[11:03] <sabdfl> hello all
[11:03] <czajkowski> sabdfl: morning
[11:03] <popey> o/
[11:04] <sabdfl> do we have all the wiki licensing folks?
[11:04] <sabdfl> dholbach: can you lead this one, or do we need mdke?
[11:05] <sabdfl> unfortunately i have another meeting on the half-hour
[11:07] <popey> seems a bit quiet
[11:07] <sabdfl> indeed
[11:07] <sabdfl> popey: let's move onto your items
[11:07] <popey> ok
[11:07] <popey> so sounder...
[11:07] <popey> General consensus in the CC seems to be shut it down.
[11:08] <dholbach> sorry, I'm late
[11:08] <popey> But there seems to be some merit in it being around as a discussion forum but one that needs to be somewhat more respectful.
[11:08] <dholbach> sabdfl: let's defer the wiki until we have mdke here
[11:09] <sabdfl> i'd be sad to shut it down
[11:09] <sabdfl> but i don't read it, so wouldn't miss it
[11:09] <sabdfl> has it continued to be a mess?
[11:09] <dholbach> I don't think we ever actively moderated threads on mailing lists before, but it seems to be the only solution at times on ubuntu-users@ and sounder@
[11:09] <popey> there's been some kickback from the regulars on sounder
[11:10] <popey> some protesting that they believe it should still be around and should still have the free speech ethos
[11:10] <popey> I don't know how many subscribers there are on sounder
[11:10] <popey> i suspect only mako and elmo know this as they're the admins of the list
[11:11] <sabdfl> me neither, but i don't think "free speech ethos" should trump "quality conversation and tone"
[11:11] <popey> so don't know if there's a vocal minority, or if in fact they are the vocal _majority_
[11:11] <popey> agreed
[11:11] <dholbach> sabdfl: +1
[11:11] <popey> there was some kickback that we'd turn it into a far too clean and clinical place
[11:11] <popey> where people feel they can't be free to talk
[11:12] <popey> for example there seems to be a "take it to sounder" mentality when things get out of control on other lists
[11:12] <dholbach> my feeling is that it has turned from a chitchat mailing list to a forum for people to regularly misbehave
[11:12] <ghostcube> if i allowed to say anything i would moderate the list, iam on the ccc discussion list in germany and this one isnt moderated, the garbage comeing into mail in folders is to heavy so there wont be a working discussion sometimes
[11:13] <ghostcube> maybe its the same here
[11:13] <popey> there is also a bit of a limit to what we can do in terms of moderation with mailman
[11:13] <popey> its "set the moderate bit" or "ban"
[11:13] <sabdfl> ghostcube: most like moderation, few like moderating
[11:13] <ghostcube> ah ok :)
[11:14] <popey> there do seem to be a diminishing number of people actually using sounder
[11:14] <dholbach> how would you feel about more moderators and n+1 strike model for being moderated for a few weeks? I know that it sounds heavy but it would probably solve the problem :)
[11:14] <popey> as is the case with many Linux based community lists IME
[11:14] <dholbach> elmo says there's 438 subscribers on sounder@
[11:14] <popey> ok, thats not many
[11:14] <popey> the UK LoCo list has more than that
[11:14] <popey> ~650
[11:15] <dholbach> I don't think it's as actively advertised as other lists
[11:15] <sabdfl> what is n+1 strike?
[11:15] <dholbach> probably because of its unclear focus :)
[11:15] <popey> fair point
[11:15] <ghostcube> sabdfl: not using correct speach or atitudes so after n+1 he gets striekd out ?
[11:16] <ghostcube> like saying 2 times stfu you will be kicked ?
[11:16] <dholbach> sabdfl: n+1 was just a random number, but I was envisioning some kind of "3 strikes model" where you'd tell somebody to watch their tone 3 times and mention the  consequences (moderation for a few weeks), and then do it if doesn't help
[11:16] <dholbach> ghostcube: I don't think that's the language we'd use there :)
[11:16] <ghostcube> dholbach: nah just en example
[11:16] <ghostcube> :D
[11:16] <popey> i suspect some of the "worst offenders" would quit in protest
[11:17] <elky> and we will bring out the tiny violins.
[11:17] <popey> well, indeed
[11:17] <elky> I stopped reading it years ago when it became a place-to-link-any-blog-post-ever-that-dissed-ubuntu slash FUDfest. I'd be surprised if there really are 438 people who actually care about it.
[11:18] <ghostcube> what is the aim of the sounder list by default guys ?
[11:18] <ghostcube> official mailing list free for all users to claim anything ?
[11:19] <popey> "Anything goes Ubuntu community chit-chat and discussion list"
[11:19] <popey> from https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder
[11:19] <popey> which is fundamentally wrong IMO
[11:19]  * elky winces at the "anything goes" terminology
[11:19] <dholbach> I personally don't think it'd be surprising to receive an email that tells me "could you please rephrase your last paragraph a bit" if I fly off the handle in a mailing list post
[11:19] <sabdfl> that was fine back in the day, when Ubuntu was tiny
[11:19] <ghostcube> oha long long ago
[11:19] <ghostcube> :D
[11:19] <maco> sounds like its like the Forums' Backyard (which is gone now) than the Community Cafe (which is how i guess it was intended?)
[11:20] <popey> The problem with mailing lists is once someone has said something, it's in the archive forever, unless someone has the time/patience to scrub it out
[11:20] <popey> with forums, posts can be redacted fairly easily
[11:20]  * maco shoves the word "more" into that sentence
[11:20] <maco> thats true
[11:20] <popey> so the "can you rephrase that" either becomes public in which case you get others jumping on the thread making it worse..
[11:20] <dholbach> does anybody have any other ideas about how to solve the problem?
[11:21] <sabdfl> in principle, it's supposed to be a "wise forum for setting the direction of Ubuntu"
[11:21]  * jussi01 has spotted only 3 CC members, do we have quorum or is this unofficial?
[11:21] <sabdfl> but i suspect most of the key folks in Ubuntu don't participate, so if we defined it that way, it would fail
[11:21] <popey> jussi01: we dont need quorum to discuss stuff :)
[11:21] <sabdfl> and worse, set a bad tone for "wise words in Ubuntu land"
[11:21] <maco> ping me if pleia2 needs to be woken. its not a long distance call for me :)
[11:22] <cjwatson> has anyone seriously tried to "internally moderate" sounder (i.e. shift the culture to a more respectful tone, without technical means)?
[11:22] <sabdfl> i'm leaning towards closing it down
[11:22] <sabdfl> i don't see it playing a positive service, and moderation is work that could also be done elsewhere
[11:22] <elky> cjwatson, know any volunteers?
[11:22] <popey> It doesn't seem to serve much of a useful purpose
[11:22] <cjwatson> I haven't read it for a few months but it was OK when I last read it
[11:22] <sabdfl> or, work that could generate benefits elsewhere
[11:22] <cjwatson> and actually vaguely interesting at times
[11:22] <cjwatson> but the traffic was pretty low
[11:23] <cjwatson> elky: those who are objecting to its tone, presumably; I don't have context
[11:23] <sabdfl> we've sent a few "please moderate your tone here" emails to the list
[11:23] <sabdfl> but since none of us read it regularly...
[11:23] <popey> I do now :S
[11:23] <dholbach> that has changed in recent months: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/ (October 2009: "[ Gzip'd Text 275 KB ]")
[11:23] <cjwatson> I wonder if this is one of those cases where the damage done by closing it is more than the damage done by ignoring it :)
[11:23] <dholbach> admittedly that was a peak
[11:24] <popey> cjwatson: I'm not convinced there are enough people who really care if it's there or not
[11:24] <popey> a few vocal people, sure.
[11:24] <popey> e.g.
[11:24] <popey> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/2009-December/013568.html
[11:25] <jussi01> Does it not serve a purpose that it lets these people with very vocal items sound off somewhere and not on other lists? (isnt that the point of it?)
[11:25] <dholbach> I personally could very well live with it being closed down as it does not serve any purpose and lots of the more interesting posts that inform me of stuff that's going on somewhere else I read in blog posts or announces as well
[11:25] <dholbach> but that wouldn't solve the problem with ubuntu-users@
[11:26] <popey> ubuntu-users is probably easier to fix
[11:26] <popey> because it has a more well defined purpose
[11:26] <popey> dholbach: can you ask elmo how many are on -users?
[11:26] <elky> jussi01, i know some people who like to blow stuff up to vent, but i don't necessarily let them do it in my house or to my stuff. I dont see a reason why bad behaviour should be tolerated in a corner just to keep it out of the way.
[11:27] <sabdfl> popey: since you read it, do you sense that the tone could be improved just by remaining a positive force (i.e. publicly asking folks to tone it down when their language is unacceptable)?
[11:27] <popey> sabdfl: well, I've asked twice now to "be nice" and it's resulted in some massive wandering threads. I can't tell yet if people are actually "being nicer"
[11:27] <popey> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/2009-December/thread.html
[11:27] <cjwatson> popey: ubuntu-users' problem isn't purpose, it's that it's vast :)
[11:27] <popey> note the big "etiquette" thread
[11:28] <dholbach> sabdfl: at least popey, pleia2 and I sent mails there which resulted in even more discussion, parts of it about "does the CoC apply to me, I'm not an Ubuntu member", etc.
[11:28] <sabdfl> looks to me like a list that only exists because it existed
[11:28] <dholbach> popey: 4720
[11:28] <popey> wow
[11:29] <popey> would it be worthwhile asking the community what they want?
[11:29] <sabdfl> better to ask if they are willing to moderate it
[11:29] <sabdfl> they WANT everything :-)
[11:30] <popey> well, indeed, but I'm all out of spherical lunar devices atop thin wooden poles.
