[15:27] <dbungert> May I get a retest click for sshuttle?  I believe the problem is resolved by the addition to long_tests.  https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=impish&arch=amd64&package=sshuttle&trigger=sshuttle/1.0.5-1ubuntu1
[15:27] <dbungert> sorry, wrong window
[23:05] <madhens> Is anyone from the CC here?
[23:05] <toddy> madhens: :)
[23:05] <nhaines> \o
[23:05] <madhens> Hello! There's a meeting this evening, correct?
[23:06] <teward> madhens: yes, we're determining who chair is atm
[23:06] <teward> but because nobody's stepping up guess I'm chair today
[23:06] <teward> stdby 1 moment
[23:06] <nhaines> Then who is phone??
[23:06] <madhens> Gotcha
[23:06] <teward> talking with an officer RE: at this second RE: the small police blockade that was up a few minutes ago
[23:07] <toddy> thank you, teward :)
[23:07] <madhens> teward: Eek? Hope all is okay
[23:07] <teward> yeah all's good, suspicious package in the parallel street
[23:08] <teward> lots of lights and sirens so I checked in once it all died down
[23:08] <teward> anyways...
[23:08] <teward> #startmeeting Community Council Regular Meeting - May 5, 2021
[23:08] <meetingology> Meeting started at 23:08:42 UTC.  The chair is teward.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[23:08] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[23:08] <teward> #chairs madhens toddy jose teward
[23:09] <nhaines> Oh, I see how it is.
[23:09] <jose> you meant nhaines? :)
[23:09] <teward> #chair nhaines toddy jose teward
[23:09] <meetingology> Current chairs: jose, nhaines, teward, toddy
[23:09] <teward> yes, sorry, fubar command :)
[23:09] <teward> So, a regular community council meeting again.
[23:09] <teward> looks like the last meeting never happened because nothing to discuss so
[23:09] <teward> guess we'll start with some bits to the CC at the moment.
[23:10] <teward> #topic Forum Council
[23:10] <teward> The Forum Council, via Monica (madhens), told us they were about to expire.  Unilaterally at the time, I extended their roles for 30 days to the end of this month.
[23:10] <teward> at some point we need to handle an FC election process.
[23:10] <jose> do we have the process documented?
[23:10] <teward> but I believe Monica made a proposal that may make that moot
[23:11] <jose> I might've missed that?
[23:11] <teward> jose: ERR: Undocumented, we may need to create a new process from scratch.  Frankly, unless there's a major need to redo the FC (and everyone on it currently is still happy to be doing the job) I don't see a need to do much.
[23:11] <teward> jose: it went on the list
[23:11] <teward> i'll dredge it up when I get to that topic
[23:11] <madhens> I forwarded the request to the CC list
[23:11] <jose> ah I remember seeing that
[23:12] <teward> yep
[23:12] <teward> #topic "Confusion over ESM Messaging" - ongoing, ML
[23:13] <teward> we continue to hear back from Rhys on the process of updating ESM definitions, etc. including that there is a change in place in the next months(?) RE: UA-I coverage for the 'free' edition
[23:13] <teward> and what it does/doesn't provide.  (i.e. no limitations)
[23:13] <teward> I don't see any more actions that we need to do, as Nathan raised a question to RHys and that was answered I believe?
[23:14] <jose> yep, I think comms have been flowing good on that one
[23:14] <teward> yep, thank you madhens again for getting that one where it needs to go so things can be less confusing to the masses :)
[23:14] <jose> indeed
[23:14] <teward> #topic "Confusion over 'Community Team' naming" - src: Eickmeyer via ML
[23:14] <madhens> You're welcome! But yes, Rhys has been doing a great job
[23:15] <teward> #link https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/private/community-council/2021-May/019964.html
[23:15]  * Eickmeyer is here
[23:15] <teward> Erich Eickmeyer of the Ubuntu Studio team made known a concern to the CC regarding the Canonical Community Team's naming.
