[15:26] <cpaelzer> FYI I'll most likely be slightly delayed
[15:31] <sarnold> good morning
[15:31] <slyon> hello o/
[15:31] <didrocks> hey o/
[15:32] <cpaelzer> a few more minutes
[15:36] <cpaelzer> now
[15:36] <cpaelzer> sorry
[15:36] <cpaelzer> #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status
[15:36] <meetingology> Meeting started at 15:36:19 UTC.  The chair is cpaelzer.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[15:36] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[15:36] <cpaelzer> Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage
[15:36] <cpaelzer> #topic current component mismatches
[15:36] <cpaelzer> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[15:36] <cpaelzer> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg
[15:36] <cpaelzer> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg
[15:36] <cpaelzer> nothing totally new in non-proposed
[15:36] <jamespage> o/
[15:36] <cpaelzer> licensecheck -> perl things - didn#t we ahve thta int he past?
[15:37] <slyon> licensecheck is new in -proposed
[15:37] <slyon> seems they've switched build-depends again
[15:37] <cpaelzer> non-yay
[15:37] <slyon> I need to investigate the reasoning
[15:37] <sarnold> cpaelzer: that might have been lintian -> perl things
[15:37] <cpaelzer> slyon: but still that seems like a foundations tackle
[15:37] <slyon> ack
[15:37] <cpaelzer> sarnold: it is a reoccuring pattern for both
[15:37] <cpaelzer> other news here is OVS -> xdp-tools
[15:37] <cpaelzer> fnordahl: has already filed a MIR
[15:37] <sarnold> ack
[15:37] <cpaelzer> I have reviewed it this morning
[15:38] <cpaelzer> it LGTM, but needs security
[15:38] <cpaelzer> so one more for your queue
[15:38] <cpaelzer> jamespage: while we have you here, jaraco.text is on openstack i guess
[15:38] <cpaelzer> and this week i see MIRs linked
[15:38] <cpaelzer> so that processing seems to be started
[15:38] <cpaelzer> *reading*
[15:38] <jamespage> yeah I raised those as corey was busy on some other stuff
[15:39] <cpaelzer> ok so these will look for reviewers in the next section
[15:39] <cpaelzer> nothing else in mismatches AFAICS
[15:39] <jamespage> great
[15:39] <cpaelzer> #topic New MIRs
[15:39] <cpaelzer> Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing
[15:39] <cpaelzer> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/?field.searchtext=&orderby=-date_last_updated&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&assignee_option=none&field.assignee=&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir
[15:39] <cpaelzer> duktape (still/again ?)
[15:39] <cpaelzer> and the two python bits for jaraco
[15:39] <cpaelzer> I can do one of the pythons tomorrow morning I guess
[15:40] <cpaelzer> taking autocommand
[15:40] <cpaelzer> what has changed on duktape ... ?
[15:40] <cpaelzer> didrocks: marked it as new
[15:40] <slyon> I can take the other python thingy
[15:40] <cpaelzer> maybe the prep is complete and the decision was they need it
[15:40] <cpaelzer> ok slyon, done
[15:41] <cpaelzer> so this one is still looking for a reviewer https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/duktape/+bug/1997417
[15:41] <didrocks> IMHO, there are some parts that are missing still
[15:41] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 1997417 in duktape (Ubuntu) "[MIR] duktape" [Undecided, New]
[15:41] <didrocks> like no tests
[15:41] <cpaelzer> joalif: didrocks: jamespage: ^^ who could have a look ?
[15:41] <didrocks> (and I don’t think the reporters should skip section or have TODO before filing the MIR)
[15:41] <didrocks> should we start doing an entire review or just mention from the get go "this section is missing, please file it?"
