/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2019/03/25/#ubuntu-meeting.txt

rbasako/19:00
sil2100o/19:00
rbasak#startmeeting DMB19:01
meetingologyMeeting started Mon Mar 25 19:01:13 2019 UTC.  The chair is rbasak. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.19:01
meetingologyAvailable commands: action commands idea info link nick19:01
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice | DMB Meeting | Current topic:
rbasak#topic Review of previous action items19:01
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice | DMB Meeting | Current topic: Review of previous action items
rbasakcyphermox to deal with PPU rights for Rosco2 and Eickmeyer19:02
rbasaksil2100 to send out announcements for Rosco2 and Eickmeyer19:02
rbasakcyphermox to fix the packageset-report script19:02
rbasaktsimonq2 to better document what we expect applicants to know (carried over)19:02
rbasakslashd to follow up on the APAC Ubuntu community coverage19:02
rbasakFollow up on the ubuntustudio packageset upload permissions for Rosco219:02
cyphermoxmy PPU actions are done19:02
rbasakThanks!19:02
sil2100cyphermox: \o/19:02
sil2100Announcements were sent as well19:02
cyphermoxthe packageset-report script is changed, too; though I haven't really had much of a feedback on it19:03
rbasakI had a glance and it seemed reasonable19:03
sil2100cyphermox: I didn't see the code changes yet, yes, but the packageset changes you sent were ok19:03
slashdo/ no update on the APAC, still figure it out stuff with my APAC contact who wants to eventually apply for contrib devel19:04
cyphermoxthen let's consider this done?19:04
rbasaktsimonq2: sends his apologies19:04
rbasakSo the first three are done then.19:04
rbasak4 is to carry over19:04
rbasak#action tsimonq2 to better document what we expect applicants to know (carried over)19:04
meetingologyACTION: tsimonq2 to better document what we expect applicants to know (carried over)19:04
rbasak5 is to carry over19:05
sil2100o/19:05
rbasak#action slashd to follow up on the APAC Ubuntu community coverage19:05
meetingologyACTION: slashd to follow up on the APAC Ubuntu community coverage19:05
rbasakWho owned 6?19:05
sil2100No one, this was more like a whole-team toppic19:05
sil2100i.e. us voting on Rosco2's packageset upload permissions19:06
rbasakOh, I see.19:06
rbasakWhere are we with that?19:06
sil2100So, I guess that's something we should discuss now19:07
sil2100Do we want to re-start the vote? Did anyone change their minds after our recent discussions and packageset changes?19:07
rbasakI have synced with cyphermox and I think we now understand each others position better19:08
sil2100I guess that in overall, for clarity, I would propose re-starting the vote for granting Rosco2 PPU rights to the ubuntustudio packageset19:10
rbasakI'm quite happy to give Rosco2 upload access to things that affect Ubuntu Studio but not other flavours, as a step towards what I hope would eventually be MOTU.19:10
sil2100Since we had far too many votes open last time for that that didn't resolve the issue19:10
cyphermoxcan we please use the right nomenclature though?19:10
rbasakHowever we have some trouble with how that squares with the packageset19:10
cyphermoxie. if it's PPU, it's PPU, if it's packageset, it's packageset19:10
sil2100cyphermox: understood19:10
rbasakNevertheless I believe that would satisfy the TB requirement.19:10
cyphermoxmixing an matching makes it really hard to understand19:10
cyphermoxrbasak: AFAIK right now the only overlap is xfce* packages19:11
cyphermoxit can be trivially fixed19:11
sil2100That's basically what I meant, anyway, do we need Rosco2 around for questions? I assumed we all know what we need to know, just that we need to come to a conclusion19:12
Rosco2o/19:12
sil2100Rosco2: thanks for being around o/19:13
rbasakcyphermox: that would bring us back to approving the packageset including all future changes though, versus approving a specific set or narrow definition.19:14
cyphermoxsorry, I don't understand what you mean by that19:14
sil2100Well, I guess we'd be voting to grant upload rights to the packageset, whatever contents it has now or in the future19:14
sil2100Packagesets change, sometimes even quite dynamically, and that's normal19:15
cyphermoxthat's undeed what we should do19:15
cyphermox(I think)19:15
cyphermoxI mean, I can remove the overlap now, I don't think we need to block on whether that's done or not just now19:15
cyphermox(we just need to decide)19:16
rbasakSure19:16
cyphermoxmy opinion is: there are other packagesets in the same boat, we shouldn't special case; but I'm not against it19:16
rbasakBut my point was that I felt that approving only the "narrow" set was appropriate right now.19:16
cyphermoxack19:17
cyphermoxby narrow you mean without xfce?19:17
