[15:00] <rbasak> o/
[15:00] <rbasak> Who's here?
[15:00] <sil2100> o/
[15:00] <ddstreet> o/
[15:01] <rbasak> ddstreet, tdaitx: here?
[15:01] <jbicha> o/
[15:01] <tdaitx> o/
[15:01] <rbasak> Need one more DMB member for quorum.
[15:01] <cyphermox> o/
[15:01] <rbasak> \o/
[15:01] <cyphermox> I'm here :)
[15:01] <rbasak> #startmeeting Developer Membership Board
[15:01] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Nov 19 15:01:49 2018 UTC.  The chair is rbasak. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[15:01] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[15:01] <rbasak> #topic Review of previous action items
[15:02] <rbasak> Adding Andreas to ~ubuntu-core-dev and sending announcements (done)
[15:02] <rbasak> Looks like that can be cleared out.
[15:02] <rbasak> No other previous action items.
[15:02] <rbasak> #topic Ubuntu Core Developer Applications
[15:02] <rbasak> I suggest starting with ddstreet as his application has been postponed multiple times from previous missed meetings. Any objections?
[15:02] <sil2100> +1 on tha
[15:02] <sil2100> *that
[15:03] <cyphermox> yup, sounds good
[15:03] <rbasak> #subtopic Dan Streetman
[15:03] <rbasak> ddstreet: hello! Thank you for your patience with this. Could you introduce yourself please?
[15:03] <ddstreet> hi i'm ddstreet, been using ubuntu since i started with canonical in 2015
[15:03] <ddstreet> i'm part of the canonical sustaining engineering team, for reference re: canonical
[15:04] <ddstreet> my application page is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ddstreet/coredeveloper
[15:04] <ddstreet> for older history, been using linux since 1997 and unix since 1993 (solaris, college)
[15:04] <rbasak> I have some questions, so shall I go first?
[15:04] <ddstreet> mostly my work has been with the linux kernel, but more recently i've expanded/shifted into more userspace packages
[15:05] <ddstreet> fine with me
[15:05] <rbasak> We recently updated https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/DeveloperApplicationTemplate but I guess your application page predates that change.
[15:05] <ddstreet> rbasak probably, i actually just copied over my sru-developer application and edited it
[15:05] <rbasak> Please could you explain your goals in applying to be core dev? Is there anything in particular that you are blocked from doing now, where a successful application would unblock you?
[15:06] <ddstreet> primarily 1) upload to devel release and 2) develop/maintain core tooling, e.g. ubuntu-dev-tools
[15:07] <rbasak> OK. What sorts of uploads to the devel release are you expecting to make?
[15:07] <ddstreet> bugfixes
[15:07] <ddstreet> almost exclusively
[15:07] <ddstreet> and then sru those fixes
[15:07] <jbicha> ddstreet: I'm leaning towards voting no because it looks like your list of non-SRU uploads is pretty short & you already have upload rights to do SRUs
[15:08] <rbasak> ddstreet: do you have specific examples of sponsored uploads of this nature done to the development release please?
[15:08] <ddstreet> jbicha yep i've familiar with the 'no, moar' position from the dmb :)
[15:08] <ddstreet> rbasak just whatever is listed in my upload history
[15:08] <rbasak> It's hard to sift through those filtering for just the ones relevant to your "unblocking request", IYSWIM.
[15:09] <rbasak> That's why we updated https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/DeveloperApplicationTemplate :)
[15:09] <ddstreet> you mean, can i list specific uploads that i needed to have sponsored instead of being able to upload myself?
[15:09] <rbasak> Right
[15:09] <ddstreet> no i don't have that broken out
[15:10] <rbasak> That's what I feel I ought to be assessing.
