[15:01] <bdmurray> !dmb ping
[15:02] <bdmurray> micahg_work: Is there a command to ping the whole DMB?
[15:02] <micahg_work> !dmb-ping
[15:02] <cyphermox> o/
[15:02] <bdmurray> o/
[15:03] <xnox> o/
[15:03] <stgraber> sprinting this week here, so I'm only vaguely kinda around, hopefully you guys can do the meeting without me
[15:04] <bdmurray> stgraber: it doesn't look like there is anything to vote on, unless Unit193 shows up.
[15:04] <Laney> hello
[15:06] <bdmurray> #startmeeting
[15:06] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Aug  3 15:06:00 2015 UTC.  The chair is bdmurray. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[15:06] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[15:06] <bdmurray> #topic Review of previous action items
[15:07] <bdmurray> micahg_work: How is getting Noskcaj feeback going?
[15:07] <micahg_work> not great, I haven't had time to compile, if someone else has time, I'd be willing to hand that off, otherwise, I will try again to get it done over the next 2 weeks
[15:08] <bdmurray> micahg_work: Could you elaborate on what is required so people know what they are getting into?
[15:09] <micahg_work> basically a summary of what the reasons were why the DMB wasn't in favor of granting Xubuntu packageset and MOTU status as well as requesting and compiling any additional information from DMB members on the subject
[15:09] <bdmurray> okay, is there anybody else who could take that on?
[15:09] <micahg_work> *in favor at this time
[15:11] <micahg_work> bdmurray, you suggested starting a pad where can can collaborate on a response, would you be up for doing that and DMB members can add things at their leisure
[15:11] <micahg_work> *where we cab
[15:11] <micahg_work> *can
[15:11] <bdmurray> sure
[15:12] <Laney> you'll have to chivvy people along
[15:12] <micahg_work> then, I or someone else can compile the responses from the ML as well and hopefully once the ball is rolling, we'll be able to take care of this quickly
[15:12] <bdmurray> #action bdmurray to setup a pad for the dmb to collaborate on response for noskcaj
[15:12] <meetingology> ACTION: bdmurray to setup a pad for the dmb to collaborate on response for noskcaj
[15:12] <micahg_work> yes, I know, but if the pad is there, it's easier to do that
[15:12] <Laney> I can almost guarantee nobody will do anything proactively
[15:12] <Laney> :( :( :(
[15:12] <Laney> ): ): ):
[15:13] <bdmurray> Laney: Do you think that is something we should discuss?
[15:14] <Laney> not really
[15:15] <bdmurray> okay, moving on then
[15:15] <bdmurray> micahg_work: What about the election results, is that taken care of?
[15:16] <micahg_work> #link https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2015-July/002132.html
[15:16] <micahg_work> only thing I think is left is team changes, TB seems not to have responded
[15:17] <Laney> I think JFDI
[15:17] <micahg_work> sure, you poked stgraber already :)
[15:17] <Laney> sure did
[15:17] <Laney> one thing that comes to mind is...
[15:17] <Laney> we have 0 onboarding process
[15:17] <Laney> I wonder if we could do something there
[15:18] <Laney> or should..?
[15:18] <micahg_work> well, there are the DMB wiki pages, we try to document the processes
[15:18] <cyphermox> depends, approvals don't typically span multiple weeks
[15:18] <micahg_work> were you referring to DMB members of developers?
