/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2023/06/13/#ubuntu-meeting.txt

sarnoldgood morning14:29
eslermhello14:29
dviererbeo/14:29
didrockshey14:30
cpaelzerhi14:31
didrocksseems it will be only us again?14:31
didrocksah cpaelzer is back :)14:31
didrockswb!14:31
cpaelzergive me a sec to start14:31
joalifo/14:31
didrockshey joalif!14:31
cpaelzer#startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status14:32
meetingologyMeeting started at 14:32:41 UTC.  The chair is cpaelzer.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology14:32
meetingologyAvailable commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick14:32
cpaelzerPing for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage ( eslerm dviererbe )14:33
cpaelzer#topic current component mismatches14:33
cpaelzerMission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams14:33
cpaelzer#link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg14:33
cpaelzer#link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg14:33
dviererbewow14:33
sarnoldomg14:33
cpaelzerwut14:33
didrocksspamassin is assassinating us :p14:34
cpaelzerthe moment you zoom out and realize the thing at the top is yours14:34
cpaelzeroh no :-/14:34
cpaelzerlet me pass that to the team14:34
cpaelzerand then we look what else is in the report14:34
didrockshopefully, we don’t care about the recommends and then, no big deal14:35
sarnoldI assume it's on this graph because we do care about recommends14:35
eslermis this MIR still valid? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libnet-idn-encode-perl/+bug/149489014:35
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 1494890 in libnet-idn-encode-perl (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libnet-idn-encode-perl (b-d of libio-socket-ssl-perl)" [Undecided, Fix Released]14:35
didrockssarnold: yeah, I mean, just a question of removing the recommends14:35
sarnoldafterall, we have to teach users about apt install --no-install-recommends all the time :(14:35
sarnoldahhh14:35
cpaelzerok, looking at others14:36
cpaelzerlibww-perl -> libhttp-cookiejar-perl14:36
cpaelzerruby-rack14:36
cpaelzerruby is a transiton to 3.0 which kanashiro[m] is on top already14:37
cpaelzerruby-rack I should say14:37
cpaelzerwhich was even a requirement in the pcs MIR last cycle14:37
cpaelzerso consider that under control14:37
cpaelzerhow about this www-perl?14:37
cpaelzerslyon isn't here, that sounds like foundations14:37
cpaelzerlet me ping mclemenceau ^^14:38
cpaelzermclemenceau: could you have someone look after the component mismatch in mantic-proposed please14:38
sarnoldwoah looks like launchpad got a stylesheet refresh14:38
cpaelzerdid it?14:38
cpaelzerindeed14:38
cpaelzerlibhttp-cookiejar-perl: libhttp-cookiejar-perl14:39
cpaelzer[Reverse-Depends: libwww-perl (MAIN)]14:39
cpaelzermclemenceau: that is the one you could look at14:39
cpaelzereverything else is known14:39
cpaelzerno further action14:39
cpaelzerexcept me finding someone to unbreak this massive tree behind spamassassin14:40
cpaelzer#topic New MIRs14:40
cpaelzerMission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing14:40
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-mir14:40
cpaelzer4 in the queue14:40
dviererbeThere is also https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/boot-managed-by-snapd/+bug/202336614:40
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2023366 in boot-managed-by-snapd (Ubuntu) "[MIR] boot-managed-by-snapd" [Undecided, New]14:40
cpaelzerall of them we have seen before14:40
cpaelzerdviererbe: that is subscribed to the wrong team14:40
didrocksyeah, some for quite some time as I was the only available MIR reviewer around and can only take 2 by pulse14:40
cpaelzertoday myself and joalif can take a few if possible14:41
didrocksso, for next pulse, I can take 2 of them (I guess cairo/pango in the order of deps, apart if someone else can parallelize those)14:41
joalifyup14:41
cpaelzerand it is fair to limit the number per pulse or whatever cycle you plan for14:41
seb128technically those are new version of packages already in main but I guess you want to review them again?14:41
cpaelzerdviererbe: we are the "MIR approval team" not the "Mir development team"14:42
cpaelzerdviererbe: I fixed the subscription14:42
dviererbethanks14:42
dviererbeweirdly that was the only team that popped up when I searched for mir14:42
cpaelzerI'd take boot-managed-by-snap14:42
cpaelzeras I'm curious by the name14:42
cpaelzerdidrocks: is "next pulse" today or next week or even later?14:43
dviererbeits mostly just a transitional package14:43
didrockscpaelzer: next week14:43