sil2100Should we vote? Since I'm sure Rosco2 is dying from all the suspense ;)19:17
Eickmeyer^so am I.19:17
cyphermoxsil2100: what is your opinion? xfce in or out?19:17
cyphermoxslashd: ^19:18
rbasakBy narrow I mean "stuff seeded by the flavour but not any other flavor" which right now means without xfce, AIUI, but may not be this in the future, so it's not the same thing.19:18
Rosco2If it makes a difference - I promise not to touch xfce packages without consulting the xubuntu guys19:18
cyphermoxrbasak: well, we can only deal with what is currently real, can't address what isn't a problem right now19:18
sil2100cyphermox: I don't have a strong opinion, although seeing how big the ubuntustudio packageset will be big anyway, due to the nature of the project19:19
sil2100That being said, I would really prefer not to block on that, as cyphermox mentioned19:19
slashdcyphermox, I'm mixed feeling, can't really say 'yes' or 'no' on with or without xfce19:20
rbasakcyphermox: the point of a packageset approval is to deal with future changes also.19:20
cyphermoxrbasak: sure, but we can only action the right now19:21
rbasakcyphermox: since I'm specifically reluctant about the defined future changes, PPU for a larger set would be more appropriate IMHO.19:21
rbasakSay for example PPU to the current contents of the packageset less xfce19:21
cyphermoxthere are two separate decisions: is the ubuntustudio packageset what it should be;  and are we ready to give upload rights for what the packageset should be19:21
rbasakIf that is implemented technically by packageset approval, then that's fine by me.19:21
sil2100I would really not want that19:21
sil2100eh, ok, I see we still don't have a solid decision here among the team19:22
rbasakNo :-(19:22
sil2100My rationale for just voting on the 'packageset' upload rights is: question - should Rosco2, as the maintainer of Ubuntu Studio, have upload rights to the ubuntustudio 'packageset'19:22
cyphermoxI feel it's unfair to special-case ubuntustudio; it should be handled (right now) as all the other packagesets. That is, everything that is on the seeds/image is in the packageset.19:22
cyphermoxsil2100: +119:23
sil2100My answer is: yes, just like the maintainers of Xubuntu have access to the xubuntu packageset, mate to mate etc.19:23
rbasakcyphermox: I'm not special casing ubuntustudioi though19:23
cyphermoxif we think packagesets aren't what they should; it's a separate action / voting / whatever to address that19:23
cyphermoxrbasak: no, if you want to do a special PPU you're not, but I feel that's extra work for very little benefit19:23
sil2100cyphermox: agreed19:23
rbasakcyphermox: sure, so pragmatically let's save the work and give him the packageset ACL.19:24
sil2100Regardless of whether the current ubuntustudio packageset is correct or not in our terms, this doesn't change the fact that Ubuntu Studio should not be treated differently from other flavors19:24
sil2100If it's not, we need to keep working on fixing it, but it's neither Rosco2's or anyone else's from Ubuntu Studio's fault19:25
sil2100*If it's not correct19:25
cyphermoxrbasak: that was my point yes19:25
cyphermoxaye19:25
cyphermoxare we ready to vote on rosco2's application then?19:26
rbasakcyphermox: right, but the motion would be different.19:26
rbasakI propose that we "give Rosco2 upload rights that are the current set of packages in the ubuntustudio packageset less xfce"19:26
sil2100I would not want that19:26
cyphermoxneither do I19:27
sil2100I just want a vote: "give Rosco2 upload rights to the ubuntustudio packageset"19:27
rbasakI think your proposal is to "give Rosco2 upload rights equivalent to the existing definition of ubuntustudio that may change in the future according to that definition"19:27
cyphermoxrbasak: I think we really are in full understanding now; just absolutely disagreeing ;)19:27
sil2100rbasak: I want to give him the same upload rights as any other flavor maintainers19:27
rbasakOK. Well we can vote if you like.19:27
rbasakThough a couple of members have sent apologies19:27
rbasakSo we might struggle.19:27
cyphermoxyeah, that's really quite unfortunately19:27
sil2100But they have sent their votes19:27
cyphermox*unfortunate19:27
sil2100Ah, they actually did not, crap19:28
cyphermoxjbicha did19:29
sil2100Anyway, I'd propose starting the vote19:29
slashdsil2100, so voting to give same upload rights as any other flavor maintainers as you said ?19:30
rbasakOh I forgot I'm chair19:30
rbasakSorry19:30
sil2100slashd: yes, basically giving him upload rigths to the ubuntustudio packageset - so to the current packageset and however it will look in the nearest future19:30
rbasak#vote give Rosco2 upload rights to the ubuntustudio packageset - so to the current packageset and however it will look in the nearest future19:31
