[15:59] <rbasak> o/
[16:01] <sil2100> o/
[16:01] <bdmurray> o/
[16:01] <seb128> hey, I'm around but will need to leave early
[16:03] <sil2100> Who was supposed to chair today?
[16:03] <sil2100> There seems to be no mention of that on the agenda
[16:04] <teward> *burps* wasnt me thats all i know
[16:04] <utkarsh21021> \o
[16:05] <teward> *sips coffee*
[16:05] <teward> i'm also here via phone so slower reply is guaranteed but i'm here
[16:05] <utkarsh21021> sil2100: for past couple of months, I've been chairing except for the last one or two times when rbasak chaired ;)
[16:05] <utkarsh21021> I can chair this time, too
[16:05] <utkarsh21021> #startmeeting Developer Membership Board
[16:05] <meetingology> Meeting started at 16:05:56 UTC.  The chair is utkarsh21021.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[16:05] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[16:06] <sil2100> huh, somehow I remember chairing not so long ago
[16:06]  * kanashiro[m] waves
[16:06] <sil2100> Since I was fixing up dates on the Agenda as part of my post-chairing updates
[16:06] <utkarsh21021> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda
[16:07] <utkarsh21021> #topic Core Dev Applications
[16:07] <utkarsh21021> #subtopic Nick Rosbrook (enr0n)
[16:07] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: hi! \o
[16:07] <enr0n> o/
[16:07] <utkarsh21021> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/enr0n/CoreDeveloperApplication
[16:08] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: can you please introduce yourself?
[16:08] <sil2100> o/
[16:08] <enr0n> Hi! I'm Nick Rosbrook (enr0n). I am a Canonical employee, and have been working on the Foundations team for just over a year now.
[16:09] <enr0n> I live in Vermont, USA :)
[16:10] <rbasak> o/
[16:11] <rbasak> Hi!
[16:11] <teward> o/
[16:11] <rbasak> Have you done any merges apart from procps and systemd?
[16:12] <enr0n> I recently worked on one for pcre2, because I was TIL, but it turned out we were able to sync because the original FTBFS issue had gone away.
[16:12] <rbasak> Have you been involved in any transitions?
[16:12] <utkarsh21021> uh? is it a no-show?
[16:12] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: hellu? are you around?
[16:12] <teward> (rbasak stole my question lol)
[16:13] <rbasak> utkarsh21021: I can see enr0n's messages
[16:13] <teward> utkarsh21021: unignore everyone on your ignores
[16:13] <enr0n> Yes, did you not see my last message?
[16:13] <bdmurray> I did
[16:13] <teward> utkarsh21021: then fetch me coffee :P
[16:13] <enr0n> Ah, ok. I will continue with rbasak's question in the mean time.
[16:13] <utkarsh21021> I mean if they were around, they'd have gotten back the first time :P
[16:13] <utkarsh21021> there!
[16:14] <utkarsh21021> rbasak is in a rush, I didn't even open the stage to questions
[16:14] <enr0n> I have not worked on a "traditional" transition. A large part of my work is centered around systemd, and while systemd has a large number of revdeps, it does not trigger the type of transitions that I normally think of. E.g. new toolchain versions, soname bumps/ABI changes, etc/
[16:15] <utkarsh21021> damn my IRC client
[16:15] <sil2100> enr0n: I like it that you have endorsements from your most frequent sponsors. But I only see a few sponsorships from people from outside Foundations. Did you cooperate with other non-team-member uploaders on any uploads/changes to Ubuntu?
[16:16] <bdmurray> Does my being on the QA team count?
[16:16] <utkarsh21021> no :P
[16:17] <enr0n> sil2100: During my +1 maintenance work, I typically put a note in #ubuntu-devel to see if anyone is interested in sponsoring (after also making sure the LP is the the sponsore queue, but that does not usually work). I also try to forward bugs to debian early, and often the Debian maintainer will pick up a change of mine, and it syncs to Ubuntu before a Ubuntu upload has happened
[16:18] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: another question: why did you not get PPU for systemd, et al or perhaps a packageset?