[15:18] <cyphermox> ie. I like to believe getting Noskca feedback is an exception rather than the rule
[15:18] <micahg_work> s/of/or/
[15:19] <Laney> DMB
[15:19] <cyphermox> I read this as onboarding a new member in the DMB
[15:20] <Laney> sure we could say "go away and read all of the public documentation"
[15:20] <Laney> but there are some things which might not be in there
[15:20] <Laney> like... useful resources to check on someone's history (sponsorship tracker thing)
[15:20] <Laney> how to manipulate packagesets (edit-acl)
[15:21] <Laney> where the code to update the auto-packagesets is
[15:21] <cyphermox> yes, that could certainly help
[15:21] <Laney> umm, how we vote to +4 and if it doesn't reach that then defer to email
[15:21] <Laney> when you can JFDI a packageset change (if it matches the description)
[15:22] <bdmurray> and last week or so there was discussion about which team to add a per package uploader to so they could target bugs to a release and vote for the dmb
[15:22] <Laney> which teams to add new devs to
[15:22] <Laney> exactly
[15:22] <micahg_work> managing seed based packagesets and what constitutes a reason not to update
[15:22] <Laney> plenty of stuff
[15:22] <Laney> how to do a vote for a new member
[15:23] <micahg_work> maybe we should create a wiki page of wishlist wiki pages
[15:23] <Laney> I was just thinking DMB/New unless it becomes too mad
[15:24] <bdmurray> Laney: that sounds good to me
[15:24] <Laney> the DD-PPU thing
[15:24] <Laney> I think we've grown a lot of mostly opaque process
[15:24] <Laney> anyway, action me to start it
[15:25] <bdmurray> #action Laney to start an onboarding page for new dmb members
[15:25] <meetingology> ACTION: Laney to start an onboarding page for new dmb members
[15:25] <bdmurray> it looked like the dmb-ping was already updated, correct?
[15:26] <Laney> /query ubottu !dmb-ping
[15:26] <micahg_work> yes, Unit193 took care of that for us
[15:26] <Laney> FFS
[15:26] <Laney> dell guy is here, sorry
[15:27] <bdmurray> and corey bryant is in the ubuntu-server-dev team now, so that's done.
[15:27] <Laney> I'll be back in however long it takes to change a keyboard
[15:27] <Laney> please discuss the thing, I think it's quite clear but I'll help later if I can
[15:27] <Laney> ttyl
[15:28] <micahg_work> I think I missed an action item which Laney took care of, updating the input-methods packageset, I'm not sure if mozc made it in, I saw the l-s upload
[15:28] <micahg_work> I'll take care of that later if it hasn't been
[15:28] <bdmurray> #action micahg_work to confim if mozc packageset change happened.
[15:28] <meetingology> ACTION: micahg_work to confim if mozc packageset change happened.
[15:29] <bdmurray> #topic PPU/Packageset uploader applications and membership by default
[15:29] <bdmurray> What's this about?
[15:30] <cyphermox> what teams we put people into in the PPU case, I believe
[15:31] <bdmurray> micahg_work: So I'd added teward to ubuntu-dev and you indicated that wasn't what we should do?
[15:31] <micahg_work> so, I'm not sure how it started, there was a question about teward not being in ubuntu-dev, in previous cases where people had ubuntu membership + PPU, we've added them to ubuntu-dev, I'm not sure if that was the impetus for the discussion or something else, I called this practice into question as it didn't seem appropriate as dev membership grants voting rights for dev related things which should require some level of active involvement
[15:31] <micahg_work>  in the Ubuntu dev community
[15:32] <micahg_work> *which IMHO
[15:34] <teward> micahg_work: this was started by bdmurray's bot tagging a debdiff as 'patch' and subscribing sponsors for an nginx bug
[15:34] <teward> i have PPU rights for nginx, so sponsorship subscription was irrelevant and unnecessary at the time
[15:34] <teward> i pinged bdmurray to request removal of sponsors on that bug as it wasn't one that needed the sponsors' attention
[15:34] <micahg_work> also, the only time there's a difference is PPU for individual packages as packagesets and other dev group membership implicitly grant ubuntu-dev membership
[15:34] <teward> that's the beginning of the case in question.
[15:35] <bdmurray> teward: thanks for the reminder. micahg_work did you have more to add?
[15:35] <teward> I didn't bother tracking much of the specifics after that time.
