| === Mkaysi_ is now known as Mkaysi | ||
| === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | ||
| === Mkaysi is now known as FossBot | ||
| === FossBot is now known as Mkaysi | ||
| === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach | ||
| NCommander | #startmeeting | 14:59 |
|---|---|---|
| MootBot | Meeting started at 09:59. The chair is NCommander. | 14:59 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 14:59 |
| davidm | G'day NCommander | 15:00 |
| NCommander | monring | 15:00 |
| NCommander | [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2011/20110728 | 15:00 |
| MootBot | LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2011/20110728 | 15:00 |
| NCommander | [topic] Standing Items | 15:00 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Standing Items | 15:00 |
| NCommander | [link] http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel.html | 15:00 |
| MootBot | LINK received: http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel.html | 15:00 |
| NCommander | [link] http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel-oneiric-alpha-3.html | 15:01 |
| MootBot | LINK received: http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel-oneiric-alpha-3.html | 15:01 |
| NCommander | so it looks like we're making good progress on work items and progression towards A3 | 15:03 |
| NCommander | beyond that, anyone else have anything to say? | 15:03 |
| GrueMaster | Still a lot to do, and A3 is next week. | 15:03 |
| davidm | Give me a minute | 15:04 |
| davidm | The burn down for A3 is not looking good | 15:05 |
| GrueMaster | We'll have to postepone all of ogra's workitems. | 15:06 |
| davidm | Yes, lets make that happen today please | 15:06 |
| davidm | He is on holiday, they should have been postponed when he left | 15:07 |
| NCommander | [action] NCommander to postpone ogra's workitems | 15:07 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: NCommander to postpone ogra's workitems | 15:07 |
| NCommander | can I move on? | 15:08 |
| GrueMaster | persia: Any chance you will get to the encryptfs testing this week? | 15:08 |
| davidm | Another items we need to postpone? | 15:08 |
| davidm | persia, is in western europe this week so I doubt it, postpone | 15:08 |
| GrueMaster | I will need to postpone a couple. The ipv6 test tools don't compile on linux yet. | 15:09 |
| davidm | OK GrueMaster adjust the workitems today please | 15:10 |
| davidm | NCommander, move on | 15:10 |
| GrueMaster | The encryptfs is something either I or mahmoh can knock out with a preseed. | 15:10 |
| GrueMaster | Will do. | 15:10 |
| davidm | OK | 15:10 |
| NCommander | [topic] ARM Server Status (NCommander, Daviey) | 15:11 |
| MootBot | New Topic: ARM Server Status (NCommander, Daviey) | 15:11 |
| NCommander | w.rt to server status, I've good news that its possible to complete a headless install on OMAP4 enc to end once you PXE boot the installer | 15:12 |
| davidm | Nice | 15:12 |
| infinity | \o/ | 15:12 |
| NCommander | Thank GrueMaster and mahmoh for testing. | 15:12 |
| NCommander | I got nothing else, Daviey ? | 15:13 |
| NCommander | [topic] Kernel Status (cooloney, ppisati) | 15:14 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Kernel Status (cooloney, ppisati) | 15:14 |
| davidm | NCommander, I just added an item to the Meting page | 15:15 |
| davidm | make that meeting page | 15:15 |
| NCommander | davidm: k | 15:16 |
| NCommander | so looks like ppisati and cooleney aren't around so moving on | 15:16 |
| NCommander | [topic] ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, janimo) | 15:16 |
| MootBot | New Topic: ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, janimo) | 15:16 |
| NCommander | made some progress on omcal on why it segfaults but no fix or workaround yet sadly | 15:17 |
| NCommander | did find ocaml is heavily thumb2 unsafe and shouldn't have been marked safe/no porting | 15:17 |
| davidm | Will is work in ARM mode? | 15:17 |
| NCommander | still failed when I tried it | 15:18 |
| NCommander | still investigatign deeper. | 15:18 |
| NCommander | anyone else? | 15:19 |
| infinity | I haven't done any FTBFS work this week, though I should do again soon. | 15:20 |
| NCommander | anyway, moving on | 15:20 |
| NCommander | [topic] ARM Image Status (ogra, NCommander) | 15:20 |
| MootBot | New Topic: ARM Image Status (ogra, NCommander) | 15:20 |
