=== asac_ is now known as asac === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === cjwatson_ is now known as cjwatson === Zic is now known as Guest45626 === Guest45626 is now known as Zic === ShadowChild is now known as lukjad007 [10:36] I'm here, may be a few minutes late to swtch over at the right time [10:36] lifeless, hello [10:37] hi [10:37] for reapplying as ubuntu member this is the channel to attend the meet.. Am I right? [10:38] this is the channel membership board meetings are held in yes [10:38] if you were a member but let it lapse I think you can just reactivate it over the web [10:38] okay [10:39] lifeless, mine is another 3 months down for lapsing but since I have holidays now I have reapplied [10:40] after a week from now college term starts and I ll be occupied [10:40] :) [10:43] you dont need to re-attend a meeting coolbhavi [10:43] popey, then? reactivation? [10:44] just re-activiate your own account [10:44] launchpad will email you when it's about to run out i think [10:45] popey, just like a team wherein members are invited to activate themselves after the period gets over [10:45] yes [10:45] am I getting it right? [10:45] okay thanks [10:45] :) [10:46] then I ll remove my name [10:46] off the wiki [10:59] * persia peers about [11:00] hai [11:00] Hi all. [11:01] So, without coolbhavi, do we have anything else on the agenda? [11:02] persia: I was invited here, not sure if it is [11:03] Excellent. That's an item then. [11:03] we would do best to wait for elky to say something and amachu to appear though. [11:11] hi [11:12] Hey amachu. [11:12] ten minutes gone [11:13] TheMuso: Hi [11:14] persia: elky: Hi [11:14] amachu, Hey. So the agenda is empty, but you invited freeflying. [11:15] and lifeless: Hey [11:17] persia: I had invited him for last meeting, and I couldn't turn out for, posted a reminder to him [11:19] freeflying is ZhengPengHou? [11:19] amachu: yes [11:20] freeflying: Welcome! [11:20] amachu: thanks [11:21] freeflying: were you available for last meeting? [11:22] Afaicr he was here. [11:22] Indeed, although quiet. [11:23] hi amachu [11:23] persia: Yes, I didn't add that to agenda, but had mentioned in the reminder sent to the list last time [11:23] lifeless: Yes. [11:24] persia: so shall take up this meet to take his consent to be part of the team? [11:24] persia: elky: lifeless: What do you all feel? [11:24] Sure, if we're doing it in a meeting. [11:24] I have no thoughts/feelings one way or another. I haven't really seen what he has been up to in the community. [11:25] elky: are you there? [11:25] persia: I hope this doesn't need a quorum and majority here :-) [11:26] freeflying: We would like to take your consent to be part of Asia Oceania Membership Board. [11:26] I second persia's nomination in this regard [11:27] amachu: its my pleasure [11:27] lifeless: elky: opinions? [11:27] hey this has been pending for a long time.. [11:28] freeflying: great! [11:28] persia: comments? [11:28] None not already expressed. [11:28] Note that I'm not sure we are authorised to extend ourselves. Our role may be to send a recommendation to the CC. [11:29] persia: I hope we took that to CC way back, and got it approved for a 2+ [11:31] amachu, Approved to grow, yes. Approved to decide who is approved, I'm not sure. [11:31] I don't say we aren't, just that I'm not sure. [11:32] I'm for increasing the board size [11:32] and the primary thing board members need, IMO, is the ability to understand the requirements we're looking for and assess candidates [11:33] I have no idea whether freeflying has this or not :) [11:33] How do we determine that? [11:33] no idea [11:33] I hope CC will nod. I will put it to CCs and freeflying's willingness [11:35] persia: Now that freeflying has agreed, I feel we will refer it to CC and recommend his inclusion [11:36] Will that be fine? [11:36] works for me [11:36] Fine by me [11:36] Thanks [11:37] freeflying: thanks for nodding to be part of the Team. We will keep you updated on CCs decision. [11:37] amachu: np :), I will be delight to take this kind of reponsebility [11:38] OK. Do we have anything else to discuss? [11:38] freeflying: thank you for turning out today. [11:38] I don't [11:38] I don't have any [11:38] lifeless: ? [11:38] sorry all. only just got home [11:38] nope === ian_brasil-afk is now known as ian_brasil [11:39] hi freeflying :) [11:40] Shall we adjourn, unless elky has anything? [11:41] elky: Do you have something to say? [11:42] elky: hi [11:42] persia, i'm trying to catch up on 2 concurrent meetings. did we vote on something? [11:43] elky, Two items came up for discussion, and were agreed by consensus. 