[16:37] <tyhicks> hello
[16:37] <tyhicks> #startmeeting
[16:37] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Dec 12 16:37:43 2016 UTC.  The chair is tyhicks. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:37] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[16:37] <tyhicks> The meeting agenda can be found at:
[16:37] <tyhicks> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting
[16:37] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Announcements
[16:37] <tyhicks> Brian Morton provided debdiffs for precise-trusty for proftpd-dfsg (LP: #1462311)
[16:37] <tyhicks> Otto Kekäläinen (otto) provided debdiffs for yakkety-xenial for mariadb-10.0 (LP: #1638125)
[16:38] <tyhicks> Otto Kekäläinen (otto) provided debdiffs for trusty for mariadb-5.5 (LP: #1638125)
[16:38] <tyhicks> Thank you for your assistance in keeping Ubuntu users secure! :)
[16:38] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Weekly stand-up report
[16:38] <tyhicks> mdeslaur: go ahead (we'll circle back to Jamie since he's in the middle of another conversation)
[16:38] <mdeslaur> I'm on triage
[16:39] <mdeslaur> but i'm only here today, I'm off for the holidays starting tomorrow
[16:39] <tyhicks> ratliff will take over triage after today
[16:39] <tyhicks> cve triage, that is
[16:39] <mdeslaur> I'm currently working on embargoed issues
[16:39] <mdeslaur> that's it from me
[16:39] <tyhicks> sbeattie: you're up
[16:39] <sbeattie> I'm in the happy place this week
[16:39] <sbeattie> it's a short week for me, I'm off thursday and friday
[16:41] <sbeattie> I'll try to pick up an update this week, possibly one or more of the embargoed issue mdeslaur is working on
[16:41] <sbeattie> I have some apparmor work to do to get the release out
[16:41] <tyhicks> do you plan on getting the release out before you go on vacation?
[16:41] <sbeattie> I also have some misc kernel triage/tasks to look after.
[16:42] <sbeattie> tyhicks: I'll be back next week (for another short week)
[16:42] <tyhicks> oh
[16:42] <tyhicks> ok
[16:42] <sbeattie> but yes, planning to get the release out before the holidays
[16:42] <sbeattie> anyway, that'll likely consume my week.
[16:42] <sbeattie> tyhicks: on to you
[16:43] <tyhicks> I'm going to be taking over bug triage this week
[16:44] <tyhicks> I'm going to be verifying the trusty dbus and apparmor SRUs (LP: #1641243)
[16:44] <tyhicks> I hope to finish up the seccomp logging changes - I think I only need to finish adding tests to libseccomp
[16:45] <tyhicks> however, the kernel merge window just opened up so the kernel changes aren't likely to land until the next kernel
[16:45] <tyhicks> I am going to publish some embargoed issues that mdeslaur and others are working on
[16:45] <tyhicks> I have some sprint prep to do
[16:46] <tyhicks> and I still have a number of ecryptfs issues on my plate (haven't been able to work on them at all)
[16:46] <tyhicks> that's it for me
[16:46] <tyhicks> I don't see jj
[16:46] <tyhicks> sarnold_: go ahead
[16:46] <sarnold_> I'm on community this week
[16:47] <sarnold_> I seem to recall seeing some sponsored updates from last week, and I'm not sure what state my schroots or vms are in, so it' spossible much of this week will be yak shaving to do the updates
[16:47] <sarnold_> with what time is left I'll head on to swift-s3-something-mumble MIR
[16:48] <tyhicks> I got through all of the sponsorings (d2u and debdiff) last week
[16:48] <sarnold_> libav too?
[16:48] <sarnold_> or was that ffmpeg?
[16:48] <tyhicks> didn't see that one, so I guess I didn't get through them all
[16:48] <ratliff> ffmpeg
[16:49] <sarnold_> that's me done, jjohansen?
[16:49] <jjohansen> yep
[16:50] <jjohansen> Its a short week for me again, I friday off
[16:50] <jjohansen> I am following up with a couple of bugs that got fixed last week
[16:50] <jjohansen> I still need to look into the mount issue, that jdstrand encountered
[16:51] <jjohansen> and I need to work on gsettings
[16:51] <tyhicks> by following up, you mean SRU verification?