meetingologyPlease vote on: give Rosco2 upload rights to the ubuntustudio packageset - so to the current packageset and however it will look in the nearest future19:31
meetingologyPublic votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1/-1/+0 #channelname)19:31
rbasak-1 for reasons already stated19:31
meetingology-1 for reasons already stated received from rbasak19:31
cyphermox+119:31
meetingology+1 received from cyphermox19:31
sil2100+119:31
meetingology+1 received from sil210019:31
slashd+119:32
meetingology+1 received from slashd19:32
rbasakThat's everyone here I think?19:32
sil2100Let's see if tsimonq2 can vote remotely maybe?19:32
rbasakThe motion cannot then pass right now but it can go to email if absent members can vote offline.19:32
Rosco2Thanks all19:33
EickmeyerWhat was jbicha's vote?19:33
rbasakOnly one further +1 is required19:33
Rosco2Crossing fingers and plowing on :-)19:34
tewardsil2100: do you need me to ping tsimonq2, who may actually be busy?  (I sent him an unrelated semi-urgent Lubuntu-infrastructure-related ping to no response a few hours ago, so...)19:34
sil2100rbasak: I guess let's move on then, tsimonq2 seems to be out of terminal19:34
teward(I may be able to ping him in another mechanism)19:34
sil2100teward: no need, we'll just do this offline I guess, through e-mail19:34
tewardmmkay :)19:34
teward*returns to lurking*19:34
cyphermoxoh; jbicha has not mentioned his stance on that vote19:34
sil2100Sadly19:35
sil2100I also thought he did19:35
cyphermoxwe'll finish this by email then19:35
rbasak#action tsimonq2, jbicha and micahg to vote on "give Rosco2 upload rights to the ubuntustudio packageset - so to the current packageset and however it will look in the nearest future"19:35
meetingologyACTION: tsimonq2, jbicha and micahg to vote on "give Rosco2 upload rights to the ubuntustudio packageset - so to the current packageset and however it will look in the nearest future"19:35
rbasak#endvote19:35
meetingologyVoting ended on: give Rosco2 upload rights to the ubuntustudio packageset - so to the current packageset and however it will look in the nearest future19:35
meetingologyVotes for:3 Votes against:1 Abstentions:019:35
meetingologyMotion carried19:35
Eickmeyer:'(19:35
tewardno it wasn't19:35
rbasak(correction: one further +1 required)19:35
rbasak#topic (rbasak proxying) Private request19:36
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice | DMB Meeting | Current topic: (rbasak proxying) Private request
rbasakOne moment please, in a private channel. I think this can be resolved quickly.19:36
rbasakDone19:43
rbasak#topic Package Set/Per Package Uploader Applications19:43
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice | DMB Meeting | Current topic: Package Set/Per Package Uploader Applications
rbasakfossfreedom: o/19:44
rbasakPlease could you introduce your application?19:44
sil2100hmmm19:47
sil2100I hope we have fossfreedom here19:47
sil2100In case not, to his defense: he did already introduce himself many meetings in the past19:47
cyphermoxyup19:47
rbasakLet's move on, and we can come back later if he shows up. Unless we have some people who want to vote in his absence?19:47
sil2100rbasak: let's maybe continue, we can get back to this later or postpone to the next meeting19:48
rbasakacheronuk: are you here?19:48
acheronuko/19:48
rbasak#info Deferred19:49
rbasak#topic MOTU Applications19:49
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice | DMB Meeting | Current topic: MOTU Applications
rbasak#subtopic Rik Mills (acheronuk)19:49
rbasakacheronuk: o/19:49
rbasakPlease could you introduce your application?19:49
acheronukI'm Rik Mills, the current mainly active Kubuntu developer19:49
acheronukMy application and reasons for applying can be found here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RikMills/Applications/MOTU#Why_am_I_applying.3F19:50
rbasakThanks!19:50
rbasakAny questions for acheronuk?19:50
* slashd reading his application page19:50
slashdacheronuk, If I see it right, you had ~10 sponsored upload in the past 3-4 month, how given you MOTU today will unblock you considering you don't have a huge amount of sponsored upload lately ?19:54
sil2100slashd: I suppose this was answered 'partially' in his application, I think19:55
* sil2100 reads it up again19:55
cyphermoxyes19:55
cyphermoxspecifically where his link is anchored ;)19:55
acheronukslashd: it will allow me to do more that I might have hesitated to invest time in or bother people (sponsors with). It would also allow me to assit more in transitions and autotests where direct uploads are not the permission problem19:55
sil2100I guess he does mention that he wants delays to be shortened, probably regarding NEW pacakge uploads?19:55