[15:10] <ddstreet> i should also state, i plan to sponsor other's uploads to devel, as well, that wasn't clear from my initial statement
[15:10] <jbicha> https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu-sponsorships.cgi?render=html&sponsoree=dan+streetman&sponsoree_search=name
[15:10] <jbicha> I found that link on your application :) :)
[15:10] <cyphermox> ddstreet: could you expand on the thought-process behind the fix for https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ebtables/2.0.10.4-3.5ubuntu4 ? seems like ignoring errors is generally worse than fixing whatever the underlying problem is, maybe there's some background I'm missing for ebtables
[15:11] <ddstreet> cyphermox that was due to an issue with WSL; the package upgrade failed because the service stop failed, but that was because it never was able to start (or work) in the first place
[15:12] <ddstreet> there is no reason to block package upgrade if the service stop fails, however
[15:12] <ddstreet> for this particular pkg, at least
[15:13] <cyphermox> I disagree; you generally do want to catch failures even if it's a stop -- if it doesn't stop and you try to start it after and it fails to start, you're not really in a better position
[15:13] <rbasak> I see five bugfix uploads to the development release in the past 12 months I think. Are there any more?
[15:13] <ddstreet> cyphermox for this particular service, nothing is running and there is no blockage to 'starting' it
[15:14] <ddstreet> cyphermox there additionall was back-and-forth discussion for that bug and that approach was settled on, though i did suggest/discuss other approaches
[15:14] <rbasak> And none of the sponsors from those five bugfix development uploads appear to have endorsed or commented on your application. Is there a reason for this?
[15:15] <ddstreet> rbasak that's probbaly right i suppose
[15:15] <ddstreet> i can't speak for sponsors, i have no idea why they ignored my request for endorsement/comment
[15:17] <rbasak> What's your experience in getting uploads landed in the development release currently?
[15:17] <rbasak> (ie. finding sponsorship)
[15:17] <ddstreet> i can usually get slashd to upload to devel when he's around
[15:17] <ddstreet> but i can't upload anyone else's devel fixes
[15:17] <rbasak> OK, thanks. Does anyone have any further questions?
[15:18] <ddstreet> and he's not always around or have time
[15:19] <jbicha> no more questions from me
[15:20] <tsimonq2> Hi, sorry I'm late.
[15:21] <cpaelzer> sorry to interrupt, can I as a sponsor of ddstreet seeing the discussion going on ask a question as well?
[15:21] <tsimonq2> cpaelzer: I don't see why not.
[15:21] <tsimonq2> I'm personally ready to vote after talking with ddstreet the other day.
[15:22] <rbasak> cpaelzer: absolutely
[15:22] <cpaelzer> thanks, I mentioned that I can't speak for the usual complexities of a core-dev in my endorsement as I haven't touched those. I wonder if ddstreet would be able to identify a list of pacakages where getting PPU on these would solve 99% of his issue withut needing full core-dev
[15:22] <cpaelzer> it seems there are a few common candidates that he is contributing to, and those might be a good first step to grow from there
[15:22] <ddstreet> cpaelzer no, i think i do need core dev
[15:22] <ddstreet> thanks for the suggestion though
[15:23] <rbasak> OK. I think everyone is ready to vote then?
[15:23] <ddstreet> i fully expect the dmb to vote me down with 'you need moar' though :)
[15:23] <cpaelzer> could you outline why that is needed and a set of PPUs would not so that the group here can include that in the decision?
[15:23] <ddstreet> cpaelzer i (and those i work with) fix a wide variety of packages
[15:24] <ddstreet> and i need devel upload not just for myself but also to upload/sponsor others
[15:24] <tsimonq2> Are they the same packages (but a lot of them)?
[15:24] <ddstreet> additionally, much of what i want to do as core dev is fix the lack of tooling to make it easier for others to prepare their uploads for sponsors
[15:24] <ddstreet> and, allow sponsors to much more easily check off the long list of upload items without manually looking to make sure uploads meet each item
[15:25] <ddstreet> tsimonq2 all pkgs in main plus quite a lot in universe, if that's what you are asking
[15:25] <tsimonq2> That would be a good idea ddstreet  have you proposed your ideas? :)
[15:26] <tsimonq2> s/  /, /
[15:26] <tsimonq2> ddstreet: I see.