[16:52] <jjohansen> tyhicks: well, bugging people to ensure the patches worked for them, and sending them up to the kt
[16:52] <tyhicks> jjohansen: ^
[16:52] <tyhicks> ah
[16:52] <tyhicks> thanks
[16:53] <jjohansen> thats it for /me back to you tyhicks
[16:54] <tyhicks> ratliff: you're up
[16:54] <ratliff> I'm on bug triage today, CVE triage after today.
[16:55] <ratliff> I have some reviews pending to complete and I need to prepare the zesty ghostscript debdiff.
[16:55] <ratliff> back to you tyhicks
[16:56] <tyhicks> jdstrand: go ahead
[16:56] <jdstrand> finialize dbus PR
[16:56] <jdstrand> finalize network-namespace-control PR
[16:56] <jdstrand> various PR reviews
[16:56] <jdstrand> various snappy personal reviews/design discussions
[16:56] <jdstrand> start working on seccomp arg filtering
[16:56] <jdstrand> last week I actually got to work on a few things, so I think dbus and network-namespace PRs may land soon
[16:57] <jdstrand> that's it from me
[16:57] <tyhicks> thanks jdstrand
[16:58] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Highlighted packages
[16:58] <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.
[16:58] <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.
[16:58] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/node-uuid.html
[16:58] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/node-qs.html
[16:58] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/transifex-client.html
[16:58] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/blender.html
[16:58] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Miscellaneous and Questions
[16:58] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/pdns.html
[16:58] <tyhicks> Does anyone have any other questions or items to discuss?
[16:59] <tyhicks> jdstrand, mdeslaur, sbeattie, jjohansen, sarnold, ratliff: Thanks!
[16:59] <tyhicks> #endmeeting
[16:59] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Dec 12 16:59:34 2016 UTC.
[16:59] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2016/ubuntu-meeting.2016-12-12-16.37.moin.txt
[16:59] <mdeslaur> thanks tyhicks!
[16:59] <sarnold_> thanks tyhicks!
[16:59] <sbeattie> tyhicks: thanks!
[17:00] <jjohansen> thanks tyhicks
[17:00] <ratliff> thank you, tyhicks!
[18:54] <slashd> o/ rbasak fossfreedom
[18:54] <rbasak> o/
[18:55] <fossfreedom> hi!
[18:57] <sil2100> p/
[18:59] <micahg> o/
[19:00] <rbasak> Need one more.
[19:01] <fossfreedom> cross-fingers
[19:01] <slashd> cyphermox ping
[19:01] <BenC> o/
[19:01] <rbasak> o/
[19:02] <rbasak> Who's chairing this meeting?
[19:02] <rbasak> Any volunteers?
[19:02] <sil2100> I could
[19:02] <slashd> thanks guys for joining this special mtg
[19:02] <slashd> much appreciated
[19:03] <rbasak> sil2100: please do. Thanks!
[19:03] <sil2100> #startmeeting DMB meeting
[19:03] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Dec 12 19:03:15 2016 UTC.  The chair is sil2100. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[19:03] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[19:03] <sil2100> Should we start off like any usual DMB meeting?
[19:03] <sil2100> I suppose so
[19:03] <sil2100> #topic Review of previous action items
[19:04] <sil2100> Action: rbasak to get mapreri's PPU additions done by the TB <- what's the status of this one?
[19:04] <rbasak> Let me check. One minute.
[19:05] <rbasak> bug 1643648 - still outstanding.
[19:05] <sil2100> Ok
[19:06] <sil2100> Action: rbasak to address GunnarHj's im-config yakkety question on the ML <- I have problems with memory recently, is this done?
[19:06] <rbasak> I made progress, just checking to see if it is done.
[19:08] <rbasak> This is still todo. Sorry!
[19:08] <rbasak> The TB have done their part, now I need to do mine.
[19:08] <sil2100> ACK, let's leave it around for the next meeting then
[19:08] <sil2100> Action: rbasak to address cpaelzer's dovecot-antispam ubuntu-server packageset request on the ML <- from what I see this is done I think, right?
[19:09] <rbasak> Done.
[19:09] <sil2100> Action: sil2100 to update the lubuntu packageset according to the current seed (carried over)  <- this is now also done for zesty, I might still back-port the same packageset changes to yakkety and xenial, but that's a different story I suppose
[19:09] <sil2100> The original request is done I would say
[19:10] <sil2100> #topic PPU Applications
[19:11] <sil2100> fossfreedom: hello!