[16:18] <utkarsh21021> why straight to core-dev?
[16:18] <sil2100> enr0n: ok, thanks!
[16:18] <bdmurray> I'm pretty sure the Foundations team doesn't have any packagesets defined
[16:19]  * rbasak waits to ask more questions
[16:19] <enr0n> utkarsh21021: While I do focus on systemd, I am also responsible for a lot of ubuntu-release-upgrader work. And since I am on the Foundations team, it would be more helpful if I could generally work on packages in main, and not just systemd et al.
[16:20] <teward> (by the time i finish writing my questions rbasak or sil or utkarsh already ask the question so i'mma just sit and wait to ask any questions I have others don't ask)
[16:20] <utkarsh21021> hahahaha
[16:20] <seb128> sorry but I've to step out for ~30min, don't wait on my for reply/vote, I will catch up if I'm back before the end of meeting otherwise follow up via email if needed
[16:20] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: ack, thanks
[16:21] <utkarsh21021> I still feel getting upload rights to systemd and ubuntu-release-upgrader would have helped inspire some confidence :)
[16:21] <utkarsh21021> rbasak: go!
[16:21] <rbasak> What's the process you're using to do merges?
[16:22] <bdmurray> utkarsh21021: Would it though? The questions I've seen have been about merges and transitions.
[16:24] <enr0n> I first learned the grab-merge workflow for basic merges, but I have recently started getting familiar with the git-ubuntu merge workflow (while the pcre2 merge ended up being a sync, I used it to practice the git-ubuntu workflow). Specifically with systemd however, I use a typical `git merge debian/<tag>` workflow.
[16:24] <rbasak> Do you check to see if any delta still being applied is still needed?
[16:24] <sil2100> I think Nick is doing a lot of work around +1 maintenance, for which I think having a core-dev is rather useful
[16:25] <utkarsh21021> bdmurray: I mean, in general, yes, it'd have been good to see a track record of uploads to the archive. If they're in good shape, it's a big +1.
[16:25] <rbasak> Since you have only two merges uploaded (I appreciate one more was a sync), I looked at the procps one.
[16:25] <utkarsh21021> fair & noted!
[16:25] <enr0n> Yes, I make an effort to reduce Ubuntu delta whenever possible.
[16:26] <rbasak> In the procps merge, it looks like rm_conffile on /etc/sysctl.d/protect-links.conf was no longer needed as the focal release pocket had a higher version.
[16:27] <rbasak> And debian/compat 11 is being added but isn't mentioned in the changelog
[16:29] <enr0n> rbasak: Thanks for that feedback. That was my first month on the job and I am confident that I have learned a lot since then.
[16:29] <rbasak> Sure, it's not a major thing.
[16:29] <rbasak> But it is a substantial part of your application here :-/
[16:30] <kanashiro[m]> enr0n: have you touched seeds by any chance?
[16:30] <utkarsh21021> the one we sow?
[16:30] <utkarsh21021> at some point, everyone has, kanashiro :P
[16:31] <enr0n> kanashiro[m]: I think so, but I cannot remember. Maybe when we removed acpi-support?
[16:32] <rbasak> enr0n: have you done any SRUs?
[16:33] <utkarsh21021> rbasak: lots of them mentioned on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/enr0n/CoreDeveloperApplication#My_involvement
[16:33] <enr0n> rbasak: yes, I have done several. See the "SRU" section here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/enr0n/CoreDeveloperApplication#Examples_of_my_work_.2F_Things_I.27m_proud_of
[16:33] <utkarsh21021> 12 to be precise
[16:33] <rbasak> Ah, sorry. I didn't see any on the sponsorship miner that didn't look like false positives for some reason
[16:34] <enr0n> No worries
[16:36] <rbasak> I remain concerned that your range of experience seems to be quite narrow.
[16:36] <rbasak> And that when I dived into a random one, what I found wasn't great.
[16:37] <enr0n> Into a random what, exactly?
