[18:58] <slashd> o/
[18:59] <cyphermox> o/
[18:59] <rbasak> o/
[18:59] <slashd> I think sil2100 will be late a little bit but he didn't say he won't be attending
[18:59] <sil2100> o/
[18:59] <sil2100> (made it)
[18:59] <slashd> o/ sil2100
[18:59] <slashd> #startmeeting DMB meeting
[18:59] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Nov  4 18:59:52 2019 UTC.  The chair is slashd. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[18:59] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[18:59] <slashd> #topic Review of previous action items
[19:00] <slashd> #topic slashd to announce & add rafaeldtinoco to ~ubuntu-server-dev and ~motu
[19:00] <slashd> done ^
[19:00] <slashd> #topic slashd to add marcustomlinson to the right LP teams -> ~ubuntu-dev & ~ubuntu-developer-members
[19:00] <slashd> done ^
[19:00] <slashd> #topic cyphermox to update PPU for marcustomlinson, adding libreoffice and libreoffice-l10n
[19:00] <mfo> o/
[19:01] <cyphermox> done
[19:01] <slashd> #topic cyphermox to setup nominations, voting for new DMB members
[19:01] <cyphermox> carry over
[19:01] <slashd> #topic cyphermox to build report for expiry from dev teams
[19:01] <cyphermox> carry over
[19:01] <slashd> #topic sil2100 to update PPU for Gunnar, adding ibus-avro
[19:02] <cyphermox> btw there is #subtopic for that
[19:03] <slashd> ok will do next time, been a while since I chair
[19:03] <slashd> any update on Gunnar sil2100 ?
[19:03] <cyphermox> np, it's just a bit less spammy
[19:03] <slashd> right
[19:03] <sil2100> slashd: yes, it's done o/
[19:04] <slashd> anything else you guys want to talk about before we go with our candidate, mfo ?
[19:05] <slashd> ok well seems like nothing to discuss
[19:05] <slashd> Today, Mauricio (mfo) is applying for SRU Developer: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/mfo/sru-developer
[19:05] <slashd> mfo can you please introduced yourself ?
[19:06] <mfo> slashd, sure, ctrl-v
[19:06] <mfo> I'm Mauricio. I work for Canonical in the support organization, more specifically in the Sustaining Engineering team, where I fix bugs reported by Ubuntu Advantage customers, thus usually on the stable releases; fixes go across the main and universe components as necessary, both on userspace packages and kernel.
[19:06] <mfo> I've been working with Ubuntu since late 2013 for Trusty/14.04 on my previous job at IBM (and also with other company-supported distros), and have been working exclusively with Ubuntu since joining Canonical in June 2018.
[19:06] <mfo> I'm applying for SRU Developer rights mainly to off-load/load-balance the 2 sponsors in the sustaining engineering team, slashd & ddstreet, as me and
[19:06] <mfo> all other colleagues in the team currently have only them to review and sponsor our pathes (they're both great and efficient, but they also have all the rest of their own work to do), so looking forward to be able to help them and the team on that front.
[19:06] <mfo> EOF :)
[19:07] <slashd> FWIW, mfo is a colleague of mine. I closely work with Mauricio on a daily basis and I have obviously sponsored multiple packages for him.
[19:07] <slashd> so I know what he is capable of already.
[19:08] <slashd> Any questions for mfo ?
[19:08] <sil2100> I need a minute to get up to speed
[19:08] <slashd> all good
[19:08] <sil2100> (apologies, just got back from some errands)
[19:08] <slashd> sil2100, take your time
[19:10] <sil2100> mfo: ok, a small question from me: let's say you want to upload a new version of the package foo, but notice that there's already a foo in the Unapproved queue from someone else - how would you proceed? Let's assume that your foo fixes are quite important, so you'd want them in -proposed as soon as possible
[19:11] <mfo> sil2100, ok, i'd reach out to the uploader to see if his/her fixes are too, and accordingly ask to upload a new version either merging our both (important) fixes, or checking if either one can/must wait.
[19:14] <mfo> eg, if current version in upload queue is not too important/time-sensitive but introduces changes that could risk the acceptance/mmigration of the quite-important/time-sensitive upload,  we could probably talk about getting the more import one first,  so not to risk it's acceptance/verification/migration/delivery :)
[19:15] <marcustomlinson> The suspense... ;)
[19:17] <sil2100> mfo: ok, good, thanks
[19:17] <mfo> sil2100, ack, thanks.
[19:18] <rbasak> I have no questions.
[19:18] <slashd> cyphermox ?