[23:15] <teward> FYI: this is teeeechnically out of the CC's purview.
[23:15] <teward> I'll let Eickmeyer summarize so madhens can be aware of his concern.
[23:15] <teward> *drags Eickmeyer to center-stage*
[23:15] <madhens> Go ahead!
[23:15] <teward> Eickmeyer: madhens is our contact on the Community Team at Canonical ;)
[23:16] <teward> she's always here, you have the floor for a couple minutes.
[23:16] <Eickmeyer> Possibly, but the name of the team is very ambiguous vis-a-vis the Community Council. It wasn't about the name of the IRC chatroom, but about the name of the teams.
[23:16] <Eickmeyer> Community Council and Community Team are way too close.
[23:17] <jose> I believe that we might want to think more about it and see if we can make any proposals.
[23:17] <Eickmeyer> It only adds to the confusion between Canonical and Ubuntu.
[23:17] <jose> Monica, if you, Rhys, or Ken have any ideas, happy to hear as well
[23:17] <nhaines> I submit that we are *already* the "Ubuntu Community Council": https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/what-is-the-ubuntu-community-council/706
[23:17] <teward> i don't disagree with Jose.  However, we should be very clear: whether Canonical chooses to rename the Community Team is their decision, not a CC one.  We can weigh in on our opinions, however it's up to Canonical to make the decision
[23:17] <teward> hence my pinging madhens on this one.
[23:17] <toddy> and the "Canonical Community Team"
[23:18] <Eickmeyer> nhaines: Correct we are. The concern is that the Community Team is a team at Canonical.
[23:18] <teward> madhens: fyi I'll forward that msg over to you for your awareness.
[23:18] <jose> Indeed. I don't think that this is a high-prio concern (at least for me) but would like to explore options
[23:18] <Eickmeyer> teward: Agreed, but we can definitely make recommendations.
[23:18] <teward> Eickmeyer: if we do anything, I'd like to make a change of the name to "Community Relations Team"
[23:18] <nhaines> Eickmeyer: Correct, but since there was the suggestion that we should change our name from "Community Council" to "Ubuntu Community Council," I thought it relevant.
[23:18] <teward> because that is more clear that that's more the team that's go-between between Community (Council or otherwise), and Canonical's internal teams.
[23:18] <madhens> I think I'd definitely like to loop Ken in, and whoever our Head of Community will be
[23:18] <teward> which... is madhens' job.
[23:18] <teward> madhens: 👍
[23:19] <teward> i'll forward you the email, but i'd like for the CC to be kept in the loop if you do make a change to the name, and we can make some proposed names as well.
[23:19] <madhens> And I think Community Relations or Community Engagement is a better description of what we do.
[23:19] <jose> I don't really think this is a friction point, but happy to be proven wrong or to hear other points of view.
[23:19] <Eickmeyer> Correct, teward, except that there have been recent news articles about the "Community Team" and that can spark confusion.
[23:19] <nhaines> Aww, I was going to suggest Community Engagement Team sounded dynamic and buzzwordy.  I was beat to the punch.  :)
[23:19] <nhaines> Eickmeyer: That's more of a problem for the news outlets.
[23:19] <teward> Eickmeyer: that's more a UWN problem than our issue
[23:20] <Eickmeyer> teward: It wasn't just uWN.
[23:20] <teward> if you want we can have madhens go after em about it
[23:20] <nhaines> And the sooner resolved, the less it will matter.
[23:20] <madhens> I think we used that term because it was what had been used in the past.
[23:20] <teward> Eickmeyer: UWN sent the article, others picked it up
[23:20] <teward> i think at the MOMENT your point that there's confusion is valid
[23:20] <teward> but not the highest priority thing on the CC's plate at this moment
[23:20] <teward> (and more a Canonical executive call not CC)
[23:20] <teward> my 2 cents with the hat on :)
[23:20] <Eickmeyer> No, it's not a huge priority, but I think there should be a recommendation from our end.
