[16:58] <scott-upstairs> the ubuntu studio team should be starting their meeting in two minutes
[16:58] <scott-upstairs> the meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Meetings/2011September4
[17:00] <astraljava> #startmeeting Ubuntu Studio collaborator meeting
[17:00] <meetingology> Meeting started Sun Nov  6 17:00:48 2011 UTC.  The chair is astraljava. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot.
[17:00] <meetingology> 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
[17:00] <astraljava> Hello everybody.
[17:01] <astraljava> Who's with us today?
[17:01] <scott-upstairs> hello astraljava
[17:01] <scott-upstairs> i am here
[17:01] <stochastic> Hi
[17:01] <stochastic> can't stay too long
[17:01] <scott-upstairs> holstein and falktx said they would not be present today
[17:01] <astraljava> Right, okay. Do we have an agenda?
[17:01] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, how much time, do you have preferred topics to discuss now
[17:01] <scott-upstairs> agend:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Meetings/2011September4
[17:01] <scott-upstairs> agenda
[17:02] <stochastic> just the sooner I get on the road today the happier I will be, preferably no more than 30min
[17:02] <astraljava> Same as from the last one?
[17:02] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, ack
[17:02] <astraljava> Ok. What are the most important topics, Scott?
[17:02] <scott-upstairs> astraljava, no, i unfortunately updated the wrong one (i.e. sept)
[17:03] <astraljava> Ahh... okay, that's fine.
[17:03] <scott-upstairs> so the agenda in the link is correct in scope, just not on the right wiki, i will resolve that after the meeting
[17:03] <scott-upstairs> okay, i won't bother reading the old business in the meeting
[17:04] <scott-upstairs> i will quickly explain the new development process for the ubuntu studio team
[17:04] <scott-upstairs> we will be actively involved with the release planning team this cycle
[17:04] <astraljava> #topic New development process
[17:04] <scott-upstairs> we will collate a group of tasks we want into blueprints within launchpad
[17:04] <scott-upstairs> kate stewart, the release manager, will approve them as she sees fit
[17:05] <scott-upstairs> our progress will then be tracked on the status.ubuntu.com site
[17:05] <scott-upstairs> if anyone has questions how this works, please let me know outside the meeting
[17:05] <scott-upstairs>  
[17:05] <astraljava> Sounds good, thanks.
[17:05] <scott-upstairs> this is good because it forces us to be organized
[17:06] <scott-upstairs> but it also holds us accountable as our progress (or lack of) will be extremely public
[17:06] <scott-upstairs> but this also gives us a forum for resolution if someone is blocking us this cycle
[17:06] <astraljava> That is true.
[17:06] <scott-upstairs> done
[17:06] <astraljava> Ok, any comments/questions regarding this topic?
[17:07] <stochastic> just want to say that I'd love a step-by-step e-mail to be sent to the dev list regarding the process if that's possible
[17:07] <stochastic> i.e. how do I get task x approved etc..
[17:07] <stochastic> keep everyone in the loop
[17:08] <astraljava> Sure, we can work something out, right Scott?
[17:08] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, i can do that, but i should point out that this is something done only at the beginning of the cycle (i.e. getting blueprints approved)
[17:08] <stochastic> okay
[17:08] <scott-upstairs> i should probably also note this in a wiki somewhere, i'll work on that too
[17:09] <scott-upstairs> i'm good
[17:09] <astraljava> #action Scott document devel process in the wiki
[17:09] <meetingology> ACTION: Scott document devel process in the wiki
[17:09] <astraljava> #topic Release planning for Precise
[17:09] <scott-upstairs> has anyone NOT looked at the release planning wiki?
[17:10] <scott-upstairs> i don't want to over commit the team
[17:10] <scott-upstairs> hi shnatsel
[17:10] <shnatsel> hi scott-upstairs
[17:10] <scott-upstairs> so i wanted to make sure that people agree with what is preliminarily planned
[17:10] <stochastic> I like the scope of the release plan
[17:11] <scott-upstairs> thank you starcraftman
[17:11] <scott-upstairs> stochastic,
[17:11] <astraljava> Yeah it shouldn't be impossible.
[17:11] <scott-upstairs> sorry, starcraftman
[17:11] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, any opinion on the scope of precise release planning https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/ReleasePlanning
[17:12] <scott-upstairs> i think most of the tasks already have people (mainly me) associated with them, so we will be asking people to commit as well
[17:12] <astraljava> We can't just do it now, as there's not many in here.