| * NCommander has nothing new on this subject | 15:22 | |
| NCommander | so moving on ... | 15:22 |
| GrueMaster | What is the status of iMX51/53 images? Feature Freeze is coming in two weeks. | 15:22 |
| davidm | Good question | 15:22 |
| infinity | persia put some work into it, but then stalled on some kernel support issues. | 15:22 |
| mahmoh | I'd like to know if there should be a separate kernel for server, or separate boot args, I should think so. | 15:22 |
| infinity | I haven't had a chance to do anything here, and he hasn't forwarded me his stuff. | 15:23 |
| GrueMaster | I would think it would be critical to get an image building, even if it doesn't work. | 15:23 |
| persia | My stuff doesn't result in a usable machine at this stage. | 15:23 |
| davidm | infinity, lets take that up with Linaro early next week | 15:23 |
| * infinity nods. | 15:24 | |
| cmagina | mahmoh: +1 on the server kernel image | 15:24 |
| davidm | I'll ship and Imx 52 to jani this week | 15:24 |
| davidm | boot args maybe extra kernel not at this point | 15:24 |
| mahmoh | ok, I think I have a bug to track it but who's going to look into it? | 15:25 |
| davidm | GrueMaster, we will likely need a FF exception for IMX53 | 15:25 |
| davidm | mahmoh, what do you need turned on/off from standard kernel? | 15:25 |
| mahmoh | elevator=deadline at least | 15:26 |
| GrueMaster | We should probably do some perfomance analisys on the server kernel boot args. | 15:26 |
| mahmoh | bug 814157 | 15:26 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 814157 in base-installer (Ubuntu) "arm net install fails to install server kernel after selecting Ubuntu Server" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/814157 | 15:26 |
| mahmoh | agreed GrueMaster | 15:26 |
| davidm | NCommander, ^^ | 15:26 |
| mahmoh | it may or not make sense, but I don't want to lose track of it | 15:26 |
| cmagina | we will want to investigate the best scheduler for server workloads | 15:27 |
| davidm | NCommander, can you look into 814157 please | 15:27 |
| NCommander | k | 15:27 |
| infinity | I'm not sure if it's worth discussing until we have "server" hardware. | 15:27 |
| NCommander | mahmoh: server kenl on omap4 is pointless | 15:27 |
| davidm | GrueMaster, yes we should test differnet schedulers for perfomance | 15:27 |
| mahmoh | maybe so but someone should still look into it and verify that's true | 15:28 |
| NCommander | davidm: scheluders are heavily IO bound; numbers gleamed off a panda are useless IMHO | 15:28 |
| cmagina | we still need to be aware that it is highly likely to be necessary for when we get server hardware | 15:28 |
| davidm | We should set up tests to be rerun once server hardware aval | 15:28 |
| GrueMaster | mahmoh: Let's get together after the meeting to discuss testing. | 15:28 |
| davidm | Same as we are doing on all other tests | 15:28 |
| mahmoh | ack | 15:29 |
| NCommander | [topic] QA Status (GrueMaster) | 15:29 |
| MootBot | New Topic: QA Status (GrueMaster) | 15:29 |
| GrueMaster | Most of the easy workitems for Alpha 3 have been completed and documented. The remaining few will require some development work. | 15:30 |
| GrueMaster | Work on automating these tests for future execution has been slow, but progressing. | 15:30 |
| GrueMaster | Focus is currently on getting tests to run with good documentation so that they can be automated in the future. | 15:30 |
| GrueMaster | Spot testing the daily preinstalled image builds is looking good. No glaring bugs on install. Unfortunately, not a lot of app testing has happened yet, with all the focus on server. | 15:30 |
| GrueMaster | The remaining test workitems for Alpha 3 will require some research to setup, and in the case of ipsec/ipv6, the only tests I have found are for freebsd and will need some coder work. | 15:32 |
| GrueMaster | The good side of that last, is these are the tools used for ipv6-ready certification testing. | 15:32 |
| GrueMaster | mahmoh: Anything to add to the QA stuff? | 15:34 |
| mahmoh | just focusing on automating the testing and so they're tested nightly | 15:34 |
| mahmoh | we're updating the wiki to make it more friendly | 15:35 |
| mahmoh | if others would like to contribute to typical server applications/loads, please discuss and feel free | 15:35 |
| mahmoh | if you've testing things and would like to add the results, please discuss and feel free | 15:35 |