[23:21] <Eickmeyer> Maybe not today, but I'd like to see some brainstorming.
[23:21] <Eickmeyer> Again, maybe not today.
[23:21] <jose> If anything, the recommendation should be to the media outlet. Happy to reach out to any of them - I have some contacts in the OSS media world too.
[23:21] <madhens> But we can forward that proposal to Ken and then on to Dean (and Mark if needed). So put one together?
[23:21] <teward> CC can discuss internally on name proposals, and provide them.  You're free to submit recommendations to the CC as well.  But yes, the MEdia Outlets need to eb the ones yelled at ;)
[23:21] <teward> madhens: i think that's a good idea, it won't be a "tonight" brainstorming session though I think ;)
[23:21] <madhens> To be fair, they were only reporting what we wrote.
[23:21] <madhens> Because we picked up the previous nomenclature.
[23:22] <jose> I think we should keep looking into the root of the issue, but I agree it's not something we can do in the span of this meeting
[23:23]  * Eickmeyer was just hoping it would be a discussion in the email and never intended it to be added as an agenda item
[23:23] <teward> Eickmeyer: one of the things we bring up is 'current ML items" sometimes ;)
[23:23] <teward> and besides, Monica's here so :)
[23:23] <Eickmeyer> teward: Monica was CC'd.
[23:23] <teward> looks like it got stripped from the mail system then
[23:23] <teward> 👍
[23:23] <Eickmeyer> Probably. I CC'd Rhys and Monica.
[23:24] <jose> I wonder who didn't hit Reply All... looks at teward
[23:24] <teward> jose: i didn't reply to it ;)
[23:24] <Eickmeyer> ^
[23:24] <teward> in any case, I think we can continue the discussion since we also have Rhys voicing in on it as well :)
[23:25] <nhaines> So to summarize, this topic has been raised and we are making good progress on it.
[23:25] <nhaines> Perhaps in a meeting or two we'll have some nice results.  :)
[23:25] <teward> yep.  :)
[23:25] <Eickmeyer> Indeed. :)
[23:26] <teward> I... don't see any other items on *my* list or in the ML that still need our attention that I didn't bring up (latest being the FC issue)
[23:26] <teward> anyone else have anything?
[23:26]  * Eickmeyer salts his alarm for not going off at the right time
[23:26] <jose> not on my end, things are flowing okay
[23:26] <toddy> teward: no, I have nothing.
[23:27] <teward> I've got nothing myself, that I haven't otherwise raised up.
[23:27] <teward> nhaines: anything from you?
[23:27] <nhaines> teward: no, I'm satisfied.
[23:27] <madhens> I think the only thing I had was the Forum Council in the context of the proposal, but that's all.
[23:27] <teward> ah that's right i forgot about that
[23:27] <Eickmeyer> Combination Forum/IRC Council, the Communication Council.
[23:27] <teward> #topic Community Team Proposal: Communications Council
[23:28] <teward> madhens: this one's your lead you sent to the ML, if you want to bring it up here.
[23:28] <teward> *gives madhens the floor for now*
[23:28] <madhens> So, this was sent probably right as you all modified the IRCC to 3 instead of 5
[23:28] <madhens> So there was a bit of a 'ships in the night' thing happening there.
[23:29] <teward> at the request of the existing IRCC, yes.  Unfortunate that happened.
[23:30] <madhens> But we did want to float the proposal as a way to perhaps consolidate governance in the hopes of keeping them more sustainable, and to allow other community platforms to have a means of staying in touch with and involved with the rest of the community - but in a non-voting way.
[23:31] <madhens> And if we did end up adding another 'official' communication platform, like Mattermost, then we'd already have governance for them, since this council would be tied to function, not a specific platform.
[23:31] <madhens> So, those were our primary reasons, and I'd be happy to answer any questions or concerns, no matter how you decided to go forward (or not) on it.
[23:33] <toddy> But the specific platforms are very different from each other. I don't know if it makes sense to have the channels run from one communication council.
