=== noy_ is now known as noy === apachelogger_ is now known as apachelogger === noy_ is now known as noy === lJl is now known as LjL === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach === mahmoh3 is now known as mahmoh- [15:00] #startmeeting [15:00] Meeting started Thu Oct 20 15:00:33 2011 UTC. The chair is ogra_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot. [15:00] Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired [15:00] * davidm is drinking coffee and needs food [15:01] * davidm waves at ogra_ [15:01] * ogra_ waves back [15:01] * NCommander wants to shoot the sun [15:01] * GrueMaster raises a coffee mug. [15:01] so seems we have no announcement or wikipage ... i wont make one up right now ... and i dont think we need the agenda actually [15:01] * ppisati has coffee too [15:02] * ogra_ has coffee too now [15:02] ogra_, somewhere in todays meeting we need to deicide if we are having a meeting in 2 weeks (during UDS), I personally vote not to. [15:03] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/PBlueprintIdeasseems to look good, apart from achiang everyone has registered their specs [15:03] so everyone has plenty of notice if we are not doing it [15:03] do we miss any specs ? [15:03] davidm, ack [15:03] Historically we never have a meeting during UDS. [15:03] is there anything urgent that needs to be added to the spec list, anything we forgot or so ? [15:03] if not, lets move on :) [15:04] With specs, I got notification that they'r ein the wrong track [15:04] * davidm is looking at the spec idea page [15:04] I will be moving all specs from 'arm' to 'ubuntu-arm' [15:04] sorry for being late [15:04] NCommander, err, i was told our track is called arm [15:04] janimo, you didnt miss much [15:04] we look at the blueprint ideas once more [15:04] ogra_: I was poked by james_w ithas to be ubuntu-arm [15:04] NCommander, weird [15:04] k [15:04] And ubuntu-arm seems redundant for the Ubuntu Developers Summit. [15:04] so we have to rename all specs [15:05] ogra_: I'll bedoing so as soonas the meeting is over [15:05] even though i would like to hear that from a second authority [15:05] or the track could be renamed [15:05] davidm, ?? ^^^ [15:05] maybe ubuntu arm was chosen to distinguish from linaro-arm? [15:05] james_w: if you could rename the track to 'arm' I think that would save us a lot of work :-) [15:05] james_w, well, "arm" was what was announced to us [15:05] so getting that would be good :) [15:05] as well as "arm" being historically what we had when we had the ARM track [15:05] that too [15:05] I'm just the messenger, I'm not going to rename anything [15:06] james_w: who's the person to talk to on renaming the track? [15:06] track can't be renamed [15:06] well, if there is any compellinmg reason for us to invest 1h of work to rename them all vs someone on lp flicking a switch to rename the track, i think i'll go for the track renaming ;) [15:06] davidm, so we have to rename all specs now ? [15:07] with Linaro having a connect there it must be clear the track is ubuntu [15:07] ah [15:07] ogra_, yep [15:07] * ogra_ sighs ... [15:07] [action] everyone rename their specs [15:07] ACTION: everyone rename their specs [15:07] :) [15:07] having few specs pays off in unexpected ways [15:08] * GrueMaster is exempt. other-p-qa-baremetal-testing [15:09] GrueMaster, well, might be redundantz ... but after i have being told "i go to that sprint because of linaro and i give a sh*t on ubuntu and everything around it" by a linrao employee i think its important so they dont get accidentially into an ubuntu BOF [15:09] :P [15:09] janimo, do you have any ideas that are missing from the BP idea page you want to add ? [15:09] now would be the time ;) [15:10] just the livecd evaluation [15:10] ah, yeah, add that 8and a registered spec) please [15:10] unless we added that a few days ago [15:10] i didnt [15:10] ok [15:11] i dont think we need to talk about images or so today ... [15:11] [action] janimo to add live-installer spec [15:11] ACTION: janimo to add live-installer spec [15:11] so lets look at something that makes sense :) [15:11] MOM ! [15:11] everyone please pick some merges from mom :) [15:11] Oh, speaking of specs... [15:11] you mean merges from debian? [15:11] NCommander: You might want to fix https://blueprints.launchpad.net/~infinity for me. [15:12] (Hint: that's not me) [15:12] infinity, i registered yours, please adjust naming [15:12] janimo, right, mom.ubuntu.com [15:12] and friends [15:12] fixed [15:12] the parent party so to say :) [15:12] infinity, are you being cyber-celeb-squatted? [15:13] would be good if each of us could do a few merges before UDS [15:13] * ogra_ makes a checkmark on his mental agenda :) [15:13] ogra_: mom.ubuntu.com doesn't exist. [15:13] Actual link? [15:14] heh, it used to be