1: we'll refer freeflying to the CC as a candidate for this board, and 2: we're done. [11:43] persia, yay for first. yay for second :) [11:44] * persia goes off in search of food [11:44] Have a good evening all. [11:47] freeflying Thanks for joining and thank you everyone for participating [11:47] bye bye [11:48] amachu: np, have a nice night === fader|away is now known as fader_ === ember_ is now known as ember [14:03] Right, so let's start this thing [14:03] #startmeeting [14:03] Meeting started at 08:03. The chair is StevenK. [14:03] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [14:03] * ogra wouldnt mind if we skipped actually, was there even an announcement ? [14:04] i cant remember seeing one [14:04] Yeah, I can't either. [14:04] We'll be having the usual IRC meeting on #ubuntu-meeting, on [14:04] Tueday 2009-07-21 at the new time 13:00 UTC. [14:04] that was back on the 17th [14:04] thats the last one NCommander sent out [14:04] right [14:04] [vote] Skip the meeting [14:04] Please vote on: Skip the meeting. [14:04] 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 [14:04] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [14:04] * StevenK grins [14:05] ha [14:05] +1 [14:05] +1 received from ogra. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [14:05] +1 [14:05] +1 received from StevenK. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [14:05] +0 [14:05] Abstention received from paulliu. 2 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 2 [14:05] davidm, ? [14:05] 1 [14:05] +1 [14:05] +1 received from davidm. 3 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 3 [14:05] +0 [14:05] Abstention received from bjf. 3 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 3 [14:05] +0 [14:05] Abstention received from plars. 3 for, 0 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now 3 [14:05] dyfet, you need to add a plus [14:05] +1 [14:05] +1 received from dyfet. 4 for, 0 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now 4 [14:05] #endvote [14:05] Hm [14:06] [endvote] [14:06] Oh, right [14:06] [endvote] [14:06] Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 3 abstained. Total: 4 [14:06] Right, so it seems we skip the meeting. :-) [14:07] * ogra applauds [14:07] so much democracy in this team :) [14:07] #endmeeting [14:07] Meeting finished at 08:07. === vorian is now known as LadiesMan217 === LadiesMan217 is now known as vorian [15:01] cjwatson,Keybuk,sabdfl: ping [15:03] #startmeeting [15:03] Meeting started at 09:03. The chair is mdz. [15:03] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [15:04] I haven't been able to reach cjwatson or Keybuk yet [15:05] a lot on the agenda [15:05] Colin is at DebConf, but I thought he would still be here [15:07] Colin's phone rings to voicemail [15:07] hello [15:07] sorry, I was engrossed in something else [15:07] Keybuk texted me to say he'd miss the start [15:08] cjwatson: oh, hi [15:08] * Keybuk is here now too [15:08] perfect [15:08] was busy with multiarch impl details :) [15:08] randa called me as I was logging in [15:08] Keybuk: did you record any actions from the previous meeting? [15:09] let's skip my archive reorg item this week, I've done nothing due to alpha-3 feature work and then debconf [15:09] mdz: I do not recall ACTION items, reading the notes now [15:09] oh, yes there were [15:09] ok, we'll go ahead with the agenda then [15:09] Colin was to set up interviews with developers [15:09] Keybuk: oh, ok. please paste [15:09] Jono was to provide another draft of the patent policy [15:09] You were to review the seed lists Colin posted [15:09] I did that [15:10] interviews> I suck. I'm going to do that during the sprint [15:10] Keybuk, I have updated it [15:10] mdz: oh, did you send mail about that? I must have missed it [15:11] never mind, found it now [15:11] Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:14:04 +0100 [15:11] From: Matt Zimmerman [15:11] To: Colin Watson [15:11] Subject: Re: Initial package sets for archive reorganisation [15:11] it's very tricky