[16:37] <rbasak> Sorry, s/one/example/
[16:37] <rbasak> The procps merge
[16:38] <bdmurray> Isn't some of that on the sponsor who reviewed and uploaded it?
[16:38] <rbasak> Indeed
[16:39] <jawn-smith> That might have been me...
[16:39] <utkarsh21021> :P
[16:39] <rbasak> The thing is, if we discount that, then there are fewer examples to look at.
[16:40] <rbasak> Like are we saying "look I did a merge once, surely that's good enough for core dev?"
[16:40] <teward> rbasak raises a good point.
[16:40] <kanashiro[m]> you could also have proded someone outside of your team to endorse your application, for instance Simon Quigley (some uploads sponsored by them)
[16:41] <rbasak> IMHO, jumping direcly to core dev makes sense here, but equally that means that the application should be better than average.
[16:41] <bdmurray> I haven't done a systemd merge but don't imagince that's particularly easy.
[16:41] <rbasak> Sure. But a systemd merge is a bit special, and sounds like it uses a process that won't work for other packages.
[16:41] <teward> kanashiro[m]: given that Simon's busy as heck and owes me about 100 things Lubuntu Council related I would sooner drag Simon through fixing and sponsoring the Lubuntu stuff he owes me and the Lubuntu Team before putting more general sponsor work on Simon to work on :p
[16:41] <rbasak> Which is fine, but I'd like to see a broad understanding here, and a systemd merge cannot show it.
[16:41] <teward> (i.e. Lubuntu Team related tasks)
[16:41] <rbasak> This is the kind of situation where a systemd PPU might make more sense
[16:42] <teward> rbasak: i think then that brings a bigger question that I have: what PPU do they need?  SystemD or more than that?
[16:42] <teward> if there's only one or two more then for them to do regular work then I'm fine with that but once we start getting to a broader range it brings up the question of "scope of rights" and we're back to today
[16:42] <teward> but that's also a requisite that they file a PPU application
[16:43] <teward> right now we're here to act on coredev application, not a PPU application
[16:43] <enr0n> rbasak: In my opinion, the important part of merges is not necessarily what tooling one uses, but there ability to read changelog/git history, test existing delta, etc. While you could say that I do not have significant experience using git-ubuntu (or some other thing) in particular, that does not change the fact that I understand what considerations need to be made during a merge.
[16:43] <bdmurray> +1
[16:44] <rbasak> I don't care what workflow you use, as long as the output is correct.
[16:44] <rbasak> procps was not.
[16:44] <sil2100> I don't use git-ubuntu for merges, and I don't think that made my merges particularly worse. I mean, any mistakes I do I could do either way
[16:44] <rbasak> That's 50% of the merges on this application.
[16:45] <enr0n> rbasak: Yes, that's the point I was trying to make.
[16:46] <rbasak> OK, so in this application, the track record you're presenting does not demonstrate merges done properly, regardless of workflow. Sorry, it just doesn't.
[16:46] <rbasak> So I'm not sure why people are talking about appropriate workflows.
[16:46] <enr0n> (trying to catch up on all the messages while also typing)
[16:46] <bdmurray> Okay, I think we all know rbasak's position now. Does anybody else have questions?
[16:47] <enr0n> rbasak: Sorry, this message is what brought me in that direction: "Sure. But a systemd merge is a bit special, and sounds like it uses a process that won't work for other packages."
[16:48] <rbasak> Oh, OK.
[16:48] <enr0n> rbasak: I took that as a comment against my workflow.
[16:49] <rbasak> What I mean there is that that doesn't really demonstrate how you would merge other packages, if procps is the closest (only) example I have of that to consider as well. I see what you're saying about understanding what is required being more important than workflow, but I can only go on actual examples presented to me.
