[15:28] <Ming_Lei> Hi All
[16:01] <bjf> o/
[16:01] <bjf> o\
[16:01] <bjf> \o
[16:01] <bjf> \o/
[16:02] <bjf> -_o_-
[16:03] <ara> *\o/*
[16:04] <skaet> hi all,  I don't have an agenda made up for this week.
[16:04] <skaet> pressures of the natty release have taken priority for me.
[16:05] <skaet> is there a concensus to do a roundtable,  or should we reschedule to later in the week?
[16:05] <bjf> are we going to have more time or less, latter in the week ? :-P
[16:05] <skaet> I also didn't get around to surveying who would be around on Easter Monday,  so not sure about quorum.
[16:07] <skaet> bjf,  good point.
[16:07] <ara> skaet, a quick round table should be fine
[16:07] <skaet> who's here and has content for a round table style meeting?
[16:07] <skaet> heh,  ok
[16:07] <skaet> #startmeeting
[16:07] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:07. The chair is skaet.
[16:07] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:07] <sconklin> o/
[16:08] <skaet> ara, what's the update like from hardware certification side?
[16:09] <ara> o/
[16:09] <ara> We are planning to test the Maverick kernel currently on proposed. Our only concern is that the testing phase is the same week as the post-release week, were we need to run our full certification for 11.04.
[16:09] <ara> we were thinking about testing this week, hoping that all the patches are going to be verified
[16:10] <ara> sconklin, how likely do you think is that going to be?
[16:10] <sconklin> one sec, let me check my status
[16:10] <ara> if there are any patches reverted and kernel re-uploaded, we could try to do a best effort of 30 systems
[16:12] <bjf> ara, the cycle doesn't officially start until the 29th according to the schedule, so next week is bug verification
[16:13] <sconklin> I believe that this maverick wasn't intended for release, and was only for internal testing. The bugs should have been processed and they weren't. The more testing we get the better, but it will likely be replaced by a new kernel during the next cycle
[16:14] <ara> OK, thanks for the update
[16:14] <sconklin> and if there are testing resources available before the next cycle, I have another agenda item that may need them
[16:14] <skaet> ara, done?
[16:16] <ara> ..
[16:16] <ara> sorry :)
[16:17] <skaet> :)
[16:17] <skaet> sconklin,  how do things look from your perspective?
[16:18] <sconklin> I have two items that need attention.
[16:18] <sconklin> The first is that we've had a kernel in -proposed for dapper for over a month, and it hasn't received any updates to the tracking bug even indicating that it will boot.
[16:18] <sconklin> Therefore, Pitti will (rightfully) not publish it
[16:19] <sconklin> Pete said last week he'd see about getting some QA resources to test it, but I have not heard anything.
[16:19] <sconklin> We are going to block the next cycle for dapper unless this is resolved
[16:19] <sconklin> Second item:
[16:20] <sconklin> We still only have one archive admin who deals with kernel packages. We've had kernels in our PPA needing copying to -proposed since last week, but Martin has been on holidays and there's no trained replacement for him
[16:20] <sconklin> ..
[16:21] <skaet> Thanks sconklin.
[16:21] <skaet> just talking to pgraner about it now
[16:21] <skaet> he's jumping in to comment directly
[16:21] <pgraner> sconklin, we will have the cert team do testing to free qa up for the release, I'll get that moving today
[16:22] <sconklin> pgraner: cool, thanks
[16:22] <pgraner> sconklin, I'll be talking to victor tomorrow AM so just hang tight
[16:22] <skaet> only thing to keep in mind is that dapper will EOL on June 1,  and we probably need those CVEs out by then.
[16:22] <pgraner> skaet, ack
[16:23] <sconklin> skaet: yes, that's why we need to get the last one out, so we can get the next one out. At this pace, the next one will be the last one, and we're probably already going to be forced to respin the one we have any only get one more out
[16:23] <skaet> sconklin,  so clint is not available to backfill pitti yet?
[16:23] <sconklin> He's available but has not been trained
[16:24] <sconklin> s/any/and/
[16:24] <skaet> sconklin,  noted,  and will follow up with pitti directly about an ETA.
[16:24]  * bjf doesn't understand what the point of being "available" but unable to perform task gets us
[16:24] <sconklin> 'available' just means I could reach him today
[16:25] <skaet> sconklin, bjf - problem is that there needed to be something in the queue for pitti to show him on,  and right now we're intersecting release crunch where pitti's on critical path for several things there as well.
[16:25] <sconklin> and on holidays
[16:26] <bjf> skaet, there have been plenty of opportunities for training
[16:26] <skaet> bjf, sconklin.   Will follow up and see if it can become a priority for them both this Friday.
