like i said, i would be much happier now if we had had a vote and i'd be outnumbered
[00:15] <mako> elmo: feeling in the minority, i'm used to :)
[00:15] <elmo> mako: but Mark _can do that about any decision_
[00:15] <elmo> mako: that's what his nick is all about
[00:15] <JanC> bodhi_zazen: you mean #ubuntuforums-beginners ?
[00:15] <elmo> mako: so, umm, honestly I'm confused
[00:16] <nhandler> Yes he did JanC
[00:16] <JanC> ;)
[00:16] <silner> I can't form an opinion on whether there should have been a vote. I hate to sit on the fence but I going to have to say here for now :)
[00:17] <silner> elmo, what does his nick stand for? I should know really.
[00:17] <mako> elmo: i guess you're right. but it's the first time it's happened (at least IIRC)
[00:17] <sladen> silner: and what would the/a vote have been?  (What question /if/?)
[00:17] <elmo> silner: self appointed benevolent dictator for life
[00:17] <sladen> silner: the 'd' is the dictator bit
[00:17] <nixternal> elmo: I think the reason for the stink, is that some of the Ubuntu volunteer contributors feel they are now contributing to the pockets of Canonical, more so than they did 2 years ago
[00:17] <silner> Ah thanks
[00:18] <elmo> nixternal: well
[00:18] <elmo> nixternal: maybe they do feel that way, but I'm not sure we can fix that.  I mean, in some respects, any contributor to Ubuntu (or upstream open source) has been doing that to one degree or another?
[00:18] <JanC> I think both are contributing to each other, to some degree
[00:18] <elmo> nixternal: would renaming U1 really change that?
[00:19] <sladen> nixternal: okay, the "pockets" is not and issue for me.  For every 100 quid I've spent on Ubuntu promotion, Canonical have probably about matched that.  And in return I've made income from that
[00:19] <mako> elmo: a statement that something can happen but that is different than it actually happening.
[00:19] <nixternal> elmo: nope, but all U1 did was act as the straw that broke the camel's back, imho
[00:19] <JanC> sladen: that's not true for everybody though  ;)
[00:19] <elmo> mako: sure
[00:19] <greg-g> elmo: except Canonical hasn't been competing with the community before, really. Selling support is one thing, but competing with another floss project (specifically iFolder, which Canonical could have picked up and made into the base of what is UbuntuOne)
[00:20] <elmo> greg-g: I honestly don't think iFolder is in the same space as U1?
[00:20]  * popey stifles a giggle about ifolder
[00:20] <nixternal> sladen: as have I, but not everyone sees it that clearly I guess
[00:20] <elmo> greg-g: and certainly not in the same space as U1 the platform
[00:20] <greg-g> elmo: file sync with the ability to add in services that U1 is thinking of adding
[00:20] <popey> greg-g: its the other way round, services, of which file sync is one
[00:20] <greg-g> can U1 people explain what those services are?
[00:20] <elmo> (full disclosure: I've not run ifolder (nobody will bloody package it), just listened to jcastro rant about it)
[00:21] <popey> many have tried elmo, many have failed
[00:21] <sladen> see at the moment, I can write a piece of software and upload it to the Ubuntu archive.  I can't do that for ubuntu One
[00:21] <dholbach> greg-g: don't you think "competing with the community" is a bit drastic there for deciding to not reuse a piece of code that exists somewhere?
[00:21] <nixternal> I also feel that if U1 came out with a "First to market" product instead of a blatent Dropbox clone, it might be a bit different...and I do understand this is just the beginning and I have an idea of what is to come because of the previous UDS discussions..that's why I didn't flip out about it :)
[00:21] <elmo> it's also more than just file sync, it's also about sharing
[00:21] <greg-g> dholbach: a little yes, but I couldn't think of a better word to use.
[00:21] <gregknicholson> dholbach: closed-source code will *always* be competing with the FOSS community
[00:21] <sladen> and if I did, I perceieve, that my BetterSync(tm) it would not be on equal footing to CanonicalSync(tm)
[00:22] <greg-g> elmo: which iflder does
[00:22] <silner> At the risk of being a Luddite I can't see myself every really trusting cloud services.
[00:22] <sladen> and more likely (just as Apple do), Canonical would not allow BetterSync(tm) to be included on ubuntu One
[00:22] <elmo> greg-g: not integrated with SSO and teams like U1 will do
[00:22] <sladen> elmo: SSO?
[00:22] <mako> ok, i'm going to need to think about this more. but i'm pretty upset about the way this all happened. even if i shoulnd't have been suprirsed
[00:22] <greg-g> elmo: it is the things that can't be annouced right now due to business contracts that worry me
[00:22] <elmo> sladen: single sign on
[00:23] <dholbach> ok guys... it's 1:22 over here and I'm really really tired
[00:23] <elmo> greg-g: blink, like what?
[00:23] <dholbach> good night and thanks everyone
[00:23]  * nixternal hugs dholbach 
[00:23] <ajmitch> dholbach: sleep well :)
[00:23] <sladen> mako: well if you get a chance, do email/IRC...
[00:23]  * popey hugs dholbach 
[00:23]  * dholbach hugs y'all back
[00:23] <emmajane> mako, you around for a bit?
[00:23] <greg-g> elmo: things that shouldn't be discussed in any public channel, I would suggest asking the U1 people about it
[00:23] <mako> sladen: i've been traveling
[00:23] <elmo> mako: I'm sorry your upset, and like sladen, I'd encourage you to write it up in email
[00:23] <mako> elmo: i will
[00:24]  * tonyyarusso is mostly just upset about the choice of name
[00:24] <silner> I have to sleep now. Interesting reading though!
[00:24] <nixternal> make that email public mako :)
[00:24] <elmo> mako: I don't think irc has proved the best forum for this, as a lot of the issues require more thought than a time limited IRC meeting allows
[00:24] <greg-g> g'night dholbach
[00:24] <mako> elmo: sure, my own thinking has improved over the last week
[00:25] <greg-g> the issue is that more and more services that will be seen to be a part of Ubuntu will be dependent on a proprietary backend
[00:25] <elmo> dude
[00:25] <elmo> that's so already happening
[00:25] <greg-g> that is it. just saying.
[00:25] <elmo> with or without U1
[00:25] <greg-g> I know
[00:26] <greg-g> but people see that expansion and think "when will it stop?"
[00:26] <nixternal> right, I think the whole "when will it stop?" is what sent quite a few into a feeding frenzy
[00:26] <greg-g> my personal view is not set in stone yet, either.
[00:27] <elmo> part of my frustration with this whole situation is that I think the name's a lot less interesting than what's included by default in Ubuntu
[00:27] <elmo> and right now, Ubuntu already includes clients, by default, for a whole bunch of non-free, non-FSS services
[00:27] <elmo> the most obvious of which being the search in firefox
[00:28] <nixternal> mine isn't, as I could almost not really care anymore, I just don't like seeing a tarnish on the community and people continually bad mouthing us either...plus it wasn't named Kubuntu One so I am cool :p
[00:28] <greg-g> right, but they weren't developed by Canonical, and I think people see Canonical as having a higher standard.
[00:28] <elmo> I see users seeing _that_ as Ubuntu, and _that_ causing confusion WRT what's "free" or not, much more so than whether or not U1 has 'Ubuntu' in the name
[00:28] <tonyyarusso> I don't even care if they were developed by Canonical.  They aren't saying "hey looky, we're Ubuntu too!" when they're blatently not.  They're called things like "Google", not "Ubuntu Search".
