[16:00] <Daviey> o/
[16:00] <SergioMeneses> Daviey, \o
[16:01] <arosales> Hello
[16:01] <Daviey> anyone else?
[16:01] <arosales> looks like rbasak joined the party :-)
[16:02] <Daviey> Ursinha, shall we?
[16:02] <Ursinha> Daviey, sure
[16:02]  * Ursinha looks desperately for the links
[16:03] <arosales> Ursinha: one sec
[16:03] <arosales> I think jimbaker is on the list to drive
[16:03]  * arosales giving him a ping
[16:04] <Daviey> arosales: He is slacking off
[16:04] <Ursinha> okay, I found the links :)
[16:04] <Ursinha> #startmeeting ubuntu-server-team
[16:04] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Jan 15 16:04:42 2013 UTC.  The chair is Ursinha. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:04] <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
[16:04] <arosales> Ursinha: ya, sorry are you available to chair
[16:04] <arosales> thank you :-)
[16:05] <Ursinha> #topic Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:05] <Ursinha> arosales, is the wiki page updated?
[16:05] <arosales> I don't think m_3 updated from the last meeting minutes . . .
[16:05] <arosales> :-(
[16:05]  * Ursinha looks for the minutes
[16:05] <arosales> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[16:06] <arosales> Daviey: is deprecating http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-r-tracking-bug-tasks.html#server in progress?
[16:06] <Daviey> no
[16:07] <arosales> sorry, I got that wrong
[16:07] <arosales> we are moving to http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-r-tracking-bug-tasks.html#server
[16:07] <Daviey> nothat is done
[16:07] <arosales> is deprecate http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server/release-bugs.html done?
[16:07] <Daviey> yes
[16:07] <arosales> thanks
[16:07] <arosales> IRC commands were updated
[16:08]  * arosales is still looking into status tracker is not picking up servercloud area
[16:08] <Ursinha> arosales, okay, I thought that page was outdated, was looking for the logs
[16:08] <arosales> #action arosales to investigate why status tracker is not picking up all servercloud area BPs
[16:08] <meetingology> ACTION: arosales to investigate why status tracker is not picking up all servercloud area BPs
[16:08] <arosales> Ursinha: it is a little behind, sorry about that
[16:08] <arosales> I was just going to run through those real quick as I had some context
[16:08] <Ursinha> sure, go ahead :)
[16:08] <arosales> jamespage, smoser: BP approval look good?
[16:09] <smoser> i think we should call that shipped. if you have a BP that is not approved at this point, please raise that with myself, Daviey or james_w
[16:09] <smoser> or even jamespage
[16:09] <smoser> (sorry james_w)
[16:09] <arosales> thanks smoser
[16:09] <arosales> Ursinha: all yours. I think that covers the action items from last week.
[16:09] <Ursinha> all right, moving on
[16:09] <Ursinha> #topic Raring Development
[16:10] <Ursinha> http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server/release-bugs.html
[16:10] <Ursinha> http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-r-tracking-bug-tasks.html#server
[16:10] <Ursinha> http://status.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-quantal/group/topic-raring-servercloud-overview.html
[16:10] <Ursinha> all links, I guess
[16:10] <Daviey> ^ 404
[16:11] <Ursinha> hm, must fix wiki link
[16:12] <Ursinha> http://status.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-raring/group/topic-raring-servercloud-overview.html
[16:12] <arosales> ah needs raring
[16:12] <Ursinha> ah, obvious :)
[16:12] <Ursinha> this last link is okay, go ahead :)
[16:13]  * arosales looking at essentials that are in the red
[16:13] <arosales> zul: you feel ok with https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-r-openstack-grizzly
[16:14] <Daviey> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-r-seeded-qa-workflow needs to be re-scoped, most likely
[16:14] <zul> arosales: yep
[16:14] <Daviey> arosales: zul isn't here right now.. That blueprint looks in a worse state than it is.  The progress is actually good
[16:14] <Daviey> oh, zul is here
[16:14] <arosales> zul: ok, thanks
[16:14] <zul> Daviey: barely
[16:15]  * zul is on medication
[16:15] <arosales> I think jamespage is driving https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-r-seeded-qa-workflow correct?
