[16:42] <tyhicks> hello
[16:42] <tyhicks> #startmeeting
[16:42] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Feb 27 16:42:07 2017 UTC.  The chair is tyhicks. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:42] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[16:42] <tyhicks> The meeting agenda can be found at:
[16:42] <tyhicks> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting
[16:42] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Announcements
[16:42] <tyhicks> Andreas Cadhalpun provided debdiffs for xenial and yakkety for ffmpeg (LP: #1664402 #1664403)
[16:42] <tyhicks> Paul Gevers (elbrus) provided debdiffs for trusty and xenial for cacti (LP: #1663891)
[16:42] <tyhicks> Brian Morton (rokclimb15) provided debdiffs for precise-yakkety for libssh2 (LP: #1664812)
[16:42] <tyhicks> Gianfranco Costamagna (LocutusOfBorg) provided debdiffs for trusty-yakkety for tcpdump (LP: #1662177)
[16:42] <tyhicks> Thank you for your assistance in keeping Ubuntu users secure! :)
[16:42] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Weekly stand-up report
[16:42] <tyhicks> jdstrand: you're up
[16:42] <jdstrand> hi!
[16:43] <jdstrand> this week I plan to work on:
[16:43] <jdstrand> various snappy PR reviews (snap-confine, Personal, et al interfaces) and store reviews
[16:43] <jdstrand> review gsettings patches
[16:43] <jdstrand> various policy updates for 2.23
[16:43] <jdstrand> that's it for me
[16:43] <jdstrand> continue seccomp arg filtering policy
[16:43] <jdstrand> mdeslaur: you're up
[16:44] <mdeslaur> I'm on community this week
[16:44] <mdeslaur> and I'm about to release tiff updates
[16:44] <mdeslaur> and I'll be going down the list
[16:44] <mdeslaur> that's about it, sbeattie, you're up
[16:46] <sbeattie> I'm on bug triage this week
[16:46] <sbeattie> I also have kernel signoffs to do.
[16:46] <sbeattie> after that, I'll also be focusing on updates
[16:47] <sbeattie> that's pretty much it for me. tyhicks, you're up
[16:47] <tyhicks> I'm on cve triage this week
[16:48] <tyhicks> I need to propose a bit of a design change for the seccomp kernel patches and send out revision 5 of the set
[16:48] <tyhicks> need to circle back to the apparmor utils patch set to fix something that cboltz requested and then send out revision 2 of the set
[16:49] <tyhicks> I have a design review to do
[16:49] <tyhicks> and right now I'm fighting with configuration issues on my new laptop so I need to spend a little time smoothing those out
[16:49] <tyhicks> that's it for me
[16:49] <tyhicks> jjohansen: you're up
[16:49] <jjohansen> I need to revise the gsetting patches based on review feedback, and send out the notification patchset so it can be reviewed
[16:49] <jjohansen> and I need to get back to upstreaming work, I am hoping to get an RFC out this week so I can do another pull request in a few weeks
[16:49] <jjohansen> oh and there some bugs, I need to follow up on.
[16:51] <jjohansen> that is it for me, sarnold
[16:51] <sarnold> I'm in the happy place this week; I'm going to release the shadow update, finish the lasso mir, AA patch reviews, and then move down the list of MIRs
[16:51] <sarnold> that's it for me, chrisccoulson?
[16:52] <chrisccoulson> I plan to get our firefox packages building with rust by the end of the week
[16:52] <chrisccoulson> I've also got to start preparing the next update, which is next week
[16:52] <chrisccoulson> Before I do that, I need to fix our menubar patch which currently makes it crash thanks to a late change in firefox
[16:53] <chrisccoulson> I also need to unbreak ubufox (bug 1648649)
[16:53] <chrisccoulson> Other than that, I've got 2 large code reviews to do for oxide
[16:53] <chrisccoulson> I suspect I might not get much else done this week
[16:53] <chrisccoulson> that's me done
[16:53] <ratliff> I'm in the happy place this week
[16:53] <ratliff> I'm still working on vivid updates for Core and Touch
[16:54] <ratliff> back to you, tyhicks
[16:54] <tyhicks> thanks!