[11:30] <sabdfl> my vote is to close down sounders if we can't find folks to moderate it who are not already hugely committed, i.e. sounders leaders, not other folks who are already doing a huge amount
[11:31] <sabdfl> popey: will you chair the rest of the conversation?
[11:31] <popey> ok
[11:31] <dholbach> thanks sabdfl
[11:31] <sabdfl> i think we can make a recommendation in email to the rest of the CC on these two items, with the statement that we'll act on the recommendation in a week unless it's a problem for a majority of the CC
[11:31] <popey> ok
[11:31] <dholbach> sounds good to me
[11:32] <popey> We already have the code of conduct and a page describing mailing list etiquette..
[11:33] <dholbach> so the topics would be 1) some kind of moderation guidelines? 2) future of sounder? 3) which other mailing lists probably need some kind of guidance?
[11:33] <popey> ..we could mail both lists and ask for volunteers to moderate their lists
[11:33] <popey> Ok, so we come up with a simple set of guidelines on the wiki?
[11:34] <popey> Ask for contributions from the members of the list, or we construct that?
[11:34] <dholbach> I think it's good to have a basis for the discussion
[11:34] <popey> I fear design by committee
[11:34] <popey> ok, so we start with a framework
[11:34] <popey> and ask for contributions to it, and volunteers to implement it
[11:34]  * dholbach nods
[11:34] <popey> if we get no volunteers, sounder gets shutdown?
[11:35] <dholbach> to me that sounds reasonable
[11:35] <dholbach> we should go and see if the majority of the CC is behind that
[11:36] <popey> yes
[11:36] <popey> so, the same for -users?
[11:36] <dholbach> +1 :)
[11:36] <popey> hah
[11:36] <dholbach> I think that'd fall under 3) of the open questions I mentioned above :)
[11:36] <popey> given -users has 10x the number of users, and a massively higher signal:noise ratio, we would _suspect_ that there would be more people who might volunteer?
[11:37] <dholbach> yes, that's what I think too
[11:37] <popey> so we start with -sounder alone as the blueprint, and then roll to other lists, with -users being the likely 2nd one to hit?
[11:37] <elky> make sure you recommend that the unexpecting victims use a separate email address. :P
[11:37] <Pendulum> can I ask the obvious question of, what if the only volunteers are the ones causing the problems?
[11:38] <elky> Pendulum, then the moderation will fail.
[11:38] <Pendulum> (less likely on -users, but I could see it happening on -sounder)
[11:38] <dholbach> Pendulum: we can always redact the decision
[11:38] <Flare183> When does the Community Council meeting start?
[11:38] <popey> Flare183: 35 mins ago
[11:38] <elky> Flare183, half an hour ago
[11:38] <ghostcube> :D
[11:38] <ghostcube> http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar
[11:38] <ghostcube> o.o
[11:38] <Flare183> elky: Still going on?
[11:38] <popey> yes
[11:38] <elky> Flare183, indeed.
[11:38] <maco> you walked into it
[11:39] <Flare183> phew then then I didn't miss it
[11:39] <dholbach> is there anything that needs decision apart from that?
[11:39] <popey> don't think so
[11:39] <dholbach> awesome
[11:39] <popey> anyone else have any further comments?
[11:40]  * Flare183 would like to see if he can become a Ubuntu member
[11:40] <popey> Flare183: the cc doesn't do that anymore
[11:40] <popey> the regional membership boards do
[11:41] <popey> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Membership/RegionalBoards
[11:41] <maco> Flare183: found a year old wiki page somewhere?
[11:42] <popey> Ok, so action items:-
[11:42] <Flare183> oh
[11:42] <Flare183> :S
[11:42] <popey> * Develop guidelines for ubuntu mailing lists moderation
[11:42] <popey> * Run that past the CC
[11:42] <popey> * Run that past the community
[11:43] <popey> * Ask for volunteers on sounder to implement it
[11:43] <popey> * Look for other lists to implement it
[11:43] <popey> ??
[11:43] <dholbach> (* Make a decision about the future of sounder@?)
[11:43] <popey> should that go at the top?
[11:44] <dholbach> probably
[11:44] <popey> or should we look for moderators first?
[11:44] <popey> i.e. if we had a bunch of people willing to moderate, would that not remove the need to shut it down?
[11:44] <dholbach> although I think that having good guidelines will probably give more hope to the current situation and influence the decision :)
[11:44] <dholbach> yeah
[11:45] <jussi01> there is a little bit here: http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists/etiquette
[11:45] <dholbach> yeah, that needs fleshing out
[11:45] <popey> ok, so when we ask for volunteers, we say that if there are none, or they are not of sufficient quality then we will/may shut the list down?
[11:45] <cjwatson> for moderation: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelModeration may be worth comparing. (But ubuntu-devel doesn't have particularly significant social problems; the moderation issues there are simply making sure it's on-topic.)
[11:45] <dholbach> that'd be my proposal too, let's see if we can get majority
[11:46] <popey> (thats a specific sounder requirement, not of all lists)
[11:46] <dholbach> thanks cjwatson
[11:46] <popey> Ok, anything else?
[11:46] <dholbach> not from me
[11:46] <popey> Anyone else?
[11:47]  * dholbach will update the TeamReport
[11:47]  * popey will mail the cc with a summary
[11:47] <dholbach> thanks a bunch popey
[11:47] <popey> *hugs*
[11:47] <dholbach> yeehaw
[11:47] <dholbach> adjourned?
[11:48] <popey> unless anyone has any other business for us..
[11:48] <popey> 5
[11:48] <popey> 4
[11:48] <popey> 3
[11:48] <popey> 2
[11:48] <popey> 1
[11:48] <popey> adjourned
[11:48] <dholbach> thanks everyone
[11:48] <czajkowski> popey: *hugs*
[12:14] <liel> Hello
[12:15] <popey> hi liel
[12:22] <liel> Will EMEA meeting today  be short?
[12:28] <liel> ?
[12:30] <liel> I see it takes only 1 hour, but it usually took more time...
[12:30] <liel> *it will take
[12:31] <liel> ?
[13:00] <persia> #startmeeting
[13:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 07:00. The chair is persia.
[13:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[13:00]  * GrueMaster reports in.
[13:00]  * asac waves
[13:00] <persia> Welcome to this week's Mobile Meeting
[13:00] <persia> Agenda is up
[13:01] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2009/20091215
[13:01] <asac> JamieBennett: plars: dyfet`: there? ;)
[13:01]  * StevenK shores
[13:01] <JamieBennett> yep
[13:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2009/20091215
[13:01]  * asac knew that stevenk would be here ;)
[13:01] <plars> asac: yep
[13:01] <persia> OK.  First up is action items.
[13:01] <persia> [TOPIC] Action Item review from last week
[13:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Action Item review from last week
[13:02] <asac> first item was done
[13:02] <persia> davidm and ogra to investigate mksquashfs issue on pegatron board
[13:02]  * ogra secretly lurks doing a coffeebreak from housekeeping
[13:02] <JamieBennett> lol
[13:02] <asac> yes. we found that mksquashfs isnt ready for all latest compiler flags
[13:02] <persia> Cool.
[13:02] <asac> so we went back to -marm
[13:02] <persia> Next.
[13:02] <persia> asac to discuss work items/burndown/reporting for liquid with ian_brasil
[13:02] <asac> i followed up with ian_brasil ... he added work items
[13:02] <asac> they ar enow tracked on our chart afaict
[13:02] <asac> i have to approve his spec still, but take that as an action for htis week
[13:02] <persia> great.
[13:03] <persia> [ACTION] asac to approve outstanding liquid specs
[13:03] <MootBot> ACTION received:  asac to approve outstanding liquid specs
[13:03] <asac> since its not really in the form we would like it
[13:03] <asac> thanks
[13:03] <persia> OK.  Moving on.
[13:03] <persia> [TOPIC] http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid-alpha2/report.html
[13:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid-alpha2/report.html
[13:03] <persia> [LINK] http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid-alpha2/report.html
[13:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid-alpha2/report.html
[13:04] <persia> This doesn't look so ideal.
[13:04] <JamieBennett> no
[13:04] <JamieBennett> but I think a bunch (especially from me) will be changed to done by the end of the week
[13:04] <persia> Lets see what's blocking, in reverse order of completion level.
[13:04] <plars> would be nice to make some good progress on that before the break too
[13:04] <persia> StevenK: You're at 0, but for a very low number of items.  Any blockers?
[13:04] <asac> there are quite a few low hanging fruits on the suspend-resume testing spec
[13:05] <StevenK> persia: Yes; https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/netbook-cron/+merge/16115
[13:05] <asac> GrueMaster: sorry to bug again, but could you go through the "documentation" work items for the suspend resume testing spec so we get below the trendline again?
[13:05] <persia> Excellent.  Issue identified.
[13:06] <StevenK> But that is handled by the LP folks, so I have to sit tight, but it blocks my livecd-rootfs upload
[13:06] <GrueMaster> I'll try to get on it later today (during living hours).
[13:06] <asac> GrueMaster: yeah. we dont want you to do that before coffee ;)
[13:06] <persia> dmart: You're also at 0.  Any issues?
[13:07] <persia> We'll catch up.
[13:07] <asac> persia: he has a few items on the lightweight browser spec
[13:07] <asac> according to my books
[13:07] <asac> though those are blocked by not yet having chromium
[13:08] <persia> asac: Cool.  Thanks.  Where are we on chromium?
[13:08] <asac> build works, upstream landed another set of arm packages. waiting for new builds to finish
[13:08] <persia> Sounds like progress so dmart can get unblocked soon.
[13:08] <asac> s/packages/patches/
[13:09] <persia> GrueMaster: You said you're going to comment on stuff when you're actually awake, right?