[17:12] <stochastic> I just wanted to briefly mention that I'd like to revisit the concept of putting a 'documentation' link on the desktop.
[17:13] <astraljava> So I suppose we will ask people to assign themselves due some time?
[17:13] <stochastic> This can fit under UI redesign and I'd be happy to help with that task in general
[17:13] <scott-upstairs> astraljava, i agree, we don't need to assign everything today, just getting the agreement on the scope was enough to move forward with the release team
[17:13] <astraljava> Ok.
[17:14] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, there are several items for "new users" i would like to address as well, but unless they are liminted in scope or studid-simple i was planning on deferring them to later
[17:14] <scott-upstairs> you can see them in the release planning page as well
[17:14] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: I want more graphics apps. The doc is large, needs thinking.
[17:14] <scott-upstairs> starcraftman, look under precise+1 -> new user support
[17:14] <stochastic> quit it with the starcraftman
[17:15] <stochastic> I see thanks
[17:15] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: popups tend to not work usually
[17:15] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, sorry again
[17:15] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: they're too intrusive
[17:15] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, that is just brainstorming, i expect others have better methods to accomplish the goals ;)
[17:15] <astraljava> Yes, agreed.
[17:15] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: also, you'll need the support to be somewhat localized... and adding bookmarks to firefox doesn't work, I've tried that.
[17:15] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, also, we can certainly explore more graphic applications
[17:16] <scott-upstairs> hi JonReagan
[17:16] <scott-upstairs> as long as everyone is okay with the scope of precise development then we can discuss the particulars later
[17:16] <stochastic> yup
[17:16] <JonReagan> hello Scott  :)  Sorry I'm a bit late
[17:16] <astraljava> Ok, anything else regarding this topic?
[17:17] <shnatsel> astraljava: yes
[17:17] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: when are you going to introduce workflows in the installer instead of broad categories? 12.10?
[17:17] <astraljava> Go ahead.
[17:17] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, that is the next topic actually ;)
[17:17] <scott-upstairs> but it will be this cycle
[17:17] <astraljava> Yes, thank you. :)
[17:17] <shnatsel> ah :D
[17:17] <shnatsel> great!
[17:17] <astraljava> #topic Updating seeds based on workflows
[17:18] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: why it's not in the planning doc then?
[17:18] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, part of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/ReleasePlanning#live_dvd
[17:18] <scott-upstairs> i'll explain a bit for those not familiar
[17:19] <scott-upstairs> our goals is to do something similar to what tasksel did during the alternate installation where users could pick certain package sets to install or not install
[17:19] <scott-upstairs> however, going to the live dvd will will use a GUI method that edubuntu is currently using
[17:19] <scott-upstairs> and we will base this on work flows, instead of just broad categories
[17:20] <scott-upstairs> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntustudio/+spec/livedvd has more resources
[17:20] <scott-upstairs>  
[17:20] <astraljava> Thanks. Comments/questions?
[17:20] <shnatsel> do we need the alternate image at all?
[17:20] <scott-upstairs> the exact work flows do not have to be decided this meeting but hopefully we can decide _which_ work flows we will support
[17:20] <JonReagan> Ah, workflows meaning packages that would pertain to what people want to do with their system?
[17:21] <scott-upstairs> if not the exact contents of each work flow
[17:21] <shnatsel> JonReagan: yes, see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Workflows
[17:21] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, i believe we should not make an alternate dvd
[17:21] <scott-upstairs> err, alternate image
[17:21] <shnatsel> I think so too
[17:22] <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, rather than make a large cache of audio applications we want to support a smaller, less intrusive package set based on a smaller granularity
[17:22] <scott-upstairs> we will targe what people actually want to accomplish
[17:22] <scott-upstairs> rather than a broad generalized term
[17:22] <JonReagan> gotcha, that makes a lot of sense
[17:23] <scott-upstairs> everyone can see what is listed for the work flows at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/ReleasePlanning#live_dvd
[17:23] <scott-upstairs> i'll send out an email to the list to solicit peoples opinions so we can make a decision next week
[17:23] <astraljava> I'll just have a comment on this; let's not get carried away and add too many of those. This is going to be supported for 3 years.
[17:23] <scott-upstairs> aye!  very, very good point
[17:23] <shnatsel> astraljava: 5 years?
