[15:13] <xnox> hello
[15:13] <xnox> cyphermox: hello, how are you? =)
[15:14] <cyphermox> hey
[15:14] <xnox> cyphermox: are we meant to have a meeting or some such?
[15:14] <xnox> cyphermox: do we have any agenda items?
[15:15] <cyphermox> heh, woops. it's not actually my turn to chair, but whatever
[15:15] <cyphermox> I had chaired in place of Laney last time :)
[15:15] <xnox> cyphermox: did you do it last time? in that case it would be micahg turn
[15:15] <cyphermox> yeah
[15:16] <xnox> Next DMB meetings (Chair: Mathieu): is not helpful then on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda
[15:16] <cyphermox> but still, I think we just have the agenda item for membership to uploaders
[15:16] <cyphermox> xnox: indeed, but it's because I thought it not good to change the order for one case of switching
[15:16] <cyphermox> I can chair again, don't mind :)
[15:17] <xnox> well we don't have any applicants.
[15:17] <xnox> and I'm not sure how many people are around.
[15:18] <cyphermox> infinity is probably away on vacation this week
[15:18] <cyphermox> ah, Laney is on holiday too
[15:18] <cyphermox> bdmurray: hey
[15:19] <cyphermox> micahg will be back in a few minutes and we can start the meeting then, I suppose.
[15:31] <cyphermox> #startmeeting DMB 2015-10-26
[15:31] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Oct 26 15:31:05 2015 UTC.  The chair is cyphermox. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[15:31] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[15:31] <cyphermox> #voters micahg cyphermox xnox bdmurray
[15:31] <meetingology> Current voters: bdmurray cyphermox micahg xnox
[15:31] <cyphermox> #votesrequired 4
[15:31] <meetingology> votes now need 4 to be passed
[15:31] <cyphermox> #topic Review of the previous action items
[15:32] <cyphermox> Laney isn't around, so we'll just skip to the main topic, I guess
[15:32] <cyphermox> #subtopic Granting membership for PPU/packageset uploaders by default
[15:32] <xnox> +1
[15:32] <cyphermox> do we want to discuss this before we vote?
[15:32] <micahg> so, my position is that some should have membership and some shouldn't
[15:33] <cyphermox> This is about the default process for PPU/packageset uploaders, whether they should ask to have membership too when they apply for upload rights
[15:33] <micahg> PPU doesn't, flavor packagesets should, other packagesets were not decided from what I remember
[15:33] <xnox> micahg: the question, whether it's opt-in, or opt-out.
[15:34] <micahg> right, so, it's a mix
[15:34] <cyphermox> why shouldn't PPU? and under which conditions do you feel packagesets might or might not?
[15:34] <micahg> so, the whole goal was to lower the bar for PPU so that more people can apply when they have the technical skills, but not the significant and sustained part
[15:35] <cyphermox> fair enough
[15:35] <cyphermox> still though, doesn't the significant and sustained part get implicitly verified in the way that we account for whether they have the technical skills?
[15:35] <micahg> so, ,if we're doing that, I would think it should be like any other membership where the applicant needs to apply for it
[15:36] <micahg> it could
[15:36] <cyphermox> ok
[15:36] <xnox> well.
[15:36] <xnox> if one wants upload rights apply for PPU for a package and/or packagest.
[15:36] <cyphermox> I feel it might be a little counterproductive to get them to ask for it, etc when they go for upload rights -- if we're to do that, we might as well have them apply to the RMB simply
[15:37] <xnox> if one wants membership apply for contributing member, MOTU, or core.
[15:37] <xnox> cyphermox: we have developer path to membership only - contributing developer.
[15:37] <micahg> I think it should be made abundantly clear to applicants that if they're just going for PPU or a packageset where there isn't a requirement for significant & sustained contribution that they have the option to apply to dev membership as well if they feel they've fulfilled the significant and sustained piece as well
[15:37] <cyphermox> oh, true
[15:38] <cyphermox> so, should we vote then?
[15:38] <micahg> it's basically was it 1 upload every 6 months or something a bit more significant
[15:38] <cyphermox> fwiw, Laney's vote was +1, but he didn't take part of the discussion here now
[15:39] <micahg> but as xnox said, the DMB is still the best place to grant that membership
[15:39] <micahg> * evaluate and grant
[15:42] <micahg> my problem with opt-out is that it increases the risk we'll reject applicants, if it's opt-in, worst case is they have to come back in 2 weeks
[15:43] <bdmurray> How does that work?
[15:44] <bdmurray> "> Individuals, when they apply to the DMB for packageset or PPU rights,
[15:44] <bdmurray> > will be considered separately for their upload access and for Ubuntu
[15:44] <bdmurray> > membership (the latter being optional, and usually not explicitly
[15:44] <bdmurray> > requested)."