[19:11] <fossfreedom> hi!
[19:11] <sil2100> fossfreedom: could you introduce yourself?
[19:11] <fossfreedom> My name is David Mohammed - also known as fossfreedom - and I am the project lead of Ubuntu Budgie (formerly budgie-remix).
[19:11] <sil2100> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/fossfreedom/UbuntuBudgieDevApplication <- link to the application in mention
[19:11] <fossfreedom> Key responsibilities is the maintenance of our budgie packages -through the QA expected by the Ubuntu release team ...
[19:11] <fossfreedom> and meeting the release cadence - our packages are a mixture of Debian (sync with Ubuntu) and Ubuntu specific packages.
[19:12] <fossfreedom> Thanks in advance for considering my (our) application to be able to maintain our packages within Ubuntu.
[19:13] <BenC> With the amount of time you’ve been around the community, I’m a bit surprised to not see any endorsements.
[19:13] <sil2100> BenC: there are endorsements
[19:13] <sil2100> BenC: look at the bottom of the page, they're below the template
[19:13] <BenC> Ah, I see now.
[19:13] <rbasak> fossfreedom: this packageset doesn't yet exist, correct?
[19:13] <fossfreedom> correct
[19:13] <BenC> Thanks
[19:14] <rbasak> Do we know what packages would be in the set?
[19:14] <fossfreedom> listed at the top of the application
[19:14] <rbasak> Ah
[19:14] <rbasak> Thanks
[19:14] <fossfreedom> ooo - saw a mistake
[19:14] <fossfreedom> the indicator applet has been accepted in debian
[19:14] <fossfreedom> its no longer new
[19:15] <rbasak> OK
[19:15] <fossfreedom> and our ubuntu-budgie-meta has been sponsored
[19:17] <rbasak> Which of these packages are Ubuntu-only?
[19:17] <fossfreedom> just a sec
[19:17] <rbasak> And are there any packages here that are derived from Debian and that you don't maintain in Debian?
[19:18] <fossfreedom> budgie-desktop-environment, budgie-artwork, budgie-welcome, budgie-wallpapers, ubuntu-budgie-meta
[19:19] <fossfreedom> All others listed are our packages that have been sponsored and accepted in debian
[19:20] <rbasak> So to make sure I haven't misunderstood, the answer to my Debian maintenance question is "no"?
[19:21] <fossfreedom> If I've understood the question - no derived debian packages - they are either in debian and sync'd or are ubuntu specific
[19:21] <sil2100> fossfreedom: a standard question from me - are you aware of how proposed migration works in Ubuntu?
[19:22] <fossfreedom> before the debian freeze date - yes sponsored, and auto sync'd I believe.
[19:22] <rbasak> fossfreedom: no, I mean: apart from Ubuntu specific packages, is there any package in your requested list that you *do not* maintain in Debian?
[19:23] <fossfreedom> no.
[19:23] <rbasak> Right, that answers my question - thanks :)
[19:23] <fossfreedom> sure.  sorry about that!
[19:24] <rbasak> fossfreedom: for the packages in Debian, what sort of uploads do you expect will be necessary in Ubuntu?
[19:25] <fossfreedom> Intend to maintain the debian specific packages via debian.  Only after the various freeze dates would I want to look at critical and stability fixes specific to ubuntu coming from upstream
[19:26] <rbasak> OK. And if we do grant you upload access today, under what circumstances must you seek approval before uploading to Ubuntu?
[19:26] <rbasak> OK. And if we do grant you upload access today, under what circumstances must you seek approval _anyway_ before uploading to Ubuntu?
[19:27] <sil2100> fossfreedom: (please also note my question above ^ after answering rbasak)
[19:27] <fossfreedom> not sure I understand - if I have doubts - will ask via ubuntu-motu
[19:28] <rbasak> fossfreedom: under what release cycle freeze conditions must you seek approval before uploading, and from whom?
[19:28] <fossfreedom> k - think you are referring to feature freeze?
[19:29] <fossfreedom> release managers - but not sure who they are - will need to ask
[19:30] <rbasak> There are other freezes too, but let's start with feature freeze.