[16:54] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Highlighted packages
[16:54] <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.
[16:54] <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.
[16:54] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/php-openid.html
[16:54] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/sleekxmpp.html
[16:54] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/collectd.html
[16:54] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/vxl.html
[16:54] <tyhicks> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/libpdfbox-java.html
[16:54] <tyhicks> [TOPIC] Miscellaneous and Questions
[16:54] <tyhicks> Does anyone have any other questions or items to discuss?
[16:54] <chrisccoulson> oh, I need to sponsor chromium too :)
[16:56] <tyhicks> ack
[16:56] <tyhicks> jdstrand, mdeslaur, sbeattie, jjohansen, sarnold, ChrisCoulson, ratliff: Thanks!
[16:56] <tyhicks> #endmeeting
[16:56] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Feb 27 16:56:22 2017 UTC.
[16:56] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2017/ubuntu-meeting.2017-02-27-16.42.moin.txt
[16:56] <ratliff> thank you, tyhicks!
[16:56] <mdeslaur> thanks tyhicks
[16:56] <jjohansen> thanks tyhicks
[16:57] <sarnold> thanks tyhicks :)
[17:01] <sbeattie> tyhicks: thanks1
[19:00] <rbasak> o/
[19:00] <rbasak> Who's here?
[19:00] <bdmurray> me
[19:01] <brookswarner> rbasak: i'm here but dont count
[19:01] <slashd> rbasak, few SEG fols are here today for the sru-uploader vote
[19:01] <slashd> folks
[19:01] <tinoco> o/
[19:05]  * Mmike is here
[19:05]  * ddstreet here too
[19:06] <rbasak> I know micahg_mobile might be having connectivity issues.
[19:06] <rbasak> But we still need one more additional DMB member for quorum.
[19:09] <slashd> rbasak, can we ping them on the channel to see if someone answer ?
[19:10] <bdmurray> They were pinded in #ubuntu-devel.
[19:10] <slashd> bdmurray, ack
[19:10] <slashd> tks
[19:13] <cyphermox> o/
[19:14] <rbasak> OK we might have four if micahg_mobile manages to participate.
[19:14] <rbasak> He said he might be more able at 1930.
[19:14] <rbasak> Who's chairing?
[19:14] <micahg_mobile> Well, we can try
[19:15] <rbasak> #startmeeting DMB
[19:15] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Feb 27 19:15:02 2017 UTC.  The chair is rbasak. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[19:15] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[19:15] <rbasak> #topic Review of previous action items
[19:15] <chiluk> o/
[19:15] <rbasak> cyphermox to handle Sean Davis' xfdashboard packageset request
[19:15] <rbasak> cyphermox to refresh Kubuntu packageset
[19:15] <rbasak> cyphermox: I think both of those are done?
[19:15] <cyphermox> both still todo, hopefully I can get to them later
[19:15] <rbasak> Oh, OK.
[19:16] <cyphermox> for now I'm fighting maas here.
[19:16] <rbasak> #action cyphermox to handle Sean Davis' xfdashboard packageset request (carried over)
[19:16] <meetingology> ACTION: cyphermox to handle Sean Davis' xfdashboard packageset request (carried over)
[19:16] <rbasak> #action cyphermox to refresh Kubuntu packageset (carried over)
[19:16] <meetingology> ACTION: cyphermox to refresh Kubuntu packageset (carried over)
[19:16] <rbasak> #topic Ubuntu Contributing Developer Applications
[19:16] <rbasak> #subtopic Ross Gammon (rosco2)
[19:16] <rbasak> Rosco2: hello!
[19:16] <Rosco2> Hi All
[19:17] <rbasak> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RossGammon/ContributingDeveloperApplication
[19:17] <rbasak> I reviewed Ross' previous application earlier.
[19:17] <rbasak> Looking for the link
[19:18] <rbasak> #link https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2016/08/01/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t15:21
[19:19] <rbasak> Does anyone have any further questions for Rosco2?