to extract the gnome stuff automatically, but I'll see what I can do [15:12] jono: I'm having trouble tracking down that patent policy draft, did you send something to t-b@ about it? [15:12] jono: I looked for it last week to review before the meeting, but didn't see it [15:12] mdz, no, I updated the wiki page [15:13] and I emailed the TB about it [15:13] jono: I didn't see a mail, and therefore have not read it [15:14] I've just scanned the changes, and they look fine [15:14] I'm pretty sure I acked the previous draft [15:14] jono: have you kept track of who has reviewed it so far? [15:15] mdz, I sent it on the 20th [15:15] mdz, yes I merged in changes from you and cjwatson [15:15] cjwatson: Keybuk: sabdfl: have any of you reviewed the latest draft? [15:15] I reviewed it and replied [15:15] (21 July 10:16am) [15:15] Keybuk: the 20 July version? [15:16] I have not [15:16] ... but I have now and I'm happy with the changes [15:16] sabdfl: ? [15:16] Keybuk: weird, I don't seem to have your mail either [15:16] (https://wiki.canonical.com/UbuntuPlatform/Community/Development/PatentPolicy?action=diff&rev2=5&rev1=4) [15:16] i was basically happy with the earlier version and haven't looked at the updated one [15:16] I have Keybuk's mail [15:17] sabdfl: do you want to give your blessing to the latest draft or do you need time to review it? [15:18] looks fine to me now [15:19] ok, shall we vote on it then? [15:19] can do [15:19] [VOTE] Accept the patent policy drafted by Jono as an official TB policy [15:19] Please vote on: Accept the patent policy drafted by Jono as an official TB policy. [15:19] 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 [15:19] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [15:20] +1 [15:20] +1 received from cjwatson. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [15:20] +1 [15:20] +1 received from mdz. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:20] sabdfl: Keybuk: ? [15:20] +1 [15:20] +1 received from Keybuk. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [15:21] sorry, was checking for sneaky changes ;) [15:21] +1 [15:21] +1 received from sabdfl. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:21] #endvote [15:21] [ENDVOTE] [15:21] Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 4 [15:21] [ACTION] Matt to communicate the new patent policy [15:21] ACTION received: Matt to communicate the new patent policy [15:21] [TOPIC] Nomination period ends for TB election [15:21] New Topic: Nomination period ends for TB election [15:21] Keybuk: you seem to be most on top of this [15:21] mdz, if you need any help with communicating it, let me know, happy to help [15:22] right, we have received a number of nominations [15:22] I've seen 4 nominations come in to the TB list [15:22] some from the candidates themselves [15:22] and some indirectly [15:22] jono: thanks [15:22] our next step should be to contact those individuals to see if they wish to stand [15:22] we've had 5 nominations, by my count [15:22] cjwatson: the extra one you've seen, was that just sent to you? [15:22] cjwatson: ah, there was a new one I hadn't read yet [15:23] Keybuk: no, it was sent to TB [15:23] oh, no, I'd read that one too [15:23] oh, I forgot to count myself, so 6 [15:23] 6? [15:23] oh, I missed one too [15:23] Keybuk: do you want to do that, or shall I? [15:23] can we name names before the people have agreed to stand? [15:23] let's make sure we have the right set of people [15:23] cjwatson: I think we probably shouldn't [15:24] is the list still private [15:24] ? [15:24] ok, I see one person who was nominated twice [15:24] which may account for the discrepancy [15:24] cjwatson: right, I have 6 nominations, 5 unique names [15:24] sabdfl: yes [15:24] sabdfl: until we actually confirm with people who have been nominated that they wish to stand, I would say it should be private for now [15:24] and confirm with you that you would accept their appointment if they were voted in, obviously ;-) [15:25] I find it disappointing that we have no non-Canonical nominations [15:25] I've just PMed the list to all of you to confirm [15:25] confirmed [15:25] Keybuk: ok, I'll do it [15:25] mdz: oops, missed that [15:25] [ACTION] Matt to contact TB nominees to confirm they wish to stand [15:25] ACTION received: Matt to contact TB nominees to confirm they wish to stand [15:25] yes, I think it's appropriate for you to do that [15:26] [TOPIC] Developer application board (ScottJamesRemnant) [15:26] New Topic: Developer application board (ScottJamesRemnant) [15:26] the feedback from the MOTU Council and CC was positive [15:26] we seemed to agree on the name Developer Membership Board [15:26] I see no reason not to go ahead with this if everybody is in agreement [15:26] I thought it was Membership Council [15:26] mdz: Board in your mail of 17 July [15:26] I heard board [15:26] but if it's Board...whatever I agreed to in email [15:26] but I really don't care :) [15:26] whatever all of the others are called [15:27] I kinda deliberately put Board in originally to reflect it was a TB-derived power not CC [15:27] Board would be consistent with the CC's membership delegation [15:27] Board it is [15:27] I'm happy to take the ACTION to enact the LP changes and send out the announcements [15:27] (and arrange mailing list changes, etc.) [15:27] Keybuk: we already voted on this, right? [15:28] or do we need to do that still? [15:28] we did [15:28] Keybuk: I couldn't find the vote, but I'll trust you on it [15:28] so what's the next step to putting it into practice? [15:28] we agreed the text and content on the ML [15:28] we didn't have an IRC vote [15:29] the next step is to put it into practice [15:29] an LP team needs creating [15:29] that team should become the admin of ubuntu-core-dev and ubuntu-dev replacing TB [15:29] with TB as an admin of that team [15:29] membership of that team should be set up [15:29] a Mailing List for the team should be set up [15:29] and some magic waved to make the TB mailing list public from now on, without opening up the current archives [15:29] Keybuk: documentation updates? [15:29] but specifically not admin of motu, presumably [15:30] processes/newmember or whatever, probably [15:30] mdz: right, I'll hunt those down too [15:30] cjwatson: indeed [15:30] and also the MOTU wiki documentation [15:30] jono: could your team help with that? [15:30] since that's motu-council right now IIRC [15:30] (sorry, my network connection is a bit slow right now) [15:30] Keybuk: so will you take the action to do the necessary setup in LP etc.? [15:30] sorry just reading up, was sending a few mails [15:30] oh, the TB is a co-administrator of motu together with motu-council [15:31] so I suggest that the DMB should also replace the TB as co-admin of motu [15:31] [ACTION] Scott to implement Developer Membership Board proposal (LP, mailing list, documentation, etc.) [15:31] ACTION received: Scott to implement Developer Membership Board proposal (LP, mailing list, documentation, etc.) [15:31] cjwatson: Just to be clear, even though they will be a co-admin, the MC will still continue to handle MOTU applications [15:31] correct [15:31] mdz, yes, we can help with that [15:32] hi nhandler :) [15:32] nhandler: yes [15:32] [ACTION] Jono to see that documentation is updated to reflect the Developer Membership Board [15:32] ACTION received: Jono to see that documentation is updated to reflect the Developer Membership Board [15:32] anything else on the DMB topic? [15:33] [TOPIC] patent policy [15:33] New Topic: patent policy [15:33] already covered above, including vote [15:33] [TOPIC] # [15:33] Technical Board governance review (JonoBacon) - Outstanding Issues documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/JauntyAssessment [15:33] New Topic: # [15:33] [TOPIC] Technical Board governance review (JonoBacon) - Outstanding Issues documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/JauntyAssessment [15:33] New Topic: Technical Board governance review (JonoBacon) - Outstanding Issues documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/JauntyAssessment === nhandler changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs and [15:33] let's just go through these one by one [15:33] we may be able to tend to these issues on the mailing list [15:34] [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/JauntyAssessment [15:34] LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/JauntyAssessment [15:34] first is updating http://www.ubuntu.com/community/processes/techboard [15:34] somebody just needs to take an action to fix this up [15:34] so far, I have 2 actions, scott has 1, colin has 1 (carried over), jono has 1 [15:34] where