cpaelzerok14:43
cpaelzerjoalif: pick one of your choice please14:43
cpaelzerin case one seems nicer than the other to you14:43
joalifi can take whatever, let's say the first one14:43
cpaelzerit is important to consider the comment of seb12814:44
cpaelzerusually if this is just a foo1 to foo214:44
cpaelzerit is a fast path14:44
cpaelzerand not a full review14:44
sarnold\o/14:44
cpaelzerwe do sanity checks, ensuer the old reviews didn't say "just this time" or such14:44
cpaelzerand then approve14:44
cpaelzerjoalif: ok you take pangomm2.48 then14:44
joalifyes14:45
cpaelzerjoalif: if your check on this confirms that it is "the same as we have, just versioned source and all is fine"14:45
cpaelzerthen we can next week assign the rest assuming they are similar fast paths14:45
cpaelzerdoes that work for everyone?14:45
didrockssounds good to me14:45
joalifok14:45
cpaelzerok, let us go on then14:46
cpaelzer#topic Incomplete bugs / questions14:46
cpaelzerMission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams14:46
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-mir14:46
sarnoldman that's a lot of incompletes14:46
cpaelzernot that many recent though14:47
cpaelzerWe haven't closed incompletes for a while14:47
cpaelzerI think we had some number of days to mark them invalid14:48
sarnoldyeah, we tend to focus on the happy end of the list (for good reasons :) .. but some of these oolldd things make me sad, heh14:48
cpaelzerlet me close all pre 202314:48
cpaelzerI think they are incomplete and got no update for so long14:48
cpaelzerit is correct for expectation management14:48
cpaelzerto call them incomplete14:48
cpaelzerWDYT?14:49
sarnoldyeah, it's probably fine to just blanket set them all invalid. it might be a nice reminder to the folks who might sitll be around14:49
didrocksyeah, sounds like the correct approach to me14:49
cpaelzergive me a minute14:50
sarnoldheh, argyll, updated a few months ago, opened in 201114:51
eslermI think conditinal ACK requirements like autopkgtests should be met before promotion so that we don't get into this state, but that can be specified by MIR/Security reivews going forward14:52
cpaelzerdine14:54
sarnoldthanks14:54
sarnoldprobably some of these are changing business needs14:54
sarnoldothers might be simply overlooked TODO items that were never fulfilled14:54
cpaelzereslerm: yes, conditional ack requirements are meant to be met14:54
cpaelzerack on the chance for overlook14:54
cpaelzerthat was the reason we started to number them14:54
cpaelzerit made it easier to track them14:54
cpaelzerI need to continue in the matter of time14:55
cpaelzer#topic Process/Documentation improvements14:55
cpaelzerMission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues14:55
cpaelzer#link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls14:55
cpaelzer#link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues14:55
cpaelzerI have today reviewed and merged a few14:55
cpaelzerthere is effort for me and dviererbe before the remaining PRs are re-reviewed here14:56
cpaelzeron the issues14:56
cpaelzerone is a discussion on the same topic as the re-review PR14:56
cpaelzerand let me - for now - just say yes, we do not speak about resourcing yet14:56
cpaelzerbut we need to have in place how we think it works before I combine myself and other directors to be the meta-VP and make a decision14:56
cpaelzersarnold: are you ok to go into https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/24 when there is more time left?14:57
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Issue 24 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "More team members" [Open]14:57
sarnoldcpaelzer: yes14:57
cpaelzerthanks14:57
cpaelzer#topic MIR related Security Review Queue14:57
cpaelzerMission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable?14:57
cpaelzerSome clients can only work with one, some with the other escaping - the URLs point to the same place.14:57
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-mir14:57
cpaelzer#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-security/+bugs?field.searchtext=[MIR]&assignee_option=choose&field.assignee=ubuntu-security&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir14:57
cpaelzerInternal link14:57
cpaelzer- ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect14:57
cpaelzer- ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much14:57
cpaelzer#link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/59414:57
cpaelzernothing too surprising here14:57
sarnoldwe've got MIRs assigned around, so far I think there's happy thoughts14:58
cpaelzerindeed14:58
cpaelzerLGTM14:58