[19:19] <micahg_mobile> I'm wondering what has changed
[19:20] <micahg_mobile> I see comments now, but I don't see any uploads past October
[19:20] <cyphermox> well, his last meeting was in august.
[19:21] <bdmurray> okay, but 3 uploads since august doesn't seem like enough to show significance.
[19:21] <micahg_mobile> 3 uploads in 6 months isn't significant and sustained contribution IMHO
[19:21] <Rosco2> No uploads recently - but some waiting for sponsorship
[19:22] <cyphermox> I'm not saying it necessarily meets the guidelines, just that there exists uploads since last review.
[19:23] <micahg_mobile> Rosco2: you're also already an Ubuntu member, so this status won't confer any additional rights
[19:23] <rbasak> Rosco2: have you had any other development activity you can call out apart from uploads and uploads pending sponsorship?
[19:24] <Rosco2> Well this year so far in Ubuntu has mainly been about releases
[19:24] <micahg_mobile> Not that Contributing dev isn't a nice badge of honor as well, but just wanted to point that out
[19:24] <Rosco2> I have been ISO testing for point releases & Zesty Beta 1
[19:25] <rbasak> I see 15 uploads in all and two in the sponsorship queue.
[19:25] <rbasak> Latest thing in the sponsorship queue is dated 21 Feb
[19:25] <Rosco2> There are also a few backports that have gone stale that I need to get back to
[19:27] <rbasak> Any other questions for Rosco2?
[19:28] <rbasak> #vote Grant Rosco2 Contributing Developer
[19:28] <meetingology> Please vote on: Grant Rosco2 Contributing Developer
[19:28] <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)
[19:28] <rbasak> +1
[19:28] <meetingology> +1 received from rbasak
[19:28] <micahg_mobile> +1
[19:28] <meetingology> +1 received from micahg_mobile
[19:29] <rbasak> I think the number of uploads, even if over a long period of time and not very dense currently, adds up to significant enough. I appreciate your contributions.
[19:29] <rbasak> Especially as Set, Timo and Daniel all appear happy with your work.
[19:29] <micahg_mobile> Ditto
[19:29] <Rosco2> thanks
[19:30] <cyphermox> +12
[19:30] <meetingology> +12 received from cyphermox
[19:30] <cyphermox> ugh
[19:30] <cyphermox> +1, obviously.
[19:30] <meetingology> +1, obviously. received from cyphermox
[19:30] <bdmurray> I guess I don't need to vote then
[19:30] <bdmurray> but I will anyway
[19:30] <bdmurray> +1
[19:30] <meetingology> +1 received from bdmurray
[19:30] <rbasak> #endvote
[19:30] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Grant Rosco2 Contributing Developer
[19:30] <meetingology> Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
[19:30] <meetingology> Motion carried
[19:31] <rbasak> Congratulations Rosco2 and thank you for your contributions.
[19:31] <rbasak> Can someone volunteer to sort that and announce it please?
[19:31] <Rosco2> Your'e welcome. Tanks for your time everyone
[19:32] <rbasak> #action rbasak to add Rosco2 to the contributing developer team
[19:32] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to add Rosco2 to the contributing developer team
[19:32] <rbasak> #action rbasak to announce Rosco2's new contributing developer team membership
[19:32] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to announce Rosco2's new contributing developer team membership
[19:32] <rbasak> #topic SRU uploader proposal
[19:32] <rbasak> #link https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2017-February/039690.html
[19:32] <rbasak> My position is a +1 already obviously.
[19:33] <bdmurray> rbasak: Do you expect people to already have some upload rights before applying to this new team? If so what kind?
[19:33] <rbasak> To the other board members: opinions? Objections? Anything I can address before a vote?
[19:33] <rbasak> bdmurray: no, I expect new members of this team to be uploading directly for the first time by joining it.
[19:34] <chiluk> rbasak that's why it's a great idea ^^
[19:34] <rbasak> Right, as a stepping stone.
[19:34] <bdmurray> rbasak: directly uploading for the first time to main / restricted?
[19:34] <rbasak> bdmurry: yes. But in stable releases only, for things that meet SRU policy only.