[17:23] <scott-upstairs> this LTS is supported for 5 years
[17:23] <astraljava> shnatsel: No, that's just server edition.
[17:24] <astraljava> Really?
[17:24] <astraljava> All of it?
[17:24] <scott-upstairs> astraljava, they have changed policy during uds
[17:24] <astraljava> Holy c**p.
[17:24] <scott-upstairs> they are trying to embrace corporations more
[17:24] <astraljava> I stand corrected.
[17:24] <scott-upstairs> we'll see where it goes and adjust later
[17:24] <astraljava> Even more so.
[17:25] <scott-upstairs> astraljava's point still remains, we should ease into this (even if it wasn't an LTS)
[17:25] <scott-upstairs> and we still have the opportunity to adjust next cycle if we want to add something
[17:25] <scott-upstairs> and backport back to precise if we feel something is worth it
[17:25] <astraljava> Yep, thanks.
[17:25] <scott-upstairs> so i am strongly suggesting we are cautious and prudent
[17:26] <scott-upstairs> any further comments or questions at this time?
[17:26] <shnatsel> now postponing workflows to 12.10 sounds like a good idea
[17:26] <scott-upstairs> astraljava, can you make the bot recognize i should email the list about work flows?
[17:26] <shnatsel> can we really develop and polish them in a cycle?
[17:26] <astraljava> #action Scott to email lists regarding work flows
[17:26] <meetingology> ACTION: Scott to email lists regarding work flows
[17:26] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, do you really want to?  i would think getting the process established now would be good
[17:27] <scott-upstairs> we can continue refining the work flows each cycle as needed then
[17:27] <astraljava> I agree, this one is going to be present for a long time. Better include it now.
[17:27] <shnatsel> I'm neutral on this.
[17:27] <scott-upstairs> as long as we can give at least the same functionality as we did with the alternate cd i don't see a downside at this point
[17:27] <stochastic> essentially the concept between selecting workflows and selecting a bunch of software bundles is the same, we just label and organize them slightly differently?
[17:28] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, from the user perspective, i would say yes
[17:28] <stochastic> okay, but we'd be re-arranging packaging from the dev perspective?
[17:28] <shnatsel> stochastic: from dev perspective also
[17:28] <shnatsel> stochastic: just requires much more fine-grained selection
[17:28] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, i would say yes again
[17:29] <astraljava> What does that mean exactly?
[17:29] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, but i would describe it more as we are re-arranging the package sets but not really the packaging
[17:30] <scott-upstairs> astraljava, which part are you asking about?
[17:30] <stochastic> well I think it is a do-able concept with very few modifications required.  The largest problem will be selecting the ideal workflows to include - that's a big list.
[17:30] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, agreed!  this is one reason to focus small on this set
[17:30] <astraljava> Re-arranging packaging from dev perspective?
[17:30] <scott-upstairs> also, not all work flows are a) complete or b) desired
[17:30] <scott-upstairs> we should consider if we feel a large group of users actually desire a work flow
[17:31] <stochastic> astraljava, we'd be heavily adjusting the content/labelling of the meta packages
[17:31] <astraljava> Ok.
[17:32] <scott-upstairs> any further comments or questions?
[17:32] <stochastic> yes, this is a task best handled by a committee I think
[17:32] <scott-upstairs> agreed!  oh, i defintely agree!
[17:32] <stochastic> but done for 12.04
[17:32] <JonReagan> +1 on that
[17:33] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, please keep in mind we only need to decide _which_ work flows soon, not just _what_ exactly is in each one
[17:33] <scott-upstairs> this may seem strange, but hear me out
[17:33] <scott-upstairs> i think we should look at what the users want to do
[17:33] <stochastic> yes, true
[17:33] <JonReagan> would this mean some sort of survey?
[17:33] <scott-upstairs> if we think we can support it, then we can consider it for inclusion
[17:33] <scott-upstairs> then later we can fine tune the contents of the ones we will support
[17:34] <scott-upstairs> obvsiously we WILL need to examine the contents first if we are not sure we can support it properly before deciding about inclusion
[17:34] <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, it could, but perhaps we should discuss that in the next meeting
[17:35] <scott-upstairs> i would be completely open to a meeting of anyone interested to discuss these things outside of this meeting
[17:35] <astraljava> #action Have a separate meeting for work flows discussion
[17:35] <meetingology> ACTION: Have a separate meeting for work flows discussion
[17:35] <scott-upstairs> who would be interested in such a meeting?