mom. years ago ... [15:14] http://merges.ubuntu.com [15:14] should be merges.ubuntu.com [15:14] ppisati, anything exciting to say about kernels ? [15:15] * ogra_ guesses not at that point of the release :) [15:15] Other than "We have SRU kernels for testing"...again. [15:15] yeah, as usual [15:15] not really :) [15:15] :P [15:15] GrueMaster: btw, we have SRU kernels for testing... again! :) [15:15] ac100 kernel (meta later today) in O-proposed [15:15] |\o/ [15:15] * GrueMaster facepalms. [15:16] ah, is mx53 going to be supported more and more in the future? [15:16] with fully working sound now, even after suspend [15:16] ppisati, likely [15:16] ok [15:16] but we get the kernel from linaro 1:1 [15:16] ok [15:16] not sure if ubuntuization is expected here [15:16] davidm, ^^ ? [15:16] (mx53) [15:16] GrueMaster: i think i want one of those board then [15:16] and, what about the panda 4460? [15:17] ppisati, buy one, expense it [15:17] still MIA? [15:17] yep [15:17] but in USA is cheaper, that's why i would like to "exploit" Grue :) [15:17] order it to the UDS hotel *g* [15:17] i [15:17] and i'll bill it to my room, yep [15:17] ppisati, we will carry forward the iMX53 support [15:18] such as it is [15:18] sounds like no ubuntuization then [15:18] ppisati: We can talk offline about boards. [15:18] ogra_, iMX53 from Linaro should be Ubuntuized [15:18] by Linaro [15:18] davidm: ok, but what about any new hw we are going to see? [15:18] davidm, k, we didnt do that this time, kernel lives in universe [15:19] davidm: can we already talk about it, or not? [15:19] davidm, oh, by linaro ? [15:19] any talk of raspberry pi being there? [15:19] Should be some new hardware, nothing I can talk about just yet [15:19] i thought they dont do that [15:19] ok [15:19] wcchandler, if they move to a v7 chip [15:19] if and when raspberry switches to an ARMv7 chip we will look at it [15:19] *snap* [15:20] until then no, Ubuntu is ARM-v7+ only going forward and for sometime now [15:20] we only had one v5 release iirc [15:20] and only one v6 (which we would have skipped if we had had HW back then) [15:21] and one v6 release, only because hardware lagged [15:21] * davidm thinks ogra_ types faster then he does [15:21] well, we should go as parrots if there is a costume party at UDS :) [15:22] anyway, lets move on [15:22] i actually have nothing on my mental agenda beyond deciding if we want an IRC meeting during uds [15:23] It would be a first if we did. And it would be during a session. [15:23] We generally haven't, and I'd think it would be redundent if we did [15:23] #vote should we skip the IRC meeting at UDS ? [15:23] Please vote on: should we skip the IRC meeting at UDS ? [15:23] Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me) [15:23] +1 [15:23] +1 received from ogra_ [15:23] 01 [15:23] 01 received from NCommander [15:23] -1 [15:23] -1 received from NCommander [15:23] -1 [15:23] -1 received from GrueMaster [15:23] err, did you guys read what i wrote ? [15:23] +1 [15:23] +1 received from GrueMaster [15:23] heh [15:23] +1 [15:23] +1 received from NCommander [15:24] how do I vote to avoid the meeting? [15:24] janimo, infinity, davidm [15:24] davidm: +1 [15:24] +1 [15:24] +1 received from janimo [15:24] +1 [15:24] +1 received from davidm [15:24] davidm, plus 1 [15:24] +1 [15:24] +1 received from ppisati [15:24] * ogra_ shakes infinity ... wake up ! [15:24] :) [15:24] I like that we can change our votes, nice change from the old bot [15:24] #endvote [15:24] Voting ended on: should we skip the IRC meeting at UDS ? [15:24] Votes for:6 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 [15:24] Motion carried [15:25] * infinity blinks. [15:25] 6 were for skipping :) [15:25] yay [15:25] I was in an LP channel when you started the vote. Sorry. :P [15:25] * ogra_ likes to play with the bot :) [15:25] ogra_: we could leave if you want some alone time with it. [15:25] so thats all i have, if someone has anything beyond that, now is the AOB topic [15:26] Well, I have moderately fun news. [15:26] ?? [15:26] GrueMaster, i'll cuddle with it after the meeting :) [15:26] Please add any weekly reports to the wiki page, as we'll be doing these again [15:26] Yes do add your weekly reports to the wiki page [15:26] The archive skew thing is fixed in trunk, tested on dogfood, and is just waiting on a maintenance window to roll out to cocoplum. [15:26] So, we should see it in a day or two. [15:26] YEA [15:26] * NCommander hugs infinity [15:26] \o/ [15:27] infinity, nice [15:27] I propose we celebrate with pie at UDS [15:27] ++ [15:27] I like pie. [15:27] and beer [15:27] OK that is more then just moderately fun news [15:27] thanks infinity [15:27] davidm: can you make beer and pie happen? :-) [15:27] infinity, oh, what about hf ? [15:27] Well, it would be super fun news if it