[13:42] <jdobrien> Hello Ubuntu One'eers!
[13:43]  * jdobrien hides
[15:58]  * cjwatson waves
[15:59] <heno> hi
[15:59] <cjwatson> I guess this'll be a relatively short release meeting, since the US is celebrating some kind of rebellious colony thing :)
[16:00] <cjwatson> #startmeeting
[16:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:00. The chair is cjwatson.
[16:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:00] <cjwatson> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseTeam/Meeting/2009-07-03
[16:00] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseTeam/Meeting/2009-07-03
[16:00] <dholbach> cjwatson: that's really unfair... I mean the UK have much more experience with rebellious colonies! :-P
[16:00]  * dholbach shuts up and leaves :-)
[16:00]  * charlie-tca sends a happy 4th of July to you too
[16:00] <cjwatson> dholbach: yeah, *we* should celebrate US independence day ;-)
[16:00] <pitti> hello
[16:01] <cjwatson> hi, just getting started, I guess folks will drift in
[16:01] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Actions from previous meeting
[16:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Actions from previous meeting
[16:01] <pitti> at least those who are still working today :)
[16:01] <cjwatson> there are two kubuntu-netbook items in here
[16:01] <cjwatson> there's been some progress on kubuntu-netbook (debian-cd merged), but at the moment we're waiting on an RT ticket in order to be able to progress further
[16:02] <cjwatson> [LINK] https://rt.admin.canonical.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=34852
[16:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://rt.admin.canonical.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=34852
[16:02] <cjwatson> for those with access
[16:02] <cjwatson> rgreening: did you do anything about test case documentation?
[16:03] <rgreening> cjwatson: no. been busy porting usb-creator for kde
[16:04] <cjwatson> ok, I'll just carry those items over then
[16:04] <cjwatson> hopefully we'll have working images by next week
[16:04] <rgreening> this was something ScottK volunteered me for right?
[16:04] <cjwatson> or images anyway :)
[16:04] <cjwatson> rgreening: I forget
[16:04] <cjwatson> I think it may have been, yeah
[16:04] <rgreening> :) Im sure it was
[16:04] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] QA Team
[16:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  QA Team
[16:05] <heno> Hi
[16:05] <cjwatson> my agenda was a bit incomplete for you guys, feel free to elaborate :)
[16:05] <heno> Not much to report, most people are off
[16:05] <heno> 8.04.3 SRU testing is on-going. We have been testing ISOs but there have been rebuilds of course. We expect to step that up on Monday
[16:05] <heno> The last automated installs in the HW lab of 8.04.3 were from 20090624.1
[16:06] <cr3> for both alternate and server (20090624)
[16:06] <cjwatson> fader reported that the bnx2 issue from earlier was resolved now - have we had a full automated install run for karmic since that? I understood it was taking out quite a few machines
[16:06] <heno> We have an intern starting who will help with manual testing of laptops every Friday.  That's been a weak spot earlier.
[16:06] <cr3> pending hr, the intern should start as early as next week
[16:06] <heno> last karmic results are from 20090702.1
[16:07] <cr3> we're still having problems with bandwidth just to rsync images quickly enough to test. this should be resolved as of July 10th
[16:08] <cjwatson> 100mb internal links or something?
[16:08] <heno> I understand there was some confusion around image version numbers
[16:08] <cjwatson> I think what happened was that the CD image was being synced but the netboot initrd wasn't
[16:08] <heno> that we were caching an old image for a week
[16:08] <cr3> cjwatson: I've had to compose with a T1 for a long time, it's just not enough
[16:09] <heno> cr3: was the synching issue resolved?
[16:09] <cr3> heno: worked around by not testing desktkop (live cd) images anymore
[16:10] <heno> ok
[16:10] <cr3> heno: but the lab is just finally catching up from the backlog today at 4h00 AM
[16:10] <heno> also, the work on metrics-based testing continues
[16:11] <cr3> cjwatson: rest assured that everything was being synced properly in the automated environment, both images and initrd. the problem is that some patched manual scripts weren't doing the right thing
[16:11] <cjwatson> cr3: well, synced, used, something like that :-)
[16:11] <cr3> cjwatson: so the problem was only encountered when performing ad-hoc manual tests, not otherwise, which should've only affected a few corner cases
[16:12] <cr3> for metrics-based testing, we're working on making attachments available to users as a very simple zip file
[16:12] <cjwatson> is karmic-qa-increase-apport-adoption still on track for alpha 3? I noted that it seemed to involve some Launchpad changes, and was wondering if those were in
[16:12] <cr3> the current users targetted for this feature are Keybuk for bootchart information and kirkland for acpi information.
[16:13] <heno> cjwatson: I believe the code is ready, but I need to nudge them
[16:13] <heno> (the LP team)
[16:14] <cjwatson> right, I imagine they're pretty busy with the open-sourcing
[16:14] <cjwatson> ok, thanks
[16:14] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Desktop Team
[16:14] <MootBot> New Topic:  Desktop Team
[16:14] <pitti> etailled info about RC bug status, planned Karmic changes, and done/planned changes for alpha-3 are on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:14] <pitti> d...
