=== yofel_ is now known as yofel === ashams_ is now known as ashams [16:11] hello... [16:13] hello... [17:59] hi all [17:59] #start meeting IRCC [17:59] #startmeeting IRCC [17:59] Meeting started Sun Jun 24 17:59:59 2012 UTC. The chair is AlanBell. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. [17:59] 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: [18:00] Howdy. [18:00] hi all [18:00] who is here for the meeting? [18:00] hey [18:01] / [18:01] ♫ [18:01] er, \o [18:01] o/ [18:01] hi [18:02] o/ vaguely, crying baby [18:03] #topic Review last meetings action items === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Review last meetings action items [18:03] so actions from last time, lets see [18:04] alanbell to sort out removal of eir [18:04] #fail [18:04] so I was going to do this because uBOTu-fr was going to take over, but it was missing [18:04] lets come back to that whole question a bit later when we have a topic dedicated to it [18:05] #topic Welcome to the new IRCC member === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Welcome to the new IRCC member [18:05] welcome Tm_T \o/ [18:05] Welcome and congrats Tm_T ! [18:05] yay Tm_T ! [18:05] Woo, Tm_T! [18:05] Congrats Tm_T [18:05] No new taxes! [18:06] finns love taxes, beware [18:06] the results of the election were announced by the Community Council the other day and Tm_T is now our 5th IRCC member [18:06] launchpad groups and channel access and suchlike has been set up [18:07] launch codes, etc. [18:07] if only [18:07] Pici: not the abort codes right? [18:07] #topic Open items in the IRCC tracker === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Open items in the IRCC tracker [18:07] just a quick note, I added his expire time as the same as the rest of you, but that's just because it's not something we've discussed [18:08] we (CC and IRCC) should probably pick that up at some point [18:08] pleia2: yeah, I saw that, thanks [18:08] Yep [18:08] pleia2: setting the expire time the same was something we had planned and stated a few times [18:08] hm, wasn't that in the initial announcement that we're looking for the missing member? [18:08] even better [18:09] ooh, problem solved already? I like this. [18:09] me too :) [18:09] heh [18:09] item closed. [18:09] too good to be true, watch it... [18:09] ok, so the tracker, we do have an open item in it relating to the user mcloy [18:09] I closed it once and it reopened :( [18:10] and we have another email today relating to some kind of appeal [18:10] what is the issue exactly with mcloy? [18:10] or can we not discuss that here? [18:10] Which was sent to both lists, but we'll be taking it [18:10] so it was [18:11] i rejected the message to the irc-team list and accepted the one to the council [18:11] public vs private and all that === ashams_ is now known as ashams [18:11] good stuff [18:11] topyli: oh, good, good. [18:12] Shano56 is the user involved in that appeal [18:12] personally i think it's being handled just fine by ops [18:12] IdleOne: I would rather not discuss individual stuff here as a general rule, just being open about what appeals are going on [18:12] I think we should just talk about it 'offline' (so to speak). [18:13] AlanBell: which is what I was trying to get at. [18:13] sounds good. the Shano56 thing I think was handled properly. [18:13] ok, so that is the tracker [18:13] #topic Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council [18:14] no new bugs [18:14] #subtopic bug 892500 eir is still not fit for purpose in #ubuntu -ikonia [18:14] Launchpad bug 892500 in ubuntu-community "eir is still not fit for purpose in #ubuntu" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/892500 [18:14] lets come back to that one in a sec [18:14] #subtopic bug 913541 there are a number of people with Ubuntu IRC cloaks who have expired from the ubuntumembers group [18:14] Launchpad bug 913541 in ubuntu-community "there are a number of people with Ubuntu IRC cloaks who have expired from the ubuntumembers group" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/913541 [18:14] Pici: have you had a poke at this one? [18:15] AlanBell: I did, and then I got terribly busy with work stuff. Keep it on my docket, I'll make some time to deal with it. [18:15] ok [18:15] #topic alignment of launchpad teams and channel access lists === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: alignment of launchpad teams and channel access lists [18:15] I did some of this and sent a few mails to the lists about it [18:15] I ticked off the big channels [18:16] ticked off as in