had rolled out last night, but they couldn't fit it in. :) [15:28] yes, that is a good question where are we with ARMhf? [15:28] ogra_: I'm trying not to set my mx53 and panda on fire getting chroots ready and rebootstrapping toolchains (again). [15:28] (and again, and again) [15:28] doesnt sound fun [15:28] It surprising how often you can lock up hardware when you really don't want to. :P [15:29] Either way, we'll have things building by/before UDS. And I'm still hoping for "this weekend". [15:29] ++ [15:29] anything else we need to discuss ? [15:29] or should i close ? [15:29] I thnk we can close [15:29] speak up now ! [15:29] k [15:30] going once [15:30] going twice [15:30] ... [15:30] sold ! [15:30] #endmeeting === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [15:30] Meeting ended Thu Oct 20 15:30:20 2011 UTC. [15:30] Minutes: http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2011/ubuntu-meeting.2011-10-20-15.00.moin.txt [15:34] ogra_: imx53 kernel should have all ubuntu sauce applied already [15:34] and we'll keep releasing it that way [15:35] thanks rsalveti === beuno is now known as beuno-lunch === beuno-lunch is now known as beuno === noy_ is now known as noy [17:49] stgraber, I'm here, ping me when the meeting starts :-) [17:51] mdz: ok, will do [17:59] o/ [18:00] * stgraber waves [18:00] #startmeeting Ubuntu Technical Board meeting [18:00] Meeting started Thu Oct 20 18:00:26 2011 UTC. The chair is stgraber. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot. [18:00] Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: [18:00] o/ [18:00] cjwatson, kees: ping [18:01] here [18:03] #topic Action review === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: Action review [18:03] the wiki doesn't list anything, is there something that's not on the wiki? [18:04] Well, kind of. [18:04] On www.ubuntu.com, it says that these meetings are on Tuesdays which I why I missed the last one :( [18:04] wow, that's outdated [18:05] I took an action item to file a bug about that. I did. [18:05] however, I would like to revisit the meeting time anyway given the new board [18:05] Naturally, I didn't do that at the meeting, but it's sort of relevant. :) [18:05] cjwatson: Yes! [18:05] Me too. [18:05] this time is pretty inconvenient for me and I wonder if we could do better for others [18:05] I can take an action to organise one of those whatever the website is called things [18:05] It's very inconvenient for me as well. It'll be even worse once DST goes away. [18:05] the one that lets everyone specify their preferred times [18:06] doodle? [18:06] WEll.. [18:06] The problem is that we're spread pretty far. [18:06] ACcross many timezones. [18:06] stgraber: sounds familiar [18:06] soren: yeah, but this way we'd at least have data [18:06] worst case we could rotate [18:06] So any time we find is likely to be a bit of stretch for someone. [18:07] ..so when DST changes, it might just move into someone's unacceptable time. [18:07] stgraber, the wiki has two agenda items [18:07] If that makes sense. [18:07] this meeting time is actually pretty good for me (early afternoon), but I'm still fine with it being moved a bit [18:07] oh, you meant actions [18:07] soren: let's see what we get from a doodle survey [18:07] And DST changes at different times in different parts of the world. [18:07] cjwatson: Right. Set the data there to sometime in the middle of november. Then the data will be good at least until March. [18:08] Er... [18:08] ok [18:08] Set the *date*. [18:08] cjwatson: ok, can I give you an action to setup the doodle/whatever survey for the meeting time? [18:08] yes [18:09] #action cjwatson to setup a survey for a new Technical Board meeting time [18:09] ACTION: cjwatson to setup a survey for a new Technical Board meeting time [18:09] #topic MESA patent enquiry === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: MESA patent enquiry [18:09] I followed up to the list about that today [18:10] so are we just waiting for some more information from RAOF? [18:11] it would be useful to know if anyone else on the TB (dis)agrees with my assessment, as it looks delicate [18:11] cjwatson: Your conclusion was that we'd better steer clear, right? [18:12] it looks less safe to me than I would like, let's put it that way [18:12] I don't know if I would feel differently if we hadn't been explicitly asked [18:12] I haven't read the list recently [18:14] mdz: in case you didn't find it already: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001113.html [18:14] cjwatson: I agree. They're not saying they'll enforce it, but they're saying open source implementations certainly aren't exempt. That makes me uncomfortable. [18:14] (erk, sorry I'm late. here now) [18:18] has there been any off-list discussion of what features are missing if it