| mahmoh | the more the merrier | 15:36 |
| mahmoh | that's it | 15:36 |
| GrueMaster | NCommander: move | 15:38 |
| davidm | NCommander, moving on..... | 15:39 |
| NCommander | [topic] Wiki updates by EOD Friday 29 July 2011 (Davidm) | 15:41 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Wiki updates by EOD Friday 29 July 2011 (Davidm) | 15:41 |
| davidm | Folks we have to have the wiki updates in tomorrow without fail | 15:42 |
| NCommander | I did some work on this last night made some progresss on the landing and OMAP pages | 15:42 |
| davidm | I'm working with QA but willing to help anywhere | 15:42 |
| davidm | Review pages, if you don't like them or think they are out of date, please fix | 15:42 |
| davidm | very important | 15:43 |
| NCommander | anything else? | 15:43 |
| GrueMaster | Am I the only one that thinks any of our pages that require scrolling should have a TOC? | 15:43 |
| mahmoh | +1 | 15:43 |
| davidm | +1 | 15:44 |
| persia | GrueMaster: That's a good plan | 15:44 |
| davidm | hi persia | 15:44 |
| davidm | Make use of color where it makes sense in tables it really makes it easier to read and is easy to do | 15:45 |
| NCommander | Ill wokr more on this today | 15:45 |
| NCommander | can I move on? | 15:45 |
| davidm | Moving on | 15:45 |
| GrueMaster | Might also be useful to have an /Arm/Template | 15:45 |
| NCommander | [topic] AOB | 15:46 |
| MootBot | New Topic: AOB | 15:46 |
| GrueMaster | The USB performance issues we are seeing on Panda may be more widespread than just OMAP3/4. | 15:47 |
| GrueMaster | I have heard mention of it effecting other dev boards, like the Tegra2. Not sure on the babbage. | 15:48 |
| davidm | We need to poke at Linaro next week about this | 15:48 |
| davidm | Perhaps their Landing team can sort this | 15:48 |
| NCommander | qnything else or can I close? | 15:49 |
| davidm | OK to close by me | 15:49 |
| NCommander | #endmeeting | 15:50 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 10:50. | 15:50 |
| === costales is now known as admin_ubuntuast | ||
| === cking is now known as cking-afk | ||
| kees | \o | 17:54 |
| * kees looks around for more tb members... | 18:03 | |
| sabdfl | hi folks, sorry to be late | 18:12 |
| kees | sabdfl: no problem; still hoping to get keybuk and mdz | 18:13 |
| kees | sabdfl: right now it's just the two of us. mdz said he'd likely be available in 10 minutes | 18:13 |
| sabdfl | ok | 18:13 |
| sabdfl | i'll step afk till then | 18:13 |
| mdz | kees, back now | 18:23 |
| kees | mdz: okay, excellent. | 18:24 |
| kees | I think this'll be pretty quick. sabdfl, you ready? | 18:24 |
| sabdfl | yup, hi | 18:25 |
| kees | #startmeeting | 18:25 |
| MootBot | Meeting started at 13:25. The chair is kees. | 18:25 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 18:25 |
| kees | [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda | 18:25 |
| MootBot | LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda | 18:25 |
| kees | [TOPIC] Action review | 18:26 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Action review | 18:26 |
| kees | * Set series RM to ubuntu-release (cjwatson) | 18:26 |
| kees | it looks like this still needs to be done (the bug is not closed) | 18:26 |
| kees | * Brainstorm review update | 18:26 |
| kees | I _think_ cjwatson said he'd work on this, but I can't find last meeting's summary. And there's nothing I saw in email, so I think this is still to be done as well. | 18:26 |
| mdz | kees, I think so as well | 18:27 |
| kees | [TOPIC] Policy proposal for extensions repository | 18:27 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Policy proposal for extensions repository | 18:27 |
| kees | [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PartnerRepositoryPolicy | 18:27 |
| MootBot | LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PartnerRepositoryPolicy | 18:27 |
| kees | from what I understand, they would like some review of this document | 18:28 |
| mdz | IIRC, the last time this came up, it was written as a standalone document, and we asked that it be changed to be a delta relative to existing package policies | 18:29 |
| mdz | and it looks like that has happened (thanks!) | 18:29 |
| kees | yeah, that part has happened. it seems like there has been no further discussion in July on this. it probably needs some comment on the mailing list. | 18:29 |
| mdz | we also wanted to unify it with the ARB's policies | 18:29 |