[15:26] <ddstreet> tsimonq2 i have a long history of rewriting ubuntu-dev-tools pull-* tooling
[15:26] <ddstreet> that i'm waiting to get coredev before i push to ubuntu-dev-tools git
[15:26] <ddstreet> as well there needs to be tooling to check debdiffs instead of having to check them manually
[15:27] <cyphermox> ddstreet: I don't understand that comment? tooling to avoid manually looking over uploads?
[15:27] <tsimonq2> ddstreet: And I have a long history of nagging mapreri to merge your changes already :P
[15:27] <tsimonq2> (He's a sponsor of mine.)
[15:27] <ddstreet> cyphermox yep; check version number, changelog formatting; LP: # tag, run autopkgtests, build, etc.
[15:27] <rbasak> I've discussed ddstreet's proposals in the past. I have no objection to them, but I've been focused on the same problems but using git instead, and I prefer to focus my time there.
[15:27] <cyphermox> mmkay
[15:27] <ddstreet> tsimonq2 mapreri already discussed and agreed that i would push my changes, not him
[15:27] <rbasak> ("git ubuntu lint" etc)
[15:28] <ddstreet> as my changes will be ongoing, and waiting another year+ for 'review' and upload of my chagnes isn't sustainable
[15:28] <cyphermox> yeah. it's not bad, just won't ever be a replacement for eyes
[15:28] <ddstreet> rbasak git ubuntu doesn't cover all pkgs in ubuntu
[15:28] <rbasak> Unfortunately the nature of the changes means that it's a big review.
[15:28] <rbasak> ddstreet: the plan is that it will :)
[15:28] <ddstreet> IMHO much of git ubuntu backend functionality should go into a lib
[15:28] <rbasak> For now we accept individual additions to the whitelist
[15:29] <rbasak> git ubuntu backend functionality _is_ a lib :)
[15:29] <ddstreet> right but you restrict that functionality to only the git ubuntu tool
[15:29] <jbicha> I understand the desire to avoid sponsoring, but your application here would be stronger if you had a longer list of things that have been sponsored or at least in the sponsor queue
[15:29] <rbasak> Admittedly it's not split out
[15:29] <tsimonq2> +1 jbicha
[15:29] <ddstreet> rbasak well, if it's not split out, that's not really a usable public lib then :)  but i get your point
[15:29] <rbasak> Much functionality depends on being able to read what's there, and that's made much easier by relying on a single format (git and the nature of the git-ubuntu trees) in order to make that work.
[15:29] <ddstreet> jbicha yeah i know, 'moar'
[15:29] <ddstreet> :)
[15:30] <cyphermox> rbasak: otoh, linting is not git-specific
[15:30] <rbasak> So I think there's probably not much benefit in exporting API to share code in this case.
[15:30] <rbasak> cyphermox: it absolutely is!
[15:30] <tsimonq2> Anyway, are we ready to formally vote?
[15:30] <ddstreet> rbasak we can certainly discuss git ubuntu later if you want :)
[15:30] <cyphermox> rbasak: not checking that a package is sane :)
[15:30] <cyphermox> yeah, I think we're ready to vote
[15:30] <rbasak> cyphermox: linting needs to look at what's there already, how the archive looks, etc. In git-ubuntu we do it by examining the repo. There are other ways, but no reason for git-ubuntu lint to not use what's there.
[15:30] <rbasak> But then there's less commonality with a non-git approach.
[15:30] <rbasak> Anyway
[15:31] <rbasak> Let's move on to vote then.
[15:31] <cyphermox> rbasak: that's not what he was talking about -- it was mostly just looking at the control and stuff
[15:31] <rbasak> #vote Approve ddstreet's core dev application
[15:31] <meetingology> Please vote on: Approve ddstreet's core dev application
[15:31] <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)
[15:31] <rbasak> -1 detailed reasons to follow
[15:31] <meetingology> -1 detailed reasons to follow received from rbasak
[15:31] <tsimonq2> -1 I'd like to see more devel work.