[16:14] <pitti> Again, this week we did not really focus on bugs, but on urgent feature development which other teams depend o
[16:14] <pitti> n.
[16:14] <pitti> In particular:
[16:15] <pitti> - we got the new gdm into karmic; sorting out some fallout now, but necessary for DX and artwork to provide th
[16:15] <pitti> emes and customizations, and for porting fusa and guest session
[16:15] <pitti> - packaged gnome-shell in PPA
[16:15] <pitti> - finished a working version of automagic-python-builds (dependency of "Application Layer Cake")
[16:15] <pitti> - got UbuntuOne file sync packages into karmic
[16:15] <pitti> - sorted out gstreamer package dependencies for empathy
[16:15] <pitti> - more porting work for Halsectomy
[16:15] <pitti> I tested the current desktop CD, and fixed a couple of warts, but by and large it's working; some major bugs remain, of course.
[16:15] <cjwatson> gdm: I just heard something today about no more shutdown available without logging out first ...?
[16:15] <pitti> that was fixed in a followup gnome-panel upload
[16:15] <cjwatson> ah, good
[16:16] <pitti> system menu has these things back for now
[16:16] <pitti> it's not the final solution, of course
[16:16] <cjwatson> tell amitk before he panics too much :)
[16:16] <pitti> but porting our fusa to new gdm will take a bit
[16:16] <pitti> ted's on that
[16:16] <pitti> cjwatson: done :)
[16:16] <pitti> I updated casper for autologin, too
[16:17] <pitti> it still breaks keyboard layouts, will tackle that soon
[16:17] <cjwatson> oh, the installer will need updates if autologin has changed
[16:17] <pitti> and it has some nasty "greeter gnome-session saving yadayada" dialog, but it's just cosmetical
[16:17] <cjwatson> [ACTION] cjwatson to update installer for gdm autologin changes
[16:17] <MootBot> ACTION received:  cjwatson to update installer for gdm autologin changes
[16:17] <pitti> cjwatson: shall I file a bug against ubiquity with the necessary changes?
[16:18] <cjwatson> it's ok, I'll pick it up from casper
[16:18] <cjwatson> (it's oem-config too)
[16:18] <pitti> I tested the current desktop CD, and fixed a couple of warts, but by and large it's working; some major bugs remain, of course.
[16:18] <pitti> oops, sorry
[16:18] <pitti> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/casper/trunk/revision/647 I mean
[16:18] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/casper/trunk/revision/647 I mean
[16:18] <cjwatson> thanks
[16:19] <pitti> (papercut: two cut/paste areas are confusing)
[16:19] <pitti> so, for alpha 3 we still plan to push empathy
[16:19] <pitti> the other a3 planned changes are in
[16:19] <cjwatson> I put quite a lot of bugs on your team's list from regressions and the targeted list and such
[16:19] <pitti> we'll get into space issues, but we have some plans for that
[16:20] <pitti> that's fine, I'd rather err on the side of caution
[16:20] <cjwatson> but I don't think many of them were OHMYGODURGENT
[16:20] <pitti> *nod*
[16:20] <pitti> fortunately we have been spared of total breakers so far
[16:21] <pitti> erm, of course I mean, our careful planning and engineering avoided them :-P
[16:22] <cjwatson> ok, thanks
[16:22] <cjwatson> is anyone here for the mobile team?
[16:22] <cjwatson> lool is at GUADEC
[16:22] <cjwatson> and I assume that davidm is on holiday
[16:23] <cjwatson> well, the only real thing I had was to nag lool about the toolchain changes, so I guess that can wait
[16:23] <cjwatson> Pete said by e-mail that there would be no kernel team representation this week
[16:24] <cjwatson> bug 392709 was the only particular argh item I had there, and I believe that's getting fixed
[16:24] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Foundations Team
[16:24] <MootBot> New Topic:  Foundations Team
[16:24]  * cjwatson switches hats
[16:24] <ogra> if there is anything urgent for mobile, i am here
[16:25] <cjwatson> ogra: oh, do you have anything particular you want to report? there's nothing urgent as far as I can see except checking up on the toolchain changes for v6
[16:25] <ogra> well, the rest of arm is waiting for kernel ...
[16:25] <ogra> UNR is ongoing properly afaik
[16:25] <ogra> nothing special
[16:26] <cjwatson> is UNR actually working yet?
[16:26]  * ogra just notes that cjwatsons remark from the beginning isnt true, they cheat and pretend its the 4th today
[16:26] <ogra> as far as i heard it is
[16:26] <cjwatson> it was waiting for a soyuz cherry-pick, I hadn't checked whether that had happened
[16:26] <ogra> i dont test it myself, being busy preparing arm for A3
[16:27] <ogra> currently i go over the ftbfs list
[16:27] <ogra> but gruemaster sounded like UNR would be roughly in shape atm
[16:28] <ogra> he is testing it daily
[16:28] <cjwatson> bug 391964
[16:28] <cjwatson> I think that might actually have been CPed though, I seem to remember StevenK saying that
[16:29] <cjwatson> ok
[16:29] <ogra> well, thats it from my side
[16:29] <cjwatson> thanks
[16:30] <cjwatson> as far as the foundations team goes, our list of bugs is a little shorter than usual since I took the opportunity while preparing the agenda to fix some of the things on it ;-)
[16:30] <cjwatson> I need to scare up somebody willing to tackle bug 277069
[16:30] <cjwatson> and we have the usual list on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/ReleaseStatus/Karmic
[16:31] <cjwatson> quite a lot of features planned to land for alpha 3 still, none of which I have reason to be concerned about right now
[16:31] <cjwatson> one other thing to mention is that it looks as if we may be making a slightly late move to eglibc
[16:31] <pitti> oh, so we do
[16:31] <pitti> we all know the discussions, but how much of a "delta" is that actually nowadays?