[13:09] <asac> every biuld might be a good build ;) ... i hope we get that working asap
[13:09] <StevenK> asac: I have to upload it? Since according to the work items, it's me
[13:09] <GrueMaster> No, I said I'd work on the suspend/resume test plan when I'm awake.
[13:09] <persia> GrueMaster: OK.  Anything blocking you that keeps you at 2%?
[13:10] <asac> StevenK: you have to do the archive admin part. you could start on reviewing licensing etc.
[13:10] <GrueMaster> I've been focusing on the lsb conversion (which I have good progress to report).
[13:10] <StevenK> asac: Oh, that task. Excuse me, I need to find a rusty knife.
[13:10] <plars> GrueMaster: let me know if you need help with anything
[13:10] <asac> StevenK: then we file issues upstream and if they are not illegal get a good faith exception from TB for inclusion if we see there is progress
[13:11] <asac> StevenK: the package includes some high level summary tool which should help
[13:11] <persia> GrueMaster: OK.
[13:11] <asac> just sync with me or fta after the meeting
[13:11] <persia> asac: You're at 7%.  Anything blocking you?
[13:11] <asac> or tomorrow (guess its late)
[13:11] <asac> persia: yes. the chromium build working
[13:11] <asac> the other thing is firefox 3.6 in the archive, that will happen soonish
[13:12] <persia> OK.  That's two people blocked on that.  At least we already have progress :)
[13:12] <asac> but besides from the task itself blocking me i am not blocked ;)
[13:12] <persia> Everyone else seems to be above trend, so I'll just ask if anyone has some blocking issue they want to raise.
[13:13] <asac> we are blocked on dove
[13:13] <dmart> persia: "You're also at 0. Any issues?": Can you explain what you mean?
[13:13] <JamieBennett> I would like comment on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/CasperSpeedup by more knowledgeable people if possible
[13:13] <asac> had a call with michael this morning
[13:13] <plars> ping?
[13:13] <asac> he wants us to do some preparations so he can start right away
[13:13] <persia> dmart: Looking at http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid-alpha2/report.html, you're currently reported as having completed 0 of your 3 workitems.
[13:13] <asac> yes. those are all related to benchmarking
[13:13] <asac> of browsers
[13:13] <persia> dmart: asac explained that you're blocked on having a chromium build ready to benchmark..
[13:13] <asac> thats blocked on me
[13:14] <asac> JamieBennett: can you reproduce the slowness locally?
[13:15] <asac> e.g. by running debconf-communicate
[13:15] <asac> before disabling all debconf stuff on arm, i would like to narrow down where the time gets lost
[13:15] <JamieBennett> asac: I haven't tried to do individual debconf-communicate calls yet
[13:15] <asac> yeah. i would think looking closer there is the next step
[13:15] <asac> as making this decently quick will give us a notable boost i expect
[13:16] <JamieBennett> OK, we can talk implementation bits after the meeting.
[13:16] <asac> right
[13:16] <persia> OK.  Anything else about the alpha-2 chart?
[13:16] <JamieBennett> We got a code drop on 2D launcher
[13:16] <dmart> I was not aware of the actions assigned to me... looks like if you're not subscribed to a blueprint you never see this info.
[13:16] <StevenK> \o/
[13:16] <JamieBennett> so that should be good to go now
[13:17] <asac> dmart: hmm. sorry about that. thought we discussed that ;)
[13:17] <asac> let me subscribe you
[13:17] <persia> JamieBennett: Cool.  Could you update that task on the tracker?
[13:17] <asac> dmart: but i would have pinged you anyway when the bits are available
[13:17] <JamieBennett> persia: will do after I've reviewed its actually what we wanted ;)
[13:17] <persia> heh :)
[13:17] <asac> dmart: subscribed
[13:17] <dmart> Thanks
[13:18] <persia> OK.  Moving on.
[13:18] <dmart> Releasing the browser benchmark is ongoing; also there is not firefox for lucid yet.
[13:18] <asac> ok one thing
[13:18] <persia> OK.  Not moving on :)
[13:18] <asac> would be great if everyone checks if there are low hanging fruits and get those done
[13:18] <asac> we will have holiday season so being below the trendline is probably the onlyt hing how we can make it to close to zero
[13:19] <dmart> All, are there any other actions on me I don't know about?
[13:19] <asac> also if you are done with your tasks, dont refrain from jumping on work itesms assigned to others
[13:19] <asac> just sync with them and help out ;)
[13:19] <StevenK> asac: I'm working on stuff, but the rename involves touching lots of stuff
[13:19] <asac> StevenK: thats desktop?
[13:20] <StevenK> asac: Nah, the UNR -> UNE rename
[13:20] <persia> dmart: The benchmarking ones are the only ones I see in even the full lucid report.
[13:20] <asac> StevenK: right. isnt that currently done in the desktop team officially?
[13:20] <dmart> OK, thanks
[13:20] <asac> StevenK: if its not, do you want to add more work items to the mobile-*une spec?
[13:20] <davidm> asac, we are on the hook for the name change
[13:21] <asac> davidm: right. i know that StevenK does that. just wasnt sure if its tracked as part of mobile or desktop
[13:21] <asac> e.g. where the reporting goes to etc.
[13:21] <davidm> Ah good point
[13:21] <asac> i am fine to have it in this meeting. just not sure
[13:21] <StevenK> I was thinking both davidm and Rick. But that's me
[13:21] <asac> i would suggest that StevenK attends the desktop Asia meeting
[13:22] <asac> and gives us a summary of status here
[13:22] <asac> whats the blueprint for the rename?
[13:22] <asac> isnt that a desktop-lucid- one?
[13:22] <StevenK> One-line summary: Blocked on Launchpad changes, then livecd-rootfs, cdimage changes and then unrds -> unds
[13:23] <StevenK> asac: desktop-lucid-une
[13:23] <asac> StevenK: one question for you: how will we switch our arm images from desktop to une (which i guess is what has to happen for the 2d launcher)
[13:23] <asac> do you have that on your list? or some other plan?
[13:24] <StevenK> asac: That is for after the rename, and can be done by twiddling stuff on antimony
[13:24] <persia> Might benefit from listed workitems, just to make the graph less bumpy.
[13:24] <asac> StevenK: ok. is that tracked as a work item in the mobile-arm une? otherwise we might want to add that as a step
[13:25] <StevenK> asac: It should be
[13:25] <asac> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-lucid-arm-une
[13:25]  * StevenK twiddles
[13:25] <persia> OK.  Are we done with alpha-2 work item status?
[13:25] <asac> maybe one more item before the "initial seed changes" one
[13:25] <asac> yes
[13:26] <persia> Right.
[13:26] <persia> It appears nobody added any special items to the agenda, so on to standing items.
[13:26] <persia> [TOPIC] Lucid work item status
[13:26] <MootBot> New Topic:  Lucid work item status
[13:26] <persia> [LINK] http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid/report.html
[13:26] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://piware.de/workitems/mobile/lucid/report.html
[13:26] <asac> same boat here i guess
[13:26] <persia> This is just a big picture of what we saw before.
[13:27] <persia> Anyone have any items that show up here that already have concerns or should be moved to alpha-2 ?
[13:27] <asac> move to alpha-2? ;) ... we already have enough to do for that ;)
[13:28] <asac> we have some blockage on canola evaluation ...
[13:28] <persia> asac: You never know: maybe someone is going *really* fast, and moving completed items to alpha-2 would help the trendline :)
[13:28] <persia> But that's scheduled for later.  Do we expect problems already, or is it just a later task?
[13:28] <asac> but the canonla2 thing will make progress this week afaiu
[13:29] <JamieBennett> dyfet: you have that as one of your tasks last week (canola)
[13:29] <JamieBennett> did you review?
[13:29] <persia> OK.  Let's review next week then, and see if we can bring it forward as completed.
[13:29] <asac> persia: its not urgent. but we need to know if we go for it
[13:29] <asac> as it requires work intensive development
[13:29] <asac> to get in a suitable state for us
[13:29] <persia> Yeah.
[13:29] <asac> right
[13:29] <persia> OK.  Anything else for lucid workitems?
[13:29] <asac> next week we need to see progress on that
[13:30] <JamieBennett> asac: I'll be looking at Canola this week
[13:30] <persia> Moving on then.
[13:30] <asac> thx
[13:30] <persia> [TOPIC] ARM Image status
[13:30] <dyfet> JamieBennett: I was waiting for it to be ready, so I will review also this week...sorry, having connectivity issues today...
[13:30] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Image status
[13:30] <persia> There was a crash in mandb that is being investigated, so we don't have any current images.
[13:31] <persia> We should have some tomorrow or the next day (depending on your local timezone).
[13:31] <asac> last imx51 image produced works oob afaik
[13:31] <ogra> we had the same crash during A1
[13:31] <asac> however, the image builder got stuck as it seems
[13:31] <asac> last image produced was 13th Dec
[13:31] <ogra> (no, i'm not here ... you're hallucinating)
[13:31] <asac> that one should just work
[13:31] <persia> Anyone test the 20091213 dove image?
[13:31] <asac> GrueMaster: plars: so some testing food for you ;)
[13:31] <plars> yes
[13:31] <plars> still broken
[13:31] <plars> same errors as before
[13:32] <persia> OK.  So we're at 50% and don't have current builds.
[13:32] <asac> ncommander will be back soonish
[13:32] <persia> I'll take an action to watch those and make sure we're in better shape next week.
[13:32] <asac> thats when we will do the serious evaluation
[13:32] <GrueMaster> I can't do dove testing and lsb conversion at the same time.
[13:32] <persia> [ACTION] persia to watch the builds and make sure they happen and are testable
[13:32] <MootBot> ACTION received:  persia to watch the builds and make sure they happen and are testable
[13:32] <asac> GrueMaster: imx51 has images
[13:32] <asac> that work
[13:32] <persia> Moving on.