[15:42] <cpaelzer> didrocks: depends on the todo, if it is like "we already know but will do FOO before it is complete" fine, but if it is "this is all bad and we know it, have fun" then no
[15:42] <cpaelzer> didrocks: in incompletely filed MIRs I have in the past done partial reviews just pointing out the obvious
[15:42] <didrocks> I’m telling that because I have the same issue with gnome-sushi, I did the entire review, but there is no tests, it was TODO to write a manual test plan and nothing since it was opened a month ago
[15:42] <cpaelzer> didrocks: and saying they should ping me again once they think it is actually ready
[15:43] <cpaelzer> didrocks: then gnome-sushi goes to incomplete and will starve there until provided
[15:43] <didrocks> right, but I feel that sometimes, we are doing the reporter part compliance check because the reporter hasn’t
[15:43] <cpaelzer> that and similar things do not block the review entirely though
[15:43] <didrocks> like dependencies on universe and so on
[15:43] <cpaelzer> yes, if the reporter seems lazy just ask them to do it
[15:43] <didrocks> so basically, they are relying on the MIR team to do the work
[15:43] <didrocks> ack then
[15:43] <cpaelzer> but if they have done their due diligence and just want the review to know if there is more to resovle -> that seems fine
[15:44] <cpaelzer> I'm ok to make this a case-by-case call
[15:44] <didrocks> I will not shy away for postponing the reviews if some obvious sections are missing then
[15:44] <cpaelzer> as it is hard to formalize a perfect rule for it
[15:44] <didrocks> yeah
[15:44] <cpaelzer> didrocks: yeah, but let them know why you postpone
[15:44] <cpaelzer> so do a bug update to tell them why
[15:44] <cpaelzer> from that moment on, it can be incomplete until provided
[15:44] <didrocks> ack then
[15:45] <cpaelzer> didrocks: would you be able to look at duktape thne?
[15:45] <didrocks> I’ll take ducktape
[15:45] <didrocks> without a c :)
[15:45] <cpaelzer> didrocks: or was this another of the "known incomplete" cases?
[15:45] <didrocks> but is is known incomplete
[15:45] <didrocks> the test section is entirely skipped
[15:45] <cpaelzer> ok, then feel free to point that out OR do a full review which includes pointint ig out - up to you
[15:45] <cpaelzer> s/pointint ig/pointing it/
[15:46] <cpaelzer> thanks, assigned
[15:46] <cpaelzer> #topic Incomplete bugs / questions
[15:46] <cpaelzer> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[15:46] <cpaelzer> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/?field.searchtext=&orderby=-date_last_updated&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir
[15:46] <jbicha> yes, bandali hadn't finished preparing the duktape MIR but was planning to this week
[15:46] <cpaelzer> ok jbicha, thanks for the FYI
[15:46] <cpaelzer> we consider it incomplete and not yet assign eit then
[15:46] <cpaelzer> *unassignign didrocks*
[15:47] <cpaelzer> duktape and sishi was discussed already
[15:47] <cpaelzer> the most recent other update is cpdb-libs
[15:47] <cpaelzer> reading ...
[15:47] <cpaelzer> 4 years old for printing ... ?
[15:48] <cpaelzer> ok, just an update about the Debian side of it
[15:49] <cpaelzer> no action (by us) needed as of now
[15:49] <cpaelzer> #topic MIR related Security Review Queue
[15:49] <cpaelzer> Mission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable?
[15:49] <cpaelzer> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-security/+bugs?field.searchtext=%5BMIR%5D&assignee_option=choose&field.assignee=ubuntu-security&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir
[15:49] <cpaelzer> Internal link
[15:49] <cpaelzer> - ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect
[15:49] <cpaelzer> - ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much
[15:49] <cpaelzer> #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594
[15:49] <cpaelzer> as expected the queue grows sarnold
[15:49] <cpaelzer> sarnold: how is the planned increase in workforce to review going?
[15:51] <cpaelzer> on ruby-rack and ruby-sinatra - did you (and eslerm) come to conclusion with Kanashiro how we proceed?
[15:51] <sarnold> cpaelzer: it's going well, mark has been working on several MIRs so far, and sbeattie and aburrage and I had a discussion yesterday; we'll distribute tasks to team members soon, and would like to remind stakeholders to ensure the prioritizations in jira match their needs
[15:51] <cpaelzer> AFAIK the intend was to approve it but require to move to the new major before 24.04 - that would work
[15:51] <cpaelzer> sarnold: to match our need, what would you like most to reflect "has to go in 23.04" ?
[15:52] <cpaelzer> sarnold: flags, deadlines, due dates, comments, ... ?
