| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk | ||
| === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha | ||
| === slangase` is now known as slangasek | ||
| === jjohansen is now known as jj-afk | ||
| === Destine is now known as ofaron | ||
| === ubott2 is now known as ubottu | ||
| === bilalakhtar_ is now known as bilalakhtar | ||
| nhandler | #startmeeting | 21:00 |
|---|---|---|
| MootBot | Meeting started at 15:00. The chair is nhandler. | 21:00 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 21:00 |
| nhandler | Who is here for the IRCC meeting? | 21:00 |
| Seeker` | o/ | 21:00 |
| jussi | o/ | 21:00 |
| topyli | o/ | 21:00 |
| tsimpson | o/ | 21:00 |
| jussi | we have quorum! | 21:00 |
| rww_ | o/ (kinda) | 21:00 |
| nhandler | [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda | 21:01 |
| MootBot | LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda | 21:01 |
| nhandler | [TOPIC] -offtopic 'support' discussion policy | 21:01 |
| MootBot | New Topic: -offtopic 'support' discussion policy | 21:01 |
| nhandler | Pici: You around? | 21:01 |
| Seeker` | -20:01:55- [freenode] ~s~ idle : 0 days 18 hours 42 mins 48 secs signon: Sun Oct 3 22:00:19 2010 | 21:02 |
| nhandler | Yeah, I just noticed that Seeker` | 21:02 |
| nhandler | Does anyone know enough about what he wanted to talk about for us to discuss this? | 21:02 |
| nhandler | If not, we can hold off on this until the next meeting | 21:02 |
| jussi | not I | 21:02 |
| jussi | lets do that. | 21:02 |
| topyli | or reopen later in this one if he appears late | 21:02 |
| nhandler | [AGREED] Defer discussion about -offtopic 'support' discussion policy until next meeting | 21:03 |
| MootBot | AGREED received: Defer discussion about -offtopic 'support' discussion policy until next meeting | 21:03 |
| nhandler | [TOPIC] All core channel ops should have +o in -ops | 21:03 |
| MootBot | New Topic: All core channel ops should have +o in -ops | 21:03 |
| nhandler | Seeker`: Care to introduce this topic? | 21:03 |
| Seeker` | ok | 21:03 |
| Seeker` | basically, as it stands, the people that have +o in -ops is pretty arbitrary | 21:03 |
| Seeker` | there isn't a good coverage of all timezones at present, I've had occasion myself to call !ops in -ops and the call has gone unanswered | 21:04 |
| Seeker` | leaving 2 or 3 ops sitting in -ops not being able to do anything about a troll sitting there taunting us | 21:04 |
| jussi | My view is that we need to get the core ops thing up and running, and then the core ops will be given +o in -ops. (as planned) | 21:05 |
| Seeker` | The way I see it, if someone is trusted enough to have +o in one or more core channels, they should be trusted enough to have +o in -ops. I understand that the rules in -ops are a bit different to core channels, so perhaps a delay between becoming +o in a core channel and -ops may be appropriate, until individuals understand howt he channel works better | 21:06 |
| Seeker` | -done- | 21:06 |
| tsimpson | personally, I'm more inclined to give people +o before we get the core ops thing sorted | 21:07 |
| tsimpson | it is, after all, the ops channel | 21:07 |
| Tm_T | question is, to who? (: | 21:07 |
| tsimpson | for the moment, I'm all for giving the operators in core channels +o | 21:08 |
| nhandler | My biggest issue is that the channel has always been treated as an exception. ~ubuntu-core-irc-channels is a subteam of it on LP (which implies it is a core channel), but we've never really applied the OP application process to it | 21:08 |
| tsimpson | it should only take the modification of a template | 21:08 |
| topyli | isn't everybody in -ops an op in one or more core channels? | 21:09 |
| tsimpson | topyli: nope, for legacy reasons | 21:09 |
| Seeker` | topyli: not necessarily. Popey isn't | 21:09 |
| nhandler | topyli: Besides freenode staff, they should be (including the core devel ops) | 21:09 |
| jussi | I think we give a few ops in the correct timzones +o, as per the need, recruit the same as any other channel | 21:09 |
| nhandler | Seeker`: He is an #ubuntu-meeting op | 21:10 |
| rww_ | tsimpson: who falls under legacy reasons? as I understood it, those people got asked not to idle a while back | 21:10 |
| Seeker` | nhandler: my mistake, he said he wasn't a core channels op earlier :P | 21:10 |
| tsimpson | rww_: ops become inactive or leave, but the access list is not updated | 21:11 |