[13:32] <asac> thats what i referred to above
[13:32] <persia> [TOPIC] Any Other Business
[13:32] <MootBot> New Topic:  Any Other Business
[13:33] <persia> Anyone have any last-minute items to raise for discussion?
[13:33] <GrueMaster> Just wanted to give an update to the lsb conversion
[13:33] <asac> GrueMaster: go ahead
[13:33] <persia> [TOPIC] LSB conversion status
[13:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  LSB conversion status
[13:33] <persia> GrueMaster: Go.
[13:34] <GrueMaster> One test suite has converted so far.  OLVER tests ran overnight.  5693 tests passed.  66 failed.
[13:34] <asac> GrueMaster: did you push your work to some bzr branch or something?
[13:34] <GrueMaster> Of the failures, 24 are new.
[13:34] <asac> e.g. the patches etc.
[13:34] <GrueMaster> Not yet.  That is the next step.
[13:34] <dyfet> I remember those :)
[13:34] <asac> GrueMaster: what failsures are those?
[13:34] <asac> GrueMaster: ok great.
[13:34] <JamieBennett> I have sent a mail to the @ubuntu-mobile list inviting the community to report weekly work they are doing just like we do
[13:35] <GrueMaster> I don't know what the failures are.  I'm looking at the results as we type.
[13:35] <asac> GrueMaster: so 24 new means. that 24 tests that work with karmic libs are now broken?
[13:35] <GrueMaster> no.  24 failures that the test suite didn't find in  the central LSB database.
[13:36] <GrueMaster> 41 failures are known test issues.
[13:36] <GrueMaster> I.e. in the database.
[13:36] <asac> ok
[13:36] <persia> GrueMaster: Will your results be available on a wiki page or something for investigation?
[13:36] <asac> GrueMaster: for us most important is the karmic vs. lucid comparision
[13:37] <asac> i wouldnt assign too high prio to the 24 new failures (at least not block the progress)
[13:37] <GrueMaster> I can look into posting this for those that are interested.
[13:37] <asac> sure.
[13:37] <GrueMaster> As to the 24 failures, I need to make sure that they aren't due to something I missed.
[13:37] <persia> [ACTION] GrueMaster to post LSB test failures for investigation
[13:37] <MootBot> ACTION received:  GrueMaster to post LSB test failures for investigation
[13:37] <persia> GrueMaster: Anything else about LSB conversion?
[13:38] <GrueMaster> That's it so far.
[13:38] <persia> OK.
[13:38] <persia> JamieBennett: You injected something interesting there:
[13:38] <asac> so on image front lamont now killed the hung mandb process ... so hopefully we get new images latest today
[13:38] <persia> [TOPIC] Weeky Reports
[13:38] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weeky Reports
[13:38] <asac> ;)
[13:38] <asac> haha
[13:38]  * JamieBennett reposts I have sent a mail to the @ubuntu-mobile list inviting the community to report weekly work they are doing just like we do
[13:39] <JamieBennett> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mobile/2009-December/002629.html
[13:39] <JamieBennett> Community members are encouraged to add to the weekly page
[13:39] <persia> Anything else about that, or is it all in the email?
[13:39] <asac> yep
[13:39] <asac> JamieBennett: thanksfor that.
[13:40] <JamieBennett> mostly in the mail but if you have a cool Ubuntu based mobile project consider editing the wiki page each week
[13:40] <persia> OK.  Anyone else have anything they want to raise?
[13:40] <StevenK> Can we visit a better time for the meeting? Starting at midnight and finishing at 1am is starting to hurt.
[13:40] <GrueMaster> StevenK: maybe 5am for you would be better?
[13:40] <asac> from what i understood there is no better time.
[13:41] <StevenK> 5am is worse
[13:41] <persia> I've run a bunch of calculations about meeting times, and strongly believe that 13:00, 20:00 and 21:00 are the best year-round times for the majority of the Ubuntu community.
[13:41] <asac> or do we want to move to a rotating model?
[13:41] <ogra> StevenK, i'm just renovating my basement, want to rent a room ? (that would solve your prob once and for all) :)
[13:41] <persia> Personally, I don't really like 20:00.
[13:41] <StevenK> ogra: Except that I don't speak the language
[13:41] <persia> 13:00 is annoying for UTC-8 and UTC+11 and excludes UTC-11 and UTC+12
[13:42] <davidm> 21:00 UTC works for me :-)
[13:42] <persia> 21:00 is annoying for UTC+8
[13:42] <ogra> StevenK, pfft, minor details
[13:42] <persia> Oops.
[13:42] <StevenK> Yeah, 2100 UTC is 6am for +8
[13:42] <persia> [TOPIC] Meeting Times.
[13:42] <MootBot> New Topic:  Meeting Times.
[13:42] <persia> StevenK: 5am.
[13:42] <StevenK> Oh, of course
[13:43] <StevenK> My brain is still coded to think you're -2 hours from me
[13:43] <persia> 22:00 is 0:00 in UTC+2 (European Summer)
[13:43] <persia> I'm not in +8 :)
[13:43] <StevenK> Which means if I don't get it, they do
[13:43] <persia> Well, someone needs to get it.
[13:43] <StevenK> Yeah
[13:44]  * JamieBennett volunteers StevenK ;)
[13:44]  * GrueMaster has it currently.
[13:44] <StevenK> It means I tend to sleep in a bit on Wednesday, since I don't get to bed until 1:20am or so
[13:44] <persia> Well, you both do (5:00 & 0:00 as a result of a 19-hour time difference)
[13:45] <StevenK> Let's just agree timezones suck and move on
[13:45] <persia> StevenK: Would you prefer 21:00 ?
[13:45] <persia> I like that idea :)
[13:45] <persia> [AGREED] timezones suck
[13:45] <MootBot> AGREED received:  timezones suck
[13:45] <StevenK> Haha
[13:45] <persia> OK.  Anyone else have a topic ?
[13:45] <dmart> I think there was an outstanding problem with alignment faults on Dove?
[13:45] <asac> so no changes?
[13:45] <dmart> plars and asac know about this
[13:45] <persia> [TOPIC] alignment faults on Dove
[13:45] <MootBot> New Topic:  alignment faults on Dove
[13:46] <asac> yes. there seem to be two issues:
[13:46] <plars> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-mvl-dove/+bug/494831
[13:46] <asac> 1st. current kernel doesnt even boot
[13:46] <asac> 1nd. when we still had a working kernel (two uploads ago), ncommander reported sigills for everything
[13:46] <asac> 2snd
[13:46] <asac> argh
[13:46] <asac> 2nd
[13:47] <asac> so today i tlaked to michael (ncommander) and we agreed that we first should narrow down why the current kernel suddenyl doesnt even boot anymore
[13:47] <asac> dmart: if you have input that makes this approach void, let us know ;)
[13:47] <plars> asac: well, it boots
[13:47] <plars> can get as far as a shell
[13:47] <asac> hmm
[13:47] <dmart> Not really... it may not even be related to the alignment faults.  Is the kernel being built as -marm?
[13:48] <plars> just that pretty much anything you run after that spews the alignment faults and sigills
[13:48] <dmart> plars: can we get a coredump from a faulting binary?
[13:48] <asac> "* Starting init crypto disks...
[13:48] <asac> Alignment trap: not handling instruction ed9f9b93 at [<000626f2>]
[13:48] <asac> Unhandled fault: alignment exception (0x011) at 0x00062942"
[13:48] <asac> isnt that in kernel?
[13:48] <asac> oh ... ericm posted a patch
[13:48] <asac> 12 minutes ago
[13:48] <asac> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-mvl-dove/+bug/494831
[13:48] <asac> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-mvl-dove/+bug/494831/comments/7
[13:48] <plars> dmart: will try, so far my attempts to get anything useful have failed
[13:49] <ogra> "init" really doesnt sound like kernel
[13:49] <JamieBennett> Isn't there a patch now?
[13:49] <JamieBennett> (just got a mail)
[13:49] <asac> yes
[13:49] <dmart> Are we still building the mvl kernel with -marm?
[13:49] <asac> JamieBennett: read a few lines above ;)
[13:49] <asac> good question
[13:49] <asac> dmart: afaik yes.
[13:49] <plars> ah, nice timing eric!
[13:50] <asac> ok cool. so we have a way forward it seems
[13:50] <ogra> btw, why is dove still at .31 ?
[13:50] <asac> good question
[13:50] <asac> let me take that as an action
[13:51] <asac> persia: ^^ (figure out why we are still at .31)
[13:51] <dmart> Be sure to ping me if that patch doesn't resolve the problem
[13:51] <asac> also add an action for dyfet to do a test kernel build with that patch
[13:51] <persia> [ACTION] asac to figure out why dove still uses a 2.6.31 kernel
[13:51] <MootBot> ACTION received:  asac to figure out why dove still uses a 2.6.31 kernel
[13:52] <asac> discussed with ncommander that i t would be good if dyfet could prepare a kernel
[13:52] <persia> [action] dyfet to prepare a test kernel build with the patch in bug 494831 (comment 7)
[13:52] <MootBot> ACTION received:  dyfet to prepare a test kernel build with the patch in bug 494831 (comment 7)
[13:52] <asac> thanks
[13:52] <asac> cool
[13:52] <persia> OK.  Anything else about alignment faults on dove?
[13:52] <plars> imx51 is still on -31 too, no?
[13:52] <asac> yes. imx51 will stay on 31
[13:52] <ogra> plars, yes, thats wanted
[13:52] <asac> that was discussed/planned
[13:53] <asac> htough we will get a new kernel
[13:53] <plars> right, I was thinking the plan was the same for dove for some reason
[13:53] <asac> using freescale kernel directly rather than our stuff
[13:53] <plars> maybe I am mixing them up
[13:53]  * plars hits the caffeine button a few more times
[13:53] <asac> dove -> .32
[13:53] <asac> imx51 -> .31
[13:53] <asac> thats the current plan
[13:54] <persia> Um, I have a topic then.