[00:29] <elmo> greg-g: higher standard> is both flattering and frustrating, from my POV ;-)
[00:29] <greg-g> elmo: indeed. :)
[00:29] <nixternal> I think another reason people targetd U1 for the trademark/naming is because any other argument against it doesn't hold water as easily maybe?
[00:29] <elmo> tonyyarusso: users don't care about names.  they care about what they get by default
[00:29] <elmo> tonyyarusso: I know way too may technical users who call firefox and/or the internet 'google'
[00:29] <greg-g> elmo: thats not really true, otherwise all marketing campaings are for naught
[00:30] <sladen> elmo: none of those clients included with ubuntu use the ubuntu name
[00:30] <tonyyarusso> elmo: Even if users don't care, *contributors* do.  As someone who provides IRC support and does promotion for Ubuntu, not having a clear demarcation point is very bothersome.
[00:30] <greg-g> I think I'm going to stop, since elmo seems to be getting a barage of comments thrown at him right now
[00:30] <sladen> elmo: they are each an application that has proved itself and established its *own* brand (and even changed it successfully over time;  Firefox, Pidgin)
[00:30] <tonyyarusso> This isn't about the user experience, but whether Canonical has any right to disregard the feelings of the Ubuntu community.
[00:31] <elmo> tonyyarusso: I don't believe Canonical is disregarding them
[00:31] <gregknicholson> tonyyarusso +1 and +1 …and +1 again.
[00:31] <JanC> elmo: making Ubuntu *more* dependent on proprietary backends isn't going to make it more popular...
[00:31] <JanC> even if it only looks like it's more dependent
[00:31] <elmo> tonyyarusso: and I take exception to your implicit claim to speak for the entire Ubuntu community
[00:32] <elmo> JanC: I'm nore sure I claimed it was?
[00:32] <sladen> elmo: the (ssemingly intentional) conflating of services, platforms and integration bugs me;  not because it's not a good thing, but it's *really hard to discuss* when it's all called ".NET framework"  (CLI? CLR? C#? Classlibraries? JIT?)
[00:32] <tonyyarusso> elmo: If the exact same functionality was included, with the backend remaining proprietary and the client open, and it was included by default, but with a name that conveyed its true relationship, I would be perfectly fine with that.  I would *prefer* a FLOSS backend, but I wouldn't be angry about it.
[00:33] <elmo> tonyyarusso: ok, and on the flip side, there's demonstrably a large chunk of the community (including it's highest governance board) who are not angry, and sometimes even happy about the name
[00:33] <elmo> tonyyarusso: I'm not dismissing your concerns, but they need to be balanced with other peoples positions
[00:33] <tonyyarusso> elmo: Okay, I don't speak for the whole community.  If you want a reliable measurement of that, put the name of the service up for a vote among all Ubuntu Members, and then we can both accept the outcome of that as being representative.
[00:33] <JanC> elmo: you said that there is no problem because Ubuntu is already dependent on such backends
[00:34] <popey> popularity contests rarely resolve these questions tonyyarusso
[00:34] <greg-g> take care all, thanks for the discussion. time to head out for a beer.
[00:34] <elmo> tonyyarusso: I refer you to popey and sabdfl's response to 'popular vote' suggestions
[00:34] <JanC> that doesn't mean people like it, and/or want more of it  ;)
[00:34] <elmo> JanC: I didn't say that dude
[00:34] <gregknicholson> Freedom-hating and community-hating aside, “Ubuntu One” sounds very much like “Window Live”, which was a *rubbish* brand. Everyone still calls Windows Live Messenger MSN, and the web search offering is now named after a character from Friends.
[00:34] <sladen> gregknicholson: bing bing!!
 part of my frustration with this whole situation is that I think the name's a lot less interesting than what's included by default in Ubuntu
 and right now, Ubuntu already includes clients, by default, for a whole bunch of non-free, non-FSS services
 the most obvious of which being the search in firefox
[00:35] <sladen> gregknicholson: if it deserves the name, it really needs integrating totally.  That means making last.fm etc "just work"
[00:35] <elmo> JanC: which part of that is "there is no problem"?
[00:35]  * JanC doesn't use default search in firefox  :P
[00:36] <tonyyarusso> If the name's "a lot less interesting", then just change it and we can focus on the interesting parts instead.
[00:36] <elmo> sladen: conflation> is this not orthogonal to 'ubuntu in the name or not'?
[00:36]  * nixternal either :)
[00:36] <sladen> elmo: platform != applications
[00:36] <sladen> elmo: to me, the platform belongs to ubuntu (tell me if I'm wrong here)
[00:36] <gregknicholson> sladen: and therefore having no branding of its own. Just “Ubuntu's sync service”. Much like how Gedit and Nautilus are “Ubuntu's text editor” and “the file browser”. The code/project should have its own (largely internal) name though (think Chromium and laconica).
[00:36] <popey> JanC: you are the exception rather than the rule
[00:36] <sladen> elmo: the applications dsitributed by it belong to Canonical (tell me if I'm wrong here)
[00:37] <elmo> sladen: err, I can't speak to that
[00:37] <elmo> sladen: with either hat on
[00:37] <elmo> not authoritatively anyway
[00:37] <sladen> elmo: and (the between the lines bit), is that am beginning to come to the conlusion that that likely _should_ be the distrinction
[00:37] <JanC> popey: maybe true, but people don't use "firfox google search" because they like it more than any other search (google-provided or not)
[00:37] <elmo> sladen: but the applications are open source, so I'm not sure how they belong to Canonical, except in the way bzr does
[00:38] <sladen> elmo: and which therefore leads to no probably with the Ubuntu One name (since it's somebeing infrastructure wise, that's neutral, and for the good of ubuntu generally)
[00:38] <elmo> if by applications, we mean the client side part
[00:38] <popey> JanC: no, they use it because they're lazy and it works
[00:38] <sladen> by applications I mean "CanonicalSync"
[00:38] <elmo> anyway.  it's like past midnight, and I last ate 12 hours ago, and I'm still in the office
[00:38] <sladen> and "CanonicalCloudService"
[00:38] <popey> JanC: evidenced by the number of people who dont change their browser home page in IE from msn
[00:39] <elmo> so my answers and discussion is probably becoming increasingly incoherent
[00:39] <elmo> so I'm going to have to call it a night
[00:39] <sladen> but it's hard to discuss this, because the distinction is not being made
[00:39] <elmo> I'd encourage folks still concerned to followup in email prior to the next meeting
[00:39] <sladen> elmo: thank you for staying up so late
[00:39] <popey> thanks for taking the extended time to talk about it elmo, it's appreciated
[00:39] <JanC> popey: most search engines (including live search) aren't worse than google search these days
[00:39] <tonyyarusso> Imagine how silly it would be if it were called "Ubuntu Messenger" instead of Pidgin just because it was the default application.
[00:39] <popey> JanC: i never said they were :)
[00:39] <elmo> good night all
[00:39] <dinda> elmo: please go eat and go home!
[00:40] <sladen> night all.  Probably see you in a fortnight
[00:40] <sladen> #endmeeting
[00:40] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 18:40.
[00:40] <greg-g> oh, this was all still considered a part of the meeting?
