=== Guest44811 is now known as davidm === swoody_ is now known as swoody === fader_ is now known as fader|away === thekorn_ is now known as thekorn [13:01] * persia peers about [13:07] * persia reads https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mobile/2010-February/002655.html and goes to fiddle with REVU instead [13:07] heh [13:10] * xnox is testing connection [13:13] ah ..no meeting today [13:13] :'( [13:15] * MenZa hands coffee all around to substitute the meeting. [13:16] * ian_brasil should actually *read* mails to the mobile list [13:19] * persia too, and in a timely manner :) [13:28] persia: hi.. when is the next asia regional board meeting? [13:28] vish, read here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Membership/RegionalBoards/AsiaOceania [13:29] * persia thanks BlackZ [13:29] persia, :D [13:29] BlackZ: i already saw that , but the date is an old one ;) [13:30] "The next meeting is scheduled for 26-Jan-2010, 10:00 UTC " [13:30] hmm [13:31] Right. I'll sort that. [13:31] * vish thanks persia :) [13:31] yes, it was a mistake ;) [13:34] OK. Fixed. [13:35] vish, good luck [13:35] thanks :) [13:35] ;) [14:57] * persia peers about [14:57] hello [14:58] * coolbhavi lifts his both hands and says present sir [14:58] * geser waves [14:58] * mok0 is here [14:59] * ScottK consults the coffee pot for motivation. [14:59] * MenZa slides ScottK some fresh coffee, noting the coffee pot has been sitting for a few hours. [15:00] hello [15:00] hello [15:01] o/ [15:01] * stgraber waves [15:01] right! who's chairing this one? [15:01] hi [15:01] * persia can [15:01] I vaguely recall that each of us from the previous board volunteered assuming that we got in, and I seem to be the only one ;-) [15:01] but I don't mind [15:02] cjwatson: o/ [15:02] OK :) [15:02] pitti: sorry, meant the only one still on the board :) [15:02] #startmeeting [15:02] Meeting started at 09:02. The chair is cjwatson. [15:02] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [15:03] [TOPIC] Action review [15:03] New Topic: Action review [15:03] well, first off, welcome to the new board :-) [15:03] we have a couple of carried-over actions [15:03] the election is obviously done ... [15:03] * persia to ask CC to make DMB an admin of ~universe-contributors, as part of the DMB/MC merge [15:03] CC still hasn't completed this. I'll prod them again. [15:04] nixternal: are you here, BTW? [15:04] persia: I'll have a look at it later on [15:04] dholbach: Great. [15:04] no cody-somerville either [15:04] A related issue, but maybe OT for this meeting is currently the motu-release team does not have any administrators [15:04] hhello sorry I'm late [15:04] persia: maybe just remind me quick - I'm not awake yet ;) [15:04] ScottK: eek. though wasn't it due to be merged into ubuntu-release at some point? [15:05] cjwatson: It is. [15:05] Note that while we can hear xnox's application, as a result, we can't act on it today. [15:05] In the meantime it ought to have some admin. [15:05] dholbach: DMB to be admin of ~universe-contributors. Approved by vote in a CC meeting, pending election completion. [15:05] Will the release team merge be discussed in the release team meeting on Friday? [15:05] ScottK: I've made ubuntu-release an admin. [15:05] cjwatson: Thanks [15:05] dholbach: No meeting this Friday [15:05] persia: how come? we have 5/7 [15:06] ScottK: ah ok [15:06] It's not controversial though, just a matter of agreeing and doing it. [15:06] cjwatson: We just don't currently have authority to do anything (although as above, dholbach may be able to sort that shortly) [15:06] persia: oh. I can act on it. [15:06] I think. [15:06] Needs CC, I thought. [15:06] * cjwatson looks [15:07] persia: let me do it now [15:07] But if it's TB, that would be nice. [15:07] dholbach: Thanks. [15:07] s [15:08] persia: universe-contributors is administered by motu-council which is administered by techboard [15:08] wasn't u-u-c delegated to the MC by the CC? [15:08] cjwatson: Odd, but OK. It seems like it ought be a CC thing, since it's about membership. [15:08] geser: It was, which is why I don't understand the current model. [15:09] [TOPIC] MOTU direction (ScottK, cjwatson) [15:09] New Topic: MOTU direction (ScottK, cjwatson) [15:09] persia: as member of CC I can't change owner. [15:09] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Specs/LucidMOTU [15:09] we did some drafting work on this yesterday, and had some discussion [15:09] Thanks to persia for doing most of the drafting work (almost all). [15:10] there's a bit of discussion yet to be had on the role of motu-council, which I believe is going to be brought up on relevant mailing lists - but I'd like not to block on it [15:10] I think as a starting place for that discussion what's in the spec makes sense. [15:11] I'd like it if DMB members could look this over and confirm whether or not they're happy [15:11] I'd like to