[13:54] <davidm> Freescale to stay on .31
[13:54] <persia> [topic] imx51 kernels
[13:54] <MootBot> New Topic:  imx51 kernels
[13:54] <davidm> Marvell to move to .32
[13:54] <persia> So, under which workitems are the activities of documenting all the subsystems we want backported from .32 into the imx51 kernel?
[13:55] <asac> persia: we only had an informational blueprint
[13:55] <asac> persia: also add an action for me to check with kernel team about their pre-upload testing. e.g. can we prevent that we end up with a non-bootable kernel in future etc.
[13:55] <asac> persia: i think the subsystem backporting was supposed to be done on-demand
[13:55] <asac> ogra: ?
[13:55] <asac> (sorry)
[13:55] <ogra> well, we surely need aufs, apparmor etc
[13:55] <persia> OK.  I just fear that we haven't identified the set of subsystems to backport.
[13:56] <persia> Also, anything needed for the new boot system.
[13:56] <ogra> as well as fast boot changes
[13:56] <ogra> seems thats documented nowhere
[13:56] <persia> And the standard kernel/userspare hardware stuff, like ALSA, ASoC, bluetooth, lirc, etc.
[13:57] <ogra> preferably all the improvements that are done in house by kernel or foundations team in the .32 tree should be backported (might be an utopic wish though)
[13:57] <asac> i would like to not add all the ubuntu sauce on top of it
[13:57] <asac> at least prefer it ... ;)
[13:57] <persia> We need some of the sauce though.
[13:57] <ogra> well, we need the bootspeed stuff
[13:57] <persia> It's mostly a matter of identifying *what* needs to be backported.
[13:57] <ogra> as well as aufs and apparmor
[13:57] <asac> yes. however, i was tolded alsa isnt an issue
[13:57] <persia> Whoever told you that doesn't read ALSA bug reports :)
[13:57] <ogra> alsa lives out of tree afaik
[13:57] <asac> same for other stuff (usually its userspace that must not be out of date)
[13:58] <asac> persia: dtchen ;)
[13:58] <ogra> well, often its userspace that needs certain new kernel features too
[13:58] <asac> yes. but he assured me that its not the case for alsa/pulseaudio
[13:58] <persia> Well, then alsa did get out-of-tree.  It didn't used to be that way.
[13:58] <asac> i can reconfirm that
[13:58] <ogra> i.e. we'll totally lose on faster booting without cshurbi's patches
[13:58] <GrueMaster> also dtchen works on x86 alsa (unless someone has given him a babbage and dove recently).
[13:59] <persia> So, rather than rehashing here (we're nearly out of time).
[13:59] <persia> Can we just have an action to update somewhere?
[13:59] <asac> GrueMaster: right. i expect there to be close to zero patches
[13:59] <asac> for arm in our tree ;)
[13:59] <persia> [action] asac, ogra, persia to make sure .32 backporting for imx51 kernels is documented somewhere.
[13:59] <MootBot> ACTION received:  asac, ogra, persia to make sure .32 backporting for imx51 kernels is documented somewhere.
[13:59] <ogra> right, there only the device drivers count and we get these from FSL
[13:59] <GrueMaster> I'd like to see at least one patch for babbage - to make audio work.
[13:59] <asac> persia: right. thanks
[13:59] <ogra> GrueMaster, ??
[14:00] <persia> OK.  Anything else that *needs* to be now?
[14:00] <ogra> GrueMaster, wrks since ages ?
[14:00] <plars> GrueMaster: mine works
[14:00] <asac> i think we are fine
[14:00] <persia> THanks then.
[14:00] <persia> #endmeeting
[14:00] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 08:00.
[14:00] <asac> so one more thing. in case you dont see me and need me urgently during holiday
[14:00] <asac> just call my cell
[14:00]  * ogra goes back to sniff wet paint
[14:00] <asac> first ping me here ... i will check in the evenings usually
[14:00] <asac> ogra: get a mask ;)
[14:00] <ogra> pfft ... less fun
[14:00] <asac> or send an SMS
[14:00]  * ogra giggles madly
[14:01] <asac> ogra: enjoy!!
[14:01] <ogra> doing ! :)
[14:01] <asac> ogra: and do some nordic waling
[14:01] <ogra> lol
[15:01] <cjwatson> mdz,kees,Keybuk: TB?
[15:01] <kees> cjwatson: ya beat me to it.
[15:01] <pitti> hello
[15:01] <kees> any pittis or sabdfls around?
[15:01] <mdz> cjwatson: hi
[15:01] <kees> ah-ha!
[15:01] <Keybuk> cjwatson: I'm here
[15:01] <cjwatson> kees: wiki says you're chairing
[15:01] <kees> cjwatson: yup
[15:01] <Keybuk> slightly distracted by fixing the carnage kees caused <g>
[15:01] <cjwatson> I poked sabdfl on #canonical
[15:01] <kees> uhm..
[15:01] <mdz> sabdfl just returned to his desk and sat down
[15:02] <kees> Keybuk: what carnage?  (I just woke up...)
[15:02] <mdz> kees: #startmeeting?
[15:02] <kees> ok, that's everyone, I think.
[15:02] <kees> #startmeeting
[15:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:02. The chair is kees.
[15:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:03] <kees> [topic] review action items
[15:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  review action items
[15:03] <kees>  * cjwatson checking on IS RT #36139 to add devel-permissions
[15:03] <cjwatson> done
[15:03] <kees>  * Scott to redraft Units policy to address Scott's and Matt's concerns and clean up language
[15:03] <mdz> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-December/000654.html
[15:03] <mdz> (previous meeting minutes)
[15:03] <kees> [link] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-December/000654.html
[15:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-December/000654.html
[15:04] <mdz> Keybuk:
[15:04] <kees> Keybuk: any updates on the units policy?
[15:04] <Keybuk> none, I haven't had a chance to get to it
[15:04] <kees> [action] Scott to redraft Units policy to address Scott's and Matt's concerns and clean up language
[15:04] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Scott to redraft Units policy to address Scott's and Matt's concerns and clean up language
[15:04] <mdz> should this be redelegated?
[15:04] <Keybuk> if someone else has a few more free cycles than me, they are more than welcome
[15:04] <mdz> Scott doesn't seem to have the bandwidth, so maybe someone else could work on it
[15:04] <mdz> it's been punted the past few meetings
[15:04] <kees> hard to say, it was specifically Keybuk's issues yes?
[15:05] <kees> in that redelegation makes it tricky if Keybuk doesn't like the result.  :)  but it would be nice to move it forward.
[15:05] <mdz> we could ask for help
[15:05] <mdz> I just don't want to see an action carried from meeting to meeting without an expectation that it can be completed
[15:05] <mdz> it's bad meeting mojo
[15:06] <pitti> what were the remaining points again?
[15:06] <mdz> it's all in the TB archives, I'd have to dig itup
[15:06] <pitti> (it seemed like a ten-minute thing the last time we talked about it)
[15:06] <mdz> I said: "Looks fine to me, except for the "must add an option [to all command-linetools]" bit."
[15:07] <mdz> which was clearly unreasonable
[15:07]  * pitti actually likes that
[15:07] <bdale> fyi, all, I'm on the way out the door for a customer meeting and so won't be able to participate today
[15:07] <Keybuk> pitti: find a free character in ps? :p
[15:07] <pitti> otherwise we'd be stuck with ls etc. showing the "wrong" thing forever; and conveniently they already have --si switches
[15:07] <kees> bdale: no worries, thanks for letting us know.  :)
[15:08] <mdz> pitti: there are a *lot* of command line programs in Ubuntu, and there is no way we will patch them all to support a --si flag
[15:08] <pitti> mdz: no, but we wouldn't stop people from adding them individually either (through upstream, etc.), would we?
[15:08] <Keybuk> pitti: the policy in the current working requires us to add them
[15:08] <mdz> pitti: no, I wouldn't think so
[15:08] <pitti> it's certainly not something we should focus on
[15:08] <sabdfl> have we socialised this with the Debian TC?
[15:09] <kees> sabdfl: the units policy in general or the --si flag in particular?  (neither I think)
[15:09] <mdz> pitti: I don't want to create a policy which immediately generates hundreds or thousands of violations
[15:09] <kees> what about weakening the language to 'should' instead of 'must' ?
[15:09] <pitti> mdz: so it should say "should" perhaps, to be a recommendation
[15:09] <mdz> that would be better
[15:10] <mdz> kees: this is becoming an agenda topic in its own right, under the guise of an action review ;-)
[15:10] <sabdfl> kees: both
[15:10] <kees> mdz: agreed.
[15:11] <pitti> OTOH that's exactly what the policy is meant to do, so these "hundreds of violations" wouldn't just be an artifact
[15:11] <Keybuk> mdz: if only my day job weren't so demanding of my time <g>
[15:11] <kees> ok, I see two things todo now on it.
[15:11] <kees> 1) actually get the policy finalized
[15:11] <kees> 2) present it to debian tc
[15:11] <cjwatson> pitti: the policy was meant to handle user-facing things, not really command-line programs
[15:11] <cjwatson> we're trying to avoid having to deal with the latter, more than anything :)
[15:11] <mdz> [topic] units policy
[15:12] <kees> [topic] units policy
[15:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  units policy
[15:12] <sabdfl> i think it's fine to aim to prioritize user-facing things, and accept a long tail of violations that are not widely exposed
[15:12] <pitti> cjwatson: sure
[15:12] <kees> mdz: do you want to take the language portion?  it sounds like we're all agreed on the meaning of the cmdline portion.