[16:32] <pitti> more like "20 patches" or "rewriting half of it"?
[16:32] <cjwatson> from the investigations I've made I don't consider it any riskier than any other merge of glibc from Debian
[16:32] <cjwatson> the biggest delta is basically #ifdefs, all of which we'll be leaving in their current configuration to the best of my knowledge
[16:32] <cjwatson> the reason to change is not that it gets us anything particular but that it saves us from having to maintain the glibc packaging ourselves; not following Debian would constitute going it alone
[16:33] <pitti> right, full ack, I was just curious how big of an impact that actually is
[16:33] <cjwatson> there are still a few conversations to be had and a shedload of testing, of course
[16:33] <pitti> in debian it seems to have gone virtually unnoticed by many unstable users
[16:33] <cjwatson> right, when I looked that's basically the conclusion I came to as well
[16:34] <cjwatson> lots of heat but very little actual difficulty
[16:34] <pitti> right
[16:34] <pitti> just a single 'e' in debian/changelog :-P
[16:34] <cjwatson> I just don't want to be faced with having to do that as well as other routine merges at the start of an LTS cycle ...
[16:34] <cjwatson> hell, if that bothers people we can call it glibc with a larger than usual patch :P
[16:35] <cjwatson> 2.10 (e or otherwise) is more of a change, particularly with this single-request stuff in resolv.conf
[16:35] <cjwatson> (ipv4/ipv6 mungery)
[16:35] <cjwatson> oh, heh, that's already been backported to Debian (e)glibc ;-)
[16:36] <cjwatson> anyway, more news on that as it happens
[16:36] <pitti> cjwatson: btw, is a dpkg merge still on the plan?
[16:36] <cjwatson> oh, yes, that's rising up my guiltmeter
[16:36] <cjwatson> aiming that for first thing next week
[16:37] <pitti> I was just wondering if I should sponsor that dpkg build-dep fix (the correct one from Debian), or whether that'd be moot
[16:37] <cjwatson> sorry that's late
[16:37] <cjwatson> moot, I think
[16:37] <pitti> great
[16:37] <cjwatson> assign it to me if you want :-)
[16:37] <cjwatson> Rick said there'd be no server team representation here today due to the holiday
[16:38] <cjwatson> ScottK said he'd be on holiday and that there was no significant news on the universe front so he didn't intend to find a replacement to attend; he also mentioned that KDE 4.3rc1 is now in karmic (and jaunty ppa)
[16:38] <cjwatson> that said if there are any MOTUs around with stuff to discuss at the release-team level, feel free :-)
[16:40] <cjwatson> ok
[16:41] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Known regressions
[16:41] <MootBot> New Topic:  Known regressions
[16:41] <cjwatson> I put most things that looked interesting from that list on individual team agendas
[16:41] <cjwatson> desktop and kernel for the most part, though I hoovered up a few other bits and pieces
[16:42] <cjwatson> anything else people think is being missed?
[16:43] <pitti> fine for me
[16:43] <cjwatson> http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/karmic/alpha2#Known%20issues only had one unfixed bug, which I put on the server team's agenda and have now release-targeted too (the likewise-open5 thing)
[16:43] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/karmic/alpha2#Known%20issues only had one unfixed bug, which I put on the server team's agenda and have now release-targeted too (the likewise-open5 thing)
[16:44] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] ISO size
[16:44] <MootBot> New Topic:  ISO size
[16:44] <pitti> I expect a3 to get more, with all the new crack we put in :)
[16:44] <cjwatson> mostly we're good here, but the DVD is HUMUNGOUSLY oversized
[16:44] <cjwatson> as in .5GB
[16:44] <pitti> well, desktop CDs are only within limit because they have 0 langpacks
[16:45] <cjwatson> mm, there's 8MB or so free on i386; but yes
[16:45] <pitti> the plan from my side is (1) split gnome help to langpacks (Julien says it should work in ~ 2 weeks)
[16:45] <cjwatson> oh, that's actually going to happen this LP cycle?
[16:45] <cjwatson> great
[16:45] <pitti> and (2) drop gimp help if we need more space
[16:45]  * artir suggest a LivePen by default \0/
[16:45] <cjwatson> that sounds like a good plan of record
[16:45] <pitti> we need more space for all the U1 stuff, empathy, couchdb, etc.