[17:35] <scott-upstairs> i would
[17:35] <astraljava> o/
[17:35] <stochastic> aie
[17:36] <scott-upstairs> i'm sure holstein would be as well
[17:36] <JonReagan> I'd be interested for sure
[17:36] <scott-upstairs> good :)  basically everyone
[17:36] <shnatsel> probably me too
[17:36] <scott-upstairs> i can send out an email to coordinate times then
[17:36] <scott-upstairs> is this a good time for almost everyone?  earlier?  later?
[17:36] <astraljava> We just don't have everyone here, so we'll throw some suggestions for times on the -devel channel and mailing list later?
[17:37] <astraljava> Ahh, one step ahead of me, sorry.
[17:37] <stochastic> good time, but depends on the week as to if this day is free for me
[17:37] <scott-upstairs> would someone else but me email the list for this purpose, i have enough tasks already
[17:37] <astraljava> Good time for me.
[17:37] <astraljava> I can do that.
[17:37] <JonReagan> sure, I could send out an email
[17:37] <astraljava> Oh okay, Jon, go ahead.
[17:38] <astraljava> Moving on?
[17:38] <scott-upstairs> is it okay if we move on?
[17:38] <scott-upstairs> hehe
[17:38]  * stochastic needs to be leaving soon
[17:38] <astraljava> #topic Meeting schedule
[17:38] <JonReagan> Alrighty then.  What should be said?  Need a meeting to discuss workflows, ask for which time works best on Sunday?
[17:38] <scott-upstairs> i have a few questions about making our meetings more effective
[17:39] <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, stochastic needs to leave, can you and i coordinate after this meeting?
[17:39] <JonReagan> absolutely
[17:39] <scott-upstairs> how often should we have meetings?
[17:39] <scott-upstairs> should we alternate times between meetings for our european friends?
[17:39] <stochastic> bi-weekly or weekly would be good for informal, monthly for formal team meeting?
[17:39] <scott-upstairs> should have stagger meetings with "informal" meetings in between?
[17:40] <astraljava> I'm good for weekly.
[17:40] <astraljava> Whatever the formality.
[17:40] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, would you suggest using a regular time for the "informal" meetings?
[17:40] <scott-upstairs> not asking you to actually suggest a time right now, just qualify if you think we _should_ use a regular time
[17:40] <stochastic> yes, a set hour where it's generally anticipated that people would be around
[17:40] <scott-upstairs> i have opinions but don't want to bias the group
[17:40] <shnatsel> bi-weekly preferred here (I'm ok with not attending half of meetings, though, and you're probably OK with me missing too)
[17:41] <scott-upstairs> lol shnatsel , you are important man!
[17:41] <scott-upstairs> but i understand as well
[17:41] <JonReagan> I'd be up for weekly meetings, we have an awful lot to do before the next release
[17:41] <astraljava> Agreed.
[17:41] <scott-upstairs> the general consensus i'm seeing is weekly meetings, but perhaps alternating "formal" and "informal"?
[17:42] <shnatsel> weekly will definitely make the dev process more lively.
[17:42] <scott-upstairs> both using an agreed time?
[17:42] <JonReagan> for predictability, I'd say yes
[17:42] <astraljava> Preferably, but subject to change if necessary.
[17:42] <JonReagan> agreed
[17:43] <stochastic> to explain 'formal' and 'informal' I think one would be in here, logged, with an agenda, the other, in -dev with minimal agenda
[17:43] <scott-upstairs> perhaps we alternate times between week#1 and week#3 for the "formal meeting" and the same for #2 and #4 for "informal"?
[17:43] <astraljava> Sounds good to me.
[17:43] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, +1
[17:43] <scott-upstairs> okay, let's go with that and we can make changes as necessary as astraljava and stochastic are saying
[17:44] <scott-upstairs> any other comments or questions?
[17:44] <stochastic> I really feel formal will only be needed monthly, but that's just a minor technicality that can be adjusted later
[17:44] <astraljava> #action Move to bi-weekly formal and informal meetings alternating
[17:44] <meetingology> ACTION: Move to bi-weekly formal and informal meetings alternating
[17:44] <scott-upstairs> astraljava, what was that sign you suggested to let the chair know we are done with a topic?
[17:44] <scott-upstairs> was it '..'
[17:44] <scott-upstairs> i.e.
[17:44] <scott-upstairs> ..
[17:44] <astraljava> Yes, that would be good.