suggest that discussion on MOTU Council be separated from discussion on MOTU. It only makes sense to discuss MC if there is MOTU, and if so, MOTU, as then defined, is likely to have opinions beyond ours. [15:11] I realise that this was slightly short notice so if people aren't prepared then we can do it by mail [15:12] I'm happy with it, aside from current (separate) confusions regarding the nature of delegation to delegated teams. [15:13] But I don't think that the future of MOTU needs to block on that discussion, and would expect all docs to come in line by separate means. [15:13] soren,geser,stgraber,nixternal: do you guys want to discuss this in-band now, or out-of-band by mail? [15:13] I was really hoping to get this done today, so I'm reading through it now. [15:13] Yes. Please. [15:14] If I have time to read it now, then we can do it today [15:14] as long as we leave enough time for the applications :-) [15:14] * cjwatson gets coffee .. [15:14] I'm reading through it now [15:15] persia: While I agree that the discussion about MOTU council should be separate, I don't see how that will really make sense when the proposal specifically talks about how the MC will fit into this new world order. [15:16] we could mark the parts about the MC as pending somehow [15:16] Marking them as pending makes sense to me. I just think that future-of-MOTU and future-of-MC are separable discussions in some ways, and would rather focus on a good defintion for MOTU, if we are to keep it. [15:16] ScottK brought up yesterday that the MC is elected by MOTU and thus MOTU as a whole really ought to have a say in that (and what persia said above concurs, if I'm understanding correctly) [15:16] I agree. [15:17] cjwatson: You are understanding correctly [15:17] Personally, I don't see the sense in saying we want to have a group with no governance, but OK. [15:18] ScottK: I don't think anyone is saying that. [15:19] The point is that the decision about the future of the MC is a separate discussion, and one that should be taken by MOTU. [15:19] Fair enough. [15:19] If the decision is that the stuff in the spec is draft and it's delegated to MOTU as a whole to decide it, I'm good with that. [15:20] (I'll call time on this at :30 if we aren't done before then, to allow sufficient time for the three applications) [15:20] * xnox is back [15:20] ScottK: draft for just the (pending) MC bits? [15:20] persia: Yes. [15:20] stuff in the spec .... about mc .... [15:22] heh. Yes. [15:22] do I read the current spec/draft correctly that the DMB will handle MOTU (and UUC) applications or is that to be discussed first? [15:22] That's what's in the current spec. [15:23] so I had thought this was obvious based on the way we just did the DMB election, but I've had the impression not everyone shares this [15:23] as a small nit, "multiverse" should also be allowed in the Upload Permissions paragraph [15:23] I think that it would be part of the future discussion about if there is an MC, what powers the DMB might choose to delegate to it. [15:23] pitti: agreed, I'll edit [15:23] pitti: Yes. [15:24] I think this is the TB's power to delegate (but apparently this too is unclear ...) [15:24] (and if we get everyone to agree on the relevant delegation it may end up not mattering) [15:24] geser: Based on the contents of the 22 Dec DMB meeting, the DMB would certainly be hearing applications for Contributing Developers, regardless of any MC role. [15:24] We have 5 minutes left. [15:25] Can we get some agreement on if MOTU continues to exist? [15:25] cjwatson: Yes. That's the delegation confusions I mentioned earlier, but that's surely completely separable, and we can clean that up when entirely resolved. [15:25] persia: yes [15:26] * cjwatson at least has no appetite for deleting MOTU [15:26] and I don't see how that would be a useful thing to do [15:27] In the section Identity Communication, there is a discussion about developer teams. Is it correct to assume that every developer MUST be a member of at least ONE team= [15:27] ? [15:28] that's true already on a very basic technical level [15:28] I think that's what defines the term. [15:28] I'd be happy to continue MOTU, so long as it is redefined based on some set of goals, rather than just "deal with universe/multiverse". [15:28] since LP works in terms of teams [15:28] persia: Does the current spec satisfy that requirement in your opinion? [15:28] ScottK: Yes. [15:28] That spec makes a lot of sense for me and I'm fine with it, with the exception of the MC bit as discussed above which should be a separate discussion [15:29] * ScottK notes we are down to one minute and would really like this voted and done. [15:29] mok0: There exist some people who are bare members of ~ubuntu-dev for various reasons, but teams are generally preferred. [15:29] OK yes [15:29] [VOTE] approve community-lucid-motu other than pending motu-council sections [15:29] Please vote on: approve community-lucid-motu other than pending motu-council sections. [15:29] 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 [15:29] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [15:29] does the MC discussion also include "developer approvals" (from the Preserved Functions)? [15:29] geser: Yes, combined with some TB/DMB role defintion stuff. [15:29] +1 [15:29] +1 received from persia. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [15:30] who is responsible till the future of MC is clear? [15:30] does anyone in practice object to the DMB doing this? [15:30] For developer approvals is DMB [15:30] Discussion about MC should start right after this decision is made [15:30] I'd say it reverts to the appropriate groups delegating to the MC (CC, TB, DMB), depending on the nature of the item the MC would have done. [15:31] mok0: Yes. [15:31] +1 [15:31] +1 received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:31] +1 [15:31] +1 received from soren. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [15:32] +1 [15:32] +1 received from stgraber. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:32] +1 [15:32] +1 received from cjwatson. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5 [15:32] [ENDVOTE] [15:32] Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5 [15:32] I'd vote plus one if I could :) [15:32] Who wants the action to trigger the MC discussion? [15:32] OK, excellent. We'll bring this up at the TB meeting next week as well just to make sure all the is are dotted and such [15:32] I'll take it. [15:32] ScottK: Thanks. [15:32] (pending TB confirmation) [15:32] May I suggest that the acronym MOTU be said to mean "Masters of the Unknown" until further notice? [15:33] :) [15:33] cjwatson: Would you please make an action for me. [15:33] rofl [15:33] It sounds cool and I'd like to be one :) [15:33] [ACTION] ScottK to trigger MC discussion [15:33] ACTION received: ScottK to trigger MC discussion [15:33] Thanks. [15:33] [TOPIC] Per-package uploader: Martin-Eric Racine for xserver-xorg-video-geode [15:33] New Topic: Per-package uploader: Martin-Eric Racine for xserver-xorg-video-geode [15:34] Um, not yet. [15:34] what did I miss? [15:34] oh [15:34] Application Process. [15:34] bah [15:34] (without which we can't possibly approve anyting :) ) [15:34] [TOPIC] Approval of the application process for new applications [15:34] New Topic: Approval of the application process for new applications [15:34] [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/ApplicationProcess [15:34] LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/ApplicationProcess [15:35] can we move straight to a vote on this? it seems quite simple [15:35] That page was basically cribbed from the MC process and language changed. [15:35] [VOTE] ratify https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/ApplicationProcess [15:35] Please vote on: ratify https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/ApplicationProcess. [15:35] 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 [15:35] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [15:35] +1 [15:35] +1 received from persia. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [15:35] +1 [15:35] +1 received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:35] +1 [15:35] +1 received from soren. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [15:35] +1 [15:35] +1 [15:35] +1 received from cjwatson. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:35] +1 received from stgraber. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5 [15:36] [ENDVOTE] [15:36] Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5 [15:36] Yay. [15:36] right, duly constituted and able to conduct business? :-) [15:36] [TOPIC] Per-package uploader: Martin-Eric Racine for xserver-xorg-video-geode [15:36] New Topic: Per-package uploader: Martin-Eric Racine for xserver-xorg-video-geode [15:36] Excellent. Might I propose that we waive any minor variations from this procedure for today's applicants? [15:36] agreed [15:37] Martin-Eric isn't here, but this application has been on the table for a very long time [15:38] there also was a beginning email vote from the old board, but it timed out [15:38] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine FTR [15:38] this is only about PPU for xserver-xorg-video-geode, right? as the applications also mentions cups-pdf [15:39] he applied for both [15:39] geser: Martin-Eric is already able to upload cups-pdf by virtue of motu membership [15:39] ah [15:39] well, except in hardy, but that would go through SRU anyway [15:42] That's probably my mistake, as I added the item to the agenda based on a mail I received, rather than by following any particular process. [15:42] I have no issues with this application; looking at the changelog, he seems to be the package's only maintainer in practice anyway, and there's an