[00:40] <JanC> :P
[00:43] <nhandler> greg-g: I thought the official meeting ended around the time sabdfl left
[00:46] <JanC> who cares, logs are public
[01:00] <pace_t_zulu> everyone here for the Tennessee Team meeting?
[01:00] <pace_t_zulu> #startmeeting
[01:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 19:00. The chair is pace_t_zulu.
[01:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[01:00]  * galant14b raises his hand
[01:00]  * mac9416 <
[01:00] <wrst> present
[01:00]  * w4ett here
[01:00] <linuxman410> here
[01:01] <pace_t_zulu> so we've got our agenda on the wiki
[01:01] <pace_t_zulu> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TennesseeTeam/Meeting
[01:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TennesseeTeam/Meeting
[01:01] <pace_t_zulu> first topic is OPs and founder-ship on #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:01] <pace_t_zulu> [TOPIC] OPs and founder-ship on #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  OPs and founder-ship on #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:02] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: what's the status on foundership? I know it was up in the air last week
[01:02] <pace_t_zulu> currently we only have one active member who has OP privileges
[01:02]  * w4ett raises hand
[01:02] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, Matthew Craig never responded to my request to transfer foundership
[01:03] <pace_t_zulu> pleia2 has assured us that we will be able to transfer foundership provided the team agrees on it
[01:03] <pleia2> it's a process :) but can be done for all resources when the team leaders are MIA
[01:04] <pace_t_zulu> so i think we should transfer founder-ship to an active team member and get OP privileges to at least a couple active team members
[01:04] <pace_t_zulu> anyone else want to contribute their thoughts on the matter?
[01:05] <w4ett> It is a logical course to follow
[01:05] <pace_t_zulu> fyi commands for MootBot can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ScribesTeam/MootBot
[01:05] <pace_t_zulu> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ScribesTeam/MootBot
[01:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ScribesTeam/MootBot
[01:05] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] transfer founder-ship to an active team member and get OP privileges to at least a couple active team members
[01:05] <MootBot> IDEA received:  transfer founder-ship to an active team member and get OP privileges to at least a couple active team members
[01:06] <mac9416> I think it is fair to say that pace_t_zulu is a very active member, so I believe he would be a logical choice for founder or OP.
[01:06] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: let me look at that link really quick.
[01:06] <galant14b> mac9416: agreed
[01:06] <wrst> i agree mac9416
[01:07] <pace_t_zulu> thanks guys... i am humbled
[01:07] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: you're consistently around, helpful and never anyone incite any sort of temper. All good qualities we should want for founder/OP
[01:07] <mac9416> So, is pace_t_zulu willing?
[01:08] <pace_t_zulu> so should we take a vote regarding whether our current founder is uncooperative and we should thus pursue the process of transferring founder-ship?
[01:08] <galant14b> wow i need to proofread what i write...."never let anyone incite any sort of temper"
[01:09] <pace_t_zulu> mac9416, i am willing if the team decides it
[01:09] <galant14b> I say put it to a vote
[01:09] <w4ett> pace_t_zulu:  a vote is in order
[01:09] <mac9416> "whether our current founder is uncooperative" I'm not sure that's necessary ;-)
[01:09] <galant14b> current founder has proven he's not willing to be cooperative
[01:09] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE]  our current founder is uncooperative and we should thus pursue the process of transferring founder-ship
[01:09] <MootBot> Please vote on:   our current founder is uncooperative and we should thus pursue the process of transferring founder-ship.
[01:09] <MootBot> 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
[01:09] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[01:09] <mac9416> Ah, Ok
[01:09] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[01:09] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[01:09] <galant14b> +1
[01:09] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[01:09] <mac9416> +1
[01:09] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[01:09] <w4ett> +1
[01:09] <MootBot> +1 received from w4ett. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[01:10] <wrst> +1
[01:10] <MootBot> +1 received from wrst. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:10] <linuxman410> +1
[01:10] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 6 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 6
[01:10] <pace_t_zulu> wrst LibertyTiger  ?
[01:10] <galant14b> wrst voted
[01:10] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, sorry, missed that
[01:10] <pace_t_zulu> looks like this is unanimous...
[01:11] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[01:11] <MootBot> Final result is 6 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 6
[01:11] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] our current founder is uncooperative and we should thus pursue the process of transferring founder-ship
[01:11] <MootBot> AGREED received:  our current founder is uncooperative and we should thus pursue the process of transferring founder-ship
[01:12] <galant14b> even given the couple of active members we have missing today, i think this is the general consensus i've felt in the channel over the last couple weeks
[01:12] <MTecknology> pace_t_zulu: #ubuntu-irc can help you with that
[01:12] <pace_t_zulu> ok so now it seems we should decide on who will receive foundership ... lets do nominations
[01:12] <pace_t_zulu> i'd like to nominate w4ett ...
[01:13] <pace_t_zulu> MTecknology, thank you
[01:13] <pace_t_zulu> or do you guys think we should hold off to decide who should receive foundership?
[01:14] <wrst> i like your idea pace_t_zulu especially considering the dedication w4ett had even when he was in the hospital
[01:14] <mac9416> From Star Wars I: "Vote now!" ;-)
[01:14] <pleia2> FWIW w4ett is currently the successor for the channel, so it probably be easiest to promote him to channel founder
[01:14] <w4ett> pace_t_zulu: I think we need to resolve to make the changes before we select replacements
[01:15] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, i thought we just resolved to change foundership... can you clarify?
[01:15] <pace_t_zulu> pleia2 +1
[01:15] <mac9416> w4ett, so you suggest only appointing OPs today?
[01:15] <w4ett> Oh.......thought it was ops at this point
[01:16] <pace_t_zulu> should we conduct a quick vote to establish that w4ett is our pick for founder since his is the successor
[01:16] <galant14b> i tend to agree with what wrst and pleia2 have said though. w4ett has been here a while, he is the natural choice if he would accept/desires the position
[01:16] <w4ett> but at pleia2  says I have the successorship, but that does not mean I need to get the foundership of the channel
[01:17] <pace_t_zulu> i don't hear any dissenting w4ett receiving founder
[01:17] <pleia2> w4ett: currently you have the power to add other ops :)
[01:17] <w4ett> If appointed I will server
[01:17] <w4ett> yep
[01:18] <pleia2> you only lack the founder mode, which isn't a huge deal logistics-wise
[01:18]  * mac9416 is prepared to vote for w4ett, since there appears to be no dissent.
[01:18] <pace_t_zulu> i motion that we vote regarding w4ett being the channel founder of #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:18]  * galant14b nods
[01:18] <mac9416> second.
[01:18] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] w4ett to be appointed founder of #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:18] <MootBot> Please vote on:  w4ett to be appointed founder of #ubuntu-us-tn.
[01:18] <MootBot> 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
[01:18] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[01:19] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[01:19] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[01:19] <mac9416> +1
[01:19] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[01:19] <galant14b> +1
[01:19] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[01:19] <linuxman410> +1
[01:19] <wrst> +1
[01:19] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[01:19] <MootBot> +1 received from wrst. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:19] <w4ett> +0
[01:19] <MootBot> Abstention received from w4ett. 5 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:19] <pace_t_zulu> i reckon that vote is conclusive
[01:19] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[01:19] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 1 abstained. Total: 5
[01:19] <popey> :)
[01:20] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] w4ett to be appointed founder of #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:20] <MootBot> AGREED received:  w4ett to be appointed founder of #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:20] <pace_t_zulu> [ACTION] w4ett to be appointed founder of #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:20] <MootBot> ACTION received:  w4ett to be appointed founder of #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:21] <pace_t_zulu> so should we turn our attention to OPs in #ubuntu-us-tn?