[15:52] <sarnold> yes; it'd also be nice to have a stronger 'backup plan' idea in place should our strong commitment fade
[15:52] <cpaelzer> The backup plan is complain a lot and then crawl begging for forgiveness at anyone we committed our items to
[15:52] <sarnold> :)
[15:53] <sarnold> cpaelzer: I think the little prioritization chevrons, straight lines, etc, in jira is the way to reflect the priorities
[15:53] <sarnold> though text descriptions of *why* might be very nice
[15:54] <sarnold> something else we discussed yesterday is libssh2, the last MIR didn't go great.. and we were wondering, if cargo-in-main is intended for our building needs, do we *need* remote access stuff in this cargo?
[15:55] <cpaelzer> that is for schopin to answer I guess
[15:55] <sarnold> or, is our cargo packaging expected to be useful outside of our builders? breaking it doesn't seem great, but distro-packaged language-specific tooling always feels like it's missing functionality vs upstream stuff that changes every two or three months
[15:56] <sarnold> it doesn't have to be figured out today :)
[15:56] <cpaelzer> ok
[15:57] <cpaelzer> I've done a few prio updates to reflect the current state
[15:57] <sarnold> we're also looking at moving our meetings around to better match the pulses
[15:57] <cpaelzer> back to hoping you get enough workforce
[15:57] <sarnold> both the internal task distribution meeting and the office hours meeting
[15:57] <schopin> sarnold: we use cargo to do the vendoring, which usually will do some networking stuff.
[15:57] <cpaelzer> one day *dream* those reviews will happen early in the cycle and findings not need to be adressed last minute :-)
[15:57] <sarnold> schopin: ack, makes perfect sense. thanks
[15:57] <cpaelzer> going on then ...
[15:58] <cpaelzer> #topic Any other business?
[15:58] <sarnold> nothing from me
[15:58] <slyon> there's bug #1973033 (and possibly some other hidden, related MIR updates for jammy) – not actionable for us right now. Just a reminder for everybody to resolve/review their assigned, "hidden" Jammy MIRs from last year.
[15:58] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 1973033 in wpebackend-fdo (Ubuntu Jammy) "[MIR] wpebackend-fdo" [High, Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1973033
[15:58] <slyon> nothing else from me
[15:58] <cpaelzer> as a heads up for sarnold mostly, alex has been aware since prague - but isc-kea will also enter the 23.04 deadline security review queue soon
[15:58] <cpaelzer> we have been working on tests for a while (to prevent the case didrocks mentioned to be incomplete)
[15:58] <sarnold> cpaelzer: oh nice! is that packaged in debian yet? I thought it was entirely unpackaged :(
[15:58] <cpaelzer> but given the time of the cycle we will enter it to the queue this week
[15:59] <cpaelzer> sarnold: we have updated it for several cycles by now
[15:59] <slyon> sarnold: we'll most probably also have netplan related MIRs for python-rich + dependencies for 23.04 (but not sure if they need sec-review)
[15:59] <cpaelzer> paride in particular
[15:59] <sarnold> aha, very glad to hear it
[15:59] <didrocks> nice!
[15:59] <cpaelzer> I mostly mention so you know for capacity expectations for you sarnold
[15:59] <cpaelzer> ok, time is up
[15:59] <cpaelzer> thank you all
[15:59] <cpaelzer> !
[15:59] <cpaelzer> rushing to the next meeting ...
[15:59] <sarnold> thanks cpaelzer, all :)
[15:59] <cpaelzer> #endmeeting
[15:59] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 15:59:58 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-01-10-15.36.moin.txt
[16:00] <slyon> thanks!
[16:00] <didrocks> thanks!