[17:45] <astraljava> And asking for voices with o/ while someone is talking?
[17:45] <astraljava> As in not interrupting the talk.
[17:45] <scott-upstairs> if we can use .. to help the chair know when to move to the next topic, that would help the meeting progress
[17:45] <scott-upstairs> okay, i didn't know that one :)
[17:45] <scott-upstairs> everyone okay moving to next topic?
[17:45] <astraljava> It helps to keep the talk coherent.
[17:45] <stochastic> yup
[17:46] <astraljava> #topic Other business
[17:46] <scott-upstairs> i have no other business
[17:46] <astraljava> Me neither.
[17:46] <stochastic> I'd just like to say one brief thing
[17:47] <stochastic> In the coming days it'd be nice if the devs could ponder how much social interaction they'd feel comfortable with on the new website.
[17:47] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, would you be up to emailing the -dev list about this?
[17:47] <stochastic> yes
[17:48] <stochastic> will do
[17:48] <scott-upstairs> this would be a good forum to aggregate opinions i think
[17:48] <scott-upstairs> err, that would be
[17:48] <scott-upstairs> ..
[17:48] <stochastic> for now, ponder away, I'm on vacation for a couple days
[17:48] <scott-upstairs> enjoy your vacation :)
[17:48] <scott-upstairs> next topic?
[17:48] <astraljava> #topic Next meeting
[17:48] <scott-upstairs> oi :)
[17:49] <scott-upstairs> okay, sounds like we will meet "formally" in two weeks
[17:49] <scott-upstairs> same bat channel, same bat time?  (american joke)
[17:49] <stochastic> sure
[17:49] <astraljava> So according to the decision today, we shall meet formally here on 2011.11.20 1700 UTC
[17:49] <stochastic> I might not make that meeting
[17:50] <scott-upstairs> stochastic, should we reschedule the time?
[17:50] <scott-upstairs> move it ahead a day?
[17:50] <JonReagan> haha, that would work for me.  you mentioned earlier perhaps finding a time that would work for both europe and in the US?
[17:50] <astraljava> And informally on #ubuntustudio-devel on 2011.11.13 1700 UTC, unless otherwise signalled.
[17:50] <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, yes!  good point
[17:50] <scott-upstairs> should the next "formal" meeting be euro friendly?
[17:50] <stochastic> scott-upstairs, no need to move it, just uncertain schedule at this point
[17:51] <scott-upstairs> perhaps move ahead 12 hours?
[17:51] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, JonReagan, any suggestions?
[17:51]  * scott-upstairs is presuming that JonReagan is in a european time zone
[17:51] <astraljava> That's gonna be 5 am. for me. Well, I can work it out.
[17:51] <JonReagan> lol nope, I'm EST
[17:51] <shnatsel> I'm GMT+4
[17:52] <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, do you have a preference what we should do for the next meeting in two weeks?
[17:52] <stochastic> either case would be fine for me 9am or 9pm
[17:53] <stochastic> I like the idea of alternating, but I'm not sure how successful it will be :)
[17:53] <astraljava> Let's have a voting on this later.
[17:53] <astraljava> So we can wrap up here.
[17:53] <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: last time I checked there was only one time that fits both european and american useras
[17:53] <shnatsel> users
[17:53] <shnatsel> I've found one, let me look it up...
[17:54] <shnatsel> Asia is out ofc
[17:54]  * stochastic is out for now.  Will read the rest in meeting minutes
[17:54] <stochastic> goodbye
[17:54] <astraljava> Bye.
[17:54] <scott-upstairs> bye stochastic ,enjoy the vacation :)
[17:55] <scott-upstairs> i actually need to go as well, JonReagan can you email me about what we were going to work on together or catch me later this afternoon in IRC?
[17:55] <scott-upstairs> poof
[17:56] <astraljava> #action Decide alternating meeting times on channel/mailing list later
[17:56] <meetingology> ACTION: Decide alternating meeting times on channel/mailing list later
[17:56] <astraljava> #endmeeting
[17:56] <meetingology> Meeting ended Sun Nov  6 17:56:27 2011 UTC.
[17:56] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2011/ubuntu-meeting.2011-11-06-17.00.moin.txt
[17:56] <astraljava> Thanks everybody!
[17:57] <JonReagan> Great meeting, talk to you all later!
[18:01] <starcraftman> Too many S names in this channel! hehe :)
[20:15] <texaswriter> more a names