[01:21] <galant14b> sounds reasonable
[01:21] <mac9416> agreed
[01:22] <pace_t_zulu> shall we decide on how many new OPs we need?
[01:22] <pace_t_zulu> previously it has been suggested that we should have 2 OPs in addition to the founder
[01:22] <mac9416> Sounds reasonable.
[01:22] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: that sounds like a reasonable number
[01:22] <pace_t_zulu> [TOPIC] OPs in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  OPs in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:22] <popey> you already have that
[01:22]  * w4ett sounds good
[01:23] <popey> pleia2, nealmcb and w4ett
[01:23] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] 2 OPs in addition to founder
[01:23] <MootBot> IDEA received:  2 OPs in addition to founder
[01:23]  * galant14b has never seen nealmcb in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:23] <wrst> me either galant14b
[01:23] <popey>  /msg chanserv flags #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:23] <popey> ^^ that tells you who is
[01:23] <pace_t_zulu> popey, pleia2 is not a member of the Tennessee team... thanks you
[01:23] <pleia2> popey: neither nealmcb nor I are not part of -tn, we're mentors from the USTeams, we were added to help them out
[01:24] <popey> of course.. sorry, my bad
[01:24] <galant14b> pleia2: ahh
[01:24] <popey>  /ignore popey
[01:24] <w4ett> neal and pleia are mentors from the us team
[01:24] <pleia2> popey :)
[01:24] <pace_t_zulu> ok... moving on
[01:24] <pace_t_zulu> let's take ideas on how to decide who our OPs should be...
[01:25] <MTecknology> I vote for removing the ability for any ubuntu member to become op
[01:25] <pace_t_zulu> anyone disagree with the idea of 2 OPs in addition to w4ett?
[01:25] <mac9416> agreed
[01:25] <wrst> sounds good
[01:25] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: negative
[01:25] <w4ett> disagree
[01:26] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, clarify?
[01:26] <MTecknology> also - w/ your access list - anyone change change their nick to w4ett and become op - any random person at all
[01:26] <w4ett> ubuntu membership should not disqualify one from serving
[01:26] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, +1
[01:27] <wrst> oh yeah i agree with that w4ett
[01:27] <wrst> i was agreeing with pace_t_zulu
[01:27] <pace_t_zulu> anyone who abuses their ubuntu membership is subject to the Code of Conduct
[01:27] <w4ett> just "one bad apple" you understand
[01:27] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, have you registered your nick with freenode?
[01:27] <w4ett> yes...my nick is registered
[01:28] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] vote on 2 OPs in addition to w4ett
[01:28] <MootBot> IDEA received:  vote on 2 OPs in addition to w4ett
[01:28] <mac9416> second
[01:28]  * galant14b nominates pace_t_zulu if he's willing
[01:28] <pace_t_zulu> i think we can do this quickly
[01:29] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, we'll move on to nominations next... thank ;)
[01:29]  * wrst agrees with galant14b
[01:29] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: sorry. i love getting ahead of the game =0P
[01:29] <wrst> sorry jumped the gun with galant14b
[01:29] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] 2 OPs in addition to w4ett in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:29] <MootBot> Please vote on:  2 OPs in addition to w4ett in #ubuntu-us-tn.
[01:29] <MootBot> 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
[01:29] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[01:29] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[01:29] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[01:29] <mac9416> +1
[01:29] <galant14b> +1
[01:29] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[01:29] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[01:29] <wrst> +1
[01:29] <MootBot> +1 received from wrst. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[01:29] <w4ett> +1
[01:29] <MootBot> +1 received from w4ett. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:29] <linuxman410> +1
[01:29] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 6 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 6
[01:30] <pace_t_zulu> i reckon that is conclusive
[01:30] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[01:30] <MootBot> Final result is 6 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 6
[01:30]  * w4ett moves we nominate at this time
[01:30] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] nominations for first op
[01:30] <MootBot> IDEA received:  nominations for first op
[01:31] <w4ett> nominate pace_t_zulu
[01:31]  * galant14b agrees. again. ;)
[01:31] <pace_t_zulu> i nominate infocop411 ... he is not present right now but has usually in the channel ... he has not abused OP privileges in the past
[01:31]  * wrst agree on both 
[01:31]  * w4ett infocop is a good choice
[01:32] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: this is true. infocop411 is a good guy
[01:32] <pace_t_zulu> mac9416? linuxman410?
[01:32] <pace_t_zulu> do you have any nominations?
[01:32] <linuxman410> i agree on the two
[01:33] <mac9416> agree on both
[01:33] <pace_t_zulu> if we have only two nominations i reckon we can vote on both at once
[01:33] <w4ett> ?me agrees
[01:33] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu:
[01:33] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:33] <MootBot> IDEA received:  vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:34] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: if we're going to do it in all one shot, i'd also like to mention binarymutant. again, not here tonite, but i think he's just as deserving
[01:34] <pace_t_zulu> ok we have a nomination for binarymutant
[01:35] <pace_t_zulu> with 3 nominations i suppose this becomes a bit more complicated
[01:35] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: i'll shutup now ;)
[01:35] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, do you have any suggestions on how we decide this?
[01:35] <mac9416> I don't know enough of any of them to have an opinion.
[01:35]  * w4ett can we nominate in abstentia?
[01:36]  * pace_t_zulu thinks w4ett raises a good point
[01:36] <galant14b> w4ett: good point...but that knocks out two of the nominees
[01:36] <wrst> w4ett: that's a good point doesn't someone have to agree to the nomination?
[01:36] <pace_t_zulu> i can speak for myself here
[01:36] <pace_t_zulu> if selected, i am willing to serve
[01:36] <w4ett> I belive infocop agreed to op earlier in the team channel
[01:37] <mac9416> I nominate pace_t_zulu, if there is a second.
[01:37] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, i have no doubts that infocop has expressed desire to become op
[01:37] <galant14b> well then i would suggest that we vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop for OP then
[01:37]  * w4ett thinks that will count as a proxy "Yes"
[01:37] <galant14b> if infocop ends up not wanting OP, we can always vote again
[01:37] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, +1
[01:38] <galant14b> but like pace_t_zulu said...i doubt it
[01:38] <mac9416> galant14b, agreed.
[01:38] <wrst> galant14b: i think that sounds good
[01:38] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:38] <MootBot> IDEA received:  vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:38] <mac9416> _1
[01:38] <mac9416> +1 :-P
[01:39] <pace_t_zulu> mac9416, save your vote for a moment
[01:39] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:39] <MootBot> Please vote on:  vote on pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn.