[16:46] <pitti> and of course some langpacks
[16:46] <cjwatson> artir: let's just say this has been discussed ad infinitum :)
[16:46] <pitti> so I guess gimp help is first against the wall (and 20 MB win)
[16:46] <artir> cjwatson: it'll happen! it's just matter of time :P
[16:46] <pitti> it falls back to online help with no effort
[16:46] <cjwatson> keeping within size is good for our users
[16:46] <pitti> and enforces a good and non-crufty design
[16:46] <cjwatson> it removes the temptation for bloat
[16:46] <artir> and what about replacing gimp with nathive...
[16:47] <cjwatson> which is ever-present
[16:47] <pitti> artir: -> ubuntu-devel-discuss@
[16:47] <pitti> any idea about the Kubuntu CDs?
[16:48] <cjwatson> in terms of size?
[16:48] <pitti> they seem to have plenty of size
[16:48] <pitti> (no langpacks right now)
[16:48] <cjwatson> they have oodles free, yes
[16:48] <pitti> I meant, are there plans for adding large new stuff?
[16:48] <cjwatson> oh, that I don't know
[16:48] <cjwatson> you would know better than I :)
[16:48] <pitti> ok, nevermind
[16:48] <cjwatson> want an action to check that up with Riddell?
[16:48] <pitti> I hoped rgreening or other Kubuntu folks would know
[16:49] <pitti> I'll ask him
[16:49] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] pitti to check with Riddell whether any Kubuntu ISO size events are in the offingg
[16:49] <MootBot> New Topic:  pitti to check with Riddell whether any Kubuntu ISO size events are in the offingg
[16:49] <cjwatson> whoops
[16:49] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] ISO size
[16:49] <MootBot> New Topic:  ISO size
[16:49] <cjwatson> [ACTION] pitti to check with Riddell whether any Kubuntu ISO size events are in the offing
[16:49] <MootBot> ACTION received:  pitti to check with Riddell whether any Kubuntu ISO size events are in the offing
[16:49] <cjwatson> the DVD seems to be oversized largely due to an enormous squashfs
[16:49] <pitti> so we need to unseed stuff?
[16:50] <cjwatson> so we may have to rethink the language-support policy there; this will be easier once language-support is reorged
[16:50] <pitti> so far we used to pretty much rename "supported" to "dvd"
[16:50] <cjwatson> well, no, supported has more than that, we split the dvd seed down a while back
[16:51] <cjwatson> [ACTION] cjwatson to investigate DVD size explosion
[16:51] <MootBot> ACTION received:  cjwatson to investigate DVD size explosion
[16:51] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] AOB
[16:51] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[16:53] <cjwatson> *tumbleweed*
[16:54] <cjwatson> ok, I guess we're done with the quietest release meeting ever, then :)
[16:54] <cjwatson> #endmeeting
[16:54] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:54.
[16:54] <pitti> thanks everyone
[21:56]  * Pricey waves
[21:56]  * jussi01 waves
[21:56] <Pricey> copycat
[21:57] <jussi01> hehe
[21:57]  * nalioth copycats
[21:57] <boredandblogging> hola
[21:57] <jussi01> Doing well so far...
[21:57] <elky> hai
[21:59] <jussi01> Just waiting on Pici now
[21:59] <Tm_T> jussi01: pikku pici
[21:59] <jussi01> *g*
[22:00] <nalioth> ok, folks. welcome to the meeting.
[22:00] <Tm_T> Conan, this, Conan, urrrgh, decisions
[22:00] <Pici> I'm here, but my connection is a bit flaky
[22:00]  * Tm_T shuts up
[22:00] <nalioth> elky, care to begin?
[22:01] <Pici> So I f I take a few monites to respond, thats why.
[22:01] <Pricey> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcTeam/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda
[22:01] <Pici> minutes even.
[22:03] <boredandblogging> do we want to use mootbot?
[22:03] <boredandblogging> not that I know how it works
[22:03] <Pricey> elky: Are you here? :)
[22:04] <elky> i am, yes
[22:05] <elky> well, as here as i can be at 7am on a saturday
[22:05] <Seeker`> Mootbot is great *cough*
[22:06] <Pricey> Top of the agenda is "Change description of the offtopic channels on https://help.ubuntu.com/community/InternetRelayChat to help dispel misconceptions that they are no-rules channels "
[22:06] <nalioth> elky: you have the first item on the agenda.  would you like to lead the discussion?
[22:08] <elky> um. some people are trying to use the current description of the offtopic channels in specific as an excuse to be foul and ignore the rules. if they could be changed to null this hurdle to common decency, it'd be great.
[22:08] <elky> nalioth's point covers this too, fwiw, so maybe we s hould merge the two
[22:08] <Pricey> I don't like that description, "where everything is on-topic"... it isn't...
[22:08] <Pricey> Has that always been there?
[22:09] <Flannel> Pricey: yes
[22:10] <elky> Pricey, yes, but misinterpreting/abusing it has become far more popular than it used to be
[22:10] <nalioth> ok, the 2nd item is to get rid of some obsolete channels.  #kubuntu-kde4 has been defunct for a couple of releases now
[22:11] <jussi01> nalioth: yeah, that is forwarded, no?