| rww_ | oh, okay, I misunderstood. thanks | 21:11 |
| Seeker` | jussi: any good reasons for only appointing a few people? | 21:11 |
| jussi | I really strongly think that in the meantime, before the core ops thing is implemented, we treat it like any other channel | 21:11 |
| nhandler | jussi: I would be in favor of that. | 21:11 |
| nhandler | I really hate exceptions ;) | 21:11 |
| topyli | i think this is a normal situation of a channel needing a few more ops | 21:12 |
| topyli | much like jussi said | 21:12 |
| Seeker` | jussi: surely it is more important to get the right people, rather than just giving it to people because they occupy the right timezone | 21:12 |
| nhandler | Seeker`: Which is why interested people would apply and get chosen by the IRCC (just like people interested in being an #ubuntu op have to do) | 21:12 |
| nhandler | We aren't just going to let some unqualified person be an OP (in any core channel) | 21:13 |
| topyli | Seeker`: timezone is one of the qualities that makes a person "right" | 21:13 |
| nhandler | But not the only one ;) | 21:14 |
| topyli | certainly not :) | 21:14 |
| tsimpson | ok, so which time zones do we feel are lacking? | 21:14 |
| Seeker` | just checking :) jussi's statement implied that timezone is the deciding factor | 21:15 |
| Seeker` | err, mainly from about midnight to 9am UK time is when I've seen the most incidents | 21:15 |
| ikonia | to be honest, I don't think there is a blank spot, it's hit and miss and luck of the draw | 21:16 |
| nhandler | jussi, topyli, tsimpson: Are we basically in agreement that we will treat #ubuntu-ops like any other core channel in need of more OPs at least until we get the core-ops set up? | 21:16 |
| jussi | Im usually around on most days UK 7-9 | 21:16 |
| tsimpson | nhandler: as it is a core channel, yes | 21:17 |
| topyli | nhandler: i would agree | 21:17 |
| jussi | nhandler: make it a vote, but yes | 21:17 |
| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk | ||
| nhandler | jussi: Fine. Not much point in a vote when there is clear agreement, but for formalities sake... | 21:17 |
| tsimpson | I don't think we need to vote, it's listed as core anyway | 21:17 |
| Seeker` | ikonia: agreed. At the moment half of the -ops access list is inactive, and it is pretty much dependant on who is online when | 21:17 |
| rww_ | ikonia: I don't really agree. This is the third time I think that timeslot's been mentioned as not having enough ops in the past year.. | 21:17 |
| Seeker` | ikonia: but out of all time periods, I think that is the worst | 21:17 |
| nhandler | [VOTE] Treat #ubuntu-ops like other core channels in need of more OPs at least until core-ops are setup | 21:17 |
| MootBot | Please vote on: Treat #ubuntu-ops like other core channels in need of more OPs at least until core-ops are setup. | 21:17 |
| MootBot | Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to MootBot | 21:17 |
| MootBot | E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting | 21:17 |
| topyli | +1 | 21:18 |
| MootBot | +1 received from topyli. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 | 21:18 |
| jussi | +1 | 21:18 |
| MootBot | +1 received from jussi. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 | 21:18 |
| tsimpson | +1 | 21:18 |
| MootBot | +1 received from tsimpson. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 | 21:18 |
| ikonia | rww_: sorry, I'm sure there are blank spots, but not ones that suffer over others | 21:18 |
| nhandler | +1 | 21:18 |
| MootBot | +1 received from nhandler. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 | 21:18 |
| jussi | awesome | 21:18 |
| nhandler | [ENDVOTE] | 21:18 |
| MootBot | Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 4 | 21:18 |
| tsimpson | so, we start the process to assign new ops for TZs we need | 21:18 |
| topyli | also, let's recruit some ops there :) | 21:18 |
| nhandler | [AGREED] Treat #ubuntu-ops like other core channels in need of more OPs at least until core-ops are setup | 21:18 |
| MootBot | AGREED received: Treat #ubuntu-ops like other core channels in need of more OPs at least until core-ops are setup | 21:18 |
| nhandler | tsimpson: What timezones should that be? midnight to 9am UK time ? | 21:19 |
| tsimpson | we should note when announcing, that it will (unlike other core channels) be restricted to core channel ops only | 21:19 |