[19:30] <fossfreedom> sil2100 - are you referring to sending first to proposed.  testing, confirming before moving to universe?
[19:30] <rbasak> What can you upload when only feature freeze is in effect, and what can you not upload during the same time?
[19:31] <fossfreedom> basically my understanding is concentrate on bugs and stability issues.
[19:31] <fossfreedom> dont introduce new features
[19:31] <fossfreedom> especially dont break libraries - api's etc.
[19:31] <sil2100> fossfreedom: let's say there's such a situation: you upload your package to ubuntu, the package goes to, let's say, zesty-proposed and stays there for over a week - what would you do? Is this a normal situation?
[19:32] <fossfreedom> in that circumstance I would hop into ubuntu-motu and seek guidance.
[19:32] <fossfreedom> no - before freeze that would be most unexpected I noticed
[19:33] <fossfreedom> after freeze - depends on the issue at hand.
[19:34] <rbasak> depends> can you be more specific?
[19:34] <sil2100> fossfreedom: ok, I guess that's a good start - do you know http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html and update_output.txt ?
[19:35] <fossfreedom> lets say the problem at hand is complicated - involving more than one package - possibly concerning a package that we depend upon but is not ours.  Yes - in that example, I would expect things will take longer to check and double check
[19:35] <sil2100> In case you didn't, it's a good thing to bookmark and to look at once you see your package being stuck in -proposed
[19:36]  * cyphermox is around
[19:36] <rbasak> cyphermox: o/
[19:36] <sil2100> Anyway, any other questions to fossfreedom ?
[19:36] <fossfreedom> noted . thanks for the link
[19:36] <micahg> fossfreedom: why did you overwrite the changelog when you uploaded a new version? http://launchpadlibrarian.net/296645594/ubuntu-budgie-meta_0.0.1_0.1.diff.gz
[19:37] <fossfreedom> that was a bit of confusion .  Apparently daniel uploaded but myself and mapreri didnt know - maprari also sponsored and uploaded over the top
[19:39] <rbasak> I think I'm done with questions, thanks.
[19:40] <cyphermox> we normally deal with this in two steps, first packageset creation, then joining the packageset.
[19:40] <cyphermox> or just PPU
[19:41] <rbasak> IMHO, we should vote on granting fossfreedom upload rights first, and then think about what to do wrt. packagesets/PPU. Because if we don't move to grant fossfreedom upload rights, then the packageset discussion is pointless.
[19:42]  * BenC agrees
[19:42] <rbasak> Presumably what we'd give fossfreedom upload rights to (whether via a packageset or PPU) is uncontroversial?
[19:42] <sil2100> Agreed
[19:42] <cyphermox> well, my vote would be based on what the packageset is, TBH
[19:42] <micahg> yeah, usually packageset comes first
[19:42] <micahg> but we can table the actions on creation if no one is granted rights
[19:42] <rbasak> OK
[19:42] <rbasak> Whatever sil2100 wants to do I guess, as he's chairing!
[19:43] <sil2100> Since we already did review the applicant and a 'recommended' set of packages for the packageset has been proposed, I would say we should vote basing on the current knowledge
[19:44] <cyphermox> what does that mean?
[19:44] <sil2100> I mean that we should vote as if the packageset in mention had the packages as proposed in the application
[19:45] <sil2100> And in case the packageset ends up different, we can then bring this up on the meeting
[19:45] <micahg> is that list actually defined?
[19:45] <micahg> ah, yeah, I see it now
[19:45] <sil2100> budgie-desktop, budgie-desktop-environment, budgie-artwork, budgie-welcome, budgie-wallpapers, arc-theme, moka-icon-theme, faba-icon-theme, rhythmbox-plugin-alternative-toolbar, budgie-indicator-applet
[19:46] <fossfreedom> + ubuntu-budgie-meta
[19:47] <sil2100> cyphermox: would you be fine with this?