[19:34] <sarnold> rbasak: as a member of the security team but not core-dev I've got similar privileges; it's a bit strange to have privileges to push updates to ~25M machines but not to check in changes to -devel. But it'd be far more annoying to have to go through patch piloting for every change..
[19:34] <rbasak> bdmurray sorry :)
[19:35] <micahg_mobile> Sarnold, that was a loophole I meant to address several years ago :)
[19:35] <sarnold> micahg_mobile :)
[19:35] <bdmurray> I guess I have concerns as an SRU team member about keeping up with the volume of reviews. Its some what challenging as it is.
[19:36] <rbasak> bdmurray: I do expect the DMB to grant this only to applicants who have shown that they understand SRU policy and procedure by having a good track record of doing these things. And there would be a second sanity check through the SRU team anyway. But if there's any concern that an applicant will bother the SRU team, I'd expect that application to be refused.
[19:36] <chiluk> bdmurray.. .ubuntu-sru team would still have to approve the upload.
[19:36] <tinoco> bdmurray: it would be the same amount since our case load wouldn't change
[19:36] <bdmurray> tinoco: its not just a team for you though, anybody could apply to join it.
[19:36] <rbasak> bdmurray: it might also be reasonable to expect endorsements for the SRU team and refuse an application if there aren't any. I hadn't considered that before.
[19:36] <micahg_mobile> Bdmurray: I brought that up at the last meeting and was told the load would be the same
[19:37] <rbasak> micahg_mobile: yeah that's MHO.
[19:37] <tinoco> you can control the load with the amount of people you approve. controlling bottleneck in the sru team if needed.
[19:37] <rbasak> I don't see any reason why this would open the floodgates to the SRU team.
[19:38] <micahg_mobile> I can forsee such a case :)
[19:38] <rbasak> Currently the demand comes from Canonical STS who are getting their SRU requests sponsosred anyway
[19:39] <rbasak> Uploads under this scheme would either be acceptable to the SRU team, or not.
[19:39] <rbasak> If they're acceptable, then we should be taking them and growing the SRU team even if it does increase workload. Why should we be turning down good SRU contributions?
[19:39] <bdmurray> I don't think saying "we can't have more people in the team because the SRU team is overloaded" is fair
[19:39] <rbasak> If they're not acceptable, then I'm proposing that we don't grant membership of this team to such applicants.
[19:39] <micahg_mobile> Yeah, but once we compress the feedback window by eliminating sponsorship, there's the potential to start throwing more fixes in
[19:40] <rbasak> micahg_mobile: that's true, but that's a good thing surely?
[19:40] <bdmurray> Will there be a way for an SRU team member to request removal of somebody from the team?
[19:40] <rbasak> bdmurray: who do you think is saying that?
[19:41] <rbasak> request removal> I'm not sure the DMB has ever had to do that before, but if it came up, it would presumably be the DMB who would handle it.
[19:41] <rbasak> (and I think we have the remit)
[19:41] <bdmurray> tinoco said "you can control the load with the amount of people you approve"
[19:41] <rbasak> Ah, OK.
[19:41] <tinoco> bdmurray: totally agree on what you are saying
[19:42] <rbasak> I'd take a request to have someone removed from any uploading team quite seriously.
[19:42] <bdmurray> If there is a way for the SRU team to get people removed I'd feel better. Although the SRU team would need a way to keep track of rejections I guess.
[19:42] <rbasak> And perhaps the DMB should deal with that in private or something.
[19:43] <rbasak> But given the SRU team have to review everything anyway, it would make no sense for the DMB to refuse to remove someone the SRU team want removed.
[19:43] <rbasak> So how about:
[19:44] <rbasak> 1) We expect SRU team endorsement on any application.
[19:44] <rbasak> 2) The SRU team can ask for any SRU uploader to be removed.
[19:44] <rbasak> s/expect/require/ if you prefer.
[19:45] <rbasak> Whether the SRU team think any single SRU team member should be able to request removal, or it needs a majority, or what, could perhaps be entirely up to them.