| topyli | i wouldn't think it will be difficult to get ops for -ops, as we have very good op candidates on the channel :) | 21:19 |
| jussi | topyli: +1 | 21:19 |
| nhandler | tsimpson: Agreed. As only core channel ops can be in there, other users would not be qualified | 21:20 |
| jussi | but yeah, that tz sounds about right tio me | 21:20 |
| nhandler | [IDEA] Recruit OPs for midnight to 9am UK time | 21:20 |
| MootBot | IDEA received: Recruit OPs for midnight to 9am UK time | 21:20 |
| tsimpson | nhandler: I think US and AU (maybe Asia) would fall into those times | 21:20 |
| nhandler | What is UK time? UTC+1 ? | 21:20 |
| tsimpson | it's quite a large gap | 21:20 |
| tsimpson | currently +1, as it's summer-time | 21:21 |
| nhandler | Well, the early portion of that range could definitely work for people in the US. But 9am UK would be pretty early for most people | 21:21 |
| Seeker` | well, apart from aus | 21:21 |
| jussi | 9am UK is good for Euro | 21:21 |
| topyli | generally i think we should take good care that someone always has access in -ops because that's where we forward our problems | 21:22 |
| jussi | its the euro early morning that is the most issue | 21:22 |
| topyli | well not our problems but you know, problems | 21:22 |
| nhandler | Does someone want to volunteer to send out an email about this? If not, I think I could handle the action | 21:22 |
| jussi | nhandler: I think tsimpson is planning one about the core ops, but there needs to be one about the op recruitment | 21:23 |
| nhandler | jussi: He sent that out earlier today | 21:23 |
| topyli | go ahead. we don't need to advertise this more publically since the email list should reach all eligible candidates | 21:23 |
| jussi | oh, havent looked at mail recently :D | 21:24 |
| nhandler | [ACTION] nhandler to send out email about recruiting OPs for #ubuntu-ops | 21:24 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: nhandler to send out email about recruiting OPs for #ubuntu-ops | 21:24 |
| nhandler | [TOPIC] Any other business? | 21:24 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Any other business? | 21:24 |
| rww_ | Any idea when you're going to be asking for more #ubuntu operator applications? | 21:25 |
| tsimpson | do you think more are needed? | 21:25 |
| jussi | rww_: we were planning on it soon | 21:25 |
| jussi | we did have a discussion about it | 21:25 |
| tsimpson | who is this "we" you keep going on about? ;p | 21:26 |
| Seeker` | the voices in jussi's head | 21:26 |
| topyli | :) | 21:26 |
| IdleOne | Don't know if more are needed but I for one am +1 for rww being a #ubuntu op | 21:26 |
| jussi | tsimpson: people who werent absent for ages :P | 21:26 |
| jussi | also, perhaps we should quickly breach the topic of copying the access list of #u to #u+1? | 21:26 |
| tsimpson | oh, yes we should | 21:27 |
| nhandler | [TOPIC] Copying access list of #ubuntu to #ubuntu+1 | 21:27 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Copying access list of #ubuntu to #ubuntu+1 | 21:27 |
| rww_ | tsimpson: yes, I think #ubuntu has a similar timezone coverage issue to -ops. The other day, I think the ops factoid got called two or three times before someone showed up, for example, and it's not an isolated thing. | 21:27 |
| nhandler | jussi: Care to breifly summarize this for everyone else? | 21:27 |
| tsimpson | rww_: looks like it'll happen soon anyway | 21:27 |
| * rww_ nods | 21:27 | |
| jussi | simply that we copy the access list across to +1 as there isnt much difference between them | 21:27 |
| tsimpson | and, imo, +1 is understaffed | 21:28 |
| jussi | yes, that too | 21:28 |
| IdleOne | agreed | 21:28 |
| topyli | it's a simple and good solution | 21:28 |
| topyli | i'm not sure if it's enough though, not all #u ops are automatically active in +1 | 21:29 |
| jussi | topyli: true, but we can then add more if needed. | 21:29 |
| rww_ | topyli: true, but it can only help that | 21:29 |
| nhandler | If we were to do this, would it be a one time copy? Or would we basically say "If you become a #u op you also become a +1 op"? | 21:29 |
| tsimpson | a few are, and we can send out a mail requesting people to idle there | 21:29 |
| ikonia | +1 goes up/down in activity | 21:29 |
| topyli | nhandler: i would make it permanent | 21:30 |
| ikonia | and it's normally quite a well behaved channel | 21:30 |