[16:50] <sil2100> hm, okay, I mean, I treat uploads from an applicant as demonstration of them being able to perform a given task to some extent. Small mistakes, especially if unnoticed by more experienced uploaders, aren't necesarily a bad sign for me, as long as the resulting merge doesn't drop patches or introduce broken changes. And it does represent knowledge of the process, so enough in my eyes to count as a
[16:50] <sil2100> checkbox checked, especially with systemd in mind
[16:51] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: suppose if you were to have a PPU for systemd and u-r-u, would that restrict you in anything except +1? because, I just see systemd all around (SRUs, Merges, Lukas' sponsored uploads, et al
[16:51] <sil2100> But that's just how I see it
[16:51] <rbasak> as long as the resulting merge doesn't drop patches or introduce broken changes> what's important to me is that this bar isn't passed "by accident", as might happen with an insufficiently reviewed MoM suggestion that gets uploaded
[16:54] <enr0n> utkarsh21021: I suppose not in my typical day-to-day, but that doesn't change my intentions.
[16:54] <kanashiro[m]> more work out off systemd and ubuntu-release-upgrader would be appreciated
[16:56] <enr0n> kanashiro[m]: I suppose that's how I view +1 work.
[16:58] <rbasak> +1 work is appreciated, but a catch is that it's quite narrow in some ways (while very broad in the range of packages to touch, of course)
[16:58] <utkarsh21021> any more questions?
[16:58] <rbasak> But core dev is a very wide ACL entry
[16:58] <rbasak> And those things don't fit together well :-/
[16:58] <utkarsh21021> wait, did my client stop again?
[16:58] <teward> utkarsh21021: no, your client and Matrix are just slow as heck
[16:58] <teward> go get an irccloud account :p
[16:59] <utkarsh21021> hah
[16:59] <utkarsh21021> we haven’t started voting, no?
[16:59] <teward> no we haven't
[16:59] <teward> not officially
[16:59] <teward> i don't have any questions that haven't been asked by anyone else
[17:00] <teward> i have literally only 5 minuites left and we're past our meeting time though i think
[17:00] <teward> is there any reason we can't move to voting?
[17:00] <utkarsh21021> should we proceed to vote?
[17:00] <teward> (in 5 minutes I have a call with the CEO and IT Director at my FT job so)
[17:01] <kanashiro[m]> let's vote
[17:01] <utkarsh21021> teward: no fire today?
[17:01] <bdmurray> I'm ready to vote
[17:01] <teward> utkarsh21021: not today no, thank goodness
[17:01] <utkarsh21021> hah, nice
[17:01] <utkarsh21021> #vote Nick Rosbrook to get Core Dev rights
[17:01] <meetingology> Please vote on: Nick Rosbrook to get Core Dev rights
[17:01] <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, -1 or +0 in channel (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1|-1|+0 #channelname')
[17:01] <rbasak> -1 reasons to follow
[17:01] <meetingology> -1 reasons to follow received from rbasak
[17:03] <sil2100> +1 Decided to vote as even though Nick is part of my team, I did not endorse him nor am I working closely with him. I see sufficient understanding and involvement in the Ubuntu work, and I see potential in him making a difference with code-dev membership
[17:03] <meetingology> +1 Decided to vote as even though Nick is part of my team, I did not endorse him nor am I working closely with him. I see sufficient understanding and involvement in the Ubuntu work, and I see potential in him making a difference with code-dev membership received from sil2100
[17:04] <sil2100> (+ I have faith in the endorsers of his application)
[17:05] <teward> -1 - reasons to follow (slow to type due to phone IRCing today)
[17:05] <meetingology> -1 - reasons to follow (slow to type due to phone IRCing today) received from teward
[17:05] <bdmurray> +1 as I trust Nick, his judgement and decision making skills. I believe he will continue to look for guidance when uploading packages.
[17:05] <meetingology> +1 as I trust Nick, his judgement and decision making skills. I believe he will continue to look for guidance when uploading packages. received from bdmurray
[17:06] <teward> While I have every confidence in enr0n being able to do SRUs and other +1 work, I don't see enough package coverage in the current set of items to be "enough work" outside of a niche packageset to justify full unrestricted core-dev upload rights.  I also would like to see more work on merges as I don't currently see enough evidence to support suitable merge knowledge regardless of workflow to justify unrestricted upload rights either.