| mdz | or rather, have them all fit into the same policy framework | 18:29 |
| kees | which they did too | 18:29 |
| kees | "This policy applies to software published through one of the extension repositories Extras, Partner, and Commercial" | 18:30 |
| mdz | I have been pretty bad with email the past 6 weeks | 18:30 |
| mdz | the structure looks great | 18:31 |
| kees | yeah | 18:31 |
| mdz | reading over the content now | 18:31 |
| kees | how about we all send some notes to the mailing list, CCing allison and nick? | 18:31 |
| sabdfl | do they mean copyright enforcement, rather than assignment? | 18:32 |
| mdz | I'm confused by the reference to 4.5 debian/copyright | 18:32 |
| mdz | but I don't have that section in front of me (there's no hyperlink) | 18:32 |
| kees | [ACTION] all to send some notes on the Extension Repository Policy proposal | 18:32 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: all to send some notes on the Extension Repository Policy proposal | 18:32 |
| mdz | packages in the extension repositories should surely still have normal debian/copyright files | 18:33 |
| kees | let's take todo items each to review and send email. I think that would be more productive. | 18:33 |
| mdz | (esp. since they seem to often bundle free software) | 18:33 |
| mdz | kees, ok | 18:33 |
| mdz | that may significantly delay my response though ;-) | 18:33 |
| kees | I'll include anything that jumps out here in my email, if that helps :) | 18:34 |
| mdz | kees, I can't find the email to t-b@ requesting review | 18:34 |
| kees | mdz: Message-ID: <4E0C58FB.8090402@canonical.com> | 18:34 |
| mdz | kees, thanks | 18:34 |
| kees | mdz: ah, found it in archive too: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-June/000946.html | 18:35 |
| sabdfl | i think "board majority +1" is appropriate | 18:35 |
| kees | [LINK] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-June/000946.html | 18:35 |
| MootBot | LINK received: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-June/000946.html | 18:35 |
| kees | [TOPIC] DMB voting procedure | 18:35 |
| MootBot | New Topic: DMB voting procedure | 18:35 |
| kees | the most recent I can find on this thread is https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-July/000956.html | 18:36 |
| sabdfl | so, if there are not enough +1's in the meeting to reach that, it's enough to get the remainders via email | 18:36 |
| kees | right, I guess it's mostly about if they're voting +1 and -1 or +1 and 0. it sounds like they do +1 and 0. | 18:37 |
| maco | sabdfl: do you mean there need to be $board_majority +1s and then any number of +0 or -1 or do you mean the total must be +$board_majority? | 18:37 |
| kees | so, you just need enough "yes" votes, and the "no" do not count | 18:38 |
| maco | kees: there are sometimes -1s in the DMB. a vote in june where there was one is how that discussion got started | 18:39 |
| sabdfl | i think it's OK to appoint someone if a majority approve and a minority dissent | 18:39 |
| kees | maco: right, and I think the primary question is "is -1 allowed?" | 18:40 |
| sabdfl | i think dissention warrants discussion, not a veto | 18:40 |
| geser | kees: so a application with 4 +1 (4 members present) gets the same way accepteg like the theoretical case of 4 +1 and 3 -1 (7 members present)? | 18:40 |
| sabdfl | i think it's ok to say "you need the support of a majority of the board" | 18:40 |
| kees | geser: that's what I'm trying to understand. I'm not advocating, just trying to spell out the interpretations | 18:40 |
| kees | sabdfl: so, the expectation is "must have majority, with votes of +1, 0, and -1 allowed". then the question is "what are absent members' votes? forced to be 0?" | 18:41 |
| mdz | I'm glad that the DMB is considering this carefully, as I think the sensitivity of membership votes warrant it | 18:41 |
| mdz | but I think the KISS principle should apply as well | 18:42 |
| maco | kees: assumed 0, unless the +1s fall short, then we take it to the mailing list <-- current procedure | 18:42 |
| cody-somerville | I think that if two members of the DMB feel an applicant isn't ready, it warrants deferral | 18:42 |
| sabdfl | ah, i didn't think a -1 counteracted a +1 | 18:42 |
| maco | (oh, that's also "unless they sent a vote by email ahead of time") | 18:42 |
| cody-somerville | (which is what counting -1s does) | 18:42 |