[15:31] <meetingology> -1 I'd like to see more devel work. received from tsimonq2
[15:32] <sil2100> +0 (I know Dan's SRU work and I know his capable, but I would need to see a bit more devel work and demonstration of devel knowledge (aka. moar))
[15:32] <meetingology> +0 (I know Dan's SRU work and I know his capable, but I would need to see a bit more devel work and demonstration of devel knowledge (aka. moar)) received from sil2100
[15:32] <sil2100> s/his/he's/
[15:32] <ddstreet> ah, moar, what a surprise ;-)
[15:32] <cyphermox> -1 ; as for the others; would like to see more non-SRU, devel work -- merges, more -proposed, etc.
[15:32] <meetingology> -1 ; as for the others; would like to see more non-SRU, devel work -- merges, more -proposed, etc. received from cyphermox
[15:33] <jbicha> -1 insufficient non-SRU uploads (or evidence of other core-dev work). Sorry
[15:33] <meetingology> -1 insufficient non-SRU uploads (or evidence of other core-dev work). Sorry received from jbicha
[15:33] <rbasak> Is that everyone?
[15:33] <rbasak> #endvote
[15:33] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Approve ddstreet's core dev application
[15:33] <meetingology> Votes for:0 Votes against:4 Abstentions:1
[15:33] <meetingology> Motion denied
[15:33] <rbasak> My detailed reasons:
[15:33] <rbasak> I'm OK in principle with granting core dev for the purposes of landing bugfixes in packages in main in the development release, without having wider experience that I'd normally expect from a core dev applicant, if that is going to unblock progress. However, in that case, I'd expect a strong application. In this case, you have only five sponsored uploads in the past twelve months, which perhaps is
[15:34] <rbasak> only just on the line of demonstrating need, and no endorsements from any of your recent sponsors for this class of uploads. For this reason, I'm afraid I'm -1 for now. I welcome a reapplication once you have some of: a higher rate of sponsored uploads to the development release; strong endorsements from your sponsors for this type of upload.
[15:34] <rbasak> I wrote up some general personal opinions on what I look for in a core dev application here, which I hope will also help: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RobieBasak/DMB/CoreDev
[15:34] <rbasak> FWIW, no endorsements from sponsors for uploads directly related to the application means an automatic -1 from me, without an exceptional reason.
[15:34] <rbasak> Nothing to do with "moar".
[15:36] <rbasak> ddstreet: sorry we couldn't approve your application on this occasion. But we do appreciate your work, and hope you will continue with sponsorship for the time being. We welcome you to apply again once the concerns raised here have been addressed.
[15:36] <ddstreet> yep, already rescheduled myself for 2 wks from now :)
[15:36] <jbicha> I know it's pretty discouraging to be told "no" here, but please do work on strengthening your application & apply again in a few months
[15:36] <jbicha> lol
[15:36] <ddstreet> jbicha it's really no surprise at all - been thru this already with sru-devel application
[15:37] <rbasak> Could a DMB member volunteer to follow https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Actions_after_an_unsuccessful_application please?
[15:37] <rbasak> I guess I'll do it
[15:37] <rbasak> #action rbasak to close ddstreet's application
[15:37] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to close ddstreet's application
[15:38] <rbasak> #subtopic Tiago Daitx
[15:38] <jbicha> thanks, I was too slow
[15:38] <rbasak> tdaitx: hello! Thank you for your patience.
[15:38] <rbasak> Please could you introduce yourself?