[16:15] <Daviey> #ACTION zul, go and rest
[16:15] <meetingology> ACTION: zul, go and rest
[16:15] <arosales> :-) lol
[16:15] <Daviey> arosales: he was.. i think we need to re-asses
[16:16] <arosales> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing is behiind
[16:16] <Daviey> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-r-mysql <-- roaksoax, i believe you are taking a hunk of that.. can you update the BP please
[16:16] <arosales> I'll follow up with jim baker
[16:17] <Daviey> smoser: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-r-openstack-ubuntu-images might want a little love, can you take a gander at that at somepoint?
[16:17]  * roaksoax looks
[16:17] <smoser> yes, Daviey
[16:17] <Daviey> Thanks
[16:18] <roaksoax> Daviey: nope not taking any WI of mysql BP
[16:18] <roaksoax> the ha stuff is in the HA BP
[16:18] <Daviey> Infact, i have a feeling that many (myself included) are behind on keeping the NBP status updated.. We should all take a check before next meeting
[16:18] <Daviey> #ACTION All, check status of assigned Work Items and refresh if necessary
[16:18] <meetingology> ACTION: All, check status of assigned Work Items and refresh if necessary
[16:18] <arosales> +1
[16:19] <Daviey> roaksoax: Hmm, you made a mysql drbd charm?
[16:19] <roaksoax> Daviey: i modified the charm to support DRBD
[16:19] <Daviey> so, shal we mark that BP dead.. and track in your HA BP?
[16:19] <roaksoax> Daviey: yeah i'm tracking HA for MySQL in the HA BP
[16:20] <Daviey> (I assume clint won't work on that now?)
[16:20] <Daviey> ok, lets kill it for now
[16:20] <Daviey> thanks
[16:20] <Daviey> ..
[16:20] <Daviey> I think we are good to move on?
[16:20] <Ursinha> Daviey, are you reviewing bugs as well?
[16:21] <Daviey> Ursinha: I think you will do a better job than me ;)
[16:23] <Ursinha> Daviey, hehe, I'd have to take a better look, I'll poke you later if I find something for you :)
[16:23] <Daviey> wilco!
[16:24] <Ursinha> Daviey, but I'd take a look at the critical bugs (we have three) and see if anything can be done there
[16:25] <Daviey> i'm afraid i need to pop out for 15 mins, another engagement..
[16:25] <Ursinha> I'll move on
[16:25] <Ursinha> #topic Ubuntu Server Team Events
[16:25] <Ursinha> any events coming soon?
[16:25] <Daviey> FOSDEM 2nd/3rd Feb, Brussels - Belgium
[16:25] <arosales> Scale 11x is end of Feb
[16:25] <Daviey> attending: Myself, jamespage & rbasak
[16:26] <Ursinha> right
[16:26] <arosales> Ursinha: that seems to be it atm
[16:27] <Ursinha> okay
[16:27] <Ursinha> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:27] <Ursinha> hggdh, olá :)
[16:27] <hggdh> Ursinha: alo
[16:27] <hggdh> anything for us from the server team?
[16:28] <Ursinha> Daviey, arosales, ^
[16:28] <arosales> hggdh: nothing from me
[16:29] <hggdh> from the daily testing, raring-server-ec2 is yellow all over with some red dots :-)
[16:29] <hggdh> so it looks like flu with petechiae
[16:29] <arosales> hggdh: :-)
[16:29] <Ursinha> hehe
[16:30] <hggdh> apart from that, life is good
[16:30] <hggdh> ..
[16:30] <Ursinha> I'll move on then
[16:30] <Ursinha> thanks hggdh
[16:30] <Ursinha> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:31] <Ursinha> smb isn't here, it seems
[16:31] <Ursinha> do we have anything for him?
[16:31] <Ursinha> I'll take that as a no
[16:31] <Ursinha> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions regarding Ubuntu ARM Server (rbasak)
[16:31] <rbasak> Nothing new to report. Any questions for me?
[16:33] <Ursinha> guess not :) thanks rbasak
[16:33] <Ursinha> #topic Open Discussion
[16:33] <Ursinha> anything else you feel like discussing?
[16:33] <Ursinha> okay
[16:33] <Ursinha> #topic Announce next meeting date and time
[16:34] <Ursinha> next meeting will be on Tuesday, Jan 22th at 16:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting
[16:34] <arosales> Ursinha: thanks for chairing
[16:34] <arosales> :-)
[16:34] <Ursinha> and according to the wiki page, rbasak is the next chair
[16:34] <Ursinha> cheers everyone!
[16:34] <Ursinha> #endmeeting
[16:34] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Jan 15 16:34:39 2013 UTC.