[19:47] <cyphermox> just a second, almost done looking this over
[19:47] <sil2100> I don't want to over-extend the meeting as we still have another applicant for today
[19:47] <sil2100> Ok, thanks
[19:50] <cyphermox> yeah ok to vote
[19:50] <sil2100> #vote for David Mohammed to get upload rights for the budgie packageset
[19:50] <meetingology> Please vote on: for David Mohammed to get upload rights for the budgie packageset
[19:50] <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)
[19:52] <rbasak> -1
[19:52] <meetingology> -1 received from rbasak
[19:53] <BenC> +1
[19:53] <meetingology> +1 received from BenC
[19:54] <micahg> +0, great start, great job getting packages into Debian, would like to see a little more experience with the packages
[19:54] <meetingology> +0, great start, great job getting packages into Debian, would like to see a little more experience with the packages received from micahg
[19:54] <cyphermox> we never defined what the packageset was yet though
[19:55] <micahg> sil2100 listed the packages before the vote, but you are correct, that it's not official
[19:55] <micahg> *officially listed in the vote
[19:56] <cyphermox> +1 there is evidence of involvement, but I can't see much in terms of uploads (though some are obviosly maintained in Debian directly). On the basis that this is for a new flavor and that the risk is low (leaf packages specific to the flavor) I'm inclined to acquiesce.
[19:56] <meetingology> +1 there is evidence of involvement, but I can't see much in terms of uploads (though some are obviosly maintained in Debian directly). On the basis that this is for a new flavor and that the risk is low (leaf packages specific to the flavor) I'm inclined to acquiesce. received from cyphermox
[19:57] <cyphermox> I would strongly strongly suggest pinging people on IRC when you need sponsoring. I know I'm always happy to sponsor packages and give review, and later add testimonial to applications
[19:59] <fossfreedom> k - sure - Jeremy has done the vast majority of uploads and sponsoring for the team
[19:59] <cyphermox> who are the team?
[19:59] <fossfreedom> I myself do the packaging - the link to the team is here https://budgie-remix.org/our-team/
[20:03] <sil2100> +1 conditionally from me as this is a new flavor and things need to get going, assuming the packageset stays as mentioned above - but PLEASE always ask more experienced sponsors while in doubt
[20:03] <meetingology> +1 conditionally from me as this is a new flavor and things need to get going, assuming the packageset stays as mentioned above - but PLEASE always ask more experienced sponsors while in doubt received from sil2100
[20:03] <fossfreedom> fully agree with you sil2100
[20:04] <sil2100> Ok, I guess that's everyone present
[20:04] <sil2100> #endvote
[20:04] <meetingology> Voting ended on: for David Mohammed to get upload rights for the budgie packageset
[20:04] <meetingology> Votes for:3 Votes against:1 Abstentions:1
[20:04] <meetingology> Motion carried
[20:04] <rbasak> So I think that's not quorate?
[20:04] <sil2100> Yeah, I think it isn't
[20:05] <micahg> right
[20:05] <sil2100> So we'll have to move it to the mailing list
[20:05] <rbasak> fossfreedom: I wrote up my reasons for my -1 ready to paste. I'll do that now.
[20:05] <rbasak> This was not an easy decision, as you can probably tell from the votes! I
[20:05] <rbasak> really appreciate your contributions to Ubuntu, and in maintaining Ubuntu
[20:05] <rbasak> Budgie for us. Personally, I'd be +1 in granting you Ubuntu Contributing
[20:05] <rbasak> Developer status, though that would require a further formal DMB vote.
[20:05] <rbasak> However, I reget that I'm not satisfied with your understanding of the Ubuntu release process. I think this is important, particularly for a flavour lead.
[20:05] <rbasak> For example, the key differentiation for uploading during feature freeze is the simple criteron of whether the upload incorporates just bugfixes or feature changes, but you seemed to be unable to state this.
[20:05] <cyphermox> it's most definitely not a motion carried outcome; as per https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase
[20:05] <rbasak> I am satisfied with the other aspects of your application.
[20:06] <sil2100> fossfreedom: so for now your application is still being processed
[20:06] <sil2100> fossfreedom: since you didn't get the required number of votes we'll contintue this through the ML to get the remaining DMB memebers votes
[20:06] <fossfreedom> thanks - will continue normally motu sponsoring.  We have a number of updates to make.  thanks all for your time.
[20:07] <rbasak> fossfreedom: I'm sorry we couldn't decide in this meeting. We do all appreciate your contributions and hope you will continue regardless of the outcome here. Despite our individual opinions I'm sure we all want to get you to the stage that we're unamimously happy to grant you upload access.