[15:38] <tdaitx> hi! I'm Tiago Daitx. My core dev application is available at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TiagoDaitx/CoreDeveloperApplication
[15:38] <tdaitx> I have been on the Ubuntu Foundations team for a bit over 3 years now
[15:38] <tdaitx> when I joined I barely had any experience with packaging - which is pretty unusual for foundations
[15:39] <tdaitx> what I had was experience with openjdk and thus my main focus was on openjdk maintenance and security updates
[15:39] <tdaitx> that includes backporting security patches from newer openjdk versions
[15:39] <tdaitx> and of course packaging
[15:39] <tdaitx> on that side I have worked on openjdk-6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and now 11, from precise to disco, including the openjdk migration from 8 to 9/10/11
[15:40] <tdaitx> in addition to that I have helped on merges, FTBFS and autopkgtest fixes, srus, and a few migrations
[15:40] <tdaitx> that said I don't recall ever dealing with a NBS
[15:40] <cyphermox> it's not as much an issue with things being in proposed.
[15:40] <cyphermox> (in a way, it is, but not quite as when the docs were written)
[15:41] <tdaitx> so my sponsors have requested me to go and ask for coredev
[15:41] <jbicha> I'm curious about the status of the openjdk-11 transition for bionic
[15:41] <tdaitx> jbicha: I have a list of packages that need to be sru before openjdk-11
[15:42] <jbicha> do you have a tracker bug for it?
[15:42] <tdaitx> after bootstraping those I can move to openjdk-11 itself
[15:42] <tdaitx> and the other packages
[15:42] <tdaitx> currently it is being tracked in a trello card
[15:43] <tdaitx> I was working on the openjdk-8 and openjdk-10 fixes after a regression from the last security update
[15:43] <jbicha> is that a public card? do you have a link? (sorry for perhaps going a bit off-topic here)
[15:43] <tdaitx> and also the openjdk-7 security update
[15:43] <tdaitx> I don't think it is public, it is under the foundations team board
[15:43] <tdaitx> let me check
[15:44] <jbicha> ok, no problem today if it's not public
[15:44] <tdaitx> yeah, it is not
[15:44] <jbicha> I guess my context was user complaints in bug 1796027
[15:44] <tdaitx> with the security updates out of the way I will start now moving into the migration
[15:46] <tdaitx> jbicha: yeah, I am aware of that, but first we had to deal with getting openjdk-11 in cosmic
[15:46] <tdaitx> and all the security updates out
[15:46] <tdaitx> for now I have updated openjdk-lts (openjdk-10) in bionic with the security patches from 11.0.1
[15:46] <rbasak> Am I right in thinking this is an application to go direct to core dev - you can't currently upload anything directly?
[15:46] <tdaitx> so security wise openjdk-lts in cosmic is good
[15:47] <tdaitx> rbasak: you are correct
[15:47] <tdaitx> I never applied for openjdk upload rights because all uploads go through the security team anyway
[15:48] <tdaitx> and apart from it there is no particular package that I work on, I just look at whats broken and where people need some help
[15:49] <tdaitx> I considered motu, but I was told by sponsors/people on my team to go directly to coredev, which is understandable as it covers various packages we work on
[15:49] <rbasak> Have you ever handled a transition?
[15:50] <jbicha> no more questions from me
[15:50] <tdaitx> yes, altought it it has been some time
[15:50] <tdaitx> I helped on the gcc5 transition
[15:51] <rbasak> Can you tell me how you might detect if an upload might trigger a transition, and what you'd do if you find that to be the case?
[15:52] <tdaitx> what I recall is that abi/api changes which require a new lib version which will end up causing a transition
[15:53] <tdaitx> so every package that (build-)deps on it will need to be rebuild
[15:53] <tdaitx> and possibility fixed if there are incompatibilities
[15:54] <rbasak> OK. Good answer from the technical side. But what about the coordination side? What would you do to coordinate it?
[15:55] <tdaitx> well, first making sure the teams that have packages which would need to go through the transition know about it
[15:55] <tdaitx> then discuss it and make sure there is consensus on how to approach it
[15:55] <rbasak> OK thanks
[15:55] <rbasak> I have one final question.
[15:56] <rbasak> For a jump-straight-to-core-dev application, it seems to me that you have very few endorsements, given that you have a wide range of core dev sponsors many of whom are on your team at Canonical.
