[19:00] <rbasak> Who's here?
[19:00] <ddstreet> rbasak o/
[19:04] <tsimonq2> o/ - unfortunately I'm in and out for the next hour.
[19:14] <ddstreet> so, another DMB meeting that isn't attended by its members? ;-)
[19:14] <micahg> I'm here if it helps
[19:15] <rbasak> We need four unfortunately.
[19:15] <teward> so that's 3 actives, not enough for quorum if I remember my rules right :P
[19:15] <teward> (sorry i lurk here too frequently :P)
[19:15] <rbasak> I did propose a way to fix this (by considering those absent to have deemed agree with the consensus of those present) but my proposal wasn't accepted.
[19:16] <rbasak> Here we are: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2017-July/001141.html
[19:17] <ddstreet> well, i did ask for application via email after the last failure to get quorum, but the only person to send q's to me was sil2100
[19:17] <ddstreet> maybe I should again as for email evaluation
[19:19] <slashd> o/
[19:20] <slashd> We changed hours today, and did realise the new time
[19:20] <slashd> for me
[19:21] <rbasak> slashd, tsimonq2, micahg, rbasak: that makes four, so we have quorum if you are all still present. Are you still available to proceed?
[19:21] <slashd> rbasak, I'm here to stay
[19:24] <micahg> I have to step away for 5 min and then have a meeting on the phone, I can try to participate
[19:25] <slashd> who chair the meeting ?
[19:33] <rbasak> I was waiting to see if quorate members were still available. I'm out of time now, sorry. As we haven't started already I'm going to lose my evening to be waiting around.
[19:33] <ddstreet> maybe the DMB should stop having irc meetings, and handle all business via email?  The irc mtgs don't really seem to be working out for the DMB.
[19:34] <rbasak> Email applications get very slow and drawn out.
[19:34] <ddstreet> in any case, i'll reschedule my application again, and also again request application via email
[19:34] <ddstreet> rbasak slower than waiting 1 month? ;-)
[19:34] <rbasak> I much prefer being able to understand applications interactively.
[19:34] <ddstreet> well feel free to ask me anything now if you want
[19:34] <rbasak> What we need is people on the DMB to actually be available during meetings :-(
[19:34] <rbasak> (ie. what they signed up to do)
[19:35] <ddstreet> yeah that would be nice
[19:35] <ddstreet> ok unless anyone has any q's for me, i'll go reschedule myself and request email application again
[19:36] <slashd> rbasak, ML ? ddstreet attended 2 times now already
[19:36] <slashd> maybe it'll be faster that way if we all vote via ML
[19:37] <rbasak> Usually we want to review the candidate's answers to others' questions. That's what drags it out - I'm unwilling to vote until everyone has asked what they want. How am I supposed to know when that is?
[19:39] <ddstreet> well, it's been 3 weeks now since I announced application - DMB members have had plenty of time to come up with questions for me.  Only sil2100 has actually emailed me his q's.
[19:40] <rbasak> I thought switching to email was premature after just one missed meeting, so I didn't act on that request.
[19:40] <rbasak> Anyway, I'm going to go now and get my evening back.
[19:40] <ddstreet> ack, o/
[19:40] <slashd> o/ rbasak
[19:41] <rbasak> I'm sorry this is a bad experience for you.
[19:41] <rbasak> Unfortuately those that are here aren't the ones who can do much about it :-/
[19:42] <tsimonq2> Hi
[19:42] <tsimonq2> Sorry.
[19:43] <tsimonq2> I guess I'm too late :/
[19:43] <ddstreet> tsimonq2 nah, you have plenty of time to email me any q's you have ;-)
[19:44] <ddstreet> or ask now, if you want
[19:44] <tsimonq2> ddstreet: Give me a sec to review your app.
[19:44] <tsimonq2> What's your UTC offset by chance?
[19:44] <ddstreet> tsimonq2 -5 currently (with DST)
[19:45] <ddstreet> the dmb mtg times both are within my normal day
[19:45] <tsimonq2> Got it.