[16:27] <skaet> (after release ;) )
[16:27] <bjf> skaet, stable can't take a backseat to development forever
[16:27] <skaet> bjf,  I know,  its a balancing act though.
[16:29] <skaet> any one else have any points to bring up?
[16:29] <ara> o/
[16:29] <skaet> go ara
[16:29] <ara> Sorry, but I am still a bit confused by the maverick kernel
[16:30] <ara> shouldn't we have had another cycle before that? (I am trying to find the email Steve sent after the resync meeting we had, but still I haven't found it)
[16:31] <sconklin> another cycle before what? Sorry not getting your context.
[16:31] <skaet> ara,  the nattyreleaseinterlock, only has one this month.   Due to anticipated development release activity.
[16:31] <skaet> is that what you're asking about?
[16:31] <ara> skaet, OK, no worries, I will review my emails
[16:32] <skaet> coolio.
[16:32] <skaet> lets follow up by email thread then
[16:32] <skaet> any one else?
[16:32] <skaet> #endmeeting
[16:32] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:32.
[16:33] <skaet> Thanks ara, scoklin, bjf
[16:33] <ara> thanks skaet :)
[16:33] <skaet> appreciate the issues being raised, even if the answers aren't good right now.
[18:07] <jdstrand> o/
[18:07] <jjohansen> \o
[18:10]  * sbeattie WAVES
[18:10]  * sbeattie unsets caps-lock thanks to a reset input layer :-/
[18:11] <jdstrand> heh
[18:13] <kees> \o
[18:14] <jdstrand> cool, let's get started
[18:14] <jdstrand> #startmeeting
[18:14] <jdstrand> The meeting agenda can be found at:
[18:14] <jdstrand> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting
[18:14] <MootBot> Meeting started at 12:14. The chair is jdstrand.
[18:14] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[18:14] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting
[18:14] <jdstrand> [TOPIC] Review of any previous action items
[18:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review of any previous action items
[18:15] <jdstrand> [ACTION] kees to setup formalized sign-up page in wiki for qrt testing
[18:15] <MootBot> ACTION received:  kees to setup formalized sign-up page in wiki for qrt testing
[18:15] <jdstrand> I saw kees did this, and we are all working on it
[18:15] <jdstrand> thanks kees
[18:15] <jdstrand> [TOPIC] Weekly stand-up report
[18:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly stand-up report
[18:15] <kees> np!
[18:15] <jdstrand> I'll go first
[18:15] <jdstrand> I am on triage this week
[18:16] <jdstrand> I am doing iso testing today and whenever else I need to
[18:16] <jdstrand> I've started collecting blueprint ideas for oneiric
[18:16] <jdstrand> I'll have more on that later in the week
[18:16] <jdstrand> and will start a coordination page for peoples ideas
[18:17] <jdstrand> I do have a pending update that I hope to get to
[18:17] <jdstrand> that's it from me
[18:17] <jdstrand> mdeslaur is out today, but I know he has several updates in the works
[18:17] <jdstrand> micahg is on holiday the beginning of this week
[18:18] <jdstrand> but he has mozilla and chromium updates coming, patch piloting and the continued webkit work
[18:18] <jdstrand> kees: you're up
[18:18] <kees> cool. I'm on community this week
[18:19] <kees> I'm also continuing to make my way through the qrt list. most of the short/easy stuff has been done now, so it's slowing down a bit. :)
[18:19] <kees> I've been working steadily on AppArmor-for-Debian, and I think it's almost ready for upload now.
[18:20] <kees> I've also been making my way though the open CVEs in main.
[18:20] <kees> that's a very long list, but I've made progress. I'm going to write (finally) the changelog parser so this can be somewhat automated.
[18:21] <kees> it's literally been on the TODO list since we switched to using the current cve tracker. ;)
[18:21] <jdstrand> kees: re qrt> I'm not sure everything on there needs to be done. ideally, it would be, but mostly making sure that stuff where we have security features (eg, apparmor profiles, kernel stuff, etc) is working is the priority
[18:21] <jdstrand> kees: what do you think?
[18:21] <kees> jdstrand: yeah. to that end, it might make sense to go through and actually mark everything we think is "required", or not
[18:21] <sbeattie> jdstrand: dunno, I found an elinks issue that apparently regressed somewhere between hardy and karmic.
[18:22] <jdstrand> sbeattie: true..
[18:22] <sbeattie> though admittedly elinks is in universe now.
[18:22] <kees> I'd personally like to run them all, but there's only so much we can get done
[18:22] <jdstrand> kees: yeah, that is what I was thinking
[18:22]  * sbeattie hoes to push more on automation for qrt.
[18:22] <jdstrand> next cycle, all the non-interactive ones we should get qa to run
[18:22] <kees> anyway, that's it from me.