endorsement here from one of our X team [15:42] I have sponsored his packages to D/U for many years, no issue with them [15:42] he has the hardware to test, and is eager to keep it working with all U releases [15:42] Bryce's comment has a bit of a hint about SRU handling in it, but that's the SRU team's problem :-) [15:43] Shall we move to vote, in the interest of hearing other applicants? [15:43] I'm also very familiar with his work on Geode GX2 for LTSP, I've been one of his beta-tester for a while as we are quite few with the hardware ;) [15:43] I'm happy to vote now. [15:43] [VOTE] approve Martin-Eric Racine for xserver-xorg-video-geode upload [15:43] Please vote on: approve Martin-Eric Racine for xserver-xorg-video-geode upload. [15:43] 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 [15:43] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [15:43] +1 [15:43] +1 received from soren. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [15:43] +1 [15:43] +1 received from stgraber. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:43] +1 [15:43] +1 received from geser. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [15:43] +1 [15:43] +1 received from persia. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:43] (apologies for persistently mangling his name, BTW, this connection is slow enough without having to try to enter UTF-8 as well) [15:43] +1 [15:43] [ENDVOTE] [15:43] +1 received from cjwatson. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5 [15:43] Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5 [15:44] I'll implement that as soon as the meeting is done, then [15:44] [TOPIC] DmitrijsLedkovs for Ubuntu Contributing Developer [15:44] New Topic: DmitrijsLedkovs for Ubuntu Contributing Developer [15:44] * xnox 0/ [15:44] xnox: thanks for attending [15:45] * xnox has a lecture right now, but it's ok =) [15:46] anyone have any questions for xnox? [15:46] * cjwatson guesses everyone is quickly reading the wiki :-) [15:47] xnox: A number of your endorsers mention that you need a bit more experience. Are there specific actions you've planned to gain that? [15:47] heh :) [15:47] persia: lately I've done more syncs / merges. And I'm planning to get involved with debian qa as well. [15:48] I'm maintaining packaging in ~pkgcrosswire for debian and ubuntu and it does take quite a bit of time. [15:50] xnox: What differences are there in the packages that require continued maintenance in a PPA? Alternately, what issues have you had getting these changes applied to the commonly distributed applications? [15:51] dh 7 missing as well as package names changes - eg xulrunner-dev has a few names in hardy -> sid [15:51] hence you have to rely on less automated packaging [15:51] these issues were mostly sorted for ~pkgcrosswire by using cdbs & backporting debhelper. Not ideal imho. [15:52] Ah, so ~pkgcrosswire is mostly a backports repo? [15:53] yes. sword & apps were out of date. The upstream approached mailing lists and asked to update them in debian & ubuntu [15:53] we started with packaging and decided to offer ppa for everyone cause apps in the archive where 3 years old [15:53] Are they now up to date in lucid? [15:54] They are up-to date in karmic and lucid [15:54] and testing/squeeze [15:54] we are in sync =) [15:54] we're running low on time; any further questions before we move to a vote? [15:55] * persia is done with questions, and ready to vote [15:55] [VOTE] approve DmitrijsLedkovs for Ubuntu Contributing Developer [15:55] Please vote on: approve DmitrijsLedkovs for Ubuntu Contributing Developer. [15:55] 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 [15:55] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [15:55] +1 [15:55] +1 received from cjwatson. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [15:55] +1 [15:55] +1 received from persia. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:55] +1 [15:55] +1 received from geser. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [15:55] +1 [15:55] +1 received from soren. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:55] +1 [15:55] +1 received from stgraber. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5 [15:55] [ENDVOTE] [15:55] Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5 [15:56] xnox: thanks! [15:56] xnox: Welcome to the team. [15:56] * xnox Ura =)))!!! [15:56] thank you everyone [15:56] [TOPIC] ElliotMurphy for MOTU and ubuntuone-client, ubuntuone-storage-protocol, erlang, couchdb, desktopcouch, evolution-couchdb, couchdb-glib, libubuntuone (not yet in the archive), python-configglue, rabbitmq-server [15:56] New Topic: ElliotMurphy for MOTU and ubuntuone-client, ubuntuone-storage-protocol, erlang, couchdb, desktopcouch, evolution-couchdb, couchdb-glib, libubuntuone (not yet in the archive), python-configglue, rabbitmq-server [15:56] (phew) [15:57] anyone mind if we overrun by a few minutes? [15:57] hello [15:57] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ElliotMurphy/DeveloperApplication for the application page [15:57] [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ElliotMurphy/DeveloperApplication [15:57] LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ElliotMurphy/DeveloperApplication [15:57] there is a thread between persia and I, it looks like my mail to the devel-permissions list didn't make it through moderation: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2010-January/002370.html [15:57] * ScottK has seen statik participating in #debian-python and getting stuff into Debian. +1 for that. [15:58] I'd like to break this application up into chunks, if we could, as I'm certain I can't give +1 or -1 on the entirely. [15:58] s/entirely/entirety/ [15:58] thats fine with me === neversfelde is now known as neversfelde|mobi === neversfelde|mobi is now known as neversfelde [15:59] persia: i assume it's about evolution-couchdb/couchdb-glib upload rights, since I haven't uploaded those before. i'm preparing the next uploads for those packages in lucid right now (and converting to format 3.0 (quilt) at the same time) [15:59] so i totally understand separating those out to a later time [15:59] statik: That's part of it. For those, I'd much rather see a PPU application from the person actually maintaining them :) [16:02] persia: any particular chunks you'd prefer? === yofel_ is now known as yofel [16:02] I'm having a little bit of trouble looking through all statik's material in time, which is normally a good sign :-) [16:03] cjwatson: MOTU, PPU for evolution-couchdb/couchdb-glib, PPU for ubuntu-one-client, ubuntuone-storage-protocol, erlang. I don't know where to put couchdb and desktopcouch, but either of the PPU categories would be fine. I'd like to ignore libubuntuone for now. [16:04] couchdb and desktopcouch seem to be fairly established things strongly linked to u1 [16:05] yes. i'm also co-maintaining couchdb in debian-erlang, and working to get the changes we made in ubuntu back up to debian [16:05] and Elliot's been involved in their maintenance, though also CHad [16:05] I'm good with couchdb and desktopcouch falling into the ubuntuone-client/erlang category. [16:05] is there any appetite for an ubuntu-erlang team at the moment? [16:06] it's something that I haven't thought too much about - the debian one is almost dead and only has one uploader [16:06] i certainly care a lot about erlang in ubuntu [16:06] but haven't figured out what it would take to start a team [16:07] enthusiasm and organisation, mostly :-) [16:07] I had one other person join me with working on making the erlang history available in bzr, but thats fizzled now that the ericsson erlang team has started publishing from clearcase into github [16:07] :-( [16:08] this is a win for erlang, and i think there's some things i can do with the git importers to make it also useful on launchpad [16:08] mm, I guess so [16:08] yeah, daily snapshots are so much nicer than only getting tarballs flung over the fence [16:08] we've seen bugs being caught and fixed in the daily snapshots already [16:10] any further questions before we move on with a vote on ... let's say MOTU first? [16:11] [VOTE] approve ElliotMurphy for MOTU [16:11] Please vote on: approve ElliotMurphy for MOTU. [16:11] 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 [16:11] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [16:12] +0 : I like to see a broader sweep for MOTU, but all the code changes I reviewed looked excellent. [16:12] Abstention received from persia. 0 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 0 [16:12] Had the meeting for Ubuntu membership (EMEA) started already? [16:12] iaculallad: No. [16:12] what time would it start? [16:12] @ persia: What time would it start? [16:13] iaculallad: I don't know, but we're in the middle of another meeting just now. [16:13] +1 (I actually thought statik was MOTU already) [16:13] +1 received from soren. 1 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 1 [16:13] iaculallad: in 4 hours [16:13] +0: I'd like to see some more sponsored uploads to be able to better judge the packaging skills [16:14] +1 : broader sweep granted, but I like Elliot's style so far and I don't anticipate problems [16:14] +1 received from cjwatson. 2 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 2 [16:14] +0 [16:14] Abstention received from stgraber. 2 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 2 [16:14] stgraber: That's for the EMEA region right? [16:14] I'd also like seeing more sponsored uploads [16:14] geser: I think you need an extra space there for MootBot to take it [16:14] +0 [16:14] Abstention received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now 2 [16:15] [ENDVOTE] [16:15] Final result is 2 for, 0 against. 