| kees | right, if -1 doesn't counteract +1, then it's really a 0. | 18:43 |
| sabdfl | if a majority can bring up the confidence to +1, then that's sufficient for me | 18:43 |
| cody-somerville | In the current model, as described by myself and persia and agreed by the board in its first term, -1 'counteracts' a +1, yes. | 18:43 |
| sabdfl | i think -1's are a "i want to talk about this", not a "i'm reducing the vote by 1" | 18:43 |
| mdz | it looks like the vote is not public, so I don't see an issue with there being the possibility of -1 votes | 18:43 |
| maco | mdz: what do you mean not public? | 18:44 |
| mdz | as long as there is appropriate follow through with regard to the candidate, identifying the concerns and making a way forward | 18:44 |
| mdz | maco, that mail says "internal mailing list" | 18:44 |
| cody-somerville | mdz, | 18:44 |
| cody-somerville | votes are public | 18:44 |
| geser | mdz: the votes during the meeting are public, only the ones per mail are private | 18:44 |
| mdz | oh, sorry, i've misread | 18:44 |
| maco | geser: and even then, like with the last meeting, someone pipes up "oh, and Laney gave his +1 ahead of time" | 18:45 |
| mdz | isn't there a precedent for membership votes in other councils already? | 18:45 |
| cody-somerville | sabdfl, Since applicants are free to reapply immediately, I think the current models works as its effectively both "reducing the vote by 1" and "i want to talk about this". | 18:45 |
| sabdfl | cody-somerville, no, it really isn't | 18:45 |
| mdz | is there a need for DMB to be different in this regard? | 18:45 |
| Laney | didn't I vote on devel-permissions? | 18:46 |
| maco | mdz: im not sure it's standardised across boards. im also not sure the Americas RMB has had a single split vote since i joined it, so not sure what it'd do... | 18:46 |
| cody-somerville | sabdfl, Although we're not doing the best job at it, we'd like to follow-up with the candidate and help them resolve the concerns. | 18:46 |
| micahg | Laney: you did indeed :) | 18:46 |
| maco | Laney: you did | 18:46 |
| mdz | I'd like to refer this decision to the CC, and have it apply to all membership councils | 18:46 |
| geser | mdz: do the other councils have a good description how votes count? | 18:46 |
| sabdfl | cody-somerville, if you're saying "i want to talk about this", it's better to lay that out before folk vote, than -1 and hope that brings it under the threshold | 18:47 |
| kees | mdz: that seems like a good idea -- it strikes me that having different voting requirements is a bad idea :P | 18:47 |
| Laney | personally I think it should be as persia described, which is essentially that a majority is required | 18:47 |
| sabdfl | +1 to consistency | 18:47 |
| Laney | but yes, let's standardise | 18:47 |
| micahg | mdz: I think the DMB is different than most councils in that the result is the ability to affect all users | 18:47 |
| cody-somerville | sabdfl, Its very easy to bring under threshold since when someone votes -1 there is bound to be a number of +0s | 18:47 |
| cody-somerville | sabdfl, people are sometimes hesitant to vote -1 and instead vote +0, IMHO | 18:48 |
| mdz | micahg, true, but I don't think that warrants a different procedure for counting votes, tbh | 18:48 |
| maco | Laney: as persia described, you need a total of +4, after the -1s have subtracted away. with a 7 person board, a simple majority could be +4, -3 | 18:48 |
| maco | but that total is only +1 | 18:48 |
| sabdfl | micahg, i think any sphere of contribution can improve or be detrimental to all others | 18:49 |
| geser | but in that case it's better for a application when the board only reaches quorum as the is a chance that the non-present members vote +1 in case the application doesn't reach threshold | 18:49 |
| micahg | sabdfl: indeed, but a bad blog post on the planet compared to a broken upload to the archive are a big difference | 18:49 |
| cody-somerville | Laney, Thats not what persia described. What persia describes is that -2, +5 is enough to defer an application (which is what I think is controversial to some) | 18:49 |
| sabdfl | i've sat on quite a few boards | 18:49 |
| sabdfl | dissent is not a veto, for a reason | 18:49 |
| Laney | yeah, sorry I wasn't clear | 18:50 |
| geser | if more members are present the more likely is a vote which can't be affected by the non-present members | 18:50 |