[18:23] <sbeattie> s/hoes/hopes/
[18:23] <kees> jdstrand: yeah
[18:23] <jdstrand> it sounds like that will be a reality once some upcoming changes are done
[18:23] <jdstrand> kees: re apparmor in debian> awesome! :)
[18:24] <jdstrand> kees: re open CVEs in main> what did you have in mind? is this for the devel release?
[18:25] <kees> jdstrand: see the $UCT/TODO file. I put an outline of the logic I want to employ. I suspect it would not be strictly automatic, but rather an interactive helper.
[18:25] <kees> i.e. "make the following change, based on this changelog?" [Y/n}
[18:25] <kees> it would apply to more than just devel, and could be used for universe too
[18:28] <jdstrand> kees: that sounds pretty cool
[18:28] <jdstrand> kees: I wonder about the trimmed changelogs in natty now... but that doesn't have to be discussed here
[18:29] <jdstrand> well, I guess it is getting the debian changelog, so it wouldn't matter anyway
[18:29] <jdstrand> anyhoo, cool stuff
[18:29] <jdstrand> sbeattie: you're up
[18:29] <sbeattie> Okay, I'm in the happy place this week, after being on community last week.
[18:30] <sbeattie> I'm still working on the php update; I have a maverick package built locally that I've tested, and am now back-and-forward porting patches to other releases.
[18:31] <sbeattie> I also did and will continue to do more qrt testing.
[18:31] <sbeattie> I'll probably pick up some iso testing as well.
[18:31] <sbeattie> I think that's it for me.
[18:32] <jdstrand> cool
[18:32] <jdstrand> [TOPIC] Miscellaneous and Questions
[18:32] <MootBot> New Topic:  Miscellaneous and Questions
[18:32] <jdstrand> If haven't already booked travel for oneiric rally, please do so
[18:32] <jdstrand> beyond that, I don't have anything else
[18:32] <jdstrand> does anyone have any other questions or items to discuss?
[18:35] <jdstrand> alrighty then
[18:35] <jdstrand> thanks everyone!
[18:35] <jdstrand> #endmeeting
[18:36] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:35.
[18:36] <sbeattie> jdstrand: thanks!
[18:36] <jdstrand> sure!
[19:59] <psusi> is it time for the developer board meeting?
[19:59] <Laney> Laney: bdrung_ cody-somerville stgraber maco geser: It Is Time.
[19:59]  * stgraber waves
[19:59] <Laney> ™
[20:00]  * cody-somerville is on a work call. Sorry.
[20:02]  * geser waves
[20:02] <cyphermox> o/
[20:03] <barry> o/
[20:03] <Laney> what's a quorum? 3? 4?
[20:03] <stgraber> 4 IIRC
[20:03]  * Laney rattles some cages
[20:03] <geser> roundup(7/2)=4
[20:04] <stgraber> maco was around not too long ago. bdrung_ said he'd be a bit late
[20:04] <Laney> :(
[20:05] <maco> hello
[20:05] <Laney> yay!
[20:05] <maco> don't know how long til my manager steals me away for a status meeting
[20:05] <Laney> let's hurry then
[20:05] <Laney> #startmeeting
[20:05] <MootBot> Meeting started at 14:05. The chair is Laney.
[20:05] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[20:06] <Laney> [topic] Review of previous action items
[20:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review of previous action items
[20:06] <geser> maco: did Slyvestre mail only you the reply to the questions on devel-permissions or are they stuck in the moderation queue?
[20:06] <Laney> Laney to update delegated teams to allow members to renew their memberships themselves — I did this, may have missed some because there's no LP way to enuberate them all
[20:06] <Laney> I made devel-permissions unmoderated
[20:06] <maco> geser: i havent gotten any emails
[20:07] <Laney> so I'll call that action done
[20:07] <Laney> [topic] Administrative Matters
[20:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Administrative Matters
[20:07] <Laney> Review progress of probationary period of Marco Rodrigues
[20:07] <Laney> cody-somerville: any progress?
[20:08] <Laney> never mind, let's move on :-)
[20:09] <geser> maco: your 3 replies to that one mail from him confused me as I assumed there were part of a discussion
[20:09] <Laney> [topic] MOTU application for Sylvestre Ledru
[20:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  MOTU application for Sylvestre Ledru
[20:09] <maco> geser: no, i just didn't think all the way through before hitting send :)
[20:09] <Laney> I assume Sylvestre isn't here
[20:09] <Laney> and there's an ongoing discussion on the mailing list, so I propose we just carry that on there
[20:10] <maco> Marcin Juszkiewicz is the first on the list that's not already been told we're processing him by email
[20:10] <Laney> yep
[20:10] <cyphermox> If I may just remind people to vote for my application ;)
[20:10] <cyphermox> (the email thread, I mean, of course)
[20:10] <maco> cyphermox: there was a reminder email yesterday and i ping'd for it today ;-)
[20:11] <cyphermox> maco, thx
[20:11] <cyphermox> fwiw, Marcin has my support
[20:11] <Laney> right, let's just say: please ask RAOF questions and vote for cyphermox as a matter of urgency. :-)
[20:11] <maco> hrw seems to be missing today
[20:11] <Laney> unless you are happy to move to a vote on RAOF, which I would be fine with.