cpaelzer#topic Any other business?14:58
seb128o/14:58
cpaelzerthe PRs and issues nowadays cover most of the usual AOB topics14:58
cpaelzerseb128: have you been waiting for this and brought something new?14:58
cpaelzeror just seen the highlight that happened a while ago?14:59
seb128no, I've topics14:59
seb128first is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/webp-pixbuf-loader/+bug/1979121 ... what's the status?14:59
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 1979121 in webp-pixbuf-loader (Ubuntu Jammy) "[MIR] webp-pixbuf-loader" [Undecided, New]14:59
seb128it is assigned to you since decembre but didn't get any activity so I wonder if it got forgotten somehow?14:59
cpaelzerthis is a classic fallen therough the cracks14:59
cpaelzersorry14:59
cpaelzerI'll look at it14:59
seb128thanks15:00
cpaelzeryou said topicS15:00
cpaelzernext?15:00
seb128the other topic is that I stated a discussion about symbols for c++ libraries on ubuntu-devel@15:00
seb128unsure if you guys follow the list of if I should cross reference to github?15:00
seb128started*15:00
eslermlink please15:01
sarnoldhttps://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2023-June/date.html15:01
eslermthanks15:01
seb128eslerm, https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2023-June/042600.html15:01
sarnoldI keep hearing that the kde symbols handling is really nice stuff; I don't understand why it's not the default for all our packages15:02
seb128if you didn't read it yet it's probably better to discuss it another time after people had time to read15:02
sarnoldperhaps that's a better question on the list, though :)15:02
seb128that was mentioned, still it doesn't solve most of the issues raised15:03
seb128like the difference between architectures and how tedious the process is15:03
sarnoldit sounds almost as bad as debian/copyright15:03
sarnoldI'll throw some questions on the list, I don't know nearly enough about what these files provide for us15:04
sarnoldhopefully that'll keep the conversation moving :) (or cause everyone to roll their eyes at me, either way)15:05
cpaelzerFYI - I'm double booked now, less focus :-/15:05
didrocks(I guess the biggest blocker is the multi-arch aspect with different symbols)15:05
seb128that's not a topic that needs to be discussed/resolved here or now, I just wanted to check if you follow devel or if I should start the same discussion as a github ticket or something15:06
sarnoldhttps://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/26  :D15:06
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Issue 26 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Decide if we get enough value from symbols tracking to keep doing it" [Open]15:06
seb128sarnold, thanks!15:07
sarnoldseb128: and thank you :D15:07
cpaelzerwhich means we will revisit it every week15:07
seb128sarnold, update the title to mention c++15:07
cpaelzeruntil we find qorum and enough time to tihnk deep enough about it15:07
seb128we don't have those issues for plain C15:07
cpaelzerC symbols are worth for sure15:07
sarnoldack, done15:07
cpaelzerC++ symbols would be worth if only they would work15:07
seb128thx15:07
cpaelzerthank15:07
cpaelzers15:07
seb128and that was it from me for today :p15:08
sarnoldpfew :D15:08
cpaelzergreat15:08
cpaelzerwe are over time15:08
cpaelzerlet me close it here15:08
cpaelzerand we all handle more next week15:08
cpaelzerthank you!15:08
cpaelzer#endmeeting15:08
meetingologyMeeting ended at 15:08:36 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-06-13-14.32.moin.txt15:08
didrocksthanks!15:08
eslermbye all o/15:08
joalifthanks cpaelzer, all :)15:08
sarnoldthanks cpaelzer, all :)15:08
dviererbethank you, all!15:08
mclemenceauAck cpaelzer15:23
cpaelzerthanks mclemenceau15:24
amurrayo/18:59
seb128hey! :)18:59
rbasako/19:00
sil2100o/19:00
* vorlon waves19:01
vorlonlooks like I'm chairing today19:01
vorlon#startmeeting19:01
meetingologyMeeting started at 19:01:31 UTC.  The chair is vorlon.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology19:01
meetingologyAvailable commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick19:01
vorlon#topic Apologies19:01
vorlonlooks like maybe we're all here?19:02
vorlonapparently :)19:02
vorlon#topic Action review19:02
vorlonACTION: amurray to follow up with backporters team on Mattia's draft charter proposal19:02
vorlonis this done?  is there anything further we need to do?19:03
amurraybackporters discussed and approved this in their last meeting - https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2023-June/002740.html - I think they just want a formal ack from us19:03