| sabdfl | a proposal needs support of the majority, not consensus, and not majority-after-dissent | 18:50 |
| sabdfl | there's a reason for that, imo | 18:50 |
| sabdfl | it's too easy to make blocking the default | 18:50 |
| micahg | maco: you have your acceptance stats handy? | 18:50 |
| sabdfl | i'm concerned that the DMB's who've been firm about -1's have been overly slow to recognise the benefits of taking some chances on fresh contributors | 18:50 |
| sabdfl | jono mailed recently, and i thought he was correct, with that observation | 18:51 |
| cody-somerville | -1 is rather rare with the DMB | 18:51 |
| kees | seems like in the +1/-1 method, you'd want "above 0", but that's the same as "majority" in +1/0 method. Doing "majority" in the +1/-1 method would really raise the bar. | 18:51 |
| cody-somerville | +0 is probably the most common vote if not +1 | 18:51 |
| cody-somerville | I see the necessity for the current model because +0 is so popular. | 18:51 |
| cody-somerville | If we no longer permit +0 without good reason, I'm fine to move to what sabdfl suggests. | 18:52 |
| sabdfl | cody, that would block another way | 18:52 |
| sabdfl | i'll say again: it should be enough to muster sufficient support | 18:52 |
| sabdfl | let's raise it with the CC and gather their views | 18:53 |
| geser | I vote -1 when I'm against the application at that time, +1 when I for it, and 0 when I'm not sure but don't want to block if other give their +1 | 18:53 |
| kees | seems like simple majority is the way to go. if everyone votes +0, then the board isn't very excited about the candidate | 18:53 |
| maco | micahg: http://people.ubuntu.com/~maco.m/dmb_record_keeping.html is the link I sent to u-d@l.u.c A bit concerning how few volunteer members of the community have applied, but overall acceptance rate does seem pretty high to me. | 18:53 |
| maco | geser: ditto | 18:53 |
| kees | so, take to CC, then? | 18:54 |
| Laney | but with +4 you /can/ block it | 18:54 |
| micahg | sabdfl: here are actual numbers with the current voting system on acceptance rate, it's pretty high ^^ | 18:54 |
| cody-somerville | Indeed. Thanks for that link maco. | 18:55 |
| cody-somerville | I think it re-enforces with me that our current voting model works well. | 18:55 |
| cody-somerville | and permits us to be conservative when warranted | 18:55 |
| maco | (87% acceptance rate) | 18:56 |
| Laney | I don't think any of those three deferrals were unfair either. | 18:56 |
| mdz | kees, yes please | 18:56 |
| kees | my opinion would be that simple yes/not-yet voting to get a majority of "yes" is sufficient, and that people that really feel negative need to shop their opinion around to convince others not to vote "yes". | 18:57 |
| kees | but, since it sounds like this should go to CC, we'll defer it there. | 18:57 |
| kees | (also since we have 3 minutes left...) | 18:57 |
| Laney | So if you want to vote -1 you need to be more forceful | 18:57 |
| maco | kees: that sounds reasonable to me | 18:57 |
| micahg | what's the point of having a -1 available if it doesn't do anything? | 18:57 |
| Laney | which could end up with people being more negative than they would otherwise be | 18:58 |
| kees | micahg: right, I recognize that -- but most voting systems are yes/no. it's kind of an accident that we started the convention of +1/-1 and that then resulted in "0" meaning abstain | 18:58 |
| kees | but, yes, this needs to go the CC | 18:59 |
| kees | [ACTION] refer DMB voting to the CC (kees) | 18:59 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: refer DMB voting to the CC (kees) | 18:59 |
| sabdfl | can we wrap this point on that... thanks :) | 18:59 |
| Laney | make clear that it's not just for the DMB please | 18:59 |
| kees | Laney: yeah, will do that | 18:59 |
| kees | [TOPIC] select chair | 19:00 |
| MootBot | New Topic: select chair | 19:00 |
| kees | Keybuk is alphabetically next, iiuc | 19:00 |
| kees | I'll email him | 19:00 |
| kees | [TOPIC] other stuff | 19:01 |
| MootBot | New Topic: other stuff | 19:01 |
| mdz | nothing from me | 19:01 |
| kees | we're out of time, but is there anything we should add to the agenda or quickly cover? | 19:01 |
| kees | okay, that's it then! thanks everyone! | 19:01 |
| kees | #endmeeting | 19:01 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 14:01. | 19:01 |
| mdz | thanks kees | 19:02 |
| === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!