do we stand on the expansion of the TB? [15:35] I have had absolutely no luck getting /community/processes/techboard fixed in the past [15:35] the action needs to be newz2000's :P [15:35] sabdfl: nominations received, mdz will contact them to confirm they wish to stand [15:35] we'll then present the list to you [15:35] i get that part ;-) [15:35] we have exactly five nominations for five seats [15:35] you acknowledge them/don't [15:35] and then at the next TB meeting, voting opens for the seats [15:35] do we still want to open five seats? [15:35] and lasts for two weeks [15:35] but i'm concerned that 5 nominations doesn't leave much room for a race and larger TB [15:35] sabdfl,cjwatson: it was 6 seats [15:35] sabdfl, agreed [15:35] or call for nominations again, more forcefully? [15:35] oh, sorry, 5 open seats [15:36] yes, the mail says 5 open [15:36] would it be possible for us to have seven nominations? [15:36] I though it was 4 open seats? [15:36] jono: there is no limit to the number of nominations; we can accept as many as we receive [15:36] jono: we don't *have* seven people to nominate ;) [15:36] I'd really like to have some non-Canonical nominations, and actually wanted to go through core-dev list and nominate some myself, but ran out of time ... [15:36] jono: we simply haven't received very many [15:36] Keybuk, thats what I figured [15:36] If the nomination period was to be extended, I'd like to nominate a non-canonical person.. [15:37] perhaps the members of the TB would like to put forward more nominees [15:37] popey: if you'd like to send it to technical-board@ *really* quickly* [15:37] so we should agree on some points [15:37] done cjwatson [15:37] - how many seats are open? [15:37] gah, bounced [15:37] - who is retaining their seat? [15:38] me! [15:38] and colin [15:38] sabdfl: then that reduces us to 3 open seats [15:38] with 5 nominations [15:38] that's not too bad, then [15:39] err, four open seats, not 3 [15:39] cjwatson: I count 3 [15:39] did we extend an invitation to all core-dev folks? [15:39] no? [15:39] the mail says we wanted to expand to six members total [15:39] as in, email them? [15:39] sabdfl, me, +4 [15:39] cjwatson: sent [15:39] oh, I had 5 in my head [15:39] sabdfl: my understanding from the previous meeting was that you were nominating yourself for re-election [15:39] yes, I remembered that too ... [15:39] i can do that too [15:39] like Scott and I are [15:40] sure [15:40] so 6 seats total minus colin = 5 open seats [15:40] oh, you didn't say actually, that explains the confusion [15:40] I think the discussion went just past the end of the meeting slot [15:41] Keybuk: I think we're clear on those two points. anything else? [15:41] nope, sounds like we're clear [15:41] so the only matter is that we'd like to have more nominations [15:41] I suggest that the TB try to think of some, rather than just extending the nomination period and hoping for more [15:41] mdz, I am wondering if all the possible people who could be suitable for the TB know about the election [15:42] jono: I mailed ubuntu-devel-announce ;) [15:42] which is why I was wondering if we should email all core-dev developers directly [15:42] jono: it was on -devel-announce, on planet ubuntu, in UWN... [15:42] we also don't know what the dynamic will be now that developer membership is being delegated [15:42] hopefully, the TB becomes more tech-oriented than team-oriented [15:42] a smaller group may be fine for that [15:42] that's the plan :-) [15:42] jono: I think it's more likely that people are too shy/modest/busy to nominate themselves, which is why I think the TB should come up with a couple [15:42] so, we could roll with what we have and see how it goes [15:42] Keybuk, sure but I suspect many people miss announcements on -devel-announce [15:42] right [15:43] jono: I think that developers missing announcements on the developer announcements mailing list are unlikely to be suitable for the TB [15:43] if we have 5 seats and a Debian representative, that's quite large already [15:43] sabdfl: 6 and a Debian representative [15:43] 6 requires more nominations, 5 doesn't [15:43] ok, fair point [15:43] Keybuk, I mainly think that because the announcement list gets updated infrequently and many people will filter it to a folder, so may never see the updated [15:44] updates [15:44]