stays disabled? that questions went unanswered on the list [18:19] I doubt RAOF actually read cjwatson's e-mail yet, he probably will in a few hours though [18:20] yeah, sorry, I was prompted into replying by checking the agenda [18:20] so I guess we can keep that item on the agenda and re-discuss at the next meeting when we have some more information from RAOF [18:21] #topic Authorise temporary substitute for Emmet Hikory on DMB === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: Authorise temporary substitute for Emmet Hikory on DMB [18:21] various people have been trying to get in touch with Emmet, and have so far failed === noy_ is now known as noy [18:23] in the meantime, I think it might be appropriate for us to authorise a stand-in so that the DMB can carry on doing business more effectively [18:23] the suggested solution to that problem for the DMB would be to temporarily get the second candidate of the last election, Stefano Rivera to take Emmet's seat until we hear back from him [18:23] I have no problem with that. [18:24] sounds reasonable enough [18:24] I'm fine with that too. Only thing I was wondering is if tumbleweed was contacted about it? [18:25] I don't think so as yet, obviously he'd need to consent :) [18:25] tumbleweed: (don't suppose you're reading?) [18:25] if he's willing, I think that's fine too. [18:26] that sounds like approval by acclamation to me [18:26] ok, I'll take the action of contacting tumbleweed and if he's willing, add him to both the LP team and mailing list [18:27] thanks [18:27] #agreed Authorise Stefano Rivera as temporary substitute for Emmet Hikory on DMB [18:28] #action stgraber to contact tumbleweed and if he agrees to be on the DMB, add him to the LP team and mailing list [18:28] ACTION: stgraber to contact tumbleweed and if he agrees to be on the DMB, add him to the LP team and mailing list [18:28] ok, so the meeting time agenda item was already discussed earlier [18:29] not quite sure what to do about the brainstorm review item, do we just skip it until December 2011? [18:30] (sorry, was supposed to find some time with pitti to discuss pre/post TB meeting actions, but that didn't quite happen...) === TheDaniel0108 is now known as Daniel0108 [18:31] it's just there as a reminder [18:31] stgraber, the idea was that it would remind us [18:32] #topic DMB term length === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: DMB term length [18:32] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001105.html [18:33] I don't remember any explicit decision on that, and can't check back right now [18:34] though I can perhaps check my archives tomorrow [18:35] In case no decision has been made, perhaps we should decide now? [18:35] is the CC 2 years? [18:35] because if so, it seems like the common term is 2 years. [18:35] And fall back to whatever you find out was previously decided, if anything. [18:35] that'd be great. I had a quick look on the wiki and through my e-mails when that thread started but couldn't find any reference to the term length on there [18:36] I certainly don't object to 2, which aligns with the TB too [18:36] I have no particular preference. Two years is customary in Ubuntu, so I'm fine with that (and we can let geser off the hook early as an exception) [18:36] I'm fine with 2 years [18:36] And Laney. [18:36] per https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001107.html [18:36] 1 might have been an accident due to LP defaults [18:37] only note is that quite a few members asked for their expiry not to be cahnged if we indeed choose to make it 2 years [18:37] Ok, so geser and Laney are off the hook in Feb 2012. Everyone else's term is 2 years, unless cjwatson finds a different decision in the archives. [18:37] right, both Michael Bienia and Iain Lane asked for theirs to be kept to one year [18:38] Does that sounds good to everyone? [18:38] yep, that sounds good to me [18:39] * kees nods [18:39] ok [18:39] #vote Set DMB term to 2 years except for geser and Laney who asked for theirs to expire in February 2012 [18:39] Please vote on: Set DMB term to 2 years except for geser and Laney who asked for theirs to expire in February 2012 [18:39] Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me) [18:39] +1 [18:39] +1 received from cjwatson [18:39] +1 [18:39] +1 [18:39] +1 received from stgraber [18:39] +1 received from soren [18:40] mdz, kees: ^ [18:40] sorry [18:40] +1 [18:40] +1 received from mdz [18:41] Where's pitti today, btw? Did we just forget to ping him? [18:41] soren: I poked him in #ubuntu-devel, no response [18:41] Ok, np. [18:43] looks like we lost kees, I guess we can take that "18:39 * kees nods" as a +1, though we already have 4 +1s anyway [18:43] #endvote [18:43] Voting ended on: Set DMB term to 2 years except for geser and Laney who asked