[17:07] <teward> (this doesn't preclude enr0n from reapplying at some point in the future for coredev, but at this time the aforementioned is my reasoning)
[17:08] <teward> and while i have faith in the endorsers, I also want to see some evidence to back up that faith.
[17:08] <teward> and I just don't see it at the moment.
[17:09] <kanashiro[m]> -1, I believe more work on non systemd and ubuntu-release-upgrader packages should be done, also try to find sponsors out off the Foundations team and get an endorsement from them as well (not that Foundations members are not trustworthy, it is a matter to get a different point of view from people who are not working with you everyday). However, I do trust your technical skills and I do believe you should re-apply for core-dev
[17:09] <meetingology> -1, I believe more work on non systemd and ubuntu-release-upgrader packages should be done, also try to find sponsors out off the Foundations team and get an endorsement from them as well (not that Foundations members are not trustworthy, it is a matter to get a different point of view from people who are not working with you everyday). However, I do trust your technical skills and I do believe you should re-apply for core-dev recei
[17:09] <kanashiro[m]> once you have more data to show us.
[17:09] <utkarsh21021> +0; I know this is not the preferred vote of the DMB but this is a hard decision to make. Whilst I trust Nick's work and judgement and their endorsers, the lack of work in other areas (outside systemd and u-r-u) makes it difficult to grant core-dev straight away. I am definitely +1 for PPU and +1 for core-dev once more set of packages are touched and worked on, esp. merges.
[17:09] <meetingology> +0; I know this is not the preferred vote of the DMB but this is a hard decision to make. Whilst I trust Nick's work and judgement and their endorsers, the lack of work in other areas (outside systemd and u-r-u) makes it difficult to grant core-dev straight away. I am definitely +1 for PPU and +1 for core-dev once more set of packages are touched and worked on, esp. merges. received from utkarsh21021
[17:09] <utkarsh21021> #endvote
[17:09] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Nick Rosbrook to get Core Dev rights
[17:09] <meetingology> Votes for: 2, Votes against: 3, Abstentions: 1
[17:09] <meetingology> Motion denied
[17:10] <teward> enr0n: feel free to hit me up as well if you need a sponsor to review things, always happy to help Foundations where it is needed, and though I may not be super active on sponsors just this moment, I do have spare cycles at times through the week to do oneoff sponsors (rather than track ubuntu-sponsors heh)
[17:10] <utkarsh21021> unfortunately, the application hasn't made it through :(
[17:11] <enr0n> teward: Thank you, I appreciate that, and I appreciate your feedback.
[17:11] <rbasak> Much of the work you've been doing looks good, but I don't think there's a wide enough range of experience here to justify jumping straight to core dev. I expect everybody to make mistakes, but I expect the rate of errors from core dev applications to be low, and when considering an application I can only infer the rate from what is presented. Here, we have very little being presented as examples
[17:11] <utkarsh21021> but yes, enr0n, whenever you're doing +1, just reach out to me, too
[17:11] <rbasak> in some areas (eg. package merges), so that doesn't really help with that expectation when there seemed to be issues with one of the two package merges you presented. For someone to go straight to core dev on the Foundations team makes sense, but I think this really needs to come with a stronger application.
[17:11] <utkarsh21021> for sponsorship^
[17:11] <rbasak> To make progress, I suggest continuing to build your track record, particularly in the areas of package merges and transitions. I hope to see you become a core dev soon!
[17:12] <enr0n> utkarsh21021: I will take you up on that this week ;)
[17:13] <enr0n> rbasak: Thank you for your time and feedback
[17:13] <utkarsh21021> enr0n: yes, please. Spam me in DMs
[17:13] <enr0n> And thank you to the rest of the DMB as well.
[17:14] <utkarsh21021> #action Utkarsh to send the mail about today's application
[17:14] <meetingology> ACTION: Utkarsh to send the mail about today's application
[17:14] <utkarsh21021> #endmeeting
[17:14] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 17:14:21 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-02-06-16.05.moin.txt
[17:15] <utkarsh21021> \o
[17:16] <kanashiro[m]> o/