upset? [18:16] heh, hope not [18:16] as in marked the checkboxx. [18:16] ah, k. [18:16] then there was the IRCC election stuff and other things which distracted me [18:17] but I will continue with that and get it to a point where we can automate it [18:17] there was also a kubuntu council election which changed some kubuntu stuff [18:17] Congrats to jussi for being elected to Kubuntu Council [18:17] :) [18:17] Grats Jussi! [18:17] yes indeed! [18:18] * jussi blushes and hides [18:18] :) [18:18] any comments on the access list processing so far? [18:19] No issues from over here. [18:19] #topic Review #ubuntu-ops-team (Quarterly) === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Review #ubuntu-ops-team (Quarterly) [18:20] this is a standing item we insert quarterly [18:20] we've done this a couple of quarters now, and been generally happy. i think we could stop reviewing it [18:20] the #ubuntu-ops-team channel is an invitation only channel for operators and a few others who are invited [18:20] Pici mentioned about offtopic in there - do we want to talk about that? [18:20] that doesn't mean we shouldn't address any specific issues [18:21] knome, Unit193 and I had a good discussion the other day about offtopicness in -ops-team [18:21] jussi: sure [18:21] jussi: well, there are a couple of valid but somewhat contradicting views, so it deserves discussion [18:22] 1) offtopic stuff isn't coordination. 2) not all ops are in the same offtopic channels and thus will miss each other lolcats if they're not allowed in -ops-team [18:22] I had originally suggested to move the offtopicness into #ubuntu-offtopic, but there were problems with that suggestion, mainly that its very #ubuntu centric (Rather than #x/#k#/l etc). So the comprimise that we agreed on was to try to seed some of the good conversations that we have been having there into the various offtopic channels. [18:23] I am quite comfortable with the concept of #ubuntu-ops-team, I think it is really useful to separate that from the #ubuntu-ops channel [18:23] seeding good conversations into ot channels sounds *very* good [18:24] AlanBell: absolutely. that's why i'm suggesting we stop reviewing its existance [18:25] But publicly reviewing anything that we may have brought up in there (that should be made public) isn't probably good. [18:25] er, s/isn't/is/ [18:26] sorry for my late arrival [18:26] hi Tm_T [18:26] o/ Tm_T [18:26] hi Tm_T. welcome to the meeting and to the council :) [18:26] Anyway, the point was to be conscious of the offtopicness, and try to bring it into our offtopic channels if the parties involved are there as well. [18:26] does anyone think we should review the #ubuntu-ops-team channel in a further three months, or not bother as per topyli's proposal? [18:26] the point of the review is to make sure it isnt becoming clique and being abused [18:26] And again, this isn't a blanket ban on being able to socialize in there, just something to keep in the back of your head. [18:27] i think jussi and Pici are saying the same thing [18:27] AlanBell: I think keeping the review process is a good thing and won't hurt. [18:27] topyli: I am thinking that 5 minutes per quarter isn't a big deal, but we should focus on how we are using it rather than whether it should exist [18:28] yes [18:28] Will serve as a reminder to us to try and keep the channel on topic as much as possible. [18:28] that [18:28] ok lets move on, and I will swap the next two agenda items [18:28] AlanBell: ++ [18:28] #topic Make #ubuntu-offtopic +r (discussion on the merits of this) === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Make #ubuntu-offtopic +r (discussion on the merits of this) [18:29] this was something ikonia asked us to think about [18:29] i'm not on the ircc, but would ikonia care to explain the background of this? [18:29] We breifly weighed the pros and cons, but we suggested that he add it to the meeting agenda anyway. [18:29] as one possible way to improve conversations in -offtopic and stop a little bit of random abuse [18:30] making the channel +r will make it more difficult for the #ubuntu ops to direct new users to the channel when needed [18:30] i agree with IdleOne on this one [18:30] a majority of #ubuntu is unregistered [18:30] whatever happened to #ubuntu-discuss? wasnt it part of the master plan? [18:30] I asked ikonia to figure out how much of #ubuntu-offtopic was unregistered [18:30] jussi: still up in the air. [18:30] there is some obvious merit. less random noise, and also easier bans :) [18:31] meaning, not only do we have to explain that they are