[20:11] <maco> (hrw = marcin)
[20:12] <Laney> jelmer: are you here for your PPU application?
[20:13] <jelmer> Laney: hi!
[20:13] <Laney> excellent!
[20:13] <Laney> [topic] Per-Package Uploader application for Jelmer Vernooij
[20:13] <MootBot> New Topic:  Per-Package Uploader application for Jelmer Vernooij
[20:14] <Laney> jelmer is applying for upload access to bzr, bzr-svn, bzr-git, bzr-grep, bzr-hg, bzr-gtk, qbzr, bzr-cvsimport, bzr-dbus, bzr-email, bzr-explorer, bzr-fastimport, bzr-loom, bzr-pqm, bzr-rewrite, bzr-search, bzr-stats, bzr-upload, bzr-xmloutput, bzrtools, trac-bzr, wikkid, dulwich, subvertpy, meliae, tevent, talloc, ldb, samba4, heimdal, openchange, samba
[20:14] <Laney> jelmer: have you thought of going for a bzr package set? Are there likely to be any others interested in uploading a similar list of packages in the future?
[20:15] <jelmer> Laney: I think a bzr package set might be a good idea. Poolie also has PPU rights for just bzr-related packages, and there are others in the bzr world (maxb?) who might be interested in becoming a PPU in the future too.
[20:16] <Laney> I certainly think that the bzr world would be a good candidate for a package set, and would encourage you to ask for that soon :-)
[20:18] <Laney> As I'm always interested in Debian coordination: how well is pkg-bazaar working? Do you mainly do work in Debian first and then sync? Is there much delta?
[20:19] <jelmer> Laney: yeah, at the moment that's how things work mostly. I (and more recently, Andrew S-B) usually upload to Debian and the we request a sync.
[20:19] <jelmer> There is occasionally some delta around releases in Debian and Ubuntu, which makes the process trickier.
[20:19] <Laney> do you have any non-ubuntu people involved?
[20:20] <jelmer> Max Bowser does quite a bit of packaging too. He does use Ubuntu but he's not a Ubuntu or Debian developer; there are some other uploaders who only care about Debian but they've been busy with real-life recently.
[20:21] <Laney> :-)
[20:21] <Laney> maco: geser: stgraber: any questions?
[20:21] <stgraber> nope, I'm ready to vote.
[20:21] <geser> no
[20:22]  * stgraber is always happy to find more people with samba knowledge, that's usually useful to have around :)
[20:22] <Laney> alright, bzr packages first
[20:22] <Laney> [vote] grant jelmer PPU access to bzr, bzr-svn, bzr-git, bzr-grep, bzr-hg, bzr-gtk, qbzr, bzr-cvsimport, bzr-dbus, bzr-email, bzr-explorer, bzr-fastimport, bzr-loom, bzr-pqm, bzr-rewrite, bzr-search, bzr-stats, bzr-upload, bzr-xmloutput, bzrtools, trac-bzr, wikkid, dulwich, subvertpy, meliae
[20:22] <MootBot> Please vote on:  grant jelmer PPU access to bzr, bzr-svn, bzr-git, bzr-grep, bzr-hg, bzr-gtk, qbzr, bzr-cvsimport, bzr-dbus, bzr-email, bzr-explorer, bzr-fastimport, bzr-loom, bzr-pqm, bzr-rewrite, bzr-search, bzr-stats, bzr-upload, bzr-xmloutput, bzrtools, trac-bzr, wikkid, dulwich, subvertpy, meliae.
[20:22] <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
[20:22] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[20:23] <geser> +1
[20:23] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[20:23] <Laney> +1
[20:23] <MootBot> +1 received from Laney. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[20:23] <stgraber> +1
[20:23] <MootBot> +1 received from stgraber. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[20:24] <stgraber> maco, bdrung_, cody-somerville: ?
[20:26] <Laney> Might have to collect the remaining votes by email.
[20:27] <stgraber> well, there's not much point in continuing the meeting if we don't have quorum, so I'd just wait a few more minutes for maco to come back, cody-somerville to finish his call or bdrung_ to show up.
[20:27] <cody-somerville> I'm almost off my call
[20:27] <Laney> yep.