[16:00] <sarnold> slyon: ooh cool :) my initial guess is that wouldn't necessarily hit the security requirements, they feel like they'll only accept inputs from admins, and write outputs for admins, hehe :)
[19:59] <rbasak-mobile> o/
[20:00] <amurray> o/
[20:00] <rbasak-mobile> I messed up dinner timing so I'm going to try and use voice recognition
[20:01] <sil2100> o/
[20:01]  * vorlon waves
[20:01] <seb128> hey
[20:03] <vorlon> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda doesn't say whose turn it is to chair since we were straddling an election
[20:03] <vorlon> does anyone want to volunteer? unfortunately I have a team daily standup that now conflicts with this time slot so I'm not a good choice for chairing because I have to divide my attention
[20:04] <sil2100> I guess I can try chairing
[20:04] <vorlon> and sounds like rbasak-mobile might have trouble chairing, so sil2100 seems the last choice with experience :)
[20:04] <sil2100> We didn't elect a chair last time because we didn't know who would be on the TB!
[20:05] <sil2100> Give me a moment though
[20:05] <sil2100> #startmeeting Technical Board
[20:05] <meetingology> Meeting started at 20:05:40 UTC.  The chair is sil2100.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[20:05] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[20:05] <sil2100> #topic Welcome new TB members!
[20:06] <rbasak-mobile> Welcome!
[20:06] <sil2100> Hello seb128, amurray o/
[20:06] <amurray> thanks
[20:06] <sil2100> Glad to have you on board
[20:06] <seb128> hey :)
[20:06] <sil2100> #topic Action review
[20:07] <sil2100> ACTION: (everyone) review the Ubuntu Backports Team Charter for ratification
[20:07] <seb128> thanks, I'm honored to be there :)
[20:07] <sil2100> Let's start with action items, first one is this ^
[20:08] <sil2100> hm, do we have any links for this topic to share with those that have no context?
[20:08] <sil2100> (or forgot ;) )
[20:08] <rbasak-mobile> It would be nice to make some more progress on this. The most recent discussion was a while back on the technical board mailing list.
[20:08] <amurray> so this may sound dumb but I went looking everywhere and couldn't find the charter - there is a blank wiki page with that name - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports/Charter
[20:09] <sil2100> I remember this being discussed on the mailing list. I'll try to find the link and add it to the agenda
[20:10] <sil2100> But if anyone has it handy from the ML archives, feel free to post it here
[20:10] <vorlon> sil2100: shoving an item onto the agenda wiki page late (sorry)
[20:10] <vorlon> root of thread: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2022-March/002620.html
[20:10] <rbasak-mobile> The best way to catch up might be to look at the mailing list archive and together with the history of that wiki page lined up by time
[20:11] <sil2100> vorlon: thanks!
[20:12] <sil2100> seb128, amurray: if you could go through the thread at some point, would be good if we could discuss that on the next meeting
[20:12] <sil2100> I need to refresh my memory as well
[20:12] <seb128> I will do before the next meeting
[20:12] <amurray> sure, will do
[20:12] <sil2100> It slipped through my hands a bit
[20:12] <sil2100> ACTION: rbasak to finalize third-party seeded snap security policy
[20:12] <sil2100> rbasak-mobile: do you still need some time for that?
[20:13] <sil2100> Ah, let me put the previous one as a carry over
[20:13] <sil2100> #action (everyone) review the Ubuntu Backports Team Charter for ratification
[20:13] <meetingology> ACTION: (everyone) review the Ubuntu Backports Team Charter for ratification
[20:14] <sil2100> Ok, I'll assume that's the case and carry over it for now
[20:14] <sil2100> There was a lot of progress done there so I'm not worried about it
[20:14] <sil2100> #action rbasak to finalize third-party seeded snap security policy
[20:14] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to finalize third-party seeded snap security policy
[20:14] <sil2100> ACTION: vorlon to circle around with store, snapcraft, et all, and revise the snap source revision policy to be more clear with regards to rebuildability and GPL compliance.
[20:14] <vorlon> I think we keep saying this is now superseded by the previous action item
[20:14] <vorlon> but it hasn't gotten dropped from the agenda
[20:14] <sil2100> True
[20:15] <rbasak-mobile> This entire group of topics is making good progress.