[19:46] <rbasak> By "can ask for" I mean "the DMB will do it".
[19:46] <micahg_mobile> It should be either a majority of the SRU team or DMB votes (or both)
[19:47] <bdmurray> The SRU team is rather large so majority seems like a lot to me.
[19:47] <micahg_mobile> Ok, I just want some checks here
[19:47] <rbasak> Taking off my SRU team hat for a moment, I was thinking of leaving how they want to resolve their decision as up to them.
[19:48] <micahg_mobile> DMB vote is fine even if 1 person requests the DMB to review
[19:49] <rbasak> Let me write this down: http://pad.ubuntu.com/m9xRiL8pyP
[19:52] <rbasak> How does that look? Does that cover all options that have been proposed?
[19:53] <bdmurray> I don't think "requires" SRU team member endorsement is necessary.  SRU sponsor would be fine.  Its harder to find the SRU accepter than it is the SRU sponsor.
[19:54] <bdmurray> As an SRU team member I don't recall good uploads rather its the rejects I remember more.
[19:55] <bdmurray> I'd also like to see members of this ubuntu-sru-uploaders team not leave stuff languishing in -proposed.
[19:55] <bdmurray> The pending-sru report is full of sadness.
[19:56] <slashd> bdmurray, most of our work in STS requires to SRU to be Fix Release before we close the support ticket with customer
[19:56] <slashd> so it won't be a problem for us
[19:57] <chiluk> bdmurray, so that's an additional permission bit... promotion from -proposed -> -updates... are you proposing that ubuntu-sru-uploader have those rights?
[19:57] <bdmurray> chiluk: No, I'm saying verify your uploads if nobody else does.
[19:57] <tinoco> chiluk: i believe he said for us to verify things more quickly.
[19:58] <slashd> chiluk, I think he is talking about the verification-done step
[19:58] <micahg_mobile> I agree with bdmurray on the endoresements piece
[19:58] <micahg_mobile> And rbasak on how a member should be removed
[19:59] <slashd> bdmurray,rbasak, Does this potential sru-uploader team would be able to nominate bugs for release without approval ?
[19:59] <rbasak> slashd: I think that's a separate issue.
[19:59] <slashd> rbasak, ack
[19:59] <rbasak> And doesn't really fall under the DMB.
[20:00] <rbasak> It's a bug squad/bug control thing.
[20:00] <slashd> ok, disregard my last comment then
[20:00] <rbasak> We should still address that, but not at the DMB.
[20:00] <bdmurray> rbasak: it might just work with the acl
[20:00] <rbasak> I'm hoping so :)
[20:01] <rbasak> cyphermox: opinions?
[20:01] <chiluk> rbasak, i'm part of both bug control and bug squad teams, and don't have permission to approve nominated releases...
[20:01] <rbasak> chiluk: I'm aware :)
[20:01] <chiluk> rbasak do you know what team I'm missing?
[20:01] <rbasak> chiluk: I believe you get it if you can upload the package.
[20:01] <rbasak> But let's talk about that another time.
[20:02] <rbasak> Back to the pad
[20:02] <rbasak> For joining, I'm happy to not require 2 either.
[20:02] <bdmurray> upload the package or member of a special ubuntu-release-nominators team
[20:03] <micahg_mobile> Uploader rights for the package or there are two other teams I think, ubuntu-release and I thought we made one team that didn't have other rights attached to it
[20:03] <micahg_mobile> That's it
[20:04] <rbasak> bdmurray, micahg_mobile: how does the pad look for you now? Are you comfortable with what we have now?
[20:04] <bdmurray> Can we resolve line 1?
[20:04] <rbasak> Good point.
[20:05] <rbasak> I'm happy either way.
[20:05] <micahg_mobile> Yeah, I think it is fine
[20:05] <rbasak> I guess that means I say "expected".
[20:06] <rbasak> But if someone wants to tighten it to "requires" I'm fine with that.
[20:06] <bdmurray> That's what I expect
[20:06] <rbasak> Now that's a confusing statement :-)
[20:06] <rbasak> You expect someone to tigthen it to "requires"? :-P
[20:06] <bdmurray> I expect it to say excpet not requires
[20:07] <rbasak> OK I'll change it.