[19:19] <sil2100> mfo: somewhat related, when building the source package (either with debuild or any other tool) there is the -v option that's being passed to dpkg-genchanges - do you know what it's used for?
[19:20] <rbasak> Your existing SRU work looks good, and generally above the standard I usually see. I would like to take the opportunity to remind everyone about the reason for Regression Potential, as documented, though. It's at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure and should include information about how a regression might manifest even if unlikely please.
[19:20] <mfo> sil2100, no, i'm not familiar w/ that option at the moment, havent used it yet, but i can certainly take the time to check it out.
[19:20] <mfo> to be honest.
[19:21] <sil2100> mfo: it's very convenient! For such situations where you want to neatly merge two uploads with separate changelog entries, you can use -v to build the package and include more than one version in the .changes file ;)
[19:21] <mfo> sil2100, oh, i see. that'd be helpful in the scenario of your question, say, if we were to merge the current upload in queue w/ another one.  thanks!
[19:22] <rbasak> That information looks like it was missing from your recent SRUs that I sampled, but I trust that you can just do that without needing to see any evidence :)
[19:22] <rbasak> Sorry to step on the other thread.
[19:22] <sil2100> mfo: yw!
[19:22] <sil2100> Ok, no questions from me
[19:23] <rbasak> without *me needing to see any evidence, that is
[19:23] <mfo> rbasak, thanks for the feedback on SRU material, i appreciate it.      Hm, did I miss regression potential?  that's certainly an oversight i try hard not to make.
[19:23] <rbasak> No you put in the section
[19:23] <mfo> rbasak, i'll try to find what LP it was and how it slipped through.
[19:23] <mfo> ah.
[19:23] <rbasak> But I don't think you populate it with exactly what we're looking for
[19:24] <mfo> rbasak, got it.  i'll review the documentation you mentioned more carefully, and adjust my templates :)  thanks for this feedback as well, and pointing that out.
[19:24] <rbasak> "Low" or trying to convince us why it is Low is somewhat pointless
[19:24] <rbasak> We more want to know what to look out for during review, and what to ask for in any testing
[19:24] <slashd> cyphermox any questions ?
[19:25] <slashd> sil2100, all good ?
[19:25] <mfo> rbasak, oh I see.
[19:25] <rbasak> I mean if there is a good reason why the risk is lower than it might initially appear, that is useful to tell us about of course
[19:25] <rbasak> But it's the other bits that I'm usually looking to understand please :)
[19:26] <rbasak> Thanks :)
[19:26] <cyphermox> no questions
[19:27] <mfo> rbasak, thank you for bringing that up! :)
[19:27] <sil2100> All good here
[19:27] <slashd> #vote Please vote on: Mauricio Oliveira (mfo) SRU Developer application
[19:27] <meetingology> Please vote on: Please vote on: Mauricio Oliveira (mfo) SRU Developer application
[19:27] <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)
[19:27] <slashd> #voterequired 4
[19:27] <rbasak> +1 strong recent upload history and sponsor endorsements, and recent SRU work all looks good
[19:27] <meetingology> +1 strong recent upload history and sponsor endorsements, and recent SRU work all looks good received from rbasak
[19:27] <cyphermox> +1
[19:27] <meetingology> +1 received from cyphermox
[19:27] <sil2100> +1
[19:27] <meetingology> +1 received from sil2100
[19:28] <slashd> +1 high quality SRU and confident he will ask question when in doubt (e.g. -v parameter)
[19:28] <meetingology> +1 high quality SRU and confident he will ask question when in doubt (e.g. -v parameter) received from slashd
[19:28] <slashd> #endvote
[19:28] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Please vote on: Mauricio Oliveira (mfo) SRU Developer application
[19:28] <meetingology> Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
[19:28] <meetingology> Motion carried
[19:28] <slashd> Congrats mfo !
[19:29] <marcustomlinson> Congrats mfo!
[19:29] <slashd> I'll take care the announcement and adding mfo in LP
[19:29] <mfo> slashd, \o/
[19:29] <mfo> thanks folks!
[19:29] <slashd> of the announcement ^^^
[19:29] <slashd> anything else you guys want to discuss ?
[19:30] <rbasak> Was there anything else int he agenda?
[19:30] <slashd> rbasak, no
[19:30] <rbasak> "Expiry policy for flavor developer team membership" -> did we do that?
[19:30] <rbasak> And "DMB elections for the expired 2 members"
[19:31] <slashd> cyphermox, carried over ^
[19:31] <slashd> for the expiry policy I missed that one
[19:31] <slashd> who is working on the expiry policy ?