| tsimpson | they don't need to be especially active in there, just watch it | 21:30 |
| jussi | nhandler: I think the latter | 21:30 |
| jussi | and be able to respond to ops calls | 21:30 |
| topyli | and even if everybody doesn't join +1, it's still an improvement | 21:30 |
| tsimpson | as +1 is a support channel, it makes sense for #u ops to be ops there | 21:30 |
| nhandler | I have no objections as long as we document this on the wiki somewhere | 21:30 |
| nhandler | Shall we vote? | 21:31 |
| jussi | yes | 21:31 |
| jussi | basically that we unify and keep unified the #u and #u+1 lists | 21:31 |
| jussi | IMHO | 21:31 |
| nhandler | jussi: Well, it isn't really unifying, as there will be some OPs in +1 that aren't in #u | 21:32 |
| nhandler | But all #u ops will be ops in +1 | 21:32 |
| jussi | I suppose | 21:32 |
| nhandler | [VOTE] Make being an #ubuntu operator also grant operator access in #ubuntu+1 | 21:32 |
| MootBot | Please vote on: Make being an #ubuntu operator also grant operator access in #ubuntu+1. | 21:32 |
| MootBot | Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to MootBot | 21:32 |
| MootBot | E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting | 21:32 |
| topyli | +1 | 21:32 |
| MootBot | +1 received from topyli. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 | 21:32 |
| tsimpson | until we (probably I) get the access list stuff sorted, we can live with keeping existing ops for +1 around | 21:32 |
| tsimpson | +1 | 21:33 |
| MootBot | +1 received from tsimpson. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 | 21:33 |
| nhandler | +1 | 21:33 |
| MootBot | +1 received from nhandler. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 | 21:33 |
| jussi | +1 | 21:33 |
| MootBot | +1 received from jussi. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 | 21:33 |
| nhandler | [ENDVOTE] | 21:33 |
| MootBot | Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 4 | 21:33 |
| nhandler | [AGREED] Make being an #ubuntu operator also grant operator access in #ubuntu+1 | 21:33 |
| MootBot | AGREED received: Make being an #ubuntu operator also grant operator access in #ubuntu+1 | 21:33 |
| nhandler | Would someone like to document this on the wiki, send out an email to the ML, and update the access lists? | 21:33 |
| topyli | tsimpson: +1 is not going to be very busy for a while now, so there is time to fix this | 21:33 |
| tsimpson | topyli: if you know python, you can help :) | 21:34 |
| * tsimpson starts begging | 21:34 | |
| topyli | yes i've heard of python | 21:34 |
| nhandler | We also need to update LP to reflect this | 21:35 |
| tsimpson | once you know python, you can corrupt that knowledge with supybot | 21:35 |
| nhandler | tsimpson: Would you like this action? | 21:35 |
| tsimpson | where will we note it? | 21:36 |
| nhandler | tsimpson: Maybe on the OP application page | 21:36 |
| tsimpson | ah, we already have a "Notes" section, it will fit well there | 21:36 |
| nhandler | tsimpson: So are you fine with this action? | 21:36 |
| tsimpson | nhandler: ok, I'll do that | 21:37 |
| nhandler | [ACTION] tsimpson to document change on the OP application wiki page, send email to ML, update access lists, and update teams on LP | 21:37 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: tsimpson to document change on the OP application wiki page, send email to ML, update access lists, and update teams on LP | 21:37 |
| nhandler | [TOPIC] Any more business? | 21:37 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Any more business? | 21:37 |
| nhandler | jussi, tsimpson, topyli: Anything else? | 21:38 |
| tsimpson | nothing from me | 21:38 |
| topyli | nope | 21:38 |
| nhandler | In that case, any volunteers to do the post-meeting tasks? If not, I'll do them. | 21:40 |
| topyli | apparently not | 21:43 |
| nhandler | [ACTION] nhandler to do post-meeting tasks | 21:44 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: nhandler to do post-meeting tasks | 21:44 |
| nhandler | Great meeting everyone | 21:44 |
| nhandler | #endmeeting | 21:44 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 15:44. | 21:44 |
| topyli | thanks guys | 21:45 |
| === ian_brasil_ is now known as ian_brasil | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| === IdleOne is now known as MaverickOne | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!