[16:34] <meetingology> Minutes (wiki):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2013/ubuntu-meeting.2013-01-15-16.04.moin.txt
[16:34] <meetingology> Minutes (html):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2013/ubuntu-meeting.2013-01-15-16.04.html
[16:34] <roaksoax> y/win close
[16:41] <m_3> arosales: my bad... I was just cutting/pasting from the meeting guide... closed it at the end of the meeting
[16:42] <Daviey> thanks Ursinha
[16:42] <arosales> m_3: fyi https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#Team_policy gives instructions on actions post meeting
[16:43] <Ursinha> Daviey, it was my pleasure :)
[16:43] <arosales> I think we all in server need a refresher on those steps, I am guilty too
[16:43] <m_3> ack
[17:01] <jsalisbury> #startmeeting
[17:01] <jsalisbury> ##
[17:01] <jsalisbury> ## This is the Ubuntu Kernel Team weekly status meeting.
[17:01] <jsalisbury> ##
[17:01] <jsalisbury> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:01] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Jan 15 17:01:15 2013 UTC.  The chair is jsalisbury. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[17:01] <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
[17:01] <jsalisbury> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/raring
[17:01] <jsalisbury> # Meeting Etiquette
[17:01] <jsalisbury> #
[17:01] <jsalisbury> # NOTE: '..' indicates that you are finished with your input.
[17:01] <jsalisbury> #       'o/' indicates you have something to add (please wait until you are recognized)
[17:01] <jsalisbury> Roll Call for Ubuntu Kernel Weekly Status Meeting
[17:01] <arges> o/
[17:01] <ppisati> o/
[17:01] <cking> o/
[17:01] <herton> o/
[17:01] <henrix> o/
[17:01] <rtg> o/
[17:01] <sconklin> o/
[17:01] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] ARM Status (ppisati)
[17:02] <ppisati> R/master: still working on multiplatform support: omap3/4 boots, i'm working on adding imx6 support now
[17:02] <ppisati> ..
[17:02] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] Release Metrics and Incoming Bugs (jsalisbury)
[17:02] <jsalisbury> Release metrics and incoming bug data can be reviewed at the following link:
[17:02] <jsalisbury> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/reports/kt-meeting.txt
[17:02] <jsalisbury> ..
[17:02] <jsalisbury> I'll post the updates for ogasawara
[17:02] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] Milestone Targeted Work Items (ogasawara)
[17:02] <jsalisbury> [LINK] https://launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel-distro-team/+upcomingwork
[17:02] <jsalisbury> || apw         || hardware-r-kernel-config-review       || 9 work items ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> ||             || hardware-r-delta-review               || 4 work items ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> ||             || hardware-r-arm-kernel-maintenance     || 2 work items ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> ||             || hardware-r-kernel-misc                || 4 work items ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> ||             || foundations-r-x32-planning            || 2 work items ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> ||             || desktop-r-clean-old-kernels           || 1 work item  ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> || ogasawara   || hardware-r-kernel-config-review       || 2 work items ||
[17:02] <jsalisbury> || ppisati     || hardware-r-kernel-config-review       || 1 work item  ||
[17:03] <jsalisbury> ||             || hardware-r-kernel-version-and-flavors || 2 work items ||
[17:03] <jsalisbury> ||             || hardware-r-delta-review               || 1 work item  ||
[17:03] <jsalisbury> || sconklin    || hardware-r-arm-power-measurement      || 3 work items ||
[17:03] <jsalisbury> || rtg         || hardware-r-delta-review               || 1 work item  ||
[17:03] <jsalisbury> ..
[17:03] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] Status: Raring Development Kernel (ogasawara)
[17:03] <jsalisbury> We have rebased the Raring kernel to the latest v3.8-rc3 upstream
[17:03] <jsalisbury> kernel and uploaded last week.  Please test and let us know your
[17:03] <jsalisbury> results.
[17:03] <jsalisbury> I also want to note that the 12.04.2 point release date has been moved
[17:03] <jsalisbury> out by 2 weeks to Thurs Feb 14:
[17:03] <jsalisbury> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2013-January/001003.html
[17:03] <jsalisbury> Important upcoming dates:
[17:03] <jsalisbury>  * Raring:
[17:03] <jsalisbury>   * Fri Jan 18 - 13.04 Month 3 Milestone (3 days)
[17:03] <jsalisbury>   * Mon Feb 18 - 13.04 Month 4 Milestone (~5 weeks)
[17:03] <jsalisbury>  * Precise:
[17:03] <jsalisbury>   * Thu Feb 14 - 12.04.2 Release (~4 weeks)
[17:03] <jsalisbury> ..