[15:56] <rbasak> Is there a reason for this? Have you asked for more endorsements?
[15:56] <rbasak> Or is there some expectation that more endorsements weren't necessary?
[15:57] <tdaitx> I did ask for the endorsements on my team's channel and also for a few other people I worked with
[15:57] <tdaitx> I didn't really go around pushing people for it, I assumed 3 would be good enough
[15:57] <tdaitx> for which 2 are from my team
[15:58] <rbasak> OK, thanks.
[15:58] <rbasak> Everyone ready to vote?
[15:58] <slashd> o/
[15:58] <slashd> rbasak, yes I'm here
[15:58] <sil2100> I have one last question
[15:58] <rbasak> Sure
[15:59] <sil2100> tdaitx: did you have any experience in parsing update_output?
[15:59] <slashd> sorry need to change my calendar since I have move the time in Canada
[15:59] <tdaitx> no experience in actually parsing it, i have looked at it
[16:00] <sil2100> tdaitx: when would you consult update_output usually? Do you know any use-case of it?
[16:02] <tdaitx> so I usually go for update_excuses, I remember using update_output very fews times, but that was about 2 years back
[16:04] <tdaitx> I think it was about the gcc5 transition
[16:04] <tdaitx> sil2100: can't really remember why I needed it though, sorry
[16:04] <tdaitx> I had steve helping me back then
[16:05] <sil2100> tdaitx: yeah, during those it might also be useful - usually when a package is marked as 'valid candidate' but doesn't want to migrate due to some strange uninstallability issue
[16:05] <cyphermox> ready to vote?
[16:05] <sil2100> Yep, ready
[16:06] <rbasak> #vote approve tdaitx's core dev application
[16:06] <meetingology> Please vote on: approve tdaitx's core dev application
[16:06] <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)
[16:06] <rbasak> -1 I'm generally satisfied with everything I've seen, but I'm concerned about the lack of endorsements from the majority of your recent sponsors, especially for a jump straight to core dev which makes sense in your case but I think still requires a stronger-than-normal application. Get positive endorsements from your recent sponsors please; if they are in support of your application this shouldn't
[16:06] <meetingology> -1 I'm generally satisfied with everything I've seen, but I'm concerned about the lack of endorsements from the majority of your recent sponsors, especially for a jump straight to core dev which makes sense in your case but I think still requires a stronger-than-normal application. Get positive endorsements from your recent sponsors please; if they are in support of your application this shouldn't received from rbasak
[16:06] <rbasak> be difficult. If they aren't in support of your application, then that is cause for concern.
[16:06] <cyphermox> +1
[16:06] <meetingology> +1 received from cyphermox
[16:06] <tsimonq2> +1
[16:06] <meetingology> +1 received from tsimonq2
[16:06] <jbicha> +1 thanks for your Java work
[16:06] <meetingology> +1 thanks for your Java work received from jbicha
[16:07] <tdaitx> jbicha: thanks =)
[16:07] <tsimonq2> slashd?
[16:07] <tdaitx> rbasak: ack, I will look into that
[16:07] <rbasak> FWIW, with endorsements from others in your team I'll be an automatic +1
[16:08] <rbasak> It's down to slashd I think as to whether you'll need to do that.
[16:09] <slashd> give me 1 minute to read down, sorry I'm late with due to the time change
[16:09] <rbasak> np
[16:12] <slashd> +1 based on what I read above, I don't want to take much time, as I'm the one being late to the party
[16:12] <meetingology> +1 based on what I read above, I don't want to take much time, as I'm the one being late to the party received from slashd
[16:12] <rbasak> I think that's everyone here.
[16:12] <sil2100> +1
[16:12] <meetingology> +1 received from sil2100
[16:12] <rbasak> Or not
[16:12] <sil2100> (otherwise we'd have to wait for those that are absent)
[16:13] <rbalint> rbasak, i have not sponsored uploads from tdaitx but from following his work and interactions on irc and email i'd give a +1
[16:13] <rbasak> Now it is with only one absent team member I think?