off topic and to change channel but then explain how to register. if the channel is open then we can take the registration "support" and help the user in -ot [18:31] ^ that [18:31] I don't like restricting -ot nor necessarily the idea of extra -discuss [18:31] IdleOne: I think we already have enough pain when trying to direct folks to ##java, and simiular channels. [18:31] IdleOne: good point [18:31] There's a lot of occasions when new users are directed to -ot rather than #u when they want just general info, they're unlikely to be registered (new to IRC etc), which will cause confusion & potentially push them away from ubuntu [18:32] Pici: in #u you mean? yes, why add to it by restricting -ot? [18:32] IdleOne: Exactly. [18:32] ok :) [18:32] to my eyes "abuse" has diminished significantly - there have even been some quality discussions [18:33] Well yeah, but only when we're not scaring off our -offtopic operators ;) [18:33] guntbert: but seriously, I agree. [18:33] I have my hope on leading by example (not by me necessarily) [18:33] -1 to setting -ot +r [18:34] And the folks who are determined to troll aren't going to be deterred by it being set +r, just the folks who want to casually chat. [18:34] also, sometimes a two hour chat about kittens is quality [18:34] ok, it sounded quite an appealing suggestion to me, but those are good points about directing new people to it [18:35] i'll say -1 too. -ot is an old channel and hasn't really become any *worse* over the years. this whispers to me not to rock the boat [18:35] but I do think that new people should be directed to somewhere to discuss Ubuntu rather than kittens [18:35] it would just make -ot even more of a place for limited circle instead of whole community [18:35] (or other small fluffy/feathery creatures) [18:36] AlanBell: i think the lolcat discussions most often pause when real ubuntu discussion is starting to take place [18:36] * TheLordOfTime agrees with Tm_T's view [18:36] AlanBell: We discuss Ubuntu a lot in -ot, just that some people take great offense to Ubuntu being put down. e.g. UNITY SUCKS! [18:36] AlanBell: as long as one discussion doesn't drown the other, I see no problem with discussing pets [18:36] A UNITY SUCKS discussion is neither a) constructive nor b) something that 99% of the folks there want to discuss. [18:36] * AlanBell is all in favour of chicken related discussions [18:37] many of the people who start out with that sort of comment about Ubuntu end up having excellent points [18:37] Possibly a different thought process needs to be gone through from #u etc when directing people to -ot, at times it possibly gets used to redirect non-coc comliant conversations to to -ot rather than just asking them to stop the conversation all-together, not by ops, but by general #u users [18:37] there's very good unity criticism there as well, worthy of being directed to #ubuntu-desktop or similar really :) [18:37] IdleOne: true, but then again we've heard most of the arguments for/against it already. but lets not get too sidetracked. [18:38] Pici: I hear you [18:38] yeah, this item was about setting it +r, and it seems on balance that isn't going to be a good idea, so lets not do that then [18:38] DJones: I've been pretty quick to point that out to folks who mash !ot instead of telling people to stop. [18:38] Anyway, I want to be able to send new Ubuntu/IRC users to -ot without having to send them to #freenode first to get help registering [18:38] DJones: so we should decide if !ot is to be used or some other factoid (in #u) [18:39] AlanBell: agreed. [18:39] ok, so moving on once more [18:39] ) [18:39] #topic ubottu, uBOTu-fr and eir === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: ubottu, uBOTu-fr and eir [18:39] Lets try to get through the rest of the agenda, and then we can move back to the State of Offtopic afterwards if we have time. [18:39] so, bots [18:39] yep [18:40] can't live with'em, oh... wait, thats somethinjg else... [18:40] eir database is growing by the minute, as ikonia reminded us today in -irc-council [18:40] I was going to get eir removed so we could focus on uBOTu-fr [18:40] but uBOTu-fr was missing in action, and m4v raised some points about the test suite not passing [18:41] AlanBell: do we have a working ubotu-fr to use in #ubuntu yet? [18:41] Sounds like we might not. [18:41] I grabbed a copy of the source today to have a look at what it does [18:41] then I say we hold off until there is a known working replacement for eir [18:41] I'd say first u-fr up to shape and then drop eir [18:42] eir is not perfect