acheronukslashd: yes, subject obviously to as much scrutiny as AAs gave before19:56
slashdacheronuk, okay19:57
acheronukjust I would not have to MOTU hunt. That actually has not been as much a probelm lately, but these things come and go19:57
rbasakAny more questions for acheronuk?19:57
rbasak#vote Grant acheronuk MOTU19:58
meetingologyPlease vote on: Grant acheronuk MOTU19:58
meetingologyPublic votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1/-1/+0 #channelname)19:58
rbasak+119:58
meetingology+1 received from rbasak19:58
rbasakI also have two proxy votes19:58
slashd+119:59
meetingology+1 received from slashd19:59
sil2100+1 (I have seen a lot from acheronuk and was really happy with his work so far, I think he's "good for MOTU")19:59
meetingology+1 (I have seen a lot from acheronuk and was really happy with his work so far, I think he's "good for MOTU") received from sil210019:59
rbasaktsimonq2: votes +119:59
rbasakjbicha: votes +119:59
rbasakcyphermox: would you like to vote?19:59
cyphermox+119:59
meetingology+1 received from cyphermox19:59
rbasakThanks!19:59
rbasakI think that's everyone who's here.19:59
rbasak#endvote20:00
meetingologyVoting ended on: Grant acheronuk MOTU20:00
meetingologyVotes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:020:00
meetingologyMotion carried20:00
cyphermoxsorry; I got distracted by SRUs :/20:00
sil2100Darn SRUs20:00
cyphermoxyou bet!20:00
rbasakCongrtulations acheronuk!20:00
sil2100acheronuk: congrats!20:00
cyphermoxpesky little SRUses20:00
acheronukThank you all!20:00
EickmeyerWooohooo acheronuk!!!20:00
clivejoCongrats Rik :)20:00
acheronukclivejo: cheers20:00
cyphermoxacheronuk: congrats20:00
* acheronuk pours a Jack Daniels20:00
rbasakAny volunteers to sort him out according to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Actions_after_a_successful_application?20:01
rbasak#action rbasak to add acheronuk to MOTU20:01
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to add acheronuk to MOTU20:01
rbasak#action rbasak to announce acheronuk's successful MOTU application20:01
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to announce acheronuk's successful MOTU application20:01
rbasakIs fossfreedom around yet?20:02
slashdrbasak, I'll do it if not too late for the MOTU20:02
rbasakslashd: sure: do you want to take those two actions then?20:02
rbasak#undo20:02
meetingologyRemoving item from minutes: ACTION20:02
rbasak#undo20:02
meetingologyRemoving item from minutes: ACTION20:02
slashdrbasak, yup20:02
rbasak#action slashd to add acheronuk to MOTU20:02
meetingologyACTION: slashd to add acheronuk to MOTU20:02
rbasak#action slashd to announce acheronuk's successful MOTU application20:03
meetingologyACTION: slashd to announce acheronuk's successful MOTU application20:03
rbasakWould others prefer to vote in fossfreedom's absence or defer?20:03
slashddefer20:03
rbasakOK20:04
rbasak#topic AOB20:04
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice | DMB Meeting | Current topic: AOB
rbasakAnything?20:04
rbasak#endmeeting20:05
=== 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 | <wxl> be nice
meetingologyMeeting ended Mon Mar 25 20:05:07 2019 UTC.20:05
meetingologyMinutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2019/ubuntu-meeting.2019-03-25-19.01.moin.txt20:05
sil2100I think we're good for now, let's try resolving Rosco2's application though e-mail20:05
sil2100I suppose vorlon gave a deadline for Beta, so we'd have to do this this week20:05
acheronukThank you all again :)20:05
sil2100(IIRC)20:05
sil2100I'll continue pushing on that maybe20:05
sil2100rbasak: thank you for chairing o/20:05
rbasakyw!20:06
vorloncyphermox: you think it's unfair to ubuntustudio to have their packageset defined more narrowly?  isn't it more unfair to leave ubuntustudio unreleasable because it has no approved uploaders?20:09
cyphermoxvorlon: if a packageset is a flavour packageset, it should be maintained the same way we maintain all other flavour packagesets; that's all I'm saying20:15
cyphermoxvorlon: there's no question that we want ubuntustudio releaseable, and I think we're still well on track for that; it's just unfortunately that some DMB members couldn't be around to vote20:16
vorlonok, my skimming of the discussion made it seem like there was still an impasse20:17
vorlonand IMHO it would be better to get him upload access to a narrower set ASAP and then figure out later what the consensus is on the larger set20:17
vorlonin terms of fairness :)20:17
cyphermoxonly by missing a single +1 vote; because we were quorate but couldn't pass to motion20:17
vorlonack20:17
cyphermoxvorlon: I think we should just have it pass rfn as things as and forego extra work that would then have to be unwinded.20:18
cyphermoxI can not type today20:18

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!