[17:03] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] Status: CVE's (henrix)
[17:03] <henrix> Currently we have 34 CVEs on our radar, with 0 CVEs added and 3 CVEs retired this week.
[17:04] <henrix> See the CVE matrix for the current list:
[17:04] <henrix> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/cve/pkg/ALL-linux.html
[17:04] <henrix> Overall the backlog has decreased slightly this week:
[17:04] <henrix> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/status/cve-metrics.txt
[17:04] <henrix> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/cve/pkg/CVE-linux.txt
[17:04] <henrix> ..
[17:04] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] Status: Stable, Security, and Bugfix Kernel Updates - Quantal/Precise/Oneiric/Lucid/Hardy (bjf/herton/henrix)
[17:04] <henrix> Here is the status for the main kernels, until today (January 08):
[17:04] <henrix>  * Hardy - Nothing in this cycle
[17:04] <henrix>  * Lucid - In -updates; 1 CVE; (2 commits)
[17:04] <henrix>  * Oneiric - In -updates; 2 CVEs; 4 upstream stable release(s); (78 commits)
[17:04] <henrix>  * Precise - In Testing; 3 CVEs; 1 upstream stable release(s); (104 commits)
[17:04] <henrix>  * Quantal - In Testing; 3 CVEs; 1 upstream stable release(s); (254 commits)
[17:04] <henrix> Current opened tracking bugs details:
[17:04] <henrix>  * http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/reports/kernel-sru-workflow.html
[17:04] <henrix> For SRUs, SRU report is a good source of information:
[17:04] <henrix>  * http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/reports/sru-report.html
[17:04] <henrix> Future stable cadence cycles:
[17:04] <henrix>  * https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RaringRingtail/ReleaseInterlock
[17:04] <henrix> ..
[17:04] <bjf> The kernel SRU cadence cycle that was to start this week has been canceled. The kernels in -proposed will be used for the 12.04.2 release.
[17:05] <bjf> ..
[17:05] <jsalisbury> [TOPIC] Open Discussion or Questions? Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:05] <jsalisbury> Thanks everyone
[17:05] <jsalisbury> #endmeeting
[17:05] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Jan 15 17:05:51 2013 UTC.
[17:05] <meetingology> Minutes (wiki):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2013/ubuntu-meeting.2013-01-15-17.01.moin.txt
[17:05] <meetingology> Minutes (html):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2013/ubuntu-meeting.2013-01-15-17.01.html
[17:05] <cking> thanks jsalisbury
[17:06] <sconklin> thanks
[21:01] <czajkowski> huats: itnet7 SergioMeneses ping
[21:01] <huats> czajkowski: Hello dear
[21:02] <czajkowski> just waiting on the others to start
[21:02] <SergioMeneses> czajkowski, hey hey
[21:03] <czajkowski> anyone seen effie?
[21:03] <SergioMeneses> czajkowski, no I dont
[21:03] <czajkowski> :/
[21:04] <czajkowski> lets start in case itnet7 is being held up at work.
[21:04] <SergioMeneses> he is lost, I guess
[21:04] <czajkowski> #startmeeting
[21:04] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Jan 15 21:04:15 2013 UTC.  The chair is czajkowski. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[21:04] <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
[21:04] <czajkowski> so we don't have anything on our agenda
[21:04] <czajkowski> but seeing as we're here lets just catch up
[21:04] <SergioMeneses> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoCouncil/Agenda
[21:05] <czajkowski> SergioMeneses: we;re doing that team via bug no ?
[21:05] <SergioMeneses> only the Ubuntu Iranian team, but they want to work on the bug
[21:05] <SergioMeneses> yes czajkowski
[21:05] <czajkowski> grand
[21:06] <czajkowski> so I've seen this come up on various blog posts in comments
[21:06] <czajkowski> how people feel unmotivated due to them not being an Approved locoo and how really that word doesnt really help motvate people in getting more involved
[21:07] <czajkowski> what I'd like to do is look at if there is an alternative and see if could be used
[21:07] <czajkowski> sometimes words in english don't always translate so clearly in other languages
[21:07] <SergioMeneses> sure, like free
[21:08] <czajkowski> so I just want to see if this is possible and it also may not be. But if we don't discuss it then well we'll never know
[21:08] <czajkowski> so some alternaives that kinda spring to mind are
[21:08] <czajkowski> Sponsored loco - downsides would people may assume un approved locos would lose hosting, email etc as they are not sponsored, when they would be
[21:09] <czajkowski> if anyone has any ideas please feel free to jump in
[21:09] <SergioMeneses> I was thinking on "official" or "sponsored"
[21:09] <czajkowski> I do like offical as that is a clear word and is less black and white
[21:09] <BobJonkman2> Hi, I'm Bob Jonkman from the Canadian Team, which has recently lost its "approved" status.