[16:13] <rbasak> rbalint: thanks! I think maybe it doesn't matter now?
[16:13] <rbasak> #endvote
[16:13] <meetingology> Voting ended on: approve tdaitx's core dev application
[16:13] <meetingology> Votes for:5 Votes against:1 Abstentions:0
[16:13] <meetingology> Motion carried
[16:13] <tsimonq2> Congrats. :)
[16:13] <rbasak> Yes it can't be overturned by -1 from absent members.
[16:13] <tdaitx> \o/
[16:13] <rbasak> Congrats tdaitx! Thank you for your work!
[16:13] <rbalint> tdaitx, \o/ :-)
[16:13] <tdaitx> omg thanks folks!
[16:14] <rbasak> Can a DMB member volunteer for https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Actions_after_a_successful_application please?
[16:14]  * tsimonq2 raises hand
[16:14] <rbasak> Thanks!
[16:14] <rbasak> #action tsimonq2 to make ACL changes for tdaitx's successful application
[16:14] <meetingology> ACTION: tsimonq2 to make ACL changes for tdaitx's successful application
[16:14] <rbasak> #action tsimonq2 to announce tdaitx's successful application
[16:14] <meetingology> ACTION: tsimonq2 to announce tdaitx's successful application
[16:15] <tsimonq2> AOB now? :)
[16:15] <tsimonq2> (I have an item.)
[16:15] <rbasak> Nearly
[16:15] <rbasak> #topic Outstanding mailing list requests to assign
[16:15] <rbasak> Anything there?
[16:15] <tsimonq2> Ahh.
[16:16] <rbasak> There's Aron's packageset request
[16:16] <rbasak> And vala-panel from Martin
[16:17] <rbasak> And general packageset update requests, eg. Rik.
[16:17] <rbasak> Any volunteers?
[16:17] <cyphermox> volunteers to respond?
[16:17] <rbasak> To handle those requests, yes
[16:19] <cyphermox> yup, sure
[16:19] <rbasak> Thanks!
[16:19] <rbasak> #action cyphermox to handle the recent three packageset requests
[16:19] <meetingology> ACTION: cyphermox to handle the recent three packageset requests
[16:19] <rbasak> #topic AOB
[16:19] <rbasak> tsimonq2: over to you.
[16:19] <tsimonq2> Quick (slightly offtopic) question that someone here might know the answer to.
[16:19] <tsimonq2> Where does the udevbot code live? cyphermox proposed on ubuntu-devel a month or two back that +1 maintenance could be done in the patch pilot style as well (plus sponsoring, FTBFS, etc.) so it'd be good to have a key for it.
[16:19] <tsimonq2> It's DMBish in nature.
[16:20] <cyphermox> tsimonq2: not really
[16:20] <cyphermox> it's not owned by the DMB anyway
[16:20] <rbasak> I'm not sure the current DMB people will know :-/
[16:20] <cyphermox> that's up to the IRC team really.
[16:20] <rbasak> I guess out of scope for this meeting then.
[16:20] <tsimonq2> Got it. I'll continue asking around then, I think...
[16:20] <rbasak> Try #ubuntu-devel more generally maybe?
[16:20] <rbasak> Any other AOB?
[16:20] <tsimonq2> rbasak: I did a few days ago.
[16:21] <rbasak> Keep trying :)
[16:21] <tsimonq2> OK :)
[16:21] <rbasak> Or email ubuntu-devel@ maybe?
[16:21] <tsimonq2> Good ideam
[16:21] <tsimonq2> s/m/./
[16:21] <rbasak> OK, thanks all! The next meeting will be in two weeks at 1900 UTC.
[16:21] <rbasak> #endmeeting
[16:21] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Nov 19 16:21:39 2018 UTC.
[16:21] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2018/ubuntu-meeting.2018-11-19-15.01.moin.txt
[16:21] <tsimonq2> o/
[16:22] <tsimonq2> Thanks rbasak