[20:15] <sil2100> Let's drop it then, it's related
[20:15] <sil2100> ACTION: sil2100 to start a draft summarizing the OEM archive portion of the meeting which x-nox and TB will review, edit, and ratify before we move on to figuring out the next step
[20:15] <sil2100> ...sadly, carry over. But I'd like to finally do this
[20:15] <sil2100> #action sil2100 to start a draft summarizing the OEM archive portion of the meeting which x-nox and TB will review, edit, and ratify before we move on to figuring out the next step
[20:15] <meetingology> ACTION: sil2100 to start a draft summarizing the OEM archive portion of the meeting which x-nox and TB will review, edit, and ratify before we move on to figuring out the next step
[20:15] <rbasak-mobile> I'll need to catch Andy up on it. Seb already knows through the desktop team
[20:15] <sil2100> ACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification
[20:16] <sil2100> I think this is rather lower priority nowadays
[20:16] <rbasak-mobile> No progress, focused on the other things
[20:16] <sil2100> Do you think it still makes sense to have on the agenda?
[20:16] <amurray> rbasak-mobile: i'm alex not andy :) sadly I don't play tennis
[20:16] <rbasak-mobile> I think so. The other things are making good progress and I'm hoping to get them closed off soon
[20:16] <sil2100> Or should we get back to it when we see issues with DMB inactivity?
[20:16] <rbasak-mobile> Sorry!
[20:16] <sil2100> rbasak-mobile: ACK
[20:16] <sil2100> #action rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification
[20:16] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification
[20:17] <sil2100> ACTION: cyphermox to figure out next steps to improve TB processes previously discussed
[20:17] <sil2100> So cyphermox sadly is no longet part of the TB, so we need to move this to someone else
[20:17] <sil2100> ...though the action item is very vague
[20:17] <rbasak-mobile> This is related to the community bugs
[20:17] <seb128> right, I was going to ask, what is 'previously discussed'?
[20:18] <amurray> I can try and take it but would need more context
[20:19] <rbasak-mobile> I don't remember the detail, sorry. It was something to do with making it easier for the general public to see what progress we were making by using the bug tracker of some form. We did already have a Launchpad project for this, but I think there was some talk of combining it with this other thing.
[20:19] <sil2100> Okay, I sadly also don't remember the context, might have been that I was absent during the meeting
[20:19] <sil2100> amurray: I'll assign this to you then, one of the tasks being 'figuring out exactly what it's all about' ;)
[20:20] <amurray> ok I can try dig through the previous meeting logs and will see what I can find - first step then will be to familiarise myself with it all so I can try and report back next meeting on what I have found
[20:20] <sil2100> #action amurray to figure out next steps to improve TB processes previously discussed - and to figure out what the previous discussion was about
[20:20] <meetingology> ACTION: amurray to figure out next steps to improve TB processes previously discussed - and to figure out what the previous discussion was about
[20:20] <sil2100> ACTION: vorlon to reply to the Edubuntu ML thread with a description of what we need from Erich before we can proceed.
[20:20] <vorlon> oops - carry over
[20:20] <sil2100> Right, so Edubuntu
[20:20] <sil2100> ACK o/
[20:20] <sil2100> #action vorlon to reply to the Edubuntu ML thread with a description of what we need from Erich before we can proceed.
[20:20] <meetingology> ACTION: vorlon to reply to the Edubuntu ML thread with a description of what we need from Erich before we can proceed.
[20:21] <sil2100> ACTION: sil2100 to follow up with the release team to establish consensus on Joshua's official flavour status for Cinammon.
[20:21] <sil2100> ...still pinging people! I even pinged peeps yesterday ;)
[20:21] <sil2100> I'll carry this over and continue poking vorlon, bdmurray and ginggs
[20:22] <sil2100> #action sil2100 to follow up with the release team to establish consensus on Joshua's official flavour status for Cinammon.
[20:22] <meetingology> ACTION: sil2100 to follow up with the release team to establish consensus on Joshua's official flavour status for Cinammon.
[20:22] <sil2100> Phew, quite a lot of action items here
[20:22] <sil2100> #topic Meeting schedule w/ new TB constitutency
[20:22] <sil2100> ...is this about checking if the meeting schedule right now is good for everyone?
[20:22] <vorlon> how does this time work for everyone?