[21:09] <czajkowski> verified would also be a good one
[21:09] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: hi there
[21:10] <czajkowski> REviewed would also be good
[21:10] <SergioMeneses> and Bhavani said Sponsored or Authorised
[21:10] <czajkowski> so they are reviewed by the council
[21:10] <czajkowski> Authroised sounds a bit severe imo, but again that's just me
[21:10] <SergioMeneses> sure
[21:10] <czajkowski> and I'm trying to find a way to sum what up approved is, but also make it sound less harsh
[21:10] <czajkowski> huats: any ideas
[21:11] <SergioMeneses> it is a strong word
[21:11] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: any ideas there?
[21:11] <BobJonkman2> loss of approval has caused some agitation amongst team members.  There is some feeling that we're not allowed to gather and have events focused on Ubuntu without approval.  A different word would be welcome
[21:11] <huats> honnestly I have thought about that and approved is the best word for me
[21:11] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: why do people feel that way, we have many teams who don't have the approved status and all have events
[21:11] <czajkowski> huats: nods
[21:12] <huats> I don't llike sponsored nor authorised (team can exists without being approved)
[21:12] <czajkowski> Again, just like to point out, nothing is set in stone. it's jsut stuff I've seen and heard from many people and discussion is good.
[21:12] <czajkowski> huats: nods
[21:12] <BobJonkman2> It's the word, "Approved".  Without "approval" the sense is that activities are disapproved
[21:12] <czajkowski> what I had in my head Loco teams ( unapproved) and reviewed loco teams (approved)
[21:13] <czajkowski> taking away the unapproved and approved words
[21:13] <czajkowski> so all teams are locoteams
[21:13] <czajkowski> but one of which has been reviewed by the council
[21:13] <czajkowski> so seems offical
[21:13] <czajkowski> but also less harsh
[21:13] <czajkowski> thoughts?
[21:13] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: never heard that but interesting to think about
[21:14] <BobJonkman2> The only direct benefit the Canadian Team sees to an "Approved" status is that Canonical provides branded Ubuntu disks (which are very welcome, and show proprietary software users that Ubuntu is not just some fly-by-night thing)
[21:14] <czajkowski> nods
[21:14] <huats> I might try the word 'official' but nothing besides that
[21:14] <BobJonkman2> So perhaps a new word might focus on the benefits a Team receives.  "Sponsored" seems to work for that
[21:15] <SergioMeneses> huats, +1
[21:15] <SergioMeneses> BobJonkman2, huats czajkowski I think "official" would be better for this
[21:15] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: how would differenciate between sponsored and unsponsored then
[21:15] <SergioMeneses> imho
[21:15] <huats> BobJonkman2: I think there is something on what we can try to work : some teams (I am aware of ubuntu-fr and ubuntu-de) have agreement with Canonical to be able to sell ubuntu branded goodies
[21:16] <huats> I have been asked in the past by Jono to provide him that "agreement" so that he can work out on extending it to the rest of "approved" loco teams
[21:16] <czajkowski> So my only concern then would be for "unapproved" locos how seeing the word Sponsored and Offical not beside their team
[21:16] <BobJonkman2> From the Team members' perspective, the only thing we get out of "Approval" (or Sponsorship) is disks, which we give away gratis to anyone who is interested
[21:17] <czajkowski> and also the word Offical means what ?
