=== cpaelzer__ is now known as cpaelzer === cpaelzer__ is now known as cpaelzer [18:57] o/ [19:02] Hello! [19:05] do we have something to discuss ? [19:06] I don't know [19:06] fwiw my action is done [19:06] We do [19:07] Granting ~lubuntu-dev upload permissions. [19:08] tsimonq2: I'm not sure why ~lubuntu-countil is in the team, sounds like it shouldn't be [19:08] cyphermox: It's a temporary measure. [19:08] I don't see why it needs to be in at all [19:09] it's definitely not going to work with having ~lubuntu-dev upload permissions [19:10] gilir is the owner of the LP group and ~lubuntu-council is in the team at the moment for bus factor. [19:10] I still don't understand [19:10] gilir owning the team isn't necessarily a blocker. If he can't be reached, there's a way to request the ownership to be changed [19:11] OTOH, I don't think it's necessarily a given that a council member is also a developer [19:11] (certainly doesn't seem to be the case for other flavours) [19:11] It was not planned to keep it this way if upload permissions were granted [19:12] It's a temporary stopgap measure before ownership is transferred [19:12] well, I guess the point is, I would personally prefer that the teams are all properly set before we do any permissions changes (well, before the TB does) [19:12] no objection to lubuntu-dev being a delegated team though, that makes total sense [19:13] Well, I would like to vote on it :) [19:13] I understand [19:13] well, do we need to is also my question, because if we're all in agreement there is no real use in voting :) [19:14] I don't want to act unilaterally before giving DMB members time to voice any concerns [19:14] sure sure. [19:14] so, anyone objects? [19:15] tsimonq2: also, since ~l-council is admin, can't it change the ownership already? [19:16] or are you waiting for a council meeting before you do that? [19:16] Nope, only owners can transfer ownership [19:16] tsimonq2: or launchpad admins, if you make your case [19:16] Right [19:16] I forget if I have to file an RT or if I can just ping on #launchpad [19:17] voting sounds reasonable. It's been several years since we've had a new delegated team with ability to ability their own members. [19:17] it's usually a good idea to file the RT so it's tracked [19:17] Right, audit logs and such [19:18] jbicha: I don't think it would hurt [19:18] jbicha: we've already reached the point where the time effect is moot, but typically if there's consensus, voting is extra [19:18] ok [19:18] the logs aren't any different, they're just text [19:18] well, if someone wants to start it.. [19:19] [ACTION] tsimonq2 to file RT transferring ownership of ~lubuntu-dev, deactivate ~lubuntu-council, ask TB to do ACL change [19:19] :P [19:20] I don't think we started a meeting… [19:23] #startmeeting Developer Membership Board [19:23] Meeting started Mon Feb 25 19:23:28 2019 UTC. The chair is cyphermox. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. [19:23] Available commands: action commands idea info link nick === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds: Please leave swords by the door | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendars | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | be nice | Developer Membership Board Meeting | Current topic: [19:23] #topic ~lubuntu-dev delegated team === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds: Please leave swords by the door | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendars | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | be nice | Developer Membership Board Meeting | Current topic: ~lubuntu-dev delegated team [19:23] tsimonq2: you want to summarize for the logs? [19:24] then I'll start the vote [19:24] slashd: around? [19:24] Sure. [19:24] rbasak isn't [19:24] cyphermox, yep [19:24] oh, we're voting after all? [19:24] well since you all seem to need it :P [19:25] I wasn't going to call us for us to have a vote on whether to have a vote 😉 [19:25] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2019-February/001319.html - tl;dr Lubuntu is asking for ~lubuntu-dev to be granted upload permissions to the `lubuntu` packageset. [19:25] :D [19:25] tsimonq2: sounds like a great summary :) [19:25] #vote ~lubuntu-dev to be granted delegated control over lubuntu packageset (new delegated team) [19:25] Please vote on: ~lubuntu-dev to be granted delegated control over lubuntu packageset (new delegated team) [19:25] 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) [19:26] +1 [19:26] +1 received from tsimonq2 [19:26] +1 [19:26] +1 received from cyphermox [19:26] +1 [19:26] +1 received from jbicha [19:26] +1 [19:26] +1 received from slashd [19:27] no sil2100 either [19:27] and no micahg. [19:27] #endvote [19:27] Voting ended on: ~lubuntu-dev