[23:34] <madhens> I think that was the intent of 'peripheral' members, who could just attend  for coordination purposes, not governance. But I agree, they are very different.
[23:34] <nhaines> I find the idea intriguing.
[23:34] <toddy> But I haven't really dealt with the matter yet either.
[23:36] <toddy> Do we actually have any other official communication channels besides the forum and IRC at the moment?
[23:37] <toddy> all things in Telegram, Slack, foobar are not official I think
[23:37] <nhaines> Wasn't there something in Rocket.Chat?
[23:38] <madhens> Is AskUbuntu official?
[23:38] <toddy> nhaines: yes, in Rocket:chat was also something
[23:38] <nhaines> Yes, AskUbuntu is.
[23:38] <toddy> but I think it is dead
[23:39] <toddy> A year ago, I looked into it and I have not seen any activity there.
[23:39] <toddy> Maybe it was two years ago
[23:39] <madhens> Also, I think Ubuntu Discourse would be included
[23:40] <toddy> We have quite a mess there with those different platforms.
[23:41] <toddy> Maybe we should really sort this out a bit.
[23:41] <madhens> Fragmentation is something that does happen - we wanted a way for official platforms to govern AND unofficial platforms to connect and coordinate. Maybe those are two separate things.
[23:41] <nhaines> Well Ubuntu Discourse is the Ubuntu Community Hub.  I'm not sure who's in charge of that.
[23:42] <madhens> But I know one thing we're trying to do is find and meet the community where they are at - and that's a lot more places in 2021.
[23:42] <nhaines> I think it's a good idea to have some type of shared contact point, even if it's just a mailing list.
[23:42] <madhens> nhaines: It's kind of sad I have no idea either, but I will ask. We do have a lot of admin and moderators.
[23:43] <teward> madhens: i think we have to keep the existing councils in place though for the purpose of FC's things.  FC members are admins.  That's going to be a consideration point
[23:43] <madhens> Good point! And I figured tonight would be an initial conversation.
[23:43] <teward> madhens: and RE: Discourse, some of us have mod who don't need it, but only need it for a specific section (and it was a issue we couldn't get past because of how Discourse is made)
[23:45] <toddy> ah, here is a list of official platforms: https://ubuntu.com/community
[23:46] <madhens> We will also work on trying to clear up some of the Discourse things, while acknowledging some things we have to do because of just how Discourse is
[23:47] <toddy> How do we continue with the topic?
[23:47] <toddy> Should we continue?
[23:50] <madhens> We support any way you all want to continue, or if you don't want to continue.
[23:51] <nhaines> I want to sit down and look at the proposals again and think about it some more.
[23:51] <nhaines> Because I think the idea of a shared communication method for any of these issues would be useful for users.
[23:52] <toddy> Then we share more ideas about the ML?
[23:52] <teward> sorry i'm getting called away for work at the moment
[23:52] <teward> i think continuing the discussion on the ML is a good idea, it's not something we're going to solve in the scope of this meeting :)
[23:53] <teward> but we should continue to keep in touch on the issue and madhens please share any more thoughts you have on the matter there as well
[23:53] <madhens> Of course!
[23:53] <teward> I don't have anything else, anyone else got anything?  'cause i'mma have to nip out for work in about 3 minutes
[23:53] <madhens> That's it from me
[23:54] <toddy> ok, I think I need to go to bed.
[23:54] <madhens> Thank you all so much!
[23:54] <nhaines> I'm good.
[23:54] <nhaines> madhens: thanks for being here and bringing up these interesting topics.  :)
[23:54] <toddy> madhens: thank you for bringing up the topics.
[23:54] <madhens> Of course :)
[23:56] <toddy> #endmeeting
[23:56] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 23:56:17 UTC.  Minutes at https://new.ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2021/ubuntu-meeting.2021-05-05-23.08.moin.txt
[23:58] <madhens> Thanks again all. Night!