[15:35] <teward> bdmurray: you're welcome.  *returns to lurk mode*
[15:35] <micahg_work> ah, then this is my fault, I never made an icon for ubuntu-uploaders
[15:35] <micahg_work> that would have solved that particular issue
[15:36] <bdmurray> ?
[15:36] <bdmurray> how's that?
[15:36] <micahg_work> oh, wait
[15:36] <micahg_work> well, it would help anyone who's using that LP addon
[15:37] <bdmurray> micahg_work: this is a launchpadlib script
[15:37] <micahg_work> I'm not sure if the sponsoring page actually needs to be updated to recognize ubuntu-uploaders or if it just uses the archive ACLs
[15:38] <micahg_work> I think the point or order on which team by default should be discussed still regardless
[15:38] <micahg_work> s/or/of/
[15:38] <bdmurray> agreed
[15:39] <bdmurray> micahg_work: so this person is an ubuntu-member and has PPU - should they be added to ubuntu-dev?
[15:40] <micahg_work> that's another point of contention I suppose, we've done it in the past, I don't personally agree with it
[15:40] <micahg_work> I think the bar of significant and sustained dev contribution makes sense for having dev voting rights vs significant and sustained Ubuntu contribution
[15:41] <bdmurray> And somebody with PPU doesn't have significant and sustained dev contribution?
[15:42] <micahg_work> not necessarily, that's why we split out uploaders from dev, I thought the idea was the lower that bar (not the technical bar of understanding packaging) to make package maintenance more accessible for people that care about specific packages that might not need to be updated frequently
[15:43] <micahg_work> well, that's how I remember it at lesat
[15:43] <micahg_work> s/lesat/least/
[15:44] <micahg_work> if people were contributing significantly, they were welcome to apply for dev membership at the same time, but I was under the impression that it was not the default for PPU (only)
[15:44] <bdmurray> okay, is this something we can work on as a part of the onboarding documentation?
[15:45] <bdmurray> micahg_work: do you recall about what year these discussions took place?
[15:45] <micahg_work> I think it was within the last 2 years, I can find the references a bit later
[15:46] <micahg_work> actually, uploaders team was created 2014-01-13 (thank you Launchpad)
[15:46] <micahg_work> so, would be right around then
[15:47] <bdmurray> Okay, I'll look into the discussion around that then and send an email to the team. Does that sound good?
[15:47] <micahg_work> yep, we should probably clarify (and maybe re-announce) the policy once we decide on it, I think we were expecting many more people applying for PPU
[15:49] <bdmurray> #action bdmurray to find discussion about PPU and ubuntu-dev membership
[15:49] <meetingology> ACTION: bdmurray to find discussion about PPU and ubuntu-dev membership
[15:49] <xnox> my understanding that PPU does imply ubuntu membership.
[15:49] <xnox> one has to sign the code of conduct to be part of ubuntu-dev, and that's by default expected.
[15:50] <micahg_work> I think the same should be required of uploaders
[15:50] <xnox> and i don't want to underestimate the PPU contributions. PPU libreoffice, or PPU upstart, or PPU systemd are huge amounts of work and complexity.
[15:50] <xnox> micahg_work: and that is the case today.
[15:50] <micahg_work> it's not necessarily exclusive, just not the default IMHO
[15:51] <xnox> micahg_work: you can dig up the threads way back, when DMB chased up, pinged and kicked out everyone out of the ubuntu membership (via ubuntu-dev) that didn't satify requires (e.g. code of conduct signed etc.) and from then on it became the default.
[15:51] <xnox> do you remember that process way back then?
[15:51] <xnox> (before my time, as far as i recall correctly, or maybe not)
[15:52] <micahg_work> the applicant is welcome to apply for membership when applying for PPU if they feel they've made significant and sustained dev contributions, the idea was to allow those who have the technical know-how but don't necessarily have the time to commit for significant and sustained contribution to be able to contribute as well
[15:52] <micahg_work> xnox, hrm, that's quite a while back, I can dig a bit, sure
[15:53] <xnox> my understanding of status quo, was that all PPUs are applying for membership, and can choose for membership requirements to be lifted if they so request (and thus ask for PPU-sans-memberhip) Granted that's not obvious on the application page.