[20:31] <maco> im back
[20:31] <maco> sorry, my manager pulled me aside, and i'm +1 for jelmer
[20:32] <stgraber> maco: can you +1 the right way so the bot understands it ? :)
[20:32] <maco> +1
[20:32] <MootBot> +1 received from maco. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[20:32] <stgraber> thanks ;)
[20:32] <maco> ah i wasnt sure the bot was still listening, sorry
[20:32] <Laney> excellent
[20:32] <Laney> [endvote]
[20:32] <MootBot> Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 4
[20:32] <Laney> & the samba ones:
[20:33] <Laney> [vote] Grant jelmer PPU access to tdb tevent talloc ldb, samba4, heimdal, openchange, samba
[20:33] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Grant jelmer PPU access to tdb tevent talloc ldb, samba4, heimdal, openchange, samba.
[20:33] <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
[20:33] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[20:33] <Laney> +1
[20:33] <MootBot> +1 received from Laney. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[20:33] <geser> +1
[20:33] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[20:34] <stgraber> +1 [upstream + maintainer in Debian]
[20:34] <MootBot> +1 received from stgraber. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[20:34] <maco> +1
[20:34] <MootBot> +1 received from maco. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[20:34] <Laney> [endvote]
[20:34] <MootBot> Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 4
[20:34] <Laney> congratulations jelmer!
[20:35] <jelmer> thanks everyone :)
[20:35] <Laney> moving on...
[20:35] <Laney> [topic] Extension of the Zope packageset
[20:35] <MootBot> New Topic:  Extension of the Zope packageset
[20:35] <Laney> geser: do you want to take this? You were involved in the discussions IIRC
[20:36]  * cody-somerville is here.
[20:36] <geser> Laney: can do
[20:36] <Laney> looks like we need to vote on the 5 new packages?
[20:36] <geser> Laney: yes
[20:37] <geser> Gediminas Paulauskas asked in the past about a zope packageset which got approved
[20:37] <Laney> [link] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2011-March/000168.html
[20:37] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2011-March/000168.html
[20:37] <geser> but as the packages weren't yet in the archive it could get added in LP to the packageset
[20:38] <geser> Gediminas asked now to add those packages as they are now in the archive
[20:38] <geser> I've compared the list he mentioned with the one which got already approved
[20:39] <geser> and 5 packages were new, so we need to formally vote about it before they can get added to the packageset
[20:40] <Laney> it's clear to me that these new packages are sufficiently similar to the ones already in the set that they ought be a part of it
[20:40] <maco> agreed
[20:40] <Laney> I know that for the cli-mono set we've an agreement with the TB that new packages need not have formal approval (as they are usually so similar), do you think such an arrangement could work here?
[20:41] <cody-somerville> What exactly would the agreement be?
[20:41] <Laney> roughly — ping devel-permissions/d-m-b about additions, if no objections after 1 week (or some time period), packages get added
[20:41] <cody-somerville> But what are the criteria for the packages?
[20:41] <geser> Laney: depends on what was approved by the TB
[20:42] <cody-somerville> ie. is it any package that begins with 'zope' or that is zope related or ...?
[20:42] <Laney> well they have to fall within the scope of the set
[20:42] <Laney> we could address on an ad-hoc basis if ever an unclear package comes up
[20:42] <geser> e.g. the mozilla set has a "description" of what packages belong to that set so it easy to add packages to it as long as they match on what was approved
[20:43] <geser> the zope package set was based on a package list
[20:43] <Laney> right, cli-mono is different as it's basically a mirror of some Debian team's packages
[20:43] <Laney> let's leave that then
[20:44] <cody-somerville> It appears there a zope section in the archive.
[20:45] <Laney> Perhaps that could be used to determine the set then, depending on what criteria are used to put packages there
[20:45] <geser> btw I'm fine to make the zope package set more "wildcard" (zope\..* | z3c\..*) if it eases the maintainance in the future
[20:45] <Laney> let's discuss it another time if there's interest/adding new packages starts to take more of our time
[20:45] <Laney> for now...
[20:45] <Laney> [vote] add z3c.ptcompat zope.applicationcontrol zope.fixers zope.login zope.pluggableauth to zope package set
[20:45] <MootBot> Please vote on:  add z3c.ptcompat zope.applicationcontrol zope.fixers zope.login zope.pluggableauth to zope package set.
[20:45] <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
[20:45] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[20:45] <cody-somerville> ugh, it appears https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/TeamReports isn't being updated.