[15:13] <kees> I can take the Debian TC part, via bdale.
[15:13] <mdz> kees: the language wrt
[15:13] <mdz> requirements on command line programs?
[15:13] <kees> mdz: right.  it seems to be the main sticking point on the policy.
[15:14] <mdz> kees: OK
[15:14] <kees> [action] kees to present Units policy to Debian TC via bdale
[15:14] <MootBot> ACTION received:  kees to present Units policy to Debian TC via bdale
[15:14] <kees> [action] mdz to fix language wrt cmdline meaning in Unit policy
[15:14] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mdz to fix language wrt cmdline meaning in Unit policy
[15:14] <kees> ok to move on?
[15:14] <mdz> y
[15:14] <kees> [topic] action review
[15:14] <MootBot> New Topic:  action review
[15:14] <kees>  * Colin to clarify trademark/license distinction on licensing policy
[15:14] <cjwatson> done, second para of http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/licensing
[15:14] <kees> cool
[15:15] <kees> [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda
[15:15] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda
[15:15] <kees> [topic] Status of ARM port vs. archive publishing (slangasek, mdz)
[15:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status of ARM port vs. archive publishing (slangasek, mdz)
[15:15] <cjwatson> uh, we had more actions
[15:15] <kees> oh whoops, sorry
[15:16] <kees> [topic] action review take 3
[15:16] <MootBot> New Topic:  action review take 3
[15:16] <kees>  * cjwatson to create a wiki reference for development teams to participate in the reorg
[15:16] <mdz> kees: er, it looks like the language I took issue with in the policy has been fixed already ;-)
[15:16] <cjwatson> done, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers/TeamDelegation, would appreciate review
[15:16] <kees> mdz: easy action item.  :)
[15:16] <mdz> [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers/TeamDelegation
[15:16] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers/TeamDelegation
[15:16] <cjwatson> specifically there was one item there that Scott remembered but I didn't, so I'd like to check it
[15:17] <cjwatson> but I added an item for this on the agenda, let's clear the actions first
[15:17] <kees>  * ScottK to revise Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy proposal based on TB meeting discussion
[15:17] <kees> [link] https://wiki.kubuntu.org/Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy
[15:17] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.kubuntu.org/Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy
[15:18] <kees> it's not clear to me if this happened yet
[15:19] <cjwatson> no edits since 2009-11-05
[15:19] <kees> right, so, not done yet.
[15:19] <mdz> ScottK: when would be a good time to revisit this?
[15:19] <kees> I will check in with ScottK later today when he's unidle
[15:20] <kees> [ACTION] kees to follow up with ScottK on Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy updates
[15:20] <MootBot> ACTION received:  kees to follow up with ScottK on Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy updates
[15:20] <kees>  * sabdfl to update LP/wiki/www to reflect the actual term length for TB
[15:20] <kees> that's done, I think?
[15:20] <sabdfl> done
[15:20] <kees>  * cjwatson to nudge RT 35428
[15:20] <cjwatson> done, and closed the bug
[15:20] <kees> ok.  anything I missed before I go to next topic?
[15:20] <sabdfl> i think i marked it fix-committed, if you're happy we can mark it fix-released
[15:21] <cjwatson> sabdfl: it's fix-released
[15:21] <kees> sabdfl: when I was writing up the notes from the TB meeting that I was on vacation for I flipped it from committed to released.
[15:22] <cjwatson> kees: nothing I see, let's carry on
[15:22] <kees> ok... for real:
[15:22] <kees> [topic] Status of ARM port vs. archive publishing (slangasek, mdz)
[15:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status of ARM port vs. archive publishing (slangasek, mdz)
[15:22] <kees> slangasek: unidle?
[15:22] <mdz> this is about Subject: armel in lucid: supported architectures vs. ports
[15:23] <cjwatson> elmo's comment was that while this is technically possible the numbers are such that he would much rather we didn't (we'll lose quite a few mirrors); he said that if there's a load issue he can bring up some specialised mirrors
[15:23] <kees> right. afaik, it was now to elmo?
[15:23] <mdz> i.e. the fact that while armel is maintained, supported, blessed, etc. similar to i386 and amd64, it is on ports, while they are on archive
[15:23] <mdz> and this is seen to be inconsistent
[15:23] <cjwatson> I don't think it's a load issue, I think it's essentially just a consistency/aesthetic issue
[15:23] <mdz> I pointed out that there was some ambiguity in the semantics of ports, and elmo said that cjwatson was writing a document I think
[15:23] <cjwatson> I took an action in the platform/IS review meeting to write such a document, though haven't yet
[15:24] <mdz> to me, the important distinction of ports vs. archive is mirroring
[15:24] <mdz> and the mirroring configuration is perfectly appropriate for armel
[15:24] <sabdfl> i think we can forego ARM mirrors
[15:24] <cjwatson> which would basically be a public-facing document describing the meanings of archive vs. ports, cdimage vs. releases, etc. that we can point confused people to
[15:24] <mdz> so I think it should be left where it is, but the semantics should be documented
[15:24] <sabdfl> we can create dedicated bandwidth for *our* ARM mirrors if ARM folks feel hard done by
[15:24] <cjwatson> sabdfl: right, elmo said the same; although I don't think that's where this discussion came from
[15:25] <kees> cjwatson: shall I register an action for you for that doc?
[15:25] <cjwatson> kees: yes please
[15:25] <persia> Is it not also possible for interested external parties to create ARM mirrors (or arbitrary ports mirrors) if they desire?
[15:25] <kees> [action] cjwatson to document meanings of archive vs. ports, cdimage vs. releases, etc.
[15:26] <kees> so, with my security team hat on, which releases of armel are considered canonical-supported?  karmic and later?
[15:26] <kees> and did mootbot die?
[15:38] <pitti> however, it would potentially entail getting bug spam if the team doesn't have a contact address
[15:38] <mdz> cjwatson: I don't recall previous discussion on that point, but I think it's a good idea
[15:38] <cjwatson> but it's not one that we've enforced so far
[15:38] <cjwatson> pitti: ubuntu-core-dev does
[15:38] <pitti> cjwatson: I meant if e. g. kubuntu-dev doesn't have a contact address
[15:38] <cjwatson> pitti: adding ubuntu-core-dev to the team won't change bug spam
[15:38] <cjwatson> or at worst it'll all land on ubuntu-reviews@
[15:38] <pitti> ^ ah, due to -core-dev's contact address, right
[15:38] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers/TeamDelegation
[15:38] <cjwatson> right
[15:38] <Datad> thats cool
[15:38] <pitti> it's not unusual to subscribe such a team to a bug, etc.
[15:38] <cjwatson> so if everyone's happy with that, I'll mail the teams that are delegated so far to ask them to make that change
[15:38] <pitti> but all in all I'm also for having core-dev as a member, to mirror the permission reality and make bzr branches work
[15:38] <mdz> agreed
[15:39] <kees> +1
[15:39] <cjwatson> ok, I'll take care of that
[15:39] <pitti> ubuntu-desktop is okay, kubuntu-dev needs core-dev added
[15:39] <cjwatson> [ACTION] cjwatson to add a bit more intro to UbuntuDevelopment/TeamDelegation, and link it from appropriate places
[15:39] <kees> [ACTION] cjwatson to add a bit more intro to UbuntuDevelopment/TeamDelegation, and link it from appropriate places
[15:39] <cjwatson> [ACTION] cjwatson to follow up with kubuntu-dev and mythbuntu-dev to get ubuntu-core-dev added
[15:40] <kees> [ACTION] cjwatson to follow up with kubuntu-dev and mythbuntu-dev to get ubuntu-core-dev added
[15:40] <kees> ok, next topic?
[15:40] <mdz> y
[15:40] <kees> ScottK: around for Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy?
[15:40] <Riddell> I can answer for that
[15:40] <Riddell> it's waiting on a policy from upstream for minor point release updates
[15:41] <kees> [topic] https://wiki.kubuntu.org/Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy
[15:41] <Riddell> upstream has one but it's never been written down
[15:41] <Riddell> so I started that conversation with upstream and have a draft written down
[15:41] <kees> Riddell: ok, cool.  is there any kind of ETA?
[15:41] <Riddell> week or two?  (but then new years get in the way)
[15:41] <kees> we'll keep this on the agenda then for next meeting.
[15:42] <kees> [action] ScottK to update policy based on kubuntu upstream feedback
[15:42] <kees> I'd like to defer "When is it a good idea to fail out of a maintainer script?" to the end since it went long last time.
[15:43] <kees> [topic] Execute Permission Policy (KeesCook)
[15:43] <kees> this is waiting for wording changes, iirc.
[15:43] <mdz> from whom?
[15:43] <kees> trying to find that now
[15:44] <kees> # Execute Permission Policy:
[15:44] <kees>     * The current policy will not handle all potential cases, such as OO.o macros or application cases which wer are unaware of
[15:44] <kees>     * Colin: we should point out an alternative approach instead of just saying "No"
[15:44] <kees>     * current impact: kill GNOME desktop "do you want to run it anyway?" question, remove a few MIME handlers
[15:44] <kees>     * To be continued in the next meeting
[15:44] <kees> that's where it stood from 2009-11-17
[15:45] <kees> so, it needs something for the alternative approach.  wording for macros was handled.
[15:45] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers/TeamDelegation
[15:46] <MootBot> ACTION received:  cjwatson to add a bit more intro to UbuntuDevelopment/TeamDelegation, and link it from appropriate places
[15:46] <MootBot> ACTION received:  cjwatson to follow up with kubuntu-dev and mythbuntu-dev to get ubuntu-core-dev added
[15:46] <MootBot> New Topic:  https://wiki.kubuntu.org/Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy
[15:46] <kees> [action] kees to clean up further and re-present at next meeting
[15:46] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ScottK to update policy based on kubuntu upstream feedback
[15:46] <MootBot> New Topic:  Execute Permission Policy (KeesCook)
[15:46] <MootBot> ACTION received:  kees to clean up further and re-present at next meeting
[15:46] <kees> [topic] Check up on community bugs (standing item)
[15:47] <MootBot> New Topic:  Check up on community bugs (standing item)
[15:47] <kees> just one
[15:47] <kees> [link] https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/485559
[15:47] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/485559
[15:47] <kees> have I been netsplit again?