[01:39] <MootBot> 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
[01:39] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[01:39] <pace_t_zulu> +0
[01:39] <MootBot> Abstention received from pace_t_zulu. 0 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 0
[01:39] <mac9416> +1
[01:39] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 1 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 1
[01:39] <galant14b> +1
[01:39] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 2 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 2
[01:39] <wrst> +1
[01:39] <MootBot> +1 received from wrst. 3 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 3
[01:39] <linuxman410> +1
[01:39] <w4ett> +1
[01:39] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 4 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 4
[01:39] <MootBot> +1 received from w4ett. 5 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:39] <pace_t_zulu> i reckon that is conclusive
[01:39] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[01:39] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 1 abstained. Total: 5
[01:40] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:40] <MootBot> AGREED received:  pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:40] <w4ett> That will be fixed this evening
[01:40] <pace_t_zulu> [ACTION] pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:40] <MootBot> ACTION received:  pace_t_zulu and infocop411 receiving OP privileges in #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:40] <pace_t_zulu> so i think that concludes #ubuntu-us-tn
[01:41] <pace_t_zulu> i think we can turn our attention to Launchpad admin privileges
[01:41] <pace_t_zulu> [TOPIC] Launchpad Adminstrators for /~tennessee.team
[01:41] <MootBot> New Topic:  Launchpad Adminstrators for /~tennessee.team
[01:42] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: what do Launchpad admins do exactly in this situation? I know it involves accepting new members and such, but beyond that?...
[01:42] <pace_t_zulu> we already have w4ett as an administrator
[01:42] <galant14b> or w4ett might be better to answer that ;)
[01:42] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, could you please answer galant14b question?
[01:42] <w4ett> Basically the approval of new members and copy on the launchpad page
[01:43] <galant14b> w4ett: thanks. just curious.
[01:43] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, so modifications to the page etc.?
[01:43] <w4ett> exactly pace_t_zulu
[01:44] <pace_t_zulu> so does anyone have any proposals of how we should handle this issue?
[01:44] <w4ett> until the question of ownership of the team is addressed, this might be a moot point
[01:44]  * galant14b points to w4ett. Do we need more than one admin?
[01:44] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, can we not appoint admins without ownership
[01:45] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] select new owner of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:45] <MootBot> IDEA received:  select new owner of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:45] <w4ett> Jono can add admins
[01:45] <w4ett> I was selected that way
[01:45] <pace_t_zulu> MichaelBerger has been missing for a while
[01:46] <w4ett> 10 months now
[01:46] <galant14b> It seems logical to me that if w4ett is founder of #ubuntu-us-tn he is also owner of the Launchpad team
[01:46] <pace_t_zulu> i propose we select a new owner of the LP team
[01:46] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, +1
[01:46] <pace_t_zulu> i nominate w4ett as new owner of the launchpad team
[01:46]  * wrst agrees with pace_t_zulu
[01:47] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, would you accept ownership if selected?
[01:47] <galant14b> there is no sense in spreading out "the power" as it were in such a small LoCo. given 50+ active members that might be another story
[01:47]  * w4ett will serve if selected
[01:47] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] vote on w4ett assuming ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:47] <MootBot> IDEA received:  vote on w4ett assuming ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:47]  * galant14b agrees
[01:48]  * mac9416 agrees.
[01:48] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] w4ett assuming ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:48] <MootBot> Please vote on:  w4ett assuming ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad.
[01:48] <MootBot> 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
[01:48] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[01:48] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[01:48] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[01:48] <mac9416> +1
[01:48] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[01:48] <galant14b> +1
[01:48] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[01:48] <linuxman410> +1
[01:48] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[01:48] <wrst> +1
[01:48] <MootBot> +1 received from wrst. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:48] <w4ett> +0
[01:48] <MootBot> Abstention received from w4ett. 5 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 5
[01:48] <pace_t_zulu> conclusive
[01:48] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[01:48] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 1 abstained. Total: 5
[01:48] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] w4ett assumes ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:48] <MootBot> AGREED received:  w4ett assumes ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:49] <pace_t_zulu> [ACTION] w4ett assumes ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:49] <MootBot> ACTION received:  w4ett assumes ownership of /~tennessee.team on Launchpad
[01:49] <pace_t_zulu> ok.. those were our main topics
[01:49] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] select additional admins for Launchpad /~tennessee.team at next meeting
[01:49] <MootBot> IDEA received:  select additional admins for Launchpad /~tennessee.team at next meeting
[01:50] <w4ett> pleia2: question
[01:50] <mac9416> Someone spoke of the forums, mailing list?
[01:50] <pleia2> w4ett: sure
[01:51] <w4ett> mac9416: I believe the LP owner does the forum stuff too...pleia2 correct me please
[01:52] <pleia2> w4ett: tideline?
[01:52] <w4ett> isn't that the way it's set up?
[01:52] <w4ett> yep
[01:52] <pace_t_zulu> i reckon the mailing list and forums are running smoothly
[01:52] <pleia2> they aren't actually linked, but yes he is an admin on both
[01:52] <mac9416> OK
[01:52] <pace_t_zulu> we're nearly at the hour mark here...
[01:52] <pleia2> yeah, having a forums admin isn't a huge deal, LP is only important because as it stands you only have one active admin, and can't add more
[01:53] <w4ett> pleia2:  very true
[01:53] <mac9416> Were we to speak on events?
[01:53] <pace_t_zulu> I propose we postpone the forums and mailing list for a later meeting
[01:53] <w4ett> pace_t_zulu:  agreed
[01:53]  * mac9416 agrees
[01:53] <lifeless> pleia2: huh?
[01:53] <pace_t_zulu> I think we should discuss a regular meeting time for the team
[01:53] <lifeless> pleia2: lp can have a team of admins
[01:54] <pleia2> lifeless: their founder is gone, only the founder can add more
[01:54] <mac9416> pace_t_zulu, agreed.
[01:54] <lifeless> pleia2: take a decision, ask the contact in #launchpad to change things
[01:54] <pace_t_zulu> if it's ok with everyone else i propose that we establish a regular meeting time and postpone all other issues till then
[01:54] <lifeless> pleia2: and you *can* in lp have multiple admins for a team or project; the former you assign permissiosn to, the latter you use a team as owner/driver
[01:54] <pleia2> lifeless: that's what this whole discussion is about :)
[01:55] <pleia2> yes, I know
[01:55] <pace_t_zulu> [TOPIC] Regular meeting time for Tennessee LoCo
[01:55] <MootBot> New Topic:  Regular meeting time for Tennessee LoCo
[01:55] <lifeless> ok cool
[01:55] <mac9416> What was the consensus on the forum? Bi-weekly?
[01:55] <pace_t_zulu> ok so we had a poll and it seems as if there is a consensus on monthly meetings
[01:56] <mac9416> OK
[01:56] <pace_t_zulu> [LINK] http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1145150
[01:56] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1145150
[01:56] <galant14b> on the topic of meeting times : is 8pm/7pm not a good time? while we have a few of us here, we're missing a few active members
[01:57] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, i think it is suitable to meet outside of ordinary working hours
[01:57] <wrst> galant14b: think it might be good to ask those that couldn't make it?
[01:57]  * wrst agrees with pace_t_zulu
[01:57] <pace_t_zulu> ie no meetings 9am-5pm on weekedays
[01:57] <mac9416> I should always be good with 8/7
[01:57] <wrst> but might be a day/time that works better?
[01:57] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: oh i agree it needs to be outside of normal work hours for sure
[01:58] <pace_t_zulu> i would say that weekends can be dodgy too
[01:58] <pace_t_zulu> i for one am less able to meet on weekends...
[01:58] <mac9416> Weekends are tough for me.
[01:58] <mac9416> Very.
[01:58] <w4ett> remember that the Real Killer is the 2 time zones we cover
[01:58] <pace_t_zulu> yes
[01:58] <wrst> yes
[01:58]  * galant14b is flexible.