[15:45] <cyphermox> should we make it explicitly clear with the applicant then whether they expect to be considered for membership at the meeting?
[15:47] <bdmurray> No, "we didn't expect people to have to say they want membership too"
[15:47] <micahg> that was not my understanding
[15:47] <cyphermox> no, we didn't expect, but we can ask
[15:47] <micahg> I thought for the PPU/packagesets where it wasn't coupled, they would have to ask explicitly
[15:48] <bdmurray> Okay, and the way I read Laney's email is that we will asume they want to be considered for membership.
[15:49] <micahg> right, that seems to be his position
[15:49] <cyphermox> that's the way I read it too
[15:50] <bdmurray> But the two things aren't coupled together.
[15:50] <micahg> well, for some they were (flavor & kernel packagesets, MOTU/core-dev)
[15:53] <cyphermox> so, voting?
[15:54] <cyphermox> #vote Should uploaders be granted Ubuntu membership by default
[15:54] <meetingology> Please vote on: Should uploaders be granted Ubuntu membership by default
[15:54] <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1/-1/+0 #channelname)
[15:54] <micahg> -1
[15:54] <meetingology> -1 received from micahg
[15:54] <micahg> wait
[15:54] <micahg> that should be a little more narrow, no?
[15:54] <micahg> Should PPU/certain packagesets be granted Ubuntu membership by default?
[15:55] <cyphermox> no, we should reject Laney's proposition explicitly, I think
[15:55] <micahg> ok
[15:55] <cyphermox> or I can close the voting, reject, and we reconvene and further specify it?
[15:56] <cyphermox> I'm +0, btw, because it should be more specific; this depends on packagesets/packages
[15:56] <bdmurray> Are we saying the vote subject is about what is in the iki page?
[15:56] <micahg> you're right, we should vote on what was proposed since the proponent isn't here
[15:56] <micahg> we can then vote on follow up pieces if we want
[15:57] <cyphermox> bdmurray: the vote subject probably should be the specific thing Laney added as a topic?
[15:57] <bdmurray> the email he links to says "it's about whether we
[15:57] <bdmurray> should give these applicants membership implicitly and only use our
[15:57] <bdmurray> right to not give membership when it is needed."
[15:57] <cyphermox> it's super unclear, that's the problem
[15:58] <bdmurray> alright
[15:58] <cyphermox> it's a case-by-case basis and we're trying to codify that
[15:58] <cyphermox> +0
[15:58] <meetingology> +0 received from cyphermox
[15:58] <cyphermox> xnox: ?
[15:58] <bdmurray> I feel like this has been outstanding for quite some time.
[15:58] <cyphermox> bdmurray: yes
[15:59] <cyphermox> bdmurray: I'm not against voting on the specific cases now
[15:59] <cyphermox> or if everyone agrees that Laney meant what we were saying before
[15:59] <cyphermox> (basically, that we give it by default, unless we have a reason not to (ie. not sustained)
[15:59] <bdmurray> I don't want to make that assumption.
[16:00]  * bdmurray spoke too soon
[16:00] <cyphermox> bdmurray: I understand what you mean
[16:02] <cyphermox> xnox: bdmurray: are you voting or do you think we should refine it first?
[16:04] <xnox> i'm for: contributing, motu, core -> implies membership. the rest do not.
[16:05] <cyphermox> xnox: that's a strong -1 then, and PPU/packageset requesters should apply for contributing explicitly?
[16:05] <xnox> yeah.
[16:05] <bdmurray> I guess it needs some refining.
[16:05] <cyphermox> ok, let's see if we can convey this properly in the logs
[16:05] <cyphermox> #endvote
[16:05] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Should uploaders be granted Ubuntu membership by default
[16:05] <meetingology> Votes for:0 Votes against:1 Abstentions:1
[16:05] <meetingology> Motion denied
[16:05] <cyphermox> #rejected
[16:06] <cyphermox> should we refine this now? have we already done so and vote on a different, more specific topic?
[16:09] <bdmurray> I think Laney should be involved in the refinement.
[16:11] <cyphermox> ok, then
[16:11] <cyphermox> #action cyphermox to update wiki for refinement of Laney's proposition
[16:11] <meetingology> ACTION: cyphermox to update wiki for refinement of Laney's proposition
[16:11] <cyphermox> #topic AOB?
[16:12] <cyphermox> anyone has something else to discuss today?