[22:11] <jussi01> that can definately be droppedd
[22:11] <nalioth> it doesn't need to be on the page
[22:11] <nalioth> forwarded or not
[22:11] <jussi01> Ahh, yes, I mustve forgotten to nix it, go ahead, no issues from me
[22:11] <nalioth> #ubuntu-powerpc is not an "official" channel, either (and i don't think it needs to be on the page)
[22:12] <Pricey> I don't think we need to go through every single channel on that list in this meeting?
[22:12] <elky> nalioth, is it used by people?
[22:12] <jussi01> I think its useful to be ther
[22:12] <Pricey> But yes, it would be useful for us to clean it up.
[22:12] <nalioth> as far as the -offtopic descriptions, they do NOT need to say "where anything is on topic"
[22:12] <nalioth> no, i just wanted to touch on those two in particular
[22:12] <Pricey> Yep, I really think that should change.
[22:12] <nalioth> not saying to get rid of the channels, just to remove their presence from the page
[22:13] <nalioth> so vote to remove #kubuntu-kde4 and #ubuntu-powerpc from the listing?
[22:13] <Pici> Is -powerpc defuct as well?
[22:13] <elky> can we please vote on those individually?
[22:14] <nalioth> sure.  vote to remove #kubuntu-kde4 from the page ?
[22:14] <elky> +1
[22:14] <Pici> +1
[22:14] <jussi01> +1
[22:14] <Pricey> +1
[22:14] <nalioth> there are 10 people in #ubuntu-powerpc.  vote to remove it's listing from the page?
[22:14] <jussi01> -1
[22:14] <Pricey> Is it still a community supported port?
[22:14] <jussi01> yes afaik
[22:15] <nalioth> yes, it is.
[22:15] <elky> -1
[22:15] <Pricey> -1 I say keep it then.
[22:15] <Pici> -1, its not hurting anything to keep it available.
[22:15] <jussi01> boredandblogging: you still here?
[22:16] <nalioth> we're not closing channels here - just removing them from https://help.ubuntu.com/community/InternetRelayChat
[22:16] <boredandblogging> sorry, desktop on karmic keeps restarting on me
[22:16] <jussi01> nalioth: I know, but I still think it should be there
[22:16] <jussi01> anyway, how about the wording?
[22:16] <nalioth> ok, keep #ubuntu-powerpc and remove #kubuntu-kde4.  on to the -offtopic wording
[22:16] <Pricey> jussi01: on the -offtopic's?
[22:17] <jussi01> Pricey: yeps
[22:17] <Pricey> "for non-support chatter"?
[22:17] <jussi01> sounds good to me
[22:17] <Tm_T> Pricey: sounds good
[22:17] <nalioth> as far as i'm concerned, NO #ubuntu-* is a 'general chat zone'
[22:17] <boredandblogging> thats good
[22:17] <nalioth> "for Ubuntu-related non-support chatter"
[22:17] <nalioth> otw, we're back to where we are now
[22:18] <Pricey> otw?
[22:18] <jussi01> nalioth: but you can talk non ubuntu related in there
[22:18] <nalioth> Pricey: otherwise
[22:18] <elky> Pricey, may i suggest a link to the guidelines somehow? it's the channel that requires the most frequent quoting of it
[22:18] <Pricey> elky: a link in that list?
[22:19] <jussi01> Maybe something referencing the CoC?
[22:19] <boredandblogging> maybe put the link right above the table?
[22:19] <elky> Pricey, yes, so they lose the logic of 'i didn't scroll down so i didn't read it and hence i should be exempt'
[22:19] <nalioth> it's already there. in the first paragraph
[22:20] <Pici> Would having a separate -offtopic wiki page be useful?
[22:20] <elky> nalioth, a reminder wont hurt. i want it to be painfully obvious
[22:20] <Pici> Sort of like #defocus has one?
[22:20] <nalioth> no, because we'd end up writing a book, Pici
[22:20] <Pricey> The guideliens are in #ubuntu-offtopic's /topic
[22:20] <Pricey> I think that's sufficient.
[22:20] <Pricey> Anywhere else is just handy.
[22:20] <elky> Pricey, nobody reads topics though
[22:20] <Pricey> Not our fault
[22:21] <Pricey> and really... all the guidelines are, are common decency, politeness and smiling
[22:21] <elky> Pricey, no, but it is our problem.
[22:21] <Pricey> there's nothing restrictive in there
[22:21] <Pricey> elky: the /topic is the first thing you get when you join a channel... if you don't read that... what else are you going to read?!
[22:21] <nalioth> yep.  nobody can say they didn't see it.
[22:21] <Pricey> Should we be getting ubottu to randomly insert !guidelines during the day?
[22:22] <nixternal> question: why are you guys voting to remove #kubuntu-kde4 w/o first checking with the Kubuntu crowd on if it is still being used or what not?
[22:22] <jussi01> nixternal: I am the channel contact
[22:23] <Pricey> nixternal: 21:22:48 -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Mode lock  : +imntf #kubuntu
[22:23] <Pricey> nixternal: It is well and truly closed.