[01:59] <linuxman410> i can meet any day after 6pm
[01:59] <pace_t_zulu> i feel like 8pm EDT/ 7 pm CDT works well
[01:59] <galant14b> I'd be happier letting you guys figure that particular detail out and i'll go with whatever you decide.
[01:59] <mac9416> I'm in Central, and 7 is perfect for me.
[01:59] <w4ett> 8East/7Central seems to be sufficient to let folks get home in Central time and not too late the those in the East
[02:00] <pace_t_zulu> should we take a quick vote on the hours of the meeting (8/7)?
[02:00] <w4ett> yes
[02:00] <pace_t_zulu> then we can discuss a monthly basis on which to overlay that time...
[02:00] <mac9416> I'm game
[02:01] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] vote on meetings occurring at 8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be selected
[02:01] <MootBot> IDEA received:  vote on meetings occurring at 8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be selected
[02:01] <pace_t_zulu> sound good?
[02:01]  * galant14b agrees
[02:02]  * mac9416 agrees.
[02:02] <wrst> yes
[02:02]  * w4ett day to be determined
[02:02] <pace_t_zulu> ok
[02:02] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] Meetings will be at  8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be determined
[02:02] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Meetings will be at  8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be determined.
[02:02] <MootBot> 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
[02:02] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[02:02] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[02:02] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[02:02] <galant14b> +!
[02:02] <linuxman410> +1
[02:02] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[02:02] <mac9416> +1
[02:02] <galant14b> +1
[02:02] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[02:02] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[02:02] <w4ett> +1
[02:02] <MootBot> +1 received from w4ett. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[02:02] <pace_t_zulu> that appears to be conclusive... wrst?
[02:03] <pace_t_zulu> wrst, will you be voting on this?
[02:04] <pace_t_zulu> guys, wrst went MIA in 60 seconds...
[02:04] <pace_t_zulu> this vote is conclusive
[02:04] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[02:04] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5
[02:04] <w4ett> still majority
[02:04] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] Meetings will be at  8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be determined
[02:04] <MootBot> AGREED received:  Meetings will be at  8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be determined
[02:04] <pace_t_zulu> [ACTION] Meetings will be at  8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be determined
[02:04] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Meetings will be at  8pm EDT / 7pm CDT on a weekday to be determined
[02:05] <pace_t_zulu> ok.. so now lets establish when in the month is suitable
[02:05] <pace_t_zulu> does anyone have specific days of the week that don't work?
[02:05] <mac9416> Wednesdays
[02:05] <pace_t_zulu> i'd like to motion against meetings on friday
[02:05] <pace_t_zulu> wednesdays don't work for mac9416
[02:05] <w4ett> Tues....first week of the month
[02:06] <pace_t_zulu> so we've got Mon, Tues, or Thurs
[02:06] <pace_t_zulu> i'm inclined to go with w4ett on this one
[02:06] <wrst> woops sorry guys i agree :) on thevote that i missed
[02:06] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, do you know anything about the klug schedule? why did it the meeting fall on today?
[02:06] <pace_t_zulu> wrst, no worries
[02:06] <w4ett> No church activities or bowling :P
[02:07] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: i'm sorry i do not. I wasn't even aware the klug existed before infocop mentioned it. I apologize
[02:07] <pace_t_zulu> i know NLUG is second tuesday on each month.. so there is no conflict there
[02:07] <galant14b> if you give me a second i'll google and see if i can come up with anything
[02:07] <pace_t_zulu> one point i'd like to add is that someone mentioned that some members receive a monthly digest
[02:07] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu:
[02:08] <galant14b> When:
[02:08] <galant14b> 1st Tuesday (formal) at 6:30 PM Eastern Time.
[02:08] <pace_t_zulu> i'd like to point out that the first week of each month is a good idea with regards to that
[02:08] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: ^^ KLUG
[02:08] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, thank you
[02:08] <wrst> sorry guys gotta go i shall be here whenever catch you later
[02:08] <galant14b> wrst: take care
[02:08] <pace_t_zulu> wrst, thanks for being here
[02:08] <wrst> no prob sorry i can't stick around catch you later
[02:08]  * w4ett os 8pm EDT will be ok on Tues?
[02:09] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, i think so
[02:09] <w4ett> *so
[02:09] <galant14b> w4ett: 8pm will interfere w/ the end of the KLUG meeting most likely. that is the rason infocop is not here tonight
[02:09] <galant14b> reason*
[02:09]  * w4ett so moved......1st Tues of the month
[02:09] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, did you attend the KLUG tonight?
[02:09] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: i did not
[02:10] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, but infocop did?
[02:10] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, i think we need to discuss this a bit further
[02:10] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: i was merely saying that for the benefit of others in the area who might want to participate in both
[02:10] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, agreed
[02:10] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, i'm trying to establish how long that goes
[02:10] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: when we left Panera, he said he was headed to KLUG
[02:10] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: infocop said it usually runs til ~8:30pm
[02:10] <galant14b> EST of course
[02:11]  * w4ett I need to leave for about 15 Min.
[02:11] <pace_t_zulu> ok we need to move this along to come to a vote
[02:11] <pace_t_zulu> i think it would be poor form to schedule on top of the KLUG meeting
[02:11] <w4ett> 9/8 central then?
[02:12] <galant14b> or perhaps another tuesday of the month? 3rd perhaps?
[02:12] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, what about 8/7 on a thursday?
[02:12] <w4ett> can do
[02:12] <mac9416> pace_t_zulu, good here.
[02:12] <w4ett> usually
[02:12] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, what do you think about 8/7 on a thursday?
[02:12] <galant14b> 1st thurs of every month is what you are proposing?
[02:12] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, yes
[02:13] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: fine with me
[02:13] <mac9416> here too.
[02:13] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:13] <MootBot> IDEA received:  Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:13] <pace_t_zulu> we ready to vote on this?
[02:13] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: that does not interfere with any KLUG meetings listed on their info page
[02:13]  * galant14b agrees
[02:13] <pace_t_zulu> works with NLUG
[02:13] <pace_t_zulu> let's vote then
[02:13] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:13] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month.
[02:13] <MootBot> 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
[02:13] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[02:13] <galant14b> +1
[02:13] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[02:14] <w4ett> +1
[02:14] <MootBot> +1 received from w4ett. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[02:14] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[02:14] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[02:14] <linuxman410> +1
[02:14] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[02:14] <mac9416> +1
[02:14] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[02:14] <pace_t_zulu> conclusive
[02:14] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[02:14] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5
[02:14] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:14] <MootBot> AGREED received:  Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:14] <pace_t_zulu> [ACTION] Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:14] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Meet at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT on the first Thursday of the month
[02:15] <pace_t_zulu> great!
[02:15]  * w4ett moves we table the social event to this Thursday's meeting
[02:15] <pace_t_zulu> i think that establishes formally establishes the main issues that we needed
[02:15] <pace_t_zulu> w4ett, +1
[02:15] <galant14b> works for me
[02:16]  * w4ett the discussion anyway :P
[02:16] <pace_t_zulu> so we will be meeting Thursday in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:16] <pace_t_zulu> shall we have a quick vote on that?
[02:16] <w4ett> +1
[02:16] <galant14b> +1
[02:17] <infocop411> hiya
[02:17] <galant14b> infocop411: hey hey
[02:17]  * w4ett speak of the devil
[02:17] <pace_t_zulu> [IDEA] Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:17] <MootBot> IDEA received:  Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:17] <infocop411> forgot we were in here
[02:17]  * galant14b agrees
[02:17]  * mac9416 agrees
[02:17] <pace_t_zulu> shall we have a quick vote and conclude this meeting
[02:17] <infocop411> pace_t_zulu: on what
[02:17] <w4ett> second
[02:17] <infocop411> ?