but it is better than nothing for now [18:42] I don't want to maintain a supybot fork for stuff that should be in a plugin. [18:42] I think it might be good to trial u-fr (once it gets back up to spec) in some of our other high traffic channels [18:43] We should not start with trials with any bot, until we have a agreed on set of requirements [18:43] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApW_s9q9E0zEdE9naVF4c0xjTUhpelZnZTFoYzZWNVE#gid=0 [18:43] oCean: I thought we already had a list somewhere [18:43] requirements ^^ [18:43] May see if you can get some of that into a plugin, and general stuff into an existing fork. [18:44] Pici: we had a list of bugs for eir, the link AlanBell posted is where I started a little while ago [18:44] This could be where to start from. Decide which are the Must/Could/Should haves etc [18:44] yeah, I like the list oCean [18:45] well, there's the stuff we wrote for the next bt http://ubottu.com/devel/wiki/Spec/Bantracker [18:46] m4v: yeah, that is another point. The BT [18:46] we should not see those to apart from each other, is what I think [18:46] the requirements look good to me [18:46] those two* [18:46] oCean: another? isn't the BT the point we're discussing? [18:47] m4v: we have focussed on bot functionality a lot [18:47] there's the idea of using ubotu-fr because our bt doesn't have automatic removal of bans [18:47] for example, we started with eir, while we knew there was no integration with the BT [18:48] yeah, I am not sure why we don't just write ban expiry into the existing ubottu channel plugin [18:48] or a separate plugin [18:48] Yes, I'm all for that, AlanBell [18:49] however, I don't have the knowledge/skill to do that [18:49] AlanBell: ubottu bantracker plugin, ubotu-fr channel plugin is a rewrite of a supybot core plugin. [18:50] yeah, I saw that [18:50] I think we have enough python/supybot skill here to make that happen, but the issue was that we sort of felt that the current Bantracker system needed a lot of love in various places to bring it up to spec. [18:50] which m4v gave it did he not? [18:50] Pici: Indeed, it still does [18:50] well, I have been looking how to add automatic removal in ubottu, I think it can be done, but are we going to have ubottu +o all the time? [18:51] m4v: eir isn't +o all the time [18:51] I personally don't have a problem with that, as long as she doesn't go haywire. [18:51] m4v: maybe, or can it just talk to chanserv? [18:51] m4v: ubottu only needs +o when setting the modes [18:51] AlanBell: chanserv can't unban people. [18:51] Well, other than yourself. [18:51] orly [18:52] ok, so needs to request op when needed. [18:52] yep [18:52] AlanBell: something about accountability and not abusing chanserv to do nasty things [18:52] Being opped all the time is less noise that opping up, unbanning, and deopping. [18:53] ah, ok, unban is only for self [18:53] Pici: is also easier to implement, that's why I asked [18:53] m4v: right. [18:53] I would be fine with ubottu holding @ [18:53] any downside to always being @ [18:53] oblivious people ask it questions. [18:53] more private messages [18:53] Questions may be directed directly more. [18:53] like we get with the floodbots. [18:53] AlanBell: not unless the bot starts spitting out random errors [18:53] ;P [18:54] ubottu: do people talk to you already? [18:54] Error: I haven't seen people. [18:54] AlanBell: I am only a bot, please don't think I'm intelligent :) [18:54] I don't think eir opping and deopping is too much noise for anyone [18:54] have to be afk now, sorry [18:54] AlanBell: well, maybe the channel's "temperature"? [18:54] wouldn't be any more noisy then eir [18:54] m4v: she cannot get into an argument, so will not raise the temperature, I guess [18:55] I can't see a problem with ubottu being +o other than spam from users, most regulars know that ubottu is a bot and will normally advise users of that when they see somebody speaking directly to her [18:55] guntbert: I guess so :P [18:56] it seems fine to me, I can't imagine any security concerns about it, if someone can impersonate ubottu then they can cause a similar amount of nusiance either way [18:56] Getting into the details already :( [18:56] Why don't we see how feasible it is to make ubottu's current bantracker handling unbanning (and all that jazz), and then we can see how we want to handle the opping status. [18:56] yup [18:56] oh right, I'll get ops in #ubuntu through ubottu >D j/k [18:57] :O [18:57] I still don't know why you don't have ops in #u [18:57] so m4v, want to have a crack at implementing that? I