[16:13] <bdmurray> nope
[16:13] <cyphermox> ok
[16:13] <cyphermox> #topic Chair selection for the next meeting
[16:13] <cyphermox> micahg: your turn according to the wiki list
[16:13] <cyphermox> unless you know you won't be there
[16:13] <micahg> ok :)
[16:14] <micahg> no, I should be there
[16:14] <cyphermox> #action micahg to chair next meeting
[16:14] <meetingology> ACTION: micahg to chair next meeting
[16:14] <micahg> which reminds me, I need to send the doodle poll for meeting times
[16:14] <micahg> might as well action that..
[16:14] <cyphermox> #action micahg to send doodle poll for meeting times
[16:14] <meetingology> ACTION: micahg to send doodle poll for meeting times
[16:14] <micahg> thanks :)
[16:14] <cyphermox> #endmeeting
[16:14] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Oct 26 16:14:39 2015 UTC.
[16:14] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2015/ubuntu-meeting.2015-10-26-15.31.moin.txt
[16:14] <cyphermox> thanks everyone :)
[16:33] <mdeslaur> \o
[16:33] <tyhicks> hello
[16:33] <jjohansen> o/
[16:33] <tyhicks> #startmeeting
[16:33] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Oct 26 16:33:48 2015 UTC.  The chair is tyhicks. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:33] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[16:33] <tyhicks> The meeting agenda can be found at:
[16:34] <tyhicks> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting
[16:34] <jdstrand> hello
[16:34] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Weekly stand-up report
[16:34] <tyhicks> jdstrand: you're up
[16:34] <jdstrand> I'm working on the various tasks for click-apparmor and policy for xenial
[16:35] <jdstrand> I'm then going to be working on cleaning up snappy policy generation
[16:35] <jdstrand> and some review tools updates
[16:35] <jdstrand> that's it for me
[16:35] <jdstrand> mdeslaur: you're up
[16:36] <mdeslaur> I'm on bug triage this week
[16:36] <mdeslaur> I just released mysql updates
[16:36] <mdeslaur> and I have an embargoed issue to test
[16:36] <mdeslaur> after that, I have some ntp updates to test properly and release
[16:36] <mdeslaur> and will go down the list after that
[16:36] <mdeslaur> that's pretty much it
[16:36] <mdeslaur> sbeattie: , you're up
[16:36] <sbeattie> I'm on cve triage this week
[16:37] <sbeattie> I'm finishig testing the openjdk-7 update
[16:38] <sbeattie> I'm also working on the gcc pie patches
[16:38] <sbeattie> I have some yak shaving to finish up for xenial opening and to prep for the sprint
[16:39] <sbeattie> that's pretty much it for my week, though I'm hoping to pick up another update as well
[16:39] <sbeattie> tyhicks: you're it
[16:39] <tyhicks> I'm in the happy place this week
[16:39] <tyhicks> I need to do some sprint prep
[16:40] <tyhicks> I'm in the middle of the Mir attestable timestamps and mapplauncherd reviews
[16:40] <tyhicks> and still hoping to get to AppArmor kernel fix reviews
[16:40] <tyhicks> helping out with the update backlog would be good, too
[16:40] <tyhicks> jjohansen: you're up
[16:41] <jjohansen> I still working on the kernel patches for apparmor stacking
[16:41] <jjohansen> I will also have some sprint prep this week
[16:42] <jjohansen> and I should get the 4.3 apparmor patch tree in order so its ready for 4.3 when in lands
[16:42] <jjohansen> thats it for me sarnold you're up
[16:43] <sarnold> I'm on community this week; there's a few xenial-open tasks held over fro mlast week, perhaps embargoed updates to work on, and a long list of apparmor kernel patches to review
[16:44] <sarnold> also of course some sprint preperation
[16:44] <sarnold> I think that's it for me, chrisccoulson?
[16:45] <tyhicks> he had to step away
[16:45] <tyhicks> we'll move on
[16:45] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Highlighted packages
[16:45] <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.
[16:45] <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.
[16:45] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/radare2.html
[16:45] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/ruby-jquery-rails.html
[16:45] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/async-http-client.html
[16:45] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/php-mail.html
[16:45] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/k4dirstat.html
[16:45] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Miscellaneous and Questions
[16:46] <tyhicks> Does anyone have any other questions or items to discuss?
[16:48] <tyhicks> jdstrand, mdeslaur, sbeattie, jjohansen, sarnold: Thanks!
[16:48] <tyhicks> #endmeeting.
[16:48] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Oct 26 16:48:14 2015 UTC.
[16:48] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2015/ubuntu-meeting.2015-10-26-16.33.moin.txt
[16:48] <jjohansen> thanks tyhicks
[16:48] <sbeattie> tyhicks: thanks!
[16:49] <mdeslaur> thanks tyhicks
[16:49] <sarnold> thanks tyhicks
[16:49] <jdstrand> thanks tyhicks :)