to be granted delegated control over lubuntu packageset (new delegated team) [19:27] Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 [19:27] Motion carried [19:28] that was quorate anyway [19:28] now; one issue is that I'm not sure if we're supposed to decide if we can delegate directly, or if it needs to be approved or something [19:29] but I suppose, tsimonq2, if you're going to be the person bringing it up to the TB, it can be part of the discussion if there's any needed [19:29] I'll definitely be at the next TB meeting anyway [19:29] The original proposal I outlined was to create a new team, ~lubuntu-dev-owner, which has the DMB and ~lubuntu-council, and allow that team to approve/deny members. [19:30] yup [19:30] cyphermox: Is that something we decide or the TB does? [19:30] like kubuntu, basically [19:30] Right. [19:30] well, TB ultimately is responsible for granting access rights to developers, they delegate that to us [19:31] but it sounds exactly like what Kubuntu does, and seems like it's perfectly fine for lubuntu to do that as well [19:31] so you probably just need to finish sorting out the ownership of the teams and you'll be all set [19:31] Cool. [19:32] Do we have a wiki page somewhere for formally requesting that the TB edit ACLs? [19:32] (Or just generally some documentation I can follow.) [19:33] "The name 'lubuntu-dev-owner' has been blocked by the Launchpad administrators. Contact Launchpad Support if you want to use this name." - heh, ok, so it'll have to be with one big ticket. [19:33] (To answer my own question: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Actions_after_a_successful_applications ) [19:33] oh, looky [19:34] that actually also covers delegation [19:34] we should be looking at a policy for how the applications will be managed [19:36] [ACTION] tsimonq2 to file RT transferring ownership of ~lubuntu-dev, deactivate ~lubuntu-council, ask TB to do ACL change [19:36] ACTION: tsimonq2 to file RT transferring ownership of ~lubuntu-dev, deactivate ~lubuntu-council, ask TB to do ACL change [19:37] tsimonq2: we should really go over such a "policy" on the applications for lubuntu, but we can do that at a later meeting I guess? [19:37] that way you could write down something in the wiki like the one for the DesktopTeam; what you expect to see for an applicant, etc. [19:38] https://phab.lubuntu.me/w/lubuntu-dev/ [19:38] I wrote that when I sent the email to devel-permissions. [19:39] It's a more complete page which I'd like to generalize for Ubuntu Developers that shows everything I would expect a Lubuntu Developer to know, plus the application process. [19:40] nice [19:40] So where I'm still curious is whether that's a process that the TB or the DMB approves. [19:42] the knowledgebase page says it's us [19:42] Alright, so the vote earlier was to grant the team the packageset permissions, I guess we need a separate vote for the process? [19:42] slashd: jbicha: any issues with the aforementioned document? [19:43] or do you want to vote on it? [19:43] I don't think we need a second vote [19:44] For the record: ~lubuntu-dev changed to self-renewal, 720 day expiry period, ~ubuntu-core-dev was already a member, added ~lubuntu-dev to ~ubuntu-dev. [19:45] ack [19:45] Oh, and ~lubuntu-council deactivated prior to doing all of that. [19:47] Something else I noticed when adding ~lubuntu-dev to ~ubuntu-dev; ~ubuntu-sru-developers is the only team with an expiry date. Should that be changed to "expire never"? [19:47] tsimonq2: you mean in ~ubuntu-dev? [19:47] Yes. [19:47] possibly [19:48] #topic AOB? === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds: Please leave swords by the door | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendars | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | be nice | Developer Membership Board Meeting | Current topic: AOB? [19:48] oh [19:48] ok, I already did end the voting [19:48] https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-dev/+member/ubuntu-sru-developers vs https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-dev/+member/kubuntu-dev [19:48] anything else? [19:48] tsimonq2: I agree. [19:49] I'll make that change then. [19:49] Nothing else from me. [19:49] slashd: jbicha [19:49] cyphermox, nothing else on my side [19:50] nothing from me :) [19:50] ok [19:50] #endmeeting === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds: Please leave swords by the door | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendars | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | be nice [19:50] Meeting ended Mon Feb 25 19:50:20 2019 UTC. [19:50] Minutes: http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2019/ubuntu-meeting.2019-02-25-19.23.moin.txt [19:50] thanks everyone! [19:50] Thanks! [19:50] bye