am happy to help a bit and I am sure others will too [18:57] As am I. [18:59] AlanBell: I already started looking at it, it will be a hack, but meh. [18:59] Isn't everything ;) [18:59] If ubottu fell off freenode and somebody was alert enough to spot it, could they /nick to ubottu and gain ops in the 30 seconds before nick enforce took priority [18:59] no [18:59] DJones: nope, it would need to identify [18:59] not without knowing the nickserv pass [18:59] which is not HUNTER2 [18:59] I tried. [19:00] yeah i changed it the other day [19:00] The enteries in the access list are account names, not nicks. [19:00] lol [19:00] its not 123456789 either :P [19:00] jussi: thats the same password I have on my luggage :o [19:00] That sounds like it would restrict any 3rd party potential for abuse anyway [19:01] lets do some actions [19:01] ok, so eir stays and a mega ubottu hackfest is commensing. we can then retire eir tuesday by lunchtime? :) [19:01] (: [19:02] #action m4v Pici AlanBell to look into adding ban removal to ubottu cababilities [19:02] ACTION: m4v Pici AlanBell to look into adding ban removal to ubottu cababilities [19:02] by tuesday lunchtime [19:02] :) [19:02] #agreed ubottu can hold +o in channels where ban expiry will be used [19:03] ok, you guys never took a look at bantracker code? welcome to the madhouse. [19:03] m4v: no, I've already lost my mind looking at it a few times before. [19:03] bantracker is a huge mess [19:03] by lunch is not realistic? [19:03] Why can't something new be used in its place? [19:03] It always has been, lets blame Seveas, hes not really heere. [19:04] IdleOne: because we can't seem to do that fast enough for anyone's liking. [19:04] topyli: give them till dinner :P [19:04] this is just adding ban removal, how hard can it be? [19:04] #topic Linking IRCC 'contact this team' in launchpad with osticket [19:04] AlanBell: on a timer, HARD === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Linking IRCC 'contact this team' in launchpad with osticket [19:04] Pici: sucks to be them. [19:04] ok fine, volunteers and all [19:04] IdleOne: something new would take a lot of more time. [19:04] so who added this suggestion? [19:04] i did [19:04] What is the progress with the BT, can both bot and bt developments combined? [19:05] m4v: I understand that but it would be better than hacking stuff together and hope it doesn't explode [19:05] oh [19:05] nvm [19:05] I though the 'contact this team' thing just sent all the team members an email. [19:05] it does, but it seems we can direct it to a specific email address [19:05] |^ that [19:05] this item is about avoiding mail via launchpad in our inboxen and into the ticket system [19:05] topyli: that sounds like a much better idea to me. [19:05] can I send all my own mail there too? ;) [19:05] I like this idea [19:06] Pici: no :P [19:06] darn. [19:06] A confirmation message has been sent to 'ircc-appeals@ubottu.com'. Follow the instructions in that message to confirm the new contact address for this team. [19:06] heh [19:06] hmm [19:06] ok, we have a new appeal to deal with ;) [19:06] denied! [19:07] topyli: you need to actually read the appeal message first ;) [19:07] Noooo!!! :( [19:07] ok, so we can finish that off later, but it seems like a good idea [19:07] #topic Any Other Business === 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 | IRCC Meeting | Current topic: Any Other Business [19:07] cool cool fcool [19:07] yeah we can handle it ourselves [19:08] does anyone else have any other topics they would like to raise? [19:09] argh, I had somethign, but Ive forgotten [19:09] AlanBell: We have been having issues with certain persistent people trolling our less active channels that have hardly any access for the ops team. Would it be possible to create a spec ops team account and add this account to those smaller channels? [19:09] no doubt it will come to me after the meeting [19:09] IdleOne: Isn't that what the ircc account is for? [19:10] Pici: there are only 5 of you and they seem to know your schedules [19:10] jussi: it always does doesn't it :) [19:10] some don't have the ubuntuirccouncil account in the access list (-beginners is the example that springs to mind) [19:10] IdleOne: Is freenode-staff on those access lists? [19:10] AlanBell: which brings me to my next suggestion make it mandatory that IRCC be in all channel access list in the namespace [19:11] Pici: some but staff is not always available either [19:11] IdleOne: can you name specific time when this has happened? [19:11] back [19:11] right now it is suggested that we