[21:17] <czajkowski> any team not approved is not an offical team
[21:17] <czajkowski> I susupect our inboxes would explode in outrage
[21:17] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: makes a difference in conference packs also
[21:17] <czajkowski> which many teams use more so than CDs tbh
[21:17] <huats> this could be a real benefit to inform team that selling an ubuntu goodies without being approved is a copyright violation (and this is something people in FOSS are really looking carefully)
[21:17] <pleia2> there are sometimes also publishers who use approved/non-approved as criteria for giving out books (the official ubuntu book only went to approved teams)
[21:18] <czajkowski> also little known fact. Not many teams request the CD allocation each cycle
[21:18] <pleia2> so it's not even just canonical
[21:18] <BobJonkman2> czajkowski: True, but most members don't see the conference packs
[21:18] <BobJonkman2> and since the decline of Ontario Linuxfest 2 years ago we haven't had need of a conference pack
[21:18] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: my experience is the other way in fact
[21:18] <czajkowski> but nice to hear another side of things
[21:19] <czajkowski> well like I say nothing is fixed in stone, this is useful information and we'll follow up with a blog post and posting to the loco contacts list for wider discussion
[21:19] <BobJonkman2> czajkowski: That most members don't see the conference pack may be because the Canadian Team covers a large geographic region.
[21:20] <czajkowski> #action czajkowski write blog post and post to lococontacts on the subject
[21:20] <meetingology> ACTION: czajkowski write blog post and post to lococontacts on the subject
[21:20] <czajkowski> #topic Reviewed Large Geographic counteries for locoteam structure.
[21:20] <BobJonkman2> But smaller geographic regions would reduce active membership to a small handful in each region
[21:20] <czajkowski> So BobJonkman2 this may be of interest to your team
[21:21] <czajkowski> This has come up time and time again over the last year or so
[21:21] <BobJonkman2> :) That's one of the reasons I'm here
[21:21] <czajkowski> We have counteries such as India, Australia, Canada and Brazil
[21:21] <czajkowski> all of which are massive georgaphic regions and it's not possible to be loco in that sense
[21:22] <czajkowski> what we would propse is to break them up into state/provence like USA has done
[21:22] <czajkowski> and there can be locos that way
[21:23] <czajkowski> the reason we would like to do this now rather than in 1+years is to put in place measures to help teams from the ground up, but also helps plan and better allocate resouces when planning eg. Canonical DVDs
[21:23] <BobJonkman2> For the Canadian Team, a good geographic area is maybe 100km across.  Even members in a provincial team would be separated by hundreds of km
[21:23] <czajkowski> we've had this request in a number of times now from India and we've had to keep putting it off as we don't have the requirements in place.
[21:23] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: the same goes for many countereies and even states in the USA
[21:24] <czajkowski> what would also benefit is that the LTP would be able to have a section in the team page for a CITY contact
[21:24] <czajkowski> this merge has been ready for a long time as it was discussed at least 2 UDSs ago
[21:24] <BobJonkman2> +1 for City contacts
[21:24] <czajkowski> Brazil loco have already broken their team up into sub teams a long time ago , this would just help for making it offical
[21:25] <czajkowski> but if we don't set the standard up now, then it all becomes rather messy and has a knock on effect on other things, then such as Approved/offical locos
[21:25] <czajkowski> what do folks think?
[21:25] <SergioMeneses> but it doesnt work for all teams, russia said no
[21:26] <BobJonkman2> In Canadian Team IRC meetings the consensus is that provincial teams won't make much difference to members; our team groups are city-based
[21:26] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: right but in a provence you could have a city contact but not a city loco. this has been discussed at length at UDS and it was said no a city loco would not happen.
[21:27] <BobJonkman2> If Canada is split into provincial teams most members still would not meet face-to-face, and we'd probably continue to meet in IRC on a Canada-wide basis anyway.
[21:28] <BobJonkman2> So, splitting into provincial teams would create bureaucratic and administrative overhead that accomplishes nothing.