[15:53] <xnox> however, i wonder if that became obsolete.
[15:54] <xnox> most PPU-sans-membership no longer apply, and instead use CI train/airline/silo stuff.
[15:54] <xnox> thus imho, it's a historical artifact we should forget about =)
[15:55] <micahg_work> that's for Canonical people, the policy was meant for the community at large
[15:56] <bdmurray> we are running a bit short on time, how about we dig a bit and take it to email?
[15:56] <micahg_work> I can think that one appropriate application is DMs in Debian, PPU w/out membership would be a natural extension if they care about their packages, but don't do much in Ubuntu
[15:56] <micahg_work> bdmurray, yes, that sounds good
[15:57] <bdmurray> I think somebody should follow up with Unit193 regarding their application. Any volunteers?
[15:57] <micahg_work> bdmurray, yes, I can
[15:57] <bdmurray> #action micahg_work to follow up with Unit193 about their application
[15:57] <micahg_work> I know the timing of our meetings was a bit hard
[15:57] <meetingology> ACTION: micahg_work to follow up with Unit193 about their application
[15:58] <bdmurray> #topic any other business
[15:58] <bdmurray> Anything else?
[16:00] <bdmurray> Alright, thanks for everyone.
[16:00] <bdmurray> #endmeeting
[16:00] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Aug  3 16:00:05 2015 UTC.
[16:00] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2015/ubuntu-meeting.2015-08-03-15.06.moin.txt
[16:02] <Laney> bah
[16:03] <Laney> I thought it was quite clear, I'm susprised that this is causing problems
[16:03] <Laney> did nobody read my devel-permissions mail?
[16:05] <micahg_work> I did read the mail, I thought we were going to discuss, we did to some extent, people wanted more source material I guess
[16:06] <Laney> like what?
[16:06] <Laney> this is not going to get resolved
[16:06] <Laney> ffs
[16:10] <micahg_work> people wanted to read the original discussions from when we decided about PPU, there wasn't much time for people to read up as this was a late breaking agenda item and I believe the people that attended the meeting save for me and you were not on the board at the time the policy was implemented
[16:15] <Laney> meh
[16:15] <Laney> if we randomly decide to change what was previously agreed I'm going to be pissed off
[16:16] <micahg_work> I don't think that's the goal, I think you and I recall differently what was agreed upon, and people want to check the archives, I'll do that as well, I don't think we want to change anything that was agreed upon
[16:17] <Laney> OK, hope so
[16:31] <jjohansen> \o
[16:31] <tyhicks> hello
[16:31] <tyhicks> #startmeeting
[16:31] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Aug  3 16:31:45 2015 UTC.  The chair is tyhicks. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:31] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[16:31] <mdeslaur> \o
[16:32] <tyhicks> The meeting agenda can be found at:
[16:32] <tyhicks> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting
[16:32] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Announcements
[16:32] <tyhicks> Seyeong Kim (xtrusia) provided debdiffs for trusty-wily for pcre3 (LP: #1396768)
[16:32] <tyhicks> Your contributions are greatly appreciated! :)
[16:32] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Weekly stand-up report
[16:32] <tyhicks> mdeslaur: you're up
[16:32] <mdeslaur> I'm out all week as I'm going to a conference
[16:33] <mdeslaur> today I'm preparing my travel laptop
[16:33] <mdeslaur> that's it from me, sbeattie, you're up
[16:33] <sbeattie> I'm taking cve triage for mdeslaur this week, since he's gone and I'll be at a conference next week, when it would be my turn.