[22:23] <nalioth> nixternal: #kubuntu-kde4 was being used 3 releases ago when kde4 was optional
[22:23] <elky> nixternal, we're not deleing the channel, just it's presence in a directory on a wiki page
[22:23] <nalioth> nixternal: kde4 is now mainstream and support is in #kubuntu
[22:24] <nixternal> gotcha, but from now on, please communicate with the respective project for voting on removing anything related to it
[22:24] <Pricey> its already closed?
[22:24] <elky> ...from our team wiki pages?
[22:24] <Tm_T> nixternal: I thought jussi01 covers that?
[22:24] <nalioth> Pricey: evidently since kde4 went mainstream
[22:24] <jussi01> nixternal: yes, of course, but as I said, Im the contact, and quite clear on the situation
[22:24] <Pricey> nixternal: There is no point in it being on our wiki page when the channel is closed? Do we really need to consult with anyone still?
[22:25] <nalioth> but yes, nixternal we're discussing https://help.ubuntu.com/community/InternetRelayChat
[22:25] <nixternal> that's fine, thought you were voting on removing the channel, didn't realize it was from a "team wiki page"
[22:25] <nalioth> nixternal: scrollback is wonderful  :)
[22:25] <nixternal> ya, I was looking at that the other day, it gave me a headache so I quit looking :)
[22:25] <elky> it gives us headaches too
[22:25] <nalioth> back to the wording of the -offtopic channel listings?
[22:25] <nixternal> nalioth: have better things to do than scroll back, just skimmed...i hate tasting the cool aid :p
[22:26] <Tm_T> -offtopic indeed needs explanation more than just "non-support"
[22:26] <jussi01> Ok, can we move on?
[22:26] <elky> Tm_T, do you have a suggestion?
[22:27] <nalioth> perhaps we can separate out the -offtopic channels and have an explantory lead-in paragraph ?
[22:27] <jussi01> nalioth: that is a very good idea, IMHO
[22:27] <Tm_T> elky: for quick thinking, "non-support chat around ubuntu and community" perhaps?
[22:27] <nalioth> one that covers them all
[22:27] <jussi01> I propose both nalioth's and Tm_T's suggestions!
[22:28] <elky> +1
[22:28] <nalioth> "non support chat involving Ubuntu and the community"
[22:28] <boredandblogging> nalioth: what would the lead in say besides following the CoC and guidelines?
[22:28] <Pricey> boredandblogging: 'besides...'?
[22:28] <nalioth> that there are no "free for all chat rooms" in the #ubuntu #kubuntu #xubuntu etc namespaces
[22:29] <boredandblogging> is the lead in to reiterate to follow the CoC and guidelines?
[22:29] <nalioth> if you're not getting direct help in #ubuntu, you're asking "which music player is best on a Pentium II?" in #ubuntu-offtopic
[22:29] <nalioth> boredandblogging: that would be part of it
[22:30] <boredandblogging> ok, cool
[22:30] <elky> boredandblogging, it'd be nice to explain what 'non-support' means
[22:30] <jussi01> and add a Use your common sense part... maybe?
[22:31] <Tm_T> jussi01: problem, trolls can claim "this is my common sense" ? ):
[22:31] <Pici> I've found that even asking that #ubuntu-offtopic is not a support channel isn't even enough.  I've been constantly asking people to take their support questions (and answers) to #ubuntu lately.
[22:31] <elky> Tm_T, thanks, i was wondering how to phrase that :P
[22:32] <nalioth> Pici: that is a by-product of the current bug on LP, and I personally don't see any issues with providing help there
[22:33] <Tm_T> nalioth: well, as long as it's not the main support source for people
[22:33] <nalioth> of course not
[22:33] <Tm_T> in #k sometimes support questions leads to chit chat about it, which then (hopefully) continue in -ot
[22:34] <Pici> Aye, the same in #u+1
[22:34] <Tm_T> but chit chat can lead to support, so cannot be strict
[22:36] <jussi01> SO how are we going to do this, we need a lead in paragraph for the page, maybe we decide to take it to the ML and create something, bring it back next meeting?
[22:36] <elky> the participants tend to be able to differentiate between a continued discusson and someone coming in and announcing '#u ignored me so now i'm goign to ask here'
[22:36] <elky> (when they only waited in #u for like 30 seconds)
[22:37] <Tm_T> elky: aye, that could be the line of policy
[22:37] <nalioth> basically the lead-in paragraph needs to state two things:  "offtopic channels aren't a "free-for-all"" and "please follow the !CoC and !guidelines"
[22:38] <boredandblogging> then the question will be what isn't allowed
[22:38] <Tm_T> "offtopic is for chat involving ubuntu and community, support in #u, please follow ..."
[22:39] <elky> can we compose the exact text later?
[22:39] <nalioth> sure.
[22:40] <nalioth> right now, can we change the existing description to "community related non-support discussion" ?
[22:40] <jussi01> +1
[22:40] <elky> +1
[22:40] <Pici> +1 sounds good
[22:40] <Pricey> +1
[22:40] <boredandblogging> +1
[22:40] <jussi01> excellent
[22:40] <jussi01> nalioth: are you making these changes?