[20:45] <maco> +1
[20:45] <MootBot> +1 received from maco. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[20:45] <cody-somerville> +1
[20:45] <MootBot> +1 received from cody-somerville. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[20:45] <Laney> +1
[20:45] <MootBot> +1 received from Laney. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[20:45] <stgraber> +1
[20:45] <MootBot> +1 received from stgraber. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[20:45] <geser> +1
[20:45] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[20:45] <Laney> [endvote]
[20:46] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5
[20:46] <stgraber> that was easy :)
[20:46] <maco> cody-somerville: "ugh it appears"?
[20:46] <Laney> nobody is taking the time to do it :-)
[20:46] <Laney> i'll try and do it with the minutes
[20:47] <Laney> doesn't look like jcrigby is here
[20:47] <maco> jcrigby is next. he's in #ubuntu, so i just pinged
[20:47] <Laney> 25/04 20:47:16 -!-  idle     : 0 days 16 hours 53 mins 8 secs [signon: Wed Apr 20 04:27:07 2011]
[20:47] <Laney> if he turns up we can process him next
[20:47] <maco> ah i didnt check idle time
[20:47] <Laney> mterry: are you here?
[20:47] <mterry> yes
[20:48] <mterry> Laney, ^
[20:48] <Laney> excellent
[20:48] <Laney> we are making progress
[20:48] <Laney> [topic] Core Developer application for Michael Terry
[20:48] <MootBot> New Topic:  Core Developer application for Michael Terry
[20:48] <Laney> [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/mterry/CoreDev
[20:48] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/mterry/CoreDev
[20:49] <Laney> back in 2 minutes — someone else please lead questioning
[20:50]  * mterry takes silence as consent
[20:50] <maco> mterry: do you think a "Patch Postal Service" is something the patch review team could help with, and have you had any involvement with the patch review team?
[20:50] <mterry> maco, I'm a patch pilot (just did some today).  That's one of the primary prompts to finally applying for core-dev.  Too many patches I had to pass on
[20:50] <cody-somerville> mterry, Do you have permissions to upload to the Ubuntu Desktop package set?
[20:51] <mterry> maco, I think the new DEX effort is basically what I wanted by a "Postal Service"
[20:51] <mterry> maco, there's a session at UDS about it that I plan to attend
[20:51] <mterry> cody-somerville, yes
[20:51] <mterry> cody-somerville, I do most of my Canonical work via the ubuntu-desktop set
[20:52] <mterry> But I still hit things that I'd like to have core-dev for (including the above mentioned patch review reasons) so I thought it would be useful
[20:52] <geser> mterry: do you see this slow patch forwarding mostly in the ubuntu-desktop team or in whole Ubuntu?
[20:53] <cody-somerville> mterry, Being a core developer is more than just upload permissions, its a position of leadership. Can you give us an example where you've demonstrated strong leadership within the Ubuntu community?
[20:53] <mterry> geser, whole Ubuntu.  One thing I love doing is getting packages down to syncable state during the start of a cycle, the merge window
[20:53] <mterry> So I will often see a package with a bunch of tiny useful changes that should have been sent to Debian a while ago
[20:53] <mterry> No one's fault really -- people are busy or Debian is in freeze and they pile up
[20:55] <mterry> cody-somerville, leadership...  Probably not something non-technical?  I'm more of a work-quietly-get-things-done person.
[20:56] <cody-somerville> mterry, How familiar would you say you are with the Ubuntu release and development policies and practices? Familiar enough to mentor a new contributor on them / walk them through the process?
[20:56] <mterry> cody-somerville, yes, I believe so
[20:57] <mterry> cody-somerville, I do sometimes when talking to people in my Loco, but I don't explicitly mentor people formally
[20:57] <cody-somerville> mterry, Are you a MOTU?
[20:57] <mterry> cody-somerville, yeah
[20:57] <mterry> cody-somerville, for a little over a year now maybe?
[20:58] <Laney> (you can answer Cody's question first) One thing I keep coming up against as someone who maintains certain Desktop team packages in Debian is that I have a very hard time getting the Desktop team to proactively work with us. For example (banshee and tomboy) we try to upload to Debian and then sync/merge to Ubuntu. We also try to store the Ubuntu packaging in Alioth's git too. The problem is that Ubuntu patches are often so urgent ...
[20:58] <Laney> ... that they cannot wait, or are simply not discussed with us at all. I don't know how to improve this. Do you have any ideas?
[20:58] <Laney> :-)
[20:59] <mterry> Laney, I think I know what you mean, that Ubuntu's GNOME packaging is often just a complete fork from Debian because we often update as soon as upstream does and don't wait for Debian
[20:59] <Laney> more than that
[20:59] <cody-somerville> mterry, I notice you only have endorsements from co-workers. Are there any community members you work with regularly?
[21:00] <Laney> I have sometimes explicitly asked for patches to be forwarded or indicated that I'm willing to do the work in Debian first and then sync/merge only to later come back and find that the upload has been done regardless.