[20:07] <sil2100> Let me put an action item for this
[20:07] <sil2100> #action sil2100 to handle fossfreedom's application further through e-mail
[20:07] <meetingology> ACTION: sil2100 to handle fossfreedom's application further through e-mail
[20:08] <sil2100> Ok, let's move on!
[20:08] <rbasak> Does everyone have time to consider slashd's application? I do, but I appreciate we're 70 minutes in.
[20:08] <sil2100> BenC, cyphermox, slashd, micahg - you all have time for another application still?
[20:08] <cyphermox> yep
[20:09] <BenC> Yeah
[20:09] <micahg> I have a call in 20 min, but we can try
[20:09] <sil2100> #topic MOTU Applications
[20:09] <sil2100> slashd: hello! You still around? Could you please introduce yourself?
[20:09] <slashd> I'm a Software Engineer in the Support Sustaining Engineering Group within Canonical helping in driving Canonical customer and community bugs into resolution by troubleshooting, fixing bugs, providing guidance & workarounds, for different areas of expertise which may cover areas such as: kernel/usermode, drivers, virtualization, network, cloud, storage, ... [https://wiki.ubuntu.com/slashd/MOTU] [https://launchpad.net/~slas
[20:09] <slashd> hd] Since I first started contributing I think I've always been acting as a good team player, doing updates of high quality with as much details as I could provide, never been afraid to ask questions when in doubt and that I have the detective skills that this role requires.
[20:09] <sil2100> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/slashd/MOTU <- application
[20:12] <sil2100> slashd: first question: I noticed that m_deslaur mentioned required improvement in better formatted changelogs - could you elaborate what he could have had in mind?
[20:13] <slashd> sil2100, I think he was refering to the fact, my first changelog were not as descriptive as he wanted
[20:13] <slashd> sil2100, I think I fix that
[20:14] <slashd> I really pay attention to experience ppl feedbacks, to always improve myself
[20:15] <rbasak> slashd: are you expecting to do many uploads to universe?
[20:16] <rbasak> slashd: and what have you uploaded that is or was in universe?
[20:17] <slashd> rbasak, as you can see I'm not dedicated to a specific package or pkgset mostly due to the nature of my work at Canonical where I have to fix whaterver is broken (main, universe, ...) so I expect to do upload of course when a problem arise and also sponsor other ppl debdiff to help the community, ....
[20:18] <sil2100> slashd: what would be the primary reason for you to apply for MOTU?
[20:18] <slashd> rbasak, libpam-sshauth AFAI remember
[20:19] <slashd> sil2100, I want to involve myself more in Ubuntu development, helping fixing issue, help other in sponsoring debdiff, ...
[20:20] <cyphermox> slashd: the point of rbasak's question is that we give upload rights after proof of involvement, rather than "because I would like to X"
[20:21] <slashd> cyphermox, right, I agree that most of my work has been done for main pkg
[20:22] <sil2100> Any other questions?
[20:22] <rbasak> FTR, I have worked with slashd on SRUs.
[20:22] <slashd> rbasak, cyphermox, I simply think that being MOTU is a good step toward gaining upload experiences ..... and eventually will earn some strip to help even more in other areas
[20:23] <rbasak> AIUI, that's the main outcome of his work at Canonical, since from my perspective at least he mainly seems to handle requests that come from Canonical customers, and they generally and understandably tend to be about stable releases.
[20:23] <cyphermox> yep
[20:23] <rbasak> From that perspective, I'd like to see slashd being able to upload SRUs directly.
[20:23] <cyphermox> well, he still won't, for the most part
[20:24] <micahg> slashd: well, as cyphermox mentioned, we usually want the experience before the upload rights
[20:24] <rbasak> I'm not sure if MOTU is the right path for that, unless slashd is actually making significant contributions to universe, or is being blocked from doing so. I don't think he is.
[20:24] <rbasak> It's a new thing I think that Canonical STS employees are contributing to Ubuntu in this way.
[20:24] <rbasak> I can only recall caribou as the other person doing this.
[20:24] <rbasak> So perhaps this is something the DMB needs to tackle.
[20:24] <cyphermox> and to illustrate my point, " being MOTU is a good step toward gaining upload experiences" is precisely what we don't want, and rather give MOTU based on having seen enough evidence that someone knows what they're doing enough to not break universe
[20:24] <slashd> rbasak for now there is only caribou yes
[20:25] <rbasak> I don't think it's appropriate to force Canonical STS employees contribution to Ubuntu SRUs in main to have to make unrelated contributions to MOTU first as a path to getting upload access to the stuff they're actually helping with.