are in the access lists, and we can get staff assistance if we are not and need to be [19:11] oh, i have one other thing of business to bring up, when you're done with this issue you're discussing. [19:11] regarding access lists. [19:12] (you just reminded me AlanBell) [19:12] jussi:19:00 to 21:00 my time [19:12] UTC-5 [19:12] i would enjoy being sure without checking that ubuntuirccouncil is on the access list of any channel with an emergency [19:13] jussi: the times vary [19:13] there are a few channels which have Ubuntu Members in their access lists. Given that freenode has been starting a policy of secondary-cloaks being project.accountname rather than project.role.accountname, Ubuntu Members with newer secondary cloaks are not able to have access to channels which use the primary-cloak, and old-secondary-cloak access formats [19:13] i.e. if we see the -irc access list, you see ubuntu/member/* and ubuntu.member.* [19:14] point is that channels are being harassed for far longer then should be allowed IMO [19:14] TheLordOfTime: ahh yes, those need fixing [19:14] I thought we updated those somewhere... [19:14] jussi: indeed, and preferably globally, there's a few other channels still having that [19:14] so what would be the correct mask? [19:14] AlanBell: for newer secondary cloak formats (as an example, mine), [19:14] ubuntu/* and ubuntu.* should cover everything [19:14] ^ that [19:15] or rather for the secondary format... [19:15] */ubuntu.* [19:15] er, right [19:16] Pici: can you take that one, needs fixing in -meeting and -irc for starters [19:16] sure [19:16] I will only get the mask wrong [19:16] #action pici to review masks for Ubuntu Member access to channels [19:16] ACTION: pici to review masks for Ubuntu Member access to channels [19:17] Id also like to have the discussion/decision about #ubuntu-discus [19:17] err [19:17] #ubuntu-discuss [19:17] #ubuntu-discus could be fun though :D [19:17] IdleOne: can we start by finding channels that lack ubuntuirccouncil and see if we can just fix them one by one? [19:18] maybe search with alis for #ubuntu-* having more than 10 people in the channel and check the access lists [19:18] AlanBell: sure but it won't help solve the problem. What i am suggesting is lightning the load for the IRCC [19:19] i'm still a bit sceptical about -discuss. we have topical channels and -ot [19:19] having a second account for op access across other channels is a bit of a big topic for the any other business section IdleOne :) [19:19] is [19:20] topyli: I think it is a very topical channel - its for discussion of specifically ubuntu related things that dont fit into #ubuntu's supportarea [19:20] agree with AlanBell, needs some preparation that discussion [19:20] AlanBell: indeed. I brought it up, you folks can shoot the idea around and make a decision. let us know at some point before December :) [19:20] I like the idea of #ubuntu-discuss as a place for on-topic non support discussions [19:20] isn't that what -ot is for? [19:20] and somewhere that Ubuntu marketing materials from LoCos and Canonical can direct people to [19:20] ubuntu in the news, improvements to ubuntu, etc etc [19:20] I like the idea of #ubuntu-offtopic as aplace for all non-support discussion that is suitable to our community spirit [19:20] on topic non support [19:21] jussi: that's -ot IMO [19:21] IdleOne: no, -ot is a break room type area, for just relaxing [19:21] so why is it called "off topic"? [19:21] jussi: but it can also be for cool ubuntu news and stuff [19:21] jussi: i disagree :) [19:21] I'd like to see some folks willing to staff -discuss that will actually be able to answer questions before we set it up [19:21] topyli: topic says so :P [19:21] AlanBell: good question, similar channels on other communities are called cafes etc [19:21] Pici: hrm? [19:21] AlanBell: historical reasons. it was created to move non-support away from #ubuntu back in 2005 [19:22] i.e. not all us ops are knee deep in Ubuntu to know enough to respond to everything . [19:22] Tm_T: yes, a community cafe or something sounds about right [19:22] forums have a community cafe [19:22] so that would fit [19:22] that's pretty much what our -ot is [19:22] it sounds like another off topic channel [19:22] Isn't that what community-team is for? [19:22] * topyli is defensive of -ot :) [19:23] Pici: good point [19:23] Pici: nah, community team is for jono to organise calls :P [19:23] ok, so maybe community cafe is more what offtopic is [19:23] No.. thats what he uses it for, but its also where the community teams coordinate things [19:23]