[02:17] <pace_t_zulu> [VOTE] Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:17] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn.
[02:17] <MootBot> 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
[02:17] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[02:17]  * mac9416 agrees
[02:17] <pace_t_zulu> +1
[02:17] <MootBot> +1 received from pace_t_zulu. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[02:18] <galant14b> +1
[02:18] <w4ett> +1
[02:18] <MootBot> +1 received from galant14b. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[02:18] <MootBot> +1 received from w4ett. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[02:18] <mac9416> +1
[02:18] <MootBot> +1 received from mac9416. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[02:18] <linuxman410> +1
[02:18] <MootBot> +1 received from linuxman410. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[02:18] <infocop411> +1
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> that is conclusive
[02:18] <MootBot> +1 received from infocop411. 6 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 6
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> infocop411, we will fill you in
[02:18] <infocop411> thnx
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> [ENDVOTE]
[02:18] <MootBot> Final result is 6 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 6
[02:18] <galant14b> pace_t_zulu: thanks for chairing tonight.
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> [ACTION] Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:18] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> [AGREED] Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:18] <MootBot> AGREED received:  Table all outstanding items on agenda for meeting Thursday, June 4 at 8pm EDT/7pm CDT in #ubuntu-us-tn
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, you are very welcome
[02:18] <pace_t_zulu> thank you everyone for atteding
[02:18] <galant14b> i think we made some good progress =0]
[02:19] <pace_t_zulu> galant14b, agreed
[02:19] <w4ett> CU in the team channel
[02:19] <pace_t_zulu> let's end this
[02:19]  * galant14b out
[02:19] <infocop411> galant14b: I can't get down here less than 1, 40 min it seems
[02:19] <pace_t_zulu> #endmeeting
[02:19] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 20:19.
[02:19] <galant14b> infocop411: =0\
[02:19] <infocop411> traffic & construction, I'll take it to ubuntu-us-tn
[15:54] <\sh> siretart: ping fai ubuntu aufs...is the lp:~fai/fai/fai.hardy branch with the change of unionfs to aufs?
[15:59] <Daviey> aufs \o/
[16:03] <siretart> \sh: sorry, but I don't remember
[16:14] <\sh> siretart: looks like you didn't ;)
[16:16] <\sh> siretart: I'm just swearing about kernel + initramfs + udev
[16:17]  * persia looks confusedly at the channel name, and wonders about -devel and -motu
[16:17] <\sh> grmpf
[16:17] <\sh> why is -meeting on win 1
[16:18] <persia> heh :)
[17:59] <ara> hola!
[17:59] <heno> hey everyone!
[17:59] <bittin`> Hello
[17:59] <ogasawara> hi
[17:59] <schwuk> hi
[18:00] <schwuk> How's everyone's ubuflu?
[18:00] <heno> on a slow simmer
[18:00] <ogasawara> schwuk: slowly getting better
[18:01] <heno> Pedro is still out with full blown Ubuflu though :(
[18:01] <schwuk> ogasawara: gald to hear it :)
[18:01] <schwuk> heno: :(
[18:01] <Ursinha> mine is slowly getting better as well :)
[18:01] <schwuk> Maybe we should have UDS branded facemasks next time :)
[18:01] <fader_> Howdy
[18:01] <bdmurray> Hi
[18:01] <heno> hey Ursinha, welcome to our little meeting
[18:01] <sbeattie> hey
[18:02]  * fader_ thinks that 100L of orange juice should come standard with a UDS registration.
[18:02] <sbeattie> still trying to shake mine, the plane ride home didn't help.
[18:02] <Ursinha> hey heno, I didn't mean to disrupt you all :)
[18:02] <sbeattie> fader_: vitamin C drinks.
[18:02] <heno> no worries, we are just starting
[18:02] <fader_> sbeattie: Maybe OJ with vitamin C pills ground in :)
[18:03] <heno> I think cr3 might be out as well
[18:03] <schwuk> heno: he's around, but was getting food
[18:03] <schwuk> So might be late
[18:03] <heno> ok, let's start
[18:03] <heno> #startmeeting
[18:03] <MootBot> Meeting started at 12:03. The chair is heno.
[18:03] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[18:04] <schwuk> heno: I have to duck out at around 18:40 if the meeting is still running then.
[18:04] <heno> UbuntuBugDay highlights -- pedro
[18:04] <heno> schwuk: I think it will be short
[18:04] <schwuk> heno: ok
[18:04] <heno> anyone else wan to comment on bug days?
[18:05] <heno> bdmurray, ogasawara: ^?
[18:05] <ogasawara> the kernel team will have another one next tues
[18:05] <ogasawara> stats from the last one are at http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ogasawara/kernel-bugday/20090512.html
[18:05] <bdmurray> There was an idea of having ones for empathy and banshee which sounded good to me
[18:06] <heno> bdmurray: tomorrow or next week?
[18:06] <bdmurray> They've been added to the planning list
[18:06] <heno> ok
[18:06] <bdmurray> I think it was the 18th and 25th
[18:07] <heno> sounds good
[18:07] <heno> [TOPIC] New bug control members! -- bdmurray
[18:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  New bug control members! -- bdmurray
[18:08] <bdmurray> We've had some upstream developers added to the bug control team recently. Some members for the DX team and a Debian developer.
[18:08] <bdmurray> from the DX team
[18:08] <heno> that's excellent
[18:08]  * schwuk reminds bdmurray that he wanted to join bugcontrol
[18:09] <bdmurray> Yes, ara reviewed the relevant documentation with the DX team
[18:09] <heno> presumably they intend to focus on DX / Debian upstream bugs
[18:09] <ara> yes, the dx team just want to be more responsive when triaging their own bugs
[18:09] <bdmurray> That's correct
[18:09] <heno> schwuk: did you apply in the standard way?
[18:10] <schwuk> heno: no - I asked him at UDS.
[18:10] <schwuk> I'll do it properly this time.
[18:10] <bdmurray> schwuk: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugControl
[18:10] <heno> ara: I see you're having a good influence on them :)
[18:10] <heno> How is plars' temporary membership working out? plars: are you re-applying for bug-control?
[18:10] <bdmurray> Just including checkbox bugs would be fine
[18:10] <ara> schwuk: do you promise to be polite to bug reporters? :-P
[18:10] <bdmurray> plars has sent an application in and I temporarily extended his membership
[18:11] <schwuk> ara: Of course!
[18:11] <heno> ok, cool
[18:11] <heno> [TOPIC] Fridge Calendar Entry - wrong time -- schwuk
[18:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Fridge Calendar Entry - wrong time -- schwuk
[18:12] <schwuk> I was hoping jcastro or pedro would be around to help with this, but I'll take an action to get it fixed.
[18:12] <heno> schwuk: thank you
[18:12] <heno> [TOPIC] Specs
[18:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Specs
[18:13] <heno> I've started reviewing specs
[18:13] <cr3> heno: I've completed about 3 specs but I have about 4 more :(
[18:13] <heno> I'll go though them with people and teams on the phone first, before doing status checks in this meeting
[18:14] <heno> cr3: completed drafting or implementing? :)
[18:14] <cr3> heno: heh, that's flattering :) just drafting
[18:14] <ara> cr3: or in production?