[22:40] <nalioth> ok, is jono around?
[22:41] <nalioth> jussi01: i will make the changes, yes
[22:41] <jussi01> :)
[22:41] <jussi01> Jono isnt around
[22:41] <Tm_T> nalioth: is not, gcds travel I guess
[22:41] <nalioth> anyone want to discuss item 3? Resolving the quantity of traffic in #ubuntu
[22:41] <Pricey> Is it really that bad?
[22:41] <nalioth> i don't think it is, no.
[22:42] <jussi01> I think the bug has gone the way it should, and people are looking into reviving /using -meta
[22:42] <Tm_T> not for everyone
[22:42] <nalioth> last call for item #3 discussion . . .
[22:42] <Pricey> Has anyone involved in that bug come here?
[22:42] <elky> Tm_T, the same people who find it too fast would probably find being turned into a number just as bad.
[22:42] <Tm_T> but yeah, I was about to say that maybe we old folks could push meta more to people who might benefit from it
[22:42] <Pricey> I think I put a comment on inviting people to...
[22:43] <Tm_T> elky: agree
[22:43] <Pricey> ugh there are some lovely things on there...
[22:43] <Pici> I don't think there are any other good solutions that don't involve trying to turn IRC into something its not.
[22:43] <Pricey> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/392799/comments/11
[22:44] <jussi01> Pricey: read through a bit
[22:44] <Pricey> kicking because you are idle? (because that will make it a quieter channel)
[22:44] <Tm_T> splitting is nogo, but meta can be useful, really
[22:44] <Pricey> jussi01: Yep, I got to the meta bit... but really?!
[22:44] <jussi01> Pricey: he does apologise later on
[22:45] <Pricey> #ubuntu-hu does that and I didn't like it. Asked the channel contact about it and I think they discussed it at a meeting. Might go see what they came to.
[22:45] <Pici> I thought #winehq did it for a while too
[22:45] <elky> it strikes me that the bot opping up and removing people would only add to the perception of traffic
[22:45] <Pici> I think it would just create a mess in -ops. People constantly coming in 'Why was I kicked??'
[22:46] <nalioth> lots of channels do it, it only creates more chaos
[22:46] <Pici> Or 'why was soandso kicked?'
[22:46] <nalioth> i vote we wait for jono and discuss this at the next meeting
[22:46] <jussi01> yeah, and not to mention those ops trying to idle there...
[22:47] <elky> nalioth, yes, it'd be good to watch and see where the 'bug' ends up
[22:47] <Pricey> I would love to see people putting their cases to us for discussion.
[22:47] <Pici> I'd like to see more suggestions on fixing the issue
[22:47] <nalioth> imho, "auto kick on idle" is NOT any kind of option
[22:47] <Pici> I agree.
[22:47] <jussi01> yes, thats the main issue for me also, I want people involved to be at the meeting telling us why.
[22:47] <jussi01> nalioth: +1 on that
[22:48] <nalioth> Pici: the mailing list awaits.  again, we can use the mailing list to get the word out to everyone interested of the next meeting
[22:48] <Pricey> (if it is an issue)
[22:49] <elky> ok, so let's leave this for now and move to item 4
[22:49] <jussi01> ok,  thats mine
[22:49] <nalioth> jussi01: please enlighten us of item 4
[22:49] <Pici> I'm fine with that
[22:51] <jussi01> We have talked about previously the need to clarify the correct procedure to get +v in #ubuntu-ops - AFAIK it was that you were part of the IRC team, although that has not been followed strictly. So how does it work and if not the IRC team, what is its function?
[22:52] <elky> jussi01, i was initially under the impression it was supposed to be for the people that someone would go there to talk to.
[22:53] <jussi01> Well the thing is we need to define the correct procedure, and stick to it.
[22:54] <nalioth> i would think the +v'd folks in -ops would be from the channels -ops services, and the +v'd folks in -irc would be the ops from the channels -irc services
[22:55] <jussi01> nalioth: that is what I would think also
[22:55] <jussi01> can we write it down somewhere?
[22:55] <Pricey> You lose me.
[22:55] <Pricey> Oh wait no, back with you.
[22:56] <jussi01> Pricey: WB :D
[22:56] <Pricey> i don't think that's clear enough
[22:57] <Pricey> does #kubuntu come under -ops?
[22:57] <jussi01> yes
[22:57] <elky> yes
[22:57] <Pici> yes
[22:57] <Seeker`> yes
[22:57] <Pricey> #xubunt?
[22:57] <elky> they could if they wished to cooperate
[22:57] <jussi01> it should, but thats a whole other matter altogether
[22:57] <Pici> jussi01: +1
[22:57] <Pricey> As far as I'm concerned, it does as much as #kubuntu.
[22:58] <elky> Pricey, except #kubuntu* cooperates with the ops team.
[22:58] <nalioth> #xubuntu is served by -ops, whether they want the service or not
[22:58] <Pricey> Things need to be made clearer.