for theirs to expire in February 2012 [18:43] Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 [18:43] Motion carried [18:44] #action stgraber to update the term of the DMB members to 2 years [18:44] ACTION: stgraber to update the term of the DMB members to 2 years [18:45] Mark just commented on the MESA issue. [18:45] fwiw [18:45] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001114.html [18:46] #topic AOB === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: AOB [18:47] Looking at the mailing-list, I also found https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001104.html [18:48] Does the DMB have privileges to actually add stuff to package sets or do they still go through cjwatson for that? [18:48] Technical privileges, I mean. [18:49] the DMB actually owns a few package sets [18:49] I'm not sure I understand what that means. [18:49] for the others they ask someone on the TB to implement the changes (usually cjwatson though I guess I can do it myself now) [18:50] stupid network. back again. yeah, I was +1 :P [18:50] Ok, someone owns a package set. The owner can add and remove packages from it? And the team that can upload the packages in the package set is a different team than the owning team? [18:51] Is that right? [18:51] yep [18:51] Ok. [18:52] I just got reminded by wendar that the ARB has a selection of new members that need to be reviewed by the TB, ideally at this meeting [18:52] #topic selection of new ARB members === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | Ubuntu Technical Board meeting Meeting | Current topic: selection of new ARB members [18:52] wendar: thanks for reminding me! [18:52] the list is at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001110.html [18:53] as discussed at the last TB meeting, these would be additional members of the ARB team to help with the few new packages that the ARB got since developers.u.c was launched [18:54] How many seats are being filled? 3? [18:54] yes, three [18:54] that's an additional 3 seats on the ARB, yes [18:54] bringing us back up to the 7 seats currently listed as the max [18:55] (we've been down to 4 members for a while) [18:55] all three candidates are part of ubuntu-dev as was agreed at the last TB meeting [18:56] #vote Approve the 3 additional members for the ARB (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001110.html) [18:56] Please vote on: Approve the 3 additional members for the ARB (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001110.html) [18:56] Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me) [18:57] +1 [18:57] +1 received from kees [18:57] +1 [18:57] +1 received from stgraber [18:57] I don't personally have any reservations about them, but I wonder how it would have shown in a condorcet vote if someone did. [18:58] one moment, reading the email [18:58] +1 [18:58] +1 received from mdz [18:58] soren: it would show as a very low rating, "no opinion" gives them no points [18:58] Hm. [18:58] +1 [18:59] +1 received from soren [18:59] ...but I think we should revisit how we do this in the future. [18:59] cjwatson: ^ [19:00] soren: yeah, someone suggested a "None of the Above" entry [19:00] soren: also, more of a +1/-1 system seems appropriate here [19:00] wendar, that would be an improvement I think [19:00] That would have helped, but I'm not sure that would really do the trick. [19:00] wendar: Right, exactly. [19:00] soren: something to talk about at the UDS session [19:00] is there a document anywhere which explains the process for running an election? [19:01] another way would have been to create one poll per candidate with a simple yes/no vote [19:01] mdz: yes, it's new, but the TB reviewed it in the last meeting [19:01] mdz: so, this is our first time through electing new ARB members [19:01] I figured most of our elections are probably run in the same fashion [19:02] and if not, they probably should be :-) [19:02] mdz: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/Restaffing [19:02] we usually have more candidate than seats though [19:02] this time was a bit weird as we had 3 candidates and 3 seats [19:02] mdz: (which is just a specific application of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncil/Restaffing) [19:03] stgraber: yes, that's what made the usual poll system an odd fit for this one [19:04] ok, looks like we lost cjwatson [19:04] #endvote [19:04] Voting ended on: Approve the 3 additional members for the ARB (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-October/001110.html) [19:04] Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 [19:04] Motion carried [19:04] I wonder if we should always include a "none of the above" option. [19:04] EVen if there are more candidates than seats, there might still be candidates that people would rather be without. [19:05]