[16:34] <sbeattie> I'm testing my fix to the apparmor 2.10 regression that prevented it from migrating to wily from proposed
[16:34] <sbeattie> I've also got openjdk-6 on my plate this week
[16:35] <sbeattie> That's pretty much my priorities for this week. tyhicks, you're up.
[16:36] <tyhicks> I'm on community this week
[16:36] <tyhicks> I have a couple designs to work on
[16:38] <tyhicks> I have an embargoed issue
[16:39] <tyhicks> I need to drum up someone to verify the fix for bug #1473584
[16:39] <tyhicks> I think jjohansen is going to help me there if he has a chance
[16:39] <jjohansen> sure
[16:40] <tyhicks> and I need to finish the fix for a stale dcache issue in eCryptfs reported on Friday
[16:40] <tyhicks> shouldn't be much work left there
[16:40] <tyhicks> that's it for me
[16:40] <tyhicks> jjohansen: you're up
[16:40] <jjohansen> I need to finish investigating bind mount issue with apparmor lxd in snappy
[16:40] <jjohansen> look into secure exec around the 4.2 rebase of apparmor
[16:40] <jjohansen> send some apparmor patches upstream for 4.3
[16:40] <jjohansen> still need to finish reviewing the dconf userspace patches
[16:40] <jjohansen> continue working on the fix for bug #1448912
[16:41] <jjohansen> thats it for me sarnold you're up
[16:41] <sarnold> I'm on bug triage this week
[16:42] <sarnold> I need to have a conversation with till about testing ippusbxd, when doing the mir I wondered if it was working as advertised, and realized that we can't really test this thing end-to-end like we do with most packages
[16:43] <sarnold> most of the work with the mir is done, it'd just be useful to have an irc chat with till, rather than back-and-forth over bugmail. oh well, it'll work either way..
[16:44] <sarnold> I suspect I'll pick up more MIRs this week, though may do reactive work if needed
[16:44] <tyhicks> sarnold: he should be catchable over irc
[16:44] <sarnold> and might do an apparmor review or two for a change of pace
[16:44] <sarnold> tyhicks: yeah, I suspect summertime has just made it less likely for us to see each other
[16:44]  * tyhicks nods
[16:44] <tyhicks> sarnold: would you be able to publish the openstack updates today?
[16:44] <sarnold> tyhicks: sure
[16:45] <tyhicks> sarnold: that'll be a huge help - thanks!
[16:45] <tyhicks> sarnold: we can sync up afterwards
[16:45] <sarnold> it'll feel great have those moving :)
[16:45] <tyhicks> Chris is likely having connectivity issues
[16:45] <tyhicks> yes
[16:45] <tyhicks> I think we're done with stand-up reports
[16:45] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Highlighted packages
[16:46] <tyhicks> The Ubuntu Security team will highlight some community-supported packages that might be good candidates for updating and or triaging. If you would like to help Ubuntu and not sure where to start, this is a great way to do so.
[16:46] <tyhicks> See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdateProcedures for details and if you have any questions, feel free to ask in #ubuntu-security. To find out other ways of helping out, please see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/GettingInvolved.
[16:46] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/xorg-server-lts-utopic.html
[16:46] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/lft.html
[16:46] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Miscellaneous and Questions
[16:46] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/libspoon-perl.html
[16:46] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/libdancer-perl.html
[16:46] <tyhicks> Does anyone have any other questions or items to discuss?
[16:46] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/lwipv6.html
[16:48] <tyhicks> mdeslaur, sbeattie, jjohansen, sarnold: Thanks!
[16:48] <tyhicks> #endmeeting
[16:48] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Aug  3 16:48:03 2015 UTC.
[16:48] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2015/ubuntu-meeting.2015-08-03-16.31.moin.txt
[16:48] <sarnold> thanks tyhicks :)
[16:48] <mdeslaur> thanks tyhicks!
[16:48] <jjohansen> thanks tyhicks
[16:48] <sbeattie> tyhicks: thanks!