3 abstained. Total: 2 [16:15] uh, is that a pass or not? vote lawyers? :-) [16:16] That would be a pass [16:16] There weren't any objections, but the voting parties weren't quorate. Maybe send an email asking for our missing members to chime in, and if none object, let the motion pass? [16:16] [ACTION] cjwatson to ask nixternal and cody-somerville for votes on statik/MOTU by mail [16:16] ACTION received: cjwatson to ask nixternal and cody-somerville for votes on statik/MOTU by mail [16:18] [VOTE] approve ElliotMurphy for ubuntuone-client, ubuntuone-storage-protocol, erlang, couchdb, desktopcouch, python-configglue, rabbitmq-server upload [16:18] Please vote on: approve ElliotMurphy for ubuntuone-client, ubuntuone-storage-protocol, erlang, couchdb, desktopcouch, python-configglue, rabbitmq-server upload. [16:18] 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 [16:18] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [16:18] * statik holds his breath [16:18] I bundled python-configglue and rabbitmq-server there, didn't see a reason not to [16:19] +1 : statik has a good history of work on these packages, and sufficient time to spend to make sure they are in great shape. [16:19] +1 received from persia. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [16:19] +1 on this with more confidence, if Elliot shouldn't upload these I'm not sure who should. :-) [16:19] +1 received from cjwatson. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [16:19] +1 [16:19] +1 received from stgraber. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 [16:19] The bundling makes sense. They have the same sort of history. [16:20] +1 [16:20] +1 received from soren. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 [16:20] +1 [16:20] +1 received from geser. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5 [16:20] [ENDVOTE] [16:20] Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5 [16:21] shall we postpone evolution-couchdb/couchdb-glib for the moment, as discussed earlier? [16:21] Postpone? I'm happy to vote on them, I just wanted them separate. [16:21] oh, I misunderstood [16:21] * soren is also happy to vote now [16:22] [VOTE] approve ElliotMurphy for evolution-couchdb, couchdb-glib upload [16:22] Please vote on: approve ElliotMurphy for evolution-couchdb, couchdb-glib upload. [16:22] 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 [16:22] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting [16:22] -1 : Don't apply for PPU to sponsor someone else's work, get Rodrigo to apply. [16:22] -1 received from persia. 0 for, 1 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -1 [16:22] +0 - would prefer an upload first [16:22] Abstention received from cjwatson. 0 for, 1 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now -1 [16:22] (although I don't actually expect a *problem*) [16:23] +0 (same reasoning as cjwatson) [16:23] Abstention received from soren. 0 for, 1 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now -1 [16:23] +0 [16:23] Abstention received from geser. 0 for, 1 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now -1 [16:23] +0 [16:23] Abstention received from stgraber. 0 for, 1 against. 4 have abstained. Count is now -1 [16:23] [ENDVOTE] [16:23] Final result is 0 for, 1 against. 4 abstained. Total: -1 [16:23] OK. That can't pass, even with the other votes. [16:23] statik: OK - sorry this was a bit complicated, but at least there is no doubt on seven packages [16:24] I will implement that after the meeting [16:24] i'm happy to reapply for this later, i think it makes sense. persia, just to be clear i'm not applying to sponsor the packaging work that rodrigo does, i'm doing packaging work myself because rodrigo is busy doing the main dev work on those libraries (which i am code reviewing). i will definitely ask rodrigo to apply for PPU as well though [16:24] cjwatson, no problem. thanks everyone! [16:24] statik: OK. That is different than I understood from https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2010-January/002371.html [16:25] statik: If you proceed with that, and are involved in the packaging for the next few, I'll change my mind quickly. [16:25] statik: I think it will help if you prepare some uploads of these yourself [16:25] yeah, when you said that just know i realized the way i used 'sponsor' was ambiguous [16:25] absolutely, i'm working on those packages on my laptop today [16:26] whats the time frame to find out the results from the MOTU email vote? [16:26] statik: We'll tie them down at the next meeting if we haven't heard, but we can probably get answers this week. [16:27] excellent. thanks very much for staying late to consider my application [16:27] [TOPIC] AOB [16:27] New Topic: AOB [16:27] (based on the common latencies of the individuals involved) [16:27] over time, I hope nobody has anything :-) [16:28] #endmeeting [16:28] Meeting finished at 10:28. [16:28] thanks everyone [16:28] cjwatson, when ll cyphermox_ and my application be reviewed [16:28] ? [16:28]