[15:47] <pitti> wrt. "alternative approach", that should point to packaging and software-center?
[15:47] <mdz> kees: no, you're fine
[15:56] <sabdfl> i think this could turn into a conversations which exceeds our time limit :-)
[15:56] <mdz> sounds like it should go on the CC agenda
[15:56] <kees> ok, so, for actions...
[15:57] <kees> is "sabdfl to propose to CC that the TB is a CC delegate" what you're expecting?
[15:57] <sabdfl> sure
[15:57] <kees> [action] sabdfl to propose to CC that the TB is a CC delegate
[15:57] <MootBot> ACTION received:  sabdfl to propose to CC that the TB is a CC delegate
[15:57] <kees> and the special case would be part of that proposal?
[15:58] <sabdfl> mayyybe
[15:58] <sabdfl> i need to think about it
[15:58] <pitti> I have a call at 5, need to disappear
[15:58] <kees> ok, thanks pitti!
[15:58] <kees> the bug status should be updated with some discussion of what is happening.  sabdfl do you want to take that too?
[15:59] <kees> chair next time?
[15:59] <sabdfl> willdo
[16:00] <kees> [action] update bug with status and discussion
[16:00] <MootBot> ACTION received:  update bug with status and discussion
[16:00] <crazybytes> Hello people !
[16:00] <kees> cjwatson: will you chair next?
[16:00] <cjwatson> yes
[16:00] <kees> ok
[16:00] <cjwatson> happy to
[16:00] <kees> thanks everyone!
[16:00] <kees> #endmeeting
[16:00] <cjwatson> oh, one sec
[16:00] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:00.
[16:00] <kees> erg
[16:00] <cjwatson> next time won't be two weeks, presumably :)
[16:01] <cjwatson> 12 Jan?
[16:01] <kees> ah, right.  next meeting is 12 Jan.
[16:01] <kees> I'll note it in the, err, notes.
[16:02] <sabdfl> thanks kees
[16:02] <kees> thanks everyone!  have a great holiday!
[17:00]  * rtg waves
[17:00]  * apw fades in
[17:00] <bjf> Roll Call
[17:00] <apw> o/
[17:01]  * ogasawara_ waves
[17:01] <bjf> this could be interesting, freenode having problems?
[17:01] <mhall119|work> freenode has been netsplitting all week
[17:01] <apw> some sort of ddos
[17:02]  * jjohansen here
[17:02] <bjf> #startmeeting
[17:02] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:02] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[17:02] <bjf> NOTE: '..' indicates that you are finished with your input.
[17:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Action Item: amitk to meet with keybuk on automated boot tests
[17:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:02. The chair is bjf.
[17:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[17:02] <apw> smb is on the other half of the split
[17:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Action Item: amitk to meet with keybuk on automated boot tests
[17:02] <bjf> amitk, ??
[17:03] <rtg> bjf, haven't seen him all morning
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Lucid Release Status: Bugs (Release Meeting Bugs / RC Milestoned Bugs / Release Targeted Bugs
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Lucid Release Status: Bugs (Release Meeting Bugs / RC Milestoned Bugs / Release Targeted Bugs
[17:03] <ogasawara> Release Meeting Bugs (0 bugs, 4 blueprints) - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[17:03] <ogasawara> Alpha 2 Milestoned Bugs (17 bugs) - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+bugs?field.milestone%3Alist=21444
[17:03] <ogasawara>  * 1 linux kernel bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux/+bugs?field.milestone%3Alist=21444
[17:03] <ogasawara>  * 2 linux-fsl-imx51 bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-fsl-imx51/+bugs?field.milestone%3Alist=21444
[17:03] <ogasawara>  * 0 linux-ec2 bug - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-ec2/+bugs?field.milestone%3Alist=21444
[17:03] <ogasawara>  * 2 linux-mvl-dove bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-mvl-dove/+bugs?field.milestone%3Alist=21444
[17:04] <ogasawara> * Release Targeted Bugs (69 bugs) https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+bugs
[17:04] <ogasawara>  * 4 linux kernel bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux
[17:04] <ogasawara>  * 3 linux-fsl-imx51 bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-fsl-imx51
[17:04] <ogasawara>  * 1 linux-ec2 bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-ec2
[17:04] <ogasawara>  * 2 linux-mvl-dove bugs - https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-mvl-dove
[17:04] <ogasawara> ..
[17:04] <bjf> [TOPIC] Lucid Release Status: Milestoned Features
[17:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Lucid Release Status: Milestoned Features
[17:04] <ogasawara> Milestoned Features - https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+milestone/ubuntu-10.04
[17:04] <ogasawara>  * 1 blueprint relating to the kernel - https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-new-kernel-on-lts
[17:04] <ogasawara> ..
[17:05] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-bug-handling (ogasawara)
[17:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-bug-handling (ogasawara)
[17:05] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-bug-handling
[17:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-bug-handling
[17:05] <ogasawara> nothing new to report
[17:05] <ogasawara> ..
[17:05] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-review-of-ubuntu-delta (apw)
[17:05] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-review-of-ubuntu-delta
[17:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-review-of-ubuntu-delta (apw)
[17:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-review-of-ubuntu-delta
[17:06] <apw> we've pulled in a bunch o fupdates fro the drivers there
[17:06] <apw> still ongoing
[17:06] <apw> ..
[17:06] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-kernel-config-review (apw)
[17:06] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-kernel-config-review
[17:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-kernel-config-review (apw)
[17:06] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-kernel-config-review
[17:06] <apw> the first version of config-enforcer is out for review.  will be posting an update today
[17:06] <apw> ..
[17:07] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-kms (sconklin)
[17:07] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-kms
[17:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-kms (sconklin)
[17:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-kms
[17:07] <sconklin> apw's been doing most of the work on this
[17:07] <sconklin> this week
[17:07] <apw> we have enabled ATI KMS again in the upload after a-1
[17:08] <apw> nouveau looks to be in linus' tree, and we have a potential to backport there
[17:08] <apw> thats under review
[17:08] <apw> ..
[17:08] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-suspend-resume (manjo)
[17:08] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-suspend-resume
[17:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-suspend-resume (manjo)
[17:08] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-suspend-resume
[17:09] <bjf> doesn't seem to be a manjo today
[17:09] <apw> that blueprint needs sorting out as its not 'approved' yet and its coming up at the weekly release meeting each week
[17:09] <apw> ..
[17:09] <bjf> manjo is on holiday
[17:09] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-apparmor-development (jjohansen)
[17:09] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-apparmor-development
[17:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-apparmor-development (jjohansen)
[17:09] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-apparmor-development
[17:10] <jjohansen> apw sucked in upstream AA
[17:10] <jjohansen> and I have been updating the regression tests
[17:10] <apw> jjohansen, i sent you a build patch for that for non x86 platforms
[17:10] <jjohansen> I also sucked in a patch from serge
[17:10] <jjohansen> yep, just replied to that
[17:10] <jjohansen> thanks
[17:10] <jjohansen> ..
[17:10] <apw> when we expecting the next update?
[17:10] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: kernel-lucid-boot-performance (apw, csurbhi)
[17:10] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-boot-performance
[17:10] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: kernel-lucid-boot-performance (apw, csurbhi)
[17:10] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-lucid-boot-performance
[17:11] <csurbhi> csurbhi ..
[17:11] <jjohansen> next update, this week
[17:11] <apw> we pulled in surbhi's performance patch and a couple of others
[17:11]  * gnarl finally made it
[17:11] <apw> looks like we got about .6s out of them, and hopefully a bit more elsewhere
[17:11] <apw> ..
[17:11] <jjohansen> sweet :)
[17:12] <bjf> [TOPIC] Other Release Tasks: Lucid Audio Support (bjf)
[17:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Other Release Tasks: Lucid Audio Support (bjf)
[17:12] <bjf> I've submitted a patch to increase the size of preallocated buffers which is supposed to help
[17:12] <bjf> with users audio experience. This has been in Fedora for since 11.
[17:12] <bjf> Also, I have c-o-d pretty well working for karmic. I'll be turning it on today. I was having
[17:12] <bjf> some build issues in Lucid chroot since Alpha 1 which I need to work through and get it turned
[17:12] <bjf> on as well.
[17:12] <bjf> ..
[17:12] <apw> bjf pulled that patch in
[17:12] <bjf> apw, ack
[17:13]  * apw wonders if its very quiet for everyone
[17:14]  * ogasawara hears crickets
[17:15] <sconklin> hrmph
[17:16] <apw> i think our meeting got split
[17:16] <jjohansen> yeah
[17:18] <ogasawara> bjf is relaying my info, http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/342019/
[18:26] <liel> Hello, again :)
[18:26] <padhu> Hi
[18:27] <MenZa> Seveaz is subject to teh netsplits
[18:27] <Seveaz> gonna be fun having a meeting in this shitstorm :)
[18:29] <MenZa> Seveaz: Oh yeah.
[18:35]  * MenZa rides the wave.
[18:39]  * MenZa grabs a handrail.
[18:40] <Seveas> :)
[18:40] <Seveas> hi MenZa
[18:40] <MenZa> \o/
[18:40] <MenZa> Evening Dennis :)
[18:40] <Seveas> if freenode fails, we can move to OFTC for the meeting
[18:41] <MenZa> Seveas: Channel?