[20:25] <rbasak> Nor do I think it's appropriate to grant MOTU to people not actually contributing to universe.
[20:26] <sil2100> Ok, should we maybe start the vote? Or are there any questions to slashd before we continue?
[20:26] <rbasak> So, I'm -1 on giving slashd MOTU, but I think it's an action item for the DMB to work out how to fix this so that there's a direct way for slashd and his colleagues to get upload access to do SRUs in main.
[20:26] <micahg> rbasak: SRUs go into a queue anyways, it doesn't help so much to have "upload rights" for SRUs unless there were a high volume, and I don't think we're seeing that
[20:26] <cyphermox> there isn't really a way to do that aside from being able to upload in main though
[20:27] <slashd> rbasak, I know another sts memeber is about to apply for coredev in Jan so this point I think would be nice to be addressed
[20:27] <micahg> right, but that could be set per-series if need be
[20:27] <cyphermox> ie. SRUs are just an upload, the difference of being stuck in the unapproved queue is just because of the state of the release
[20:28] <cyphermox> well, i suppose it could be, but that wouldn't be up to the DMB to statute on.
[20:28] <rbasak> Yeah, we could tell Launchpad to allow some new ~ubuntu-sru-uploaders team access to upload to stables but not development.
[20:28] <rbasak> I believe it would be within the DMB's remit to set this up if we decided it is appropriate.
[20:29] <cyphermox> I don't think deciding whether it's appropriate is DMB-level
[20:29] <sil2100> Do we want an action item for this?
[20:29] <rbasak> And then slashd and his colleagues would have a clear path forward, whether or not you think slashd himself has enough of a track record right now.
[20:29] <sil2100> e.g. for us to remember this for the next meetings?
[20:29] <rbasak> I'll happily take an action to take it to the list.
[20:29] <rbasak> cyphermox: so we disagree, which is fine. How about: after I take this to the ML, you ask the TB to decide whether it is within our remit?
[20:30] <cyphermox> sure. whatever :)
[20:30] <sil2100> #action rbasak to start a discussion on the ML regarding the possibility of setting up a specialized team with access to upload packages to stable releases only
[20:30] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to start a discussion on the ML regarding the possibility of setting up a specialized team with access to upload packages to stable releases only
[20:30] <sil2100> Phew, hope this more or less outlines it
[20:30] <sil2100> Anyway, let's head for the vote
[20:30] <rbasak> slashd: would you like us to proceed to vote on MOTU, or would you like to withdraw that pending the outcome of my action?
[20:30] <cyphermox> my point is it's a rather large exception and we don't create the packageset ourselves
[20:30] <micahg> I see an average of 3 uploads a month here, I'm not sure the volume warrants special consideration
[20:31] <rbasak> micahg: understood. We can discuss that on the ML. I'm just concerned that we're stifling progress by not having this path, even if it is discussed and leads to "no action without more volume".
[20:31] <slashd> rbasak, let's see the outcome of you action I think, can you put me on CC on this ?
[20:31] <rbasak> slashd: I really don't mind whether you want the vote or not. Up to you.
[20:32] <rbasak> CC> sure.
[20:32] <rbasak> OK. So are we done with slashd's application for now then?
[20:32] <slashd> brookswarner, chiluk, interesting discussion here for us ^^
[20:32] <sil2100> Ok, so if I understand that: no vote today on this?
[20:32] <rbasak> That's my understanding, yes.
[20:33] <slashd> thanks for your time guys, I think we can go ahead with rbasak action item, and then depending on the result will see what is next
[20:33] <sil2100> Ok then
[20:34] <sil2100> #topic Any other business
[20:34] <sil2100> I suppose none here as we're far over our schedule
[20:34] <sil2100> #endmeeting
[20:34] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Dec 12 20:34:28 2016 UTC.
[20:34] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2016/ubuntu-meeting.2016-12-12-19.03.moin.txt
[20:34] <sil2100> Phew, thanks everyone! Sorry for this meeting being a bit rough
[20:35] <rbasak> sil2100: thank you for chairing!
[20:35] <fossfreedom> sigh - thanks for your time sil2100 - much appreciated.