[21:00] <mterry> cody-somerville, not really, no.  Most of my Ubuntu work is sponsoring patches from random people, Desktop work with coworkers, or maintaining my own packages (like deja-dup)
[21:01] <Laney> anyway that's just a general problem I have, not something I expect you to solve
[21:01] <mterry> Laney, my first reaction is that regular efforts at sending back patches we have to Debian would help, but it sounds like you want tighter integration, that you're saying some outreach efforts are ignored?
[21:02] <cody-somerville> mterry, Are there not any community contributors involved with desktop? If not, what can be done to improve that?
[21:02] <Laney> right
[21:02] <mterry> Laney, I know this next cycle with 3.0, the Desktop team is planning an explicit patch-forward review
[21:02] <Laney> I'm saying that sometimes you have Debian maintainers who actively want to help Ubuntu and are willing to 'go the extra mile', and that they are being rebuffed.
[21:03] <Laney> it's partly because the work is so high tempo and otherwise fixes would get dropped I imagine
[21:04] <mterry> cody-somerville, I'm know there are community members, but the constant keeping-up-with-GNOME may be a bit much for them, especially since there are so many on the Canonical side that do it anyway
[21:04] <mterry> cody-somerville, but the GNOME 3.0 PPA has had lots of interested community help
[21:05] <mterry> cody-somerville, partly because Canonical people were so busy, so it had to be done by community or not at all
[21:05] <cody-somerville> mterry, Can you provide an example of a really technically difficult problem or bug that you solved and are proud of?
[21:05] <mterry> cody-somerville, so there's definitely people willing to help.  It's just a matter of finding opportunities
[21:05] <mterry> cody-somerville, I'm super happy with my involvement this cycle with helping on indicators
[21:06] <cody-somerville> mterry, Whose responsibility do you think it is to find and facilitate those opportunities?
[21:06] <mterry> cody-somerville, I fixed so many crashers from bad memory use or signal connection through chasing code and staring at ref/unref pairs
[21:06] <mterry> so if your panel isn't crashing in natty, I'm going to take the credit  :)
[21:06] <cody-somerville> mterry, Why was there so many crashers and bad memory use? ;)
[21:07] <mterry> cody-somerville, :) It was many examples of a common gobject mistake that I kept having to find and chase down
[21:07] <mterry> cody-somerville, hopefully the DX team won't make those mistakes again now
[21:07] <mterry> after having to review so many of my branches
[21:08] <mterry> cody-somerville, I think the Canonical people would be a good respoinsibility source for finding low-hanging-fruit for community members
[21:08] <mterry> Not necessarily the only people to do so
[21:08] <mterry> But they know what they arem
[21:08] <mterry> aren't working on, so can flag such items as 'would be nice for someone to pick this up'
[21:08] <cody-somerville> mterry, How can community contributors get deeply involved? Is that even possible in the desktop team?
[21:09] <mterry> cody-somerville, it's certainly possible.  We don't do anything secretly.  It's just that, for example, 2.31.3 is released.  seb128 has to assign the work, and he's not going to make a community person do it, so...
[21:09] <mterry> I think it's about identifying non-time-sensitive work
[21:10] <mterry> Or people stepping up and saying they're willing to be on the hook for time-sensitive stuff, but that's not a fun thing for a community person
[21:11] <mterry> Am I being clear?
[21:11]  * cody-somerville nods.
[21:11] <mterry> We haven't prioritized identifying stuff, but seb128 always has work for people, and people do know to ask him for it
[21:12] <mterry> He's sort of the spider at the top of the desktop web, and he does a good job of liasing with community people
[21:12] <mterry> But it's ad-hoc, not a formal "help community people know where opportunities are" effort
[21:12] <mterry> Which may be useful, sure
[21:12] <cody-somerville> I have to run to another meeting. I'm going to abstain from voting on mterry's application as I used to work directly with him at Canonical before he moved to the desktop team. Sad to see he doesn't have more community involvement but I feel very lucky we have him to fix all the memory leaks in DX team's code <grins>.
[21:12] <Laney> right, let's vote
[21:13] <Laney> [vote] Michael Terry to join core-dev
[21:13] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Michael Terry to join core-dev.
[21:13] <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
[21:13] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[21:13] <Laney> maco: geser bdrung_ Laney stgraber
[21:13] <geser> +1
[21:13] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[21:13] <cody-somerville> +0 - COI
[21:13] <MootBot> Abstention received from cody-somerville. 1 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 1
[21:13] <stgraber> +1
[21:13] <MootBot> +1 received from stgraber. 2 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 2
[21:14] <maco> +1
[21:14] <MootBot> +1 received from maco. 3 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 3
[21:15] <Laney> +1 // Good work, nice to see patch piloting too. I hope to see some of the 'community' issues taken further :-)
[21:15] <MootBot> +1 received from Laney. 4 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 4
[21:15] <Laney> [endvote]
[21:15] <MootBot> Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 1 abstained. Total: 4
[21:15] <Laney> congratulations!