[20:07] <rbasak> And let me take out 2, since we seem to have some consensus it isn't required.
[20:09] <rbasak> cyphermox: ?
[20:10] <cyphermox> sorry, I'm busy
[20:11] <rbasak> OK
[20:12] <rbasak> micahg_mobile, bdmurray: are you +1 on the current pad?
[20:12] <bdmurray> yes
[20:13] <micahg_mobile> Yes
[20:13] <rbasak> Great, thanks! I guess there's no need for a formal meetingology vote for the sake of it.
[20:13] <rbasak> We'll need one more +1.
[20:13] <rbasak> Shall we move on and let the others vote offline?
[20:14] <rbasak> I will copy the pad, clean up and post it to the thread.
[20:14] <micahg_mobile> Rbasak: Shows up in the meeting logs as a vote :)
[20:14] <rbasak> #topic Expiring DMB members
[20:15] <micahg_mobile> Can we change members to membership please?
[20:15] <rbasak> micahg_mobile: you mean line 11
[20:15] <rbasak> ?
[20:15] <micahg_mobile> Current topic :)
[20:16] <rbasak> #topic Expiring DMB membership
[20:16] <rbasak> cyphermox pointed out that his membership expires soon
[20:16] <rbasak> 2015-03-02
[20:16] <cyphermox> yep, in 4 days
[20:16] <cyphermox> FWIW, +1 on the SRU proposal from me
[20:16] <rbasak> Oh great, thanks. Then it's done :)
[20:16] <rbasak> \o/
[20:17] <rbasak> s/2015-03-02/2017-03-01/
[20:17] <cyphermox> ... or less than four days
[20:17] <rbasak> Yeah, so we need to organise nominations and a vote for cyphermox's seat, right?
[20:17] <rbasak> cyphermox: are you intending to stand again?
[20:17] <micahg_mobile> I think the first thing would be to ask the TB to extend cyphermox's membership 4 weeks so we can hold an election
[20:17] <cyphermox> rbasak: I'm not sure.
[20:18] <rbasak> micahg_mobile: that sounds reasonable. Everyone happy with that?
[20:18] <bdmurray> +1 for the extension
[20:18] <bdmurray> Doesn't Adam expire this year too?
[20:19] <rbasak> #agreed The DMB will ask the TB to extend cyphermox's membership 4 weeks so we can hold an election
[20:19] <rbasak> Yes, 2017-08-03
[20:19] <rbasak> Should we hold an election early for that seat too, or wait?
[20:19] <cyphermox> ask infinity?
[20:19] <bdmurray> I guess it is 5 months
[20:19] <micahg_mobile> His membership expires in August, we could seek 2 now and have the second one's term start in August
[20:20] <rbasak> I'm fine either way
[20:20] <rbasak> Also, would it be an idea to adjust term lengths to get those two seats lined up?
[20:20] <bdmurray> Are we excluding anybody by holding the election early?
[20:20] <rbasak> Just to save admin in the future. I don't think anyone will care about the length adjustments, will they?
[20:21] <micahg_mobile> 18 months or so for the second one I guess
[20:22] <rbasak> Yeah that sounds right
[20:22] <rbasak> OK so two things
[20:23] <rbasak> 1) Hold an election for infinity's seat now, together with cyphermox's seat.
[20:23] <rbasak> 2) Shorten infinity's seat's next term to coincide expiry with cyphermox's seat's next term.
[20:24] <rbasak> Presumably we'd hold the usual ranked CIVS thing and give the top result the longer immediate seat, and the second result the shorter delayed seat?
[20:24] <rbasak> Everyone happy with that?
[20:24] <bdmurray> 0) ask for extension for cyphermox
[20:25] <rbasak> Yep
[20:25]  * rbasak minuted that already :)
[20:25] <rbasak> I thought that was uncontroversial :)
[20:26] <bdmurray> okay
[20:26] <rbasak> cyphermox? micahg_mobile?