[20:35] <rbasak> And thank you to fossfreedom and slashd for your patience.
[20:35] <fossfreedom> cheers rbasak.
[20:35] <slashd> rbasak, tks for making this mtg happen and for taking ownership on this action
[20:36] <fossfreedom> Can I ask a question please rbasak?
[20:38] <sil2100> I'll send out the e-mail with the votes for fossfreedom later today
[20:38] <sil2100> Should I send it to devel-permissions@ as well, or just to fossfreedom + DMB members?
[20:38] <sil2100> I suppose this should be public, right?
[20:40] <rbasak> fossfreedom: sure. If it's a general Ubuntu development/process question it should probably be in #ubuntu-devel.
[20:40] <rbasak> (or #ubuntu-motu, etc)
[20:41] <rbasak> sil2100: yes, public. The meeting was already public, as is fossfreedom's application :)
[20:41] <rbasak> sil2100: so devel-permissions@ I think.
[20:41] <fossfreedom> question of process for DMB
[20:41] <rbasak> fossfreedom: sure, go ahead.
[20:41] <fossfreedom> So the result effectively puts Ubuntu Budgie progress on hold whilst the mailing list member consider?
[20:41] <fossfreedom> members
[20:42] <rbasak> fossfreedom: no, not at all. You should still be able to get any sponsored uploads you need.
[20:42] <rbasak> fossfreedom: if finding a sponsor becomes a problem for you, please email the ubuntu-devel@ list asking for sponsorship.
[20:43] <fossfreedom> k - I have made a pull request against lp:ubuntu-cdimage - just wondering if this stops this because there is no formal packageset
[20:43] <rbasak> fossfreedom: effectively, all sponsorship means is "code review required from an approved reviewer".
[20:43] <rbasak> fossfreedom: not having direct access to upload should never stop any kind of progress apart from the delay/inconvenience in finding someone who can.
[20:44] <rbasak> fossfreedom: all Ubuntu core devs can do everything the DMB can grant.
[20:44] <fossfreedom> ah - so just need to be patient then whoever processes lp:ubuntu-cdimage issues and requests?
[20:45] <rbasak> fossfreedom: some chasing may be required. If so, please ask on IRC in #ubuntu-devel or on the ubuntu-devel@ list.
[20:45] <rbasak> fossfreedom: especially if the request is not in the sponsorship queue at http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/sponsoring/index.html
[20:47] <fossfreedom> ok - thanks for the hint.  I'll add the ubuntu-sponsor tag for the bug-report.  Also will seek guidance in ubuntu-devel
[20:47] <rbasak> fossfreedom: if you want to continue this discussion, let's move to #ubuntu-devel. This isn't particular DMB-specific - anyone can answer.
[20:47] <rbasak> And lurkers may decide to review and sponsor your merge proposal too :)
[20:47] <fossfreedom> will do!
[20:47] <fossfreedom> cheers
[21:13] <chiluk> sil2100, rbasak, cyphermox, sorry to re-open this, as I'll be applying for coredev come january. One observation I'd like to make though is that process has always been to fix development releases prior to fixing released series. as such members of the STS team wouldn't gain much by being part of a new ~ubuntu-sru-uploaders team, as we'd still have to wait on uploading to devel.
[21:15] <chiluk> the only time it would help is when the fix is already in one of the newer serie's..
[21:18] <rbasak> chiluk: good point.
[21:19] <chiluk> rbasak: did this discussion move somewhere else?
[21:19] <rbasak> No, it ended here. I have an action to take it to the ML.
[21:20] <chiluk> rbasak, and if it wasn't completely clear, our team has no desire to circumvent the SRU process, and think that it's healthy to require at least one additional review *(from ubuntu-sru team), after uploading.
[21:20] <rbasak> chiluk: I didn't think any different :)
[21:21] <chiluk> ok "ubuntu-sru-uploaders" is slightly ambiguous naming.
[21:21] <chiluk> rbasak^^
[21:21] <rbasak> chiluk: what I was suggesting is that if there's a thing the DMB can grant such that you can upload SRUs, then that would get through the sponsorship requirement but not ~ubuntu-sru.
[21:21] <chiluk> yeah that would be helpful.
[21:22] <chiluk> we'll abide by what the dmb, and Technical Review board deems proper.