[20:22] <vorlon> yeah
[20:23] <vorlon> fwiw my availability is again flipping to opposite weeks at the end of January
[20:23] <seb128> the current time works fine for me
[20:23] <sil2100> For me it's 'okayish', and I don't mind if the weeks need to be flipped
[20:23] <amurray> the current time works for me too
[20:23] <seb128> flipping weeks would also wfm
[20:23] <amurray> same
[20:23] <rbasak-mobile> +1
[20:24] <sil2100> Excellent o/
[20:24] <sil2100> #topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item)
[20:24] <rbasak-mobile> What will be the date of the next meeting then?
[20:25] <sil2100> There is the new e-mail from Steve about the new Xubuntu Minimal flavor, but I think it's a no-action for the TB
[20:25] <sil2100> rbasak-mobile: 24th I suppose? vorlon are you still fine to attend that one?
[20:25] <vorlon> oh er sorry, as mentioned my attention is divided
[20:25] <vorlon> I should've said that this time now overlaps on an ongoing basis with a team daily standup
[20:26] <vorlon> would 30 minutes later work for people?
[20:26] <rbasak-mobile> +1
[20:26] <amurray> 30 mins later wfm
[20:26] <sil2100> I think it would be okay
[20:26] <vorlon> sil2100: yes, 24th is ok, but then I would need it changed for February
[20:26] <seb128> I prefer the current time, I could do it later but I might have to drop before the end sometimes
[20:27] <sil2100> vorlon: ok, let me add an action item to deal with the schedule change
[20:27] <sil2100> I'll assign it to vorlon ! ;)
[20:27] <vorlon> haha ok
[20:27] <sil2100> #action vorlon to request change of the meeting weeks for the TB meeting starting February
[20:27] <meetingology> ACTION: vorlon to request change of the meeting weeks for the TB meeting starting February
[20:28] <sil2100> As for the hour change, hmm
[20:28] <sil2100> Let's maybe do this at the same time as we switch weeks, how about that?
[20:29] <vorlon> seb128 mentioned possibly having to leave early if we move it a half hour later
[20:29] <rbasak-mobile> Sure
[20:29] <sil2100> Maybe we can poke Matthieu to move the standup or something
[20:29] <vorlon> are there *later* times that would work well for all the European folks?
[20:29] <sil2100> And then no change to the meeting hour would be needed
[20:29] <vorlon> (amurray and I can obviously do plenty later)
[20:30] <sil2100> I'd recommend everyone think about this for the next meeting, and we'll discuss this as part of the above action item
[20:30] <sil2100> But as said, maybe no hour change might be needed
[20:30] <vorlon> I can ask Matthieu; I'm sure the concern will be that he can't move it *every* day so having inconsistency on just Tuesdays might not be preferred
[20:30] <seb128> no, the reason I mentioned dropping is that the current time is ending up at 10pm which is getting late to be at the computer without creating personal conflicts
[20:31] <vorlon> seb128: ok
[20:32] <sil2100> Okay, let's move on for now and get back to this next time. I'll chat with Matthieu as well
[20:32] <sil2100> #topic Check up on community bugs (standing item)
[20:32] <sil2100> ...no new bugs
[20:32] <sil2100> #topic Select a chair for the next meeting
[20:32] <sil2100> Any volunteers?
[20:33] <vorlon> since you did it today, should we just pick up from there w/ the rotation?
[20:34] <sil2100> Okay, makes sense. Looking at how people are ordered by name on the LP page, next person would be amurray !
[20:34] <sil2100> #topic AOB
[20:34] <sil2100> Any other business?
[20:35] <vorlon> nothing from me
[20:36] <amurray> nor me
[20:36] <seb128> not from me
[20:36] <sil2100> If there's anything to discuss, remember you can always use the techboard ML
[20:36] <sil2100> #endmeeting
[20:36] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 20:36:41 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-01-10-20.05.moin.txt
[20:36] <sil2100> o/
[20:36] <sil2100> Thanks everyone!
[20:37] <rbasak-mobile> Thanks for chairing!
[20:37] <vorlon> thanks!
[20:37] <amurray> cheers
[20:37] <seb128> thanks!
[20:38] <amurray> it'll be my first time driving meetingology when I chair next meeting so you'll have to bear with me
[20:38] <sil2100> No worries!
[20:39] <sil2100> Ok, updated the Agenda for next time
[20:39] <sil2100> o/