[19:45] <tsimonq2> (I'm in Wisconsin; UTC-6)
[19:46] <ddstreet> yep i'm in raleigh
[19:46] <ddstreet> the dmb mtg times seem to favor people in the americas
[19:46] <tsimonq2> Ahh :)
[19:49] <tsimonq2> ddstreet: Oh, right, I remember reviewing this. I echo Dave's comment; your uploads seem to be high quality, but I'd like to see some more +1 / proposed-migration work before +1'ing your app.
[19:50] <ddstreet> as i replied to sil2100's email, i don't intend to do much/any +1 / proposed-migration work
[19:50] <ddstreet> so i may be waiting for your +1 for a long time :)
[19:50] <ddstreet> if that's a requirement for you
[19:51] <ddstreet> but i'd still appreciate if you attend the next mtg to provide quorum, even if you don't +1 me :)
[19:51] <tsimonq2> It is, sorry. SRU Developer seems like a really great spot for you at the moment, and I appreciate your work. :)
[19:51] <ddstreet> that's too bad, but your call
[19:51] <ddstreet> see you at the next mtg then, hopefully we can find quorum then :)
[19:52] <tsimonq2> Hopefully I can be there :)
[19:53] <tsimonq2> ddstreet: I'm curious though; you have upload access to all of Ubuntu but only in stable releases. What's the reason for seeking Core Developer membership?
[19:53] <tsimonq2> (If you don't plan to do +1 work.)
[19:53] <ddstreet> bugs frequently exist in devel too, not just stable releases
[19:54] <ddstreet> actually fixing bugs in devel is quite different than +1 work
[19:54] <ddstreet> additionally i'm holding off on merging my rewrite of pull-* tooling until i get coredev
[19:55] <ddstreet> i could just push past and future changes to the repo today, but i prefer to get coredev before doing that
[19:55] <tsimonq2> Got it. I guess, to clarify, +1 work doesn't just mean hunting down things in -proposed, it means taking care of your own uploads (while I'd certainly encourage proposed-migration work). I just don't see enough work in devel to justify Core Developer membership in my opinion. 
[19:56] <ddstreet> also i don't plan to push any of my sru sponsoring tooling without coredev, as well - devel changes feel like they should require coredev
[19:56] <ddstreet> ack
[19:57] <ddstreet> tsimonq2 as this is a common theme for me - and maybe others - you (and the DMB) should really think about quantifying "how much" specific things you want to see.  instead of just telling people "you don't have enough...yet"
[19:57] <tsimonq2> Good point.
[19:57] <tsimonq2> I understand why you're seeking it though, and I would encourage you to get the opinion of other members; maybe my interpretation is stricter than others'. :)
[19:58] <ddstreet> as i've never had any objections to any of my applications besides "more"
[20:01] <tsimonq2> I understand your point, but I look at it not as an amount of uploads but demonstration you know what you're doing with a variety of different packages, which may involve a bit of uploads. When I say "more" I mean more variety, not more uploads.
[20:02] <tsimonq2> This is nothing against you, like I said, I really appreciate your work and your application is strong, but I'd just like to see a variety of devel uploads.
[20:02] <micahg> right, so SRU still gives us a check on the uploads to stable releases with SRU team review, core dev has no review, since core dev rights are expansive, appropriate demonstration of a subset of those tasks that a core dev can/should do needs to be demonstrated before being granted those rights
[20:06] <micahg> IMHO of course :)
[20:08] <tsimonq2> ^ Right; again, other members might have different opinions, so please do still apply. :)
[20:09] <tsimonq2> He does bring up a good point though. We have philisophical requirements and general requirements but a general checklist of sorts would be beneficial.
[20:10] <tsimonq2> I'll review things and bring it up within the DMB.
[20:11] <micahg> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#CoreDev
[20:13] <tsimonq2> micahg: One could argue that should be more specific though.
[20:15] <rbasak> tsimonq2, micahg: I've written up my personal opinions/thoughts at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RobieBasak/DMB/CoreDev (not previously publicly shared)
[20:16] <rbasak> And ddstreet too
[20:16]  * rbasak disappears again
[20:16] <micahg> tsimonq2: we discussed that, but we didn't want a checklist either
[20:19] <tsimonq2> rbasak: I agree with your stance.
[20:19] <tsimonq2> micahg: How long ago? I'd like to read the arguments either way.
[20:23] <micahg> it's been a while
[20:24] <tsimonq2> Maybe it's time to reassess it. :)