[21:28] <czajkowski> or it could help the team
[21:28] <czajkowski> the USA has a USA mentor team
[21:28] <czajkowski> we should try and be more encouraing about new ideas
[21:29] <czajkowski> rather than saying it wont work tbh
[21:30] <BobJonkman2> We're working on our Canadian Re-approval application now, and it's been difficult to get members working together in anything larger than a City.  Most of the discussion takes place during the Kitchener and Waterloo Ubuntu Hours, face-to-face
[21:31] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: you may not understand my point, break ing up teams into provence/state may encourage others to step up and if they dn't that's fine, but the standard is put in place
[21:31] <czajkowski> and the option is there for the future
[21:32] <BobJonkman2> True, more teams would mean more involvement from people as local contacts
[21:32] <czajkowski> yes exactly
[21:32] <czajkowski> as a person living the other side of canada may not be interested in an event in that area
[21:33] <czajkowski> but may be interested in running on in their provence
[21:33] <czajkowski> lets try adn support the idea and work out the logistics as we move forward
[21:33] <czajkowski> this idea has hit roadblocks from people for the last 18 months
[21:33] <SergioMeneses> anyways this is a sensible topic and we need a lot of ideas and commentaries
[21:33] <czajkowski> yet we keep getting requests on a monthly basis for help in this area
[21:34] <czajkowski> so I suspect we'll A) blog B) mail loco contacts and the teams we have in mind
[21:34] <czajkowski> over the coming week(s)
[21:34] <czajkowski> but it would be nice to get the ball rolling
[21:35] <SergioMeneses> czajkowski, I think is the best
[21:35] <czajkowski> so for example there are 10 provences in Canada
[21:35] <BobJonkman2> A team leader may run an event in her City, but as each province is about 1000km wide having provincial LoCos doesn't make much difference to having a country LoCo
[21:35] <czajkowski> you could have 10 locoteams there rather than one large country one
[21:35] <czajkowski> surely this makes more sense
[21:37] <BobJonkman2> We have about 300 members, spread out over more than 5000 km; most of them are in Ontario. A Saskatchewan LoCo may have only one or two members...
[21:37] <czajkowski> so my georgaphy of Canada is a bit sketchy apologies, but you'd have ubutu-ca-on for Ontario loco and a city contact on the LTP for Toronto
[21:37] <czajkowski> if I have my provence and city right there
[21:38] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: true but at least the two there would have the option and feel empowered to have a loco in their back ice skating rink! :)
[21:38]  * czajkowski has a mate there, it's very cold!
[21:38] <czajkowski> but they should have the option there to have their own loco
[21:38] <czajkowski> equally they can mail the mothership the candian team for advice and help and that team could mentor people
[21:39] <BobJonkman2> In Vancouver there is a city-based (unapproved) LoCo, that seems to work well for them.
[21:39] <SergioMeneses> like a meta team
[21:39] <BobJonkman2> But Toronto, with a population of about 5,000,000 doesn't even have Ubuntu Hours.
[21:39] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: each team is so different on their events
[21:40] <czajkowski> and like I said city contact was discussed at UDS and it was said No it would not happen, at best the LTP would be edited to allow for a city contact.
[21:40] <SergioMeneses> BobJonkman2, but what can we do in that case?
[21:40] <czajkowski> anwyasy this was just to give an idea of what the council are working on
[21:40] <BobJonkman2> If Canada should be split into provincial LoCos we would like to keep the country-wide mailing list, IRC channel &c. because of the sparse membership.
[21:41] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: thats not a problem this could be worked out n the future
[21:41] <czajkowski> it's not being decided this second
[21:41] <BobJonkman2> czajkowski: I understand.
[21:41] <czajkowski> #topic AOB
[21:41] <czajkowski> huats: SergioMeneses any other comments
[21:42] <czajkowski> or AOB
[21:42] <SergioMeneses> not from me
[21:42] <huats> I don't know what means AOB
[21:42] <huats> :)
[21:42] <czajkowski> any other business
[21:42] <czajkowski> :)
[21:43] <huats> not else
[21:43] <czajkowski> okie doke
[21:43] <czajkowski> #endmeeting
[21:43] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Jan 15 21:43:17 2013 UTC.
[21:43] <meetingology> Minutes (wiki):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2013/ubuntu-meeting.2013-01-15-21.04.moin.txt
[21:43] <meetingology> Minutes (html):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2013/ubuntu-meeting.2013-01-15-21.04.html
[21:43] <czajkowski> SergioMeneses: huats thanks for coming
[21:43] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: thanks for taking part
[21:43] <SergioMeneses> thank to you czajkowski
[21:43] <BobJonkman2> czajkowski: Thanx for having me!
[21:43] <czajkowski> it's an open meeting BobJonkman2 anyone and everyone is welcome
[21:44] <czajkowski> we dont always have such a free meeting
[21:44] <czajkowski> it's nice :)
[21:45] <BobJonkman2> If anything is to be done about LoCos, I'd like to know how to engage more people.  300 people in Ubuntu-ca out in an entire country is pretty abysmal.
[21:47] <czajkowski> BobJonkman2: it's not really
[21:47] <czajkowski> given peoples lives jobs and other stuff goig on
[21:47] <czajkowski> *going on
[21:47] <czajkowski> 300 is a lot still