[18:42] <Seveas> #ubuntu-meeting :-)
[18:42] <Seveas> but let's stay here for now. We'll see how it goes
[18:42] <MenZa> certainly
[18:42] <LjL> i predict another split just about... now :P
[18:42] <Seveas> Ljinx:
[18:43] <Seveas> LjL, you might like this: http://15.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kunlq9Sf9L1qzmowao1_500.jpg
[18:43] <MenZa> Already linked him to it!
[18:43] <Seveas> hehe
[18:43] <LjL> seen it :P
[18:43] <MenZa> Stole it from your FB :3
[18:43] <Seveas> :)
[18:46] <Seveas> LjL, you were only a few minutes off :)
[18:46] <LjL> Seveas: let's say i were wrong... "a few minutes off" would be a good guess on a normal day, but not today :P
[18:47] <Seveas> ooh, burn :)
[18:47] <LjL> i was, even
[18:49] <Seveas> ok, fail
[18:49] <MenZa> aye
[18:49] <MenZa> In case of ChanServFail?
[18:49] <MenZa> aha
[18:50] <Seveas> I don't think we can succesfully have a meeting here :)
[18:50] <MenZa> +1 on that
[18:50] <MenZa> good thing there's not a massive list of candidates like last time
[18:50] <Seveas> so far you're the only one, right?
[18:51] <Seveas> (who made it to the channel)
[18:51] <czajkowski> aloha
[18:51] <czajkowski> :)
[18:51] <MenZa> I think so
[18:51] <Seveas> hi czajkowski
[18:51] <MenZa> liel is here
[18:51] <MenZa> ninnnu as well
[18:51] <MenZa> So that makes three of us (in here)
[18:51] <czajkowski> Seveas: what time do ye start at?
[18:52] <Seveas> czajkowski, 20:00 in #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net -- freenode is too unstable today
[18:52] <padhu> really?
[18:52] <MenZa> \o Pici
[18:53] <czajkowski> Seveas: ah ok fridge shows 7pm UTC
[18:53] <czajkowski> as lococouncil is on at 8pm UTC
[18:53] <Seveas> czajkowski, apologies, I was thinking in my local time
[18:53] <Seveas> 7 UTC it is
[18:53] <MenZa> cet ftw!
[18:54] <czajkowski> Seveas: ok, was wondering how popey was going to be at this meeting and lococouncil
[18:54] <MenZa> magic, czajkowski
[18:54] <MenZa> asanchez: Change of plans, irc.oftc.net :)
[18:54] <Seveas> czajkowski, split brain
[18:54] <Pendulum> czajkowski: didn't you know he has special powers?
[18:54] <czajkowski> it's in the hair do!
[18:55] <MenZa> bahaha
[18:57] <Seveas> forumsmatthew, please also join #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net -- we will likely hold the meeting there 'cause freenode is bonkers today
[18:58] <Pendulum> czajkowski: it means people will see him years after his death, too ;)
[18:58] <popey> o/
[18:58] <popey> made it
[18:58] <MenZa> \o/ popey
[18:58] <Seveas> nice, the M25 has been conquered once more
[18:58] <Seveas> popey, /topic -- we're moving to oftc because of the netsplits
[18:58] <popey> O RLY?
[18:59] <Seveas> yeah. freenode is too unstable :)
[18:59] <forumsmatthew> see you there
[18:59] <Flare183> Alright
[18:59] <popey> you are kidding?
[18:59] <Seveas> popey, no, ddos'es all day, netsplits as a result
[18:59] <Flare183> popey: Seveas is right
[18:59] <Flare183> announce.freenode.net
[18:59] <Flare183> see for youself
[18:59] <Flare183> yourself*
[18:59] <czajkowski> Seveas: a lot of us haven't had issues, it;s only some people on some of the servers
[18:59] <popey> Flare183: I'm not saying he's wrong
[19:00] <Flare183> popey: Ok
[19:00] <Seveas> czajkowski, netsplits affect everyone as the channel is, well, split :)
[19:00] <czajkowski> Seveas: can you add it to the wiki page for ppl coming in here tonight for the meeting, so they know ?
[19:00] <czajkowski> if it's not been done already
[19:01] <popey> doubt people will look there
[19:01] <Seveas> I'll keep an eye on this place
[19:01] <popey> just keep an eye on this channel
[19:01] <Seveas> let's start, see you on oftc!
[19:09] <Seveas> those who joined for the emea board meeting: #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net
[19:10] <LjL> you scared the servers :(
[19:10] <padhu> what the topic?
[19:11] <Pendulum> padhu: they've moved the meeting to #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net
[19:11] <Pendulum> because of all the netsplits on freenode
[19:13] <padhu> Pendulum: oh.
[19:38] <Seveas> popey, you may want to use OFTC for the loco meeting as well :)
[19:38]  * popey points Seveas to the /topic
[19:39] <Seveas> doh, didn't see it
[19:39] <Seveas> due to all the netsplitting :)
[19:39] <popey> excuses
[19:40] <highvoltage> heh
[19:49] <technoviking> what netspl...
[19:49] <ZachK_> finally
[19:50] <Seveas> To those who joined for the loco meeting: please join #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net. Freenode is under attack and it's difficult to hold meetings when netsplits happen avery few minutes.
[19:50] <maco> hahahaha
[19:50] <Seveas> maco, it's not exactly funny :)
[19:51] <maco> i think its funny that you're announcing a server change. actually...especially without putting it in /topic
[19:51] <Seveas> it's in the topic :)
[19:51] <maco> i fail at reading
[19:51] <maco> nevermind
[19:51] <ZachK_> maco: just don't laugh at all man
[19:51] <maco> ZachK_: probably a good plan
[19:53] <Pendulum> maco: i suggest that laughing is good for your health so don't worry about laughing just tell people you're laughing as a healthy exercise ;)
[19:53] <ZachK_> i'm in the other server...is anyone there too?
[19:54] <maco> Pendulum: i do find it funny/surprising that a network as big as freenode could be so disrupted.
[19:55] <popey> given enough bots, any network can be disrupted I imagine
[19:55] <ZachK_> maco: please...dude.....just let it go....
[19:55] <ZachK_> trust me
[19:55] <popey> o_O
[19:55] <Seveas> maco, with enough resources, you can attack anything. And it's not hard at all to disrubt a network with a star layout such as freenode. All you need to attack are the hubs
[19:55] <maco> oh it's a star?
[19:56] <popey> ..dim and distant..
[19:56] <maco> well now it makes perfect sense why it could get screwed up so easily, they're not exactly the most reliable network formation
[19:58] <ZachK_> when is the meeting for new members scheduled to begin?
[19:58] <Seveas> ZachK_, january 5th
[19:59] <ZachK_> I thought it was for today
[20:00] <Seveas> it was
[20:00] <Seveas> at 19:00 utc
[20:00] <Seveas> and it's all over already :)
[20:00] <ZachK_> i was here.....
[20:00] <popey> note the /topic
[20:00] <popey> we moved to oftc due to the netsplits
[20:01] <Seveas> it was also on oftc, as announced in the channel and in the topic
[20:01] <popey> besides which ZachK_  you're not listed https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Membership/RegionalBoards/EMEA
[20:01] <ZachK_> i did
[20:01] <ZachK_> nevermind
[20:05] <keffie_jayx> people
[20:06] <JanC> maco: I'd think the larger an IRC network is the easier it is to disrupt 1 part of it  ;)
[20:06] <keffie_jayx> please read the topic
[20:06] <keffie_jayx> the meeting is in irc.oftc.net
[20:06] <maco> keffie_jayx: we're just chatting
[20:06] <maco> JanC: i figured theyd have the bandwidth to withstand a fairly big botnet
[20:07] <keffie_jayx> no problem, feel free to chat
[20:07] <keffie_jayx> but if anyone is interested ... we are over there
[20:26] <keffie_jayx> Just a reminder... the LoCo Council Meeting is in irc.oftc.net #ubuntu-meeting
[20:29] <keffie_jayx> ALGUIEN DE HONDURAS?
[20:29] <keffie_jayx> Just a reminder... the LoCo Council Meeting is in irc.oftc.net #ubuntu-meeting
[20:29] <keffie_jayx> Honduras is up
[20:34] <DiegoTc> not late?
[20:34] <popey> DiegoTc: no
[20:34] <tatica1> :D
[20:34] <popey> DiegoTc: we're in #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net
[20:34] <popey> because of the netsplits here on freenode
[20:34] <popey> so do join us
[20:35] <DiegoTc> okay
[20:44] <DiegoTc> hollman it is #ubuntu-meeting on irc.oftc.net
[20:45] <PabloRubianes> irc.oftc.net
[20:49] <keffie_jayx> Anyone here from EL Salvador?
[21:49] <tatica1> czajkowski
[21:50] <tatica1> can you tell me where can i get the Log of our approval?
[21:51] <ulysses__> tatica1: You can find the logs of meetings here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs
[21:52] <tatica1> ulysses_ thank you
[21:52] <ulysses__> yw
[21:56] <FFEMTcJ> Anyone around who change change the topic? Beginner Team meeting is going to oftc also.. popey ?
[21:57] <popey> sure
[21:57] <FFEMTcJ> Thank you popey !
[21:57] <popey> np
[21:58] <Silver-Fox-> Thank you
[21:59] <Silver-Fox-> popey, erm,  Mootbot doesn't seem to be in OFTC #ubuntu-meeting.   :(
[22:00] <DiegoTc> Silver-Fox-,  think popey left
[22:00] <FFEMTcJ> Silver-Fox-: half the day i dont think MootBot has been in here either
[22:00] <FFEMTcJ> heh
[22:54] <czajkowski> FFEMTcJ: it wont be
[22:54] <czajkowski> it's not on that server it's on here