[19:31] <cyphermox> I don't know
[19:31] <cyphermox> it was postponed last time because rbasak wasn't around, we weren't quorate
[19:31] <rbasak> I don't believe the DMB has ever looked at Steve's request because we never got quorum
[19:32] <cyphermox> (we had the votes but not more)
[19:32] <slashd> rbasak, right I'll have to read the link, I don't recall the details
[19:33] <slashd> cyphermox, do you recall the details of our previous discussion ?
[19:33] <slashd> I don't on top of my hea
[19:33] <slashd> head
[19:33] <cyphermox> we didn't discuss it AFAIK
[19:35] <slashd> should we vote for it now ?
[19:35] <rbasak> So I have some questions
[19:35] <slashd> how do you want to proceed ?
[19:35] <rbasak> What is the set of per flavour developer teams?
[19:35] <rbasak> Are cloud and server flavours?
[19:35] <rbasak> Or just the desktop flavours and ubuntustudio etc?
[19:36] <rbasak> To be clear I think it makes sense and am happy to implement, but to implement we need a definition I think :)
[19:36] <rbasak> vorlon: ^ around?
[19:37] <rbasak> My other request would be to ensure that the teams involved have had an opportunity to provide feedback, but I believe they have - we asked on the flavors list,e tc
[19:38] <rbasak> Maybe we can assume what the set of teams is and then vote on that.
[19:38] <slashd> right the mailling list gave them a chance to respond
[19:40] <slashd> sil2100, rbasak, cyphermox good to vote on have anything you want to address ?
[19:40] <slashd> or have ^
[19:42] <rbasak> I'm happy to vote (+1) but I'm not taking an action unless the set of teams gets defined :-)
[19:43] <rbasak> I suspect Steve will say that it's already well understood what the set is, but I'm not sure I do!
[19:43] <slashd> let's then postpone and wait until vorlon gets back to us then ? since he doesn't seems around at the moment.
[19:44] <rbasak> I'd like to avoid blocking on this for another quorate DMB meeting
[19:44] <rbasak> That might be a while.
[19:45] <rbasak> Can we just say that we assume the list is the desktop flavors only and vote on that?
[19:45] <slashd> cyphermox, sil2100 would you agree with that ?
[19:45] <cyphermox> ok
[19:45] <rbasak> (I'm counting Ubuntu Studio, but not Server nor Cloud)
[19:45] <sil2100> Ok
[19:46] <rbasak> And that we're presumably excluding Ubuntu Desktop
[19:46] <slashd> #vote Please vote on: 6-month expiry policy for flavor developer team membership
[19:46] <meetingology> Please vote on: Please vote on: 6-month expiry policy for flavor developer team membership
[19:46] <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)
[19:46] <rbasak> +1
[19:46] <meetingology> +1 received from rbasak
[19:46] <slashd> #voterequired 4
[19:47] <slashd> +1
[19:47] <meetingology> +1 received from slashd
[19:47] <sil2100> +1
[19:47] <meetingology> +1 received from sil2100
[19:49] <slashd> cyphermox ?
[19:52] <cyphermox> +1
[19:52] <meetingology> +1 received from cyphermox
[19:52] <slashd> #endvote
[19:52] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Please vote on: 6-month expiry policy for flavor developer team membership
[19:52] <meetingology> Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
[19:52] <meetingology> Motion carried
[19:53] <slashd> so I guess someone have to reply to the ML thread now ?
[19:53] <rbasak> I can take that action
[19:54] <slashd> rbasak, thanks
[19:54] <rbasak> And to implement
[19:54] <slashd> right
[19:54] <slashd> so I guess we are done for today
[19:54] <rbasak> Thank you for chairing slashd !
[19:54] <slashd> thanks guys
[19:54] <slashd> #endmeeting
[19:54] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Nov  4 19:54:42 2019 UTC.
[19:54] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2019/ubuntu-meeting.2019-11-04-18.59.moin.txt
[19:54] <slashd> \o
[19:57] <vorlon> rbasak, slashd sorry if this wasn't clear, but from my side it was implied that this is "community flavors", i.e. not those backed by Canonical and defined to be in main
[20:14] <rbasak> vorlon: thanks. Is there a list somewhere I can use?
[20:14] <rbasak> A superset would be fine
[20:14] <rbasak> Would going from the list of seed repositories work for example?
[20:24] <vorlon> rbasak: yes, the list of seed repositories would work
[20:25] <rbasak> OK thanks