[20:27] <cyphermox> heh, either way is fine by me
[20:29] <slashd> rbasak, with regard to the sru-uploader team ... what are the next steps ? Do you guys need more votes or we can already say it is officially approved ?
[20:32] <slashd> and when do you think ppl can start applying for this new team ?
[20:33] <rbasak> slashd: I'll sort it on the mailing list afterwards.
[20:33] <slashd> rbasak perfect, tks
[20:33] <slashd> tks all for your time about this subject
[20:35] <micahg_mobile> Rbasak, I'm good with that
[20:36] <rbasak> Great, thanks!
[20:36] <rbasak> Any volunteers to sort it out?
[20:38] <bdmurray> which thing?
[20:38] <bdmurray> If its the SRU team thing could we break up the tasks?
[20:38] <rbasak> The three things - extending cyphermox's term, organising the vote, announcing the adjustment of terms, etc.
[20:39] <rbasak> I'm happy to take sorting out the SRU team thing.
[20:39] <bdmurray> I guess we can't make cyphermox do it
[20:39] <bdmurray> So I'll do it
[20:40] <rbasak> Thank you!
[20:41] <rbasak> #action bdmurray to sort out votes and related items in respect of the two upcoming expiring DMB memberships
[20:41] <rbasak> #action rbasak to sort out the SRU uploaders team
[20:41] <meetingology> ACTION: bdmurray to sort out votes and related items in respect of the two upcoming expiring DMB memberships
[20:41] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to sort out the SRU uploaders team
[20:41] <rbasak> #topic Any other business
[20:41] <rbasak> Anything else to raise?
[20:41] <chiluk> rbasak.. my core dev application status?
[20:41] <rbasak> Let me check.
[20:42] <chiluk> thanks.
[20:42] <bdmurray> I may have replied privately not publicly.
[20:43] <rbasak> So there was no vote from anyone at the IRC meeting, correct?
[20:44] <chiluk> rbasak not that I recall ...
[20:44] <micahg_mobile> I'm sorry, I thought that was addressed in the last meeting, but I don't remember the conclusion
[20:45] <rbasak> I count +1s from sil2100, BenC and cyphermox.
[20:46] <rbasak> bdmurray: I don't see a private or public vote from you, nor from Adam.
[20:46] <bdmurray> rbasak: looking
[20:46] <rbasak> And I had deferred for the ~ubuntu-sru-uploader topic. Now that is resolved, I need to look again, but I suspect the reason I did that was because I felt that would be more appropriate.
[20:46] <rbasak> But I'll give myself an action to look again properly.
[20:47] <bdmurray> I see a sent mail about it
[20:49] <rbasak> #action rbasak to vote on chiluk's core dev application
[20:49] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to vote on chiluk's core dev application
[20:49] <bdmurray> resent it
[20:50] <rbasak> Ah
[20:50] <rbasak> I see it.
[20:50] <rbasak> In that case, I don't need to do anything :)
[20:50] <rbasak> #undo
[20:50] <meetingology> Removing item from minutes: ACTION
[20:50] <rbasak> chiluk: congratulations :)
[20:50] <chiluk> WOOHOO!
[20:50] <chiluk> thanks guys.
[20:51] <rbasak> Now this one we _can_ give to cyphermox :-)
[20:51] <rbasak> #action cyphermox to add chiluk's core dev membership
[20:51] <meetingology> ACTION: cyphermox to add chiluk's core dev membership
[20:51] <rbasak> #action cyphermox to announce chiluk's core dev membership
[20:51] <meetingology> ACTION: cyphermox to announce chiluk's core dev membership
[20:51] <rbasak> cyphermox: seems only fair as bdmurray is handling your seat :-)
[20:51] <rbasak> OK. AOAOB?
[20:52] <rbasak> I guess we're done then!
[20:52] <rbasak> Thank you all for your patience. Long meeting!
[20:52] <rbasak> #endmeeting
[20:52] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Feb 27 20:52:29 2017 UTC.
[20:52] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2017/ubuntu-meeting.2017-02-27-19.15.moin.txt