[22:59] <jussi01> Pricey: EXACTLY, which is why I want this written down somewhere
[22:59] <Pici> The loco teams get -irc, the team main and team channels get -ops
[22:59] <Pricey> jussi01: just saying that "+v'd folks in -ops would be from the channels -ops services" isn't anywhere near it
[22:59] <elky> Pici, s/loco/team channels/
[23:00] <jussi01> Pricey: we would also need to define which channels they are
[23:00] <nalioth> jussi01: Pici got it
[23:01] <Pici> I just mangled my words a bit.
[23:01] <Pricey> I don't understand it?
[23:01] <nalioth> primary and team channels are served by -ops.  loco teams get -irc
[23:01] <elky> can we have a more solidified proposal for next meeting?
[23:01] <Pricey> nalioth: I don't agree with that.
[23:01] <jussi01> and what about channels that dont fit either of those?
[23:01] <Seeker`> jussi01: such as?
[23:02] <jussi01> Seeker`: #ubuntu-powerpc,  #ubuntu-podcast etc
[23:02] <Pricey> I see the split as being... we have a group of operators who manage a very small number of channels, <10. That is what -ops is for. (So talking ubuntu, kubuntu, xubuntu, offtopics, +1, meeting, etc.)
[23:02] <Pricey> Everything else, goes into -irc.
[23:02] <Seeker`> I say -powerpc, -podcast are closer to loco channels than main channels
[23:02] <Pricey> -ops is where we run that small number of main channels, probably quite concentrated on bans etc.
[23:03] <Pricey> -irc is for general ubuntu irc things
[23:03] <jussi01> Pricey: how does that follow with loco's that have their own -ops channels?
[23:03] <Pricey> jussi01: i don't think it conflicts
[23:03] <jussi01> and where does #ubuntuforums fit in?
[23:03] <nalioth> you guys are forgetting that some #ubuntu-* channels are not "official" but are just there
[23:03] <Pricey> i don't think the initial idea for -irc was a broader scoped -ops, it was for operators to mingle
[23:04] <Pricey> nalioth: and as long as they abide by the guidelines, they can manage themselves?
[23:04] <nalioth> the vast majority of "official team channels" do manage themselves
[23:04] <nalioth> but that doesn't mean that -ops doesn't serve them
[23:05] <Pricey> ah right
[23:05] <jussi01> nalioth: thats a good point
[23:05] <Pricey> -ops in general doesn't serve them through 'access' etc. though does it?
[23:05] <Pricey> its either help solving a problem, or a GC?
[23:06] <nalioth> we have had "troll alerts" in -ops before
[23:08] <jussi01> boredandblogging: Ive not seen any input from you yet...?
[23:09] <Pricey> I think it is best we differentiate between the tasks performed by someone with flag +o in a channel like #ubuntu, and the way we serve other channels.
[23:09] <Pricey> I think it gets confusing too often.
[23:09] <elky> i'm confused as to what i'm inputting on. i'd much rather this be solidified into a proposal on the wiki or something first
[23:09] <nalioth> yes, i think it needs to be written up as well and not hashed about here
[23:09] <Pricey> Does anyone really have a proposal?
[23:11] <Pricey> I think that one of the things we could try and target with sorting out -ops and +v, is the way people see us as wanting to try to take over their channels.
[23:12] <nalioth> jussi01: would you care to write something up?
[23:12] <jussi01> Pricey: yes, I agree.
[23:12] <Pici> I'm not sure I understood that Pricey
[23:12] <nalioth> Pici: some channels/teams in the #ubuntu namespace do not want anything to do with the council because they are under the impression we'd "take over and run their channel"
[23:13] <elky> i'll rephrase, can we get something put into writing by next meeting so it's possible to follow what is being proposed?
[23:13] <Pricey> Pici: if we clarify #ubuntu-ops, what hte people in there do... we won't get scaremongering at team meetings telling councils we're going to take over their channels.
[23:13] <nalioth> jussi01: can you start a gobby doc or something on this?
[23:13] <Pici> Okay
[23:14] <jussi01> nalioth: If someone else can host it for now, can you pop something up on your gobby elky?
[23:15] <Pricey> I don't think we've had any real proposals?
[23:15] <nalioth> ok, jussi01 is going to write a proposal, and put it somewhere for perusal before the next meeting - where we'll discuss it
[23:15] <jussi01> Well the idea wasnt that we had a real proposal, it was that we needed to discuss the subject I put up...
[23:16] <elky> jussi01, i'm not opening my gobby up to the entire ops team though. what's wrong with a wiki page?
[23:16] <Pricey> We could at least throw some quick proposals around here now, while we're here, meeting?
[23:16] <jussi01> exactly my point Pricey :)
[23:16] <nalioth> Pricey: we're running over.
[23:17] <Pici> I think a wiki page would work fine for this, we don't need gobby since we aren't going to be modifying this real-time together
[23:17] <nalioth> jussi01: please let us know where you post your document.
[23:17] <nalioth> any other input?
[23:19] <jussi01> OK, well that looks like end of meeting to me.
[23:19] <Pici> Aye
[23:19] <nalioth> ok, everybody take care.  see you next time.
[23:19] <elky> cyas
[23:20] <jussi01> nini
[23:20] <Pici> tata