[21:15] <mterry> \o/
[21:16] <cody-somerville> mterry, Congratulations! :)
[21:16] <Laney> shall we carry on to psusi, or do people have to shoot?
[21:17] <maco> Laney: cody-somerville said he had to leave for another meeting
[21:17] <Laney> we still have quorum with the others though
[21:17] <stgraber> I can still continue for a while (at least 15 minutes)
[21:17] <cody-somerville> FYI, I think we should try and limit the time of meetings to an hour (roughly). Otherwise people will complain when we decide not to go beyond an hour.
[21:17] <cody-somerville> e.g. "You went for two hours the other week... why not this time??"
[21:17] <Laney> yeah sure, I'm treating this as special because of our large backlog
[21:18] <Laney> but I don't mind ending now either
[21:18] <maco> got through quite a bit
[21:18]  * psusi points out that there is quite a backlog from previous failed meetings ;)
[21:18] <maco> psusi: 3 of the people on the list are being processed by email
[21:18] <maco> so what remains are the 2 people who weren't here today, you, and barry
[21:19]  * barry waves
[21:19] <barry> just a quick note that 2 weeks from now will be uds
[21:19] <Laney> we've asked for a room there
[21:20] <Laney> RL grilling? ;-)
[21:20] <barry> if you run out of time today, do you want to process my application by email?
[21:20] <maco> oh right. i can add "commencement" to the list of answers for "why aren't you going to UDS?"
[21:20] <barry> maco: bummer!
[21:20]  * psusi didn't know this could be done via email
[21:20] <barry> well, commencement == good :)
[21:21] <Laney> :-)
[21:21] <Laney> we should be able to meet at UDS next time (I think most of us will be there)
[21:22]  * Laney bangs a gong
[21:22] <Laney> #endmeeting
[21:22] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 15:22.
[21:22] <mterry> Thanks all!
[21:22] <maco> shall i remove the finished people from the agenda page and update the numberings?
[21:22]  * bdrung_ arrives.
[21:22] <Laney> yes please
[21:22] <Laney> maco: you could mark the emailers with an E or something
[21:22] <bdrung_> seems that i am too late.
[21:23] <Laney> maco: if you want to action the permissions then that's cool too (and send out the annouces, et cetera)
[21:23] <Laney> otherwise I'll do it tomorrow probably
[21:24] <psusi> so did I hear that my application can be processed via email?  what do I need to do for that?
[21:24]  * barry has same question
[21:24] <geser> I'm already working on the package addition to the zope package set but have to wait to get the zope package set owned by DMB again (or ask a TB member to do it)
[21:27] <Laney> psusi: barry: We prefer not to, as it means that applications can drag on and eat up a lot of everyone's time. The only reason we invited the top three is because we repeatedly failed to meet and accrued a huge backlog.
[21:28] <barry> Laney: cool, no worries.  i'll be at uds so i'm happy to meet IRL and sit on the hot seat :)
[21:28] <psusi> ok.... I guess I can wait yet another two weeks... though if someone has a moment to look at my application and let me know if there is anything more I can do to prepare for next time, I would appreciate it
[21:29] <Laney> psusi: Having a few positive endorsements is the main thing you can ensure
[21:30] <psusi> yea, I'll have to keep poking people about that...
[21:30] <maco> Laney: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda look right?
[21:31] <Laney> maco: looks much more healthy
[21:32] <stgraber> Laney: might be worth e-mailing everyone on UDS' DMB meeting agenda to tell them we'll have a room (once we're sure we have a room ;)) and can meet in person if they are around
[21:32] <Laney> will do
[21:32] <Laney> I need to ping Marianna again
[21:32] <Laney> ...and book my flights (/me runs)
[21:33] <geser> do you have quorum with DMB members at UDS or need also some on IRC?
[21:33] <stgraber> Laney: also, it'd be nice if the meeting could appear on summit.ubuntu.com with everyone attending it marked as participation essential so the scheduling thingy doesn't put us in another meeting at the same time
[21:34] <Laney> stgraber: yeah, after it gets scheduled I'll try and sort it
[21:34] <Laney> geser: I think we have Laney stgraber cody-somerville bdrung_, so quorum, but that doesn't mean that you aren't wanted as well :-)
[21:35]  * Laney runs off to dinner
[23:39] <nhandler> topyli: /ninfo mootbot
[23:39] <nhandler> (ignore that)