[18:14] <heno> Some of the topics can be merged IMO
[18:14] <fader_> I thought the way it worked was you write the code, then write the spec to match
[18:15] <schwuk> heno: we talked about having them all complete (I assumed that meant drafted, no idea about reviewed) by the end of this week. Is that still the case?
[18:16] <heno> schwuk: that's a good target, yes. I want to cut down the numbers a bit though and only draft the ones that we are likely to do
[18:17] <heno> after last UDS we agreed we had done too many specs and should cut down -- this time we did about 50% more ...
[18:17] <heno> simply from having two rooms
[18:17] <heno> some are informational, some can be merged, some can be dropped though
[18:17] <cr3> heno: we need to have a cloning session at the next uds to attend more sessions
[18:18]  * cr3 volunteers to be the sheep
[18:18] <ara> how many people think that there were too many sessions?
[18:18] <ara> o/
[18:18] <ara> mmm, just me, apparently :)
[18:18] <heno> I would have liked to attend a greater variety
[18:18] <fader_> ara: It was overwhelming but I have no basis for comparison as this was my first UDS
[18:19] <cr3> ara: I found that the number of sessions was quite reflective of the intensity of the distribution. I missed a few sessions I wanted to attend but I listened to the audio recording
[18:19] <heno> but that's the curse of being a track lead
[18:19] <schwuk> ara: +1
[18:19] <heno> other questions about specs or UDS?
[18:20] <bdmurray> I've one about a specific spec - the increase apport coverage one
[18:20] <heno> bdmurray: ok, go
[18:21]  * ara added a hook to notify-osd that landed today in karmic
[18:21]  * bdmurray claps
[18:21] <sbeattie> ara: woo!
[18:21] <bdmurray> So I believe mdz was interested in finding out what packages the most recent 1000 bugs were filed about and then what the top 80% in terms of volume was.  Does that sound right?
[18:23] <heno> notes say both 80% and 50%
[18:23] <ara> bdmurray: I would add: and they have more than x bugs
[18:23] <heno> but it's not quite clear to me how those are used differently
[18:24] <bdmurray> Okay, the point being the numbers are rather surprising - http://pastebin.osuosl.org/26627
[18:24]  * ara looks
[18:24] <bdmurray> The packages are all over the place and the volume per package is quite low
[18:24] <heno> bdmurray: I would suggest you just start poking at the data and put together a review that seems sensible to you
[18:25] <bdmurray> Right sbeattie mentioned trying it with main only which is interesting too, but things still drop off rapidly.
[18:25] <heno> wow, I didn't expect it to be that broad
[18:25] <bdmurray> So I was wondering if there were any other bright ideas.
[18:26] <bdmurray> main at http://pastebin.osuosl.org/26636
[18:26] <sbeattie> how deep would we have to go to cover say 50% of the bugs filed in that list?
[18:27] <heno> look at the bugs (from the 1000) with the highest gravity and take packages from those?
[18:27] <bdmurray> deep in terms of number of packages?
[18:27] <sbeattie> yes, deep into the list in terms of number of packages.
[18:27] <bdmurray> heno: like an average bug gravity for a package?  I'd thought about finding that out a wee bit ago
[18:28] <heno> thinking that an X bug might have greater impact and attract more activity than a LyX bug, say
[18:28] <heno> bdmurray: that would be cool, yes
[18:28] <cr3> from looking at the list of packages, it seems that the bugs for the packages at the bottom of the list seem easier to address than those at the top
[18:29] <cr3> are we mostly looking to address the most number of bugs or the ones with the most impact?
[18:29] <heno> cr3: address as in fix or write apport hooks for?
[18:29] <bdmurray> The goal is to find which packages an apport-hook would benefit us the most
[18:30] <cr3> heno: fix bugs. as for apport hooks, my observation is the opposite and I think the ones at the top would actually be easier to add apport hooks and would seem to have the most impact
[18:30] <ara> bdmurray: incomplete bugs per package
[18:30] <ara> bdmurray: if a package has a lot of incomplete bugs, it is maybe the same information is always needed by devs
[18:31] <cr3> bdmurray: sorry, my observation was a bit off topic but I found it interesting enough to share :)
[18:31] <bdmurray> ara: that's a great idea!
[18:31] <bdmurray> Okay, I think I've a couple of different things to investigate
[18:32] <heno> that's a good idea, ara
[18:32] <heno> any other meeting topics?
[18:32] <sbeattie> BTW, one minor thing, I'm going to make the apport-in-server spec a dependency of the broader wider-apport-coverage spec.
[18:33] <sbeattie> since it seems to me to be a subtopic.
[18:33] <sbeattie> unless anyone objects, that is.
[18:33] <cr3> sbeattie: how do you run apport on server since it doesn't have a browser?
[18:33] <bdmurray> There was some discussion on the bugsquad mailing list regarding 'regression-potential' and 'default-application' bug tags for the chaning of a default application for a task.
[18:34] <cr3> sbeattie: err, or is that what the apport-in-server spec is for? :)
[18:34] <sbeattie> cr3: w3m is quite an effective browser, thank you very much. and you can save the report and file it from another machine.
[18:34] <sbeattie> :-)
[18:34] <heno> sbeattie: could just as well depend on the extend apport adoption spec
[18:34] <sbeattie> heno: err, yes, that's what I meant.
[18:34] <cr3> sbeattie: thanks, I need to have a look at LP with w3m
[18:35] <heno> sbeattie: ok, I'm happy then :)
[18:35] <sbeattie> cr3: make sure to use w3m-img as well. :-)
[18:35] <heno> bdmurray: can you expand on that?
[18:35] <heno> as in is there a question we should address in the meeting?
[18:36] <bdmurray> heno: If banshee is missing a feature that rhythmbox is one would tag the bug regression-potential and default-application.
[18:36] <bdmurray> Nope, no question just an announcement.
[18:37] <heno> bdmurray: ok, thanks. so agreement was reached on the list?
[18:37] <cr3> sbeattie: strange how I see this comment in the apport source: w3m, lynx: do not work
[18:37]  * schwuk ducks out
[18:38] <bdmurray> heno: oh, looking at the latest mail in the thread maybe not
[18:38] <sbeattie> cr3: interesting. I'm pretty certain I've filed a bug with w3m, but it bears revisiting.
[18:39] <cr3> sbeattie: it might be already fixed in karmic, don't take my word for it, I'm just being overly curious
[18:40] <heno> we may end up very many regression-tagged bugs
[18:40] <heno> would this be a topic for a bugsquad meeting
[18:40] <heno> or is it best settled on the ML?
[18:41] <bdmurray> Yes, there is debate about whether or not switching the default application could really cause a regression.
[18:41] <bdmurray> Or whether the regression is of the same importance as regression-regression. ;-)
[18:41] <heno> indeed
[18:42] <heno> let's let the ML thread decide
[18:42] <heno> and let's wrap up here
[18:42] <sbeattie> I think we wanted to capture those in the regression-* tags so that they could be included for release-note nominations.
[18:42]  * sbeattie will comment on the thread.
[18:42] <heno> #endmeeting
[18:42] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:42.
[18:43] <ara> thanks everybody!
[18:43] <bdmurray> sbeattie: negated tag searching should be available real soon now as I understand it
[18:43] <bdmurray> at least via the API which I thought might help