rbasakWe should have somewhere to document these19:03
rbasakAs we expect other teams to get some documentation too19:03
rbasakI can take an action I guess, unless someone else wants to volunteer?19:04
vorlonhappy to let you have it19:04
amurraythanks rbasak :)19:04
vorlondo you want this under https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/ ? somewhere else?19:04
seb128thanks rbasak!19:04
rbasakI was going to put it there to start with19:05
amurraysounds like a good place to me19:05
vorlon#action rbasak to get agreed backporter charter https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2023-June/002740.html documented under https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/19:06
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to get agreed backporter charter https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2023-June/002740.html documented under https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/19:06
vorlonrbasak: thanks19:06
vorlonACTION: seb128 to help draft an exception to the "must build on all architectures" requirement for snaps19:06
vorlonseb128: any news?19:06
seb128yes19:06
seb128we updated the document with rbasak19:06
rbasakI think that action item is done.19:06
seb128so that can be considered as done19:06
rbasakThe snap appendix needs a general cleanup but I'd like to push on with the main body first.19:06
vorlon#done seb128 to help draft an exception to the "must build on all architectures" requirement for snaps19:08
vorlonACTION: seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage19:08
vorlonhow about this?19:08
rbasakIt sounded like there were still some loose ends on this?19:08
amurrayyeah - I added a suggestion for this - there's some feedback from seb128 and kenvandine that I need to look over still19:09
vorloncarry-over, then?19:10
sil2100Yes please, I'm looking through it right now19:10
vorlon#action seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage19:10
meetingologyACTION: seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage19:10
vorlonACTION: 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 step19:10
vorlonsil2100: ?19:11
sil2100vorlon: still didn't have time to finalize the docs, only the 'start' of the draft here https://wiki.ubuntu.com/OEMArchive19:11
sil2100I know what to write, but still require some time. So sadly another carry over19:11
vorlon#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 step19:11
meetingologyACTION: 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 step19:11
vorlonACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification19:11
vorlonrbasak: ?19:12
rbasakCarry over please, sorry19:13
vorlon#action rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification19:13
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification19:13
vorlonACTION: the TB members have until the next meeting to review the third party repository requirements document and raise concerns19:13
rbasakI trust that the TB members have done their homework? :)19:14
vorlonhmm I think I failed to do this fwiw19:14
rbasakDoes the TB have any further questions or comments on the main body of the document - excluding the appendices? Can I take the current text to be the TB's draft position, for wider consultation?19:14
sil2100I was generally fine with it during my last read through, so you can consider me being +1 on it19:14
vorlonoh to have git diff <range> for google docs19:15
rbasakIt is still subject to change subject to feedback of course.19:15
rbasakBut I would like to present it as the TB's starting point.19:15
seb128I reviewed it and I'm fine with moving forward with the main text19:15
seb128we (as desktop) have concerns about the appendix C - requirement A though19:16
amurrayrbasak from the last meeting when I mentioned testing I thought we were going to add something about that as well... but I am struggling to remember the the specifics19:16
seb128so I think that is going to need more discussion, but as you said it's an appendix and not what we focus on atm19:16
rbasakThat rings a bell. Maybe I missed an edit.19:17
amurrayhttps://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2023/05/30/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t19:3319:17
seb128maybe my fault for not recording that in the actions, sorry :/19:17
vorlonin the list of exceptions for specific packages, I think it should list what architectures the package is supposed to be available on.  For Ubuntu desktop installer, it doesn't say *which* other arches we're missing a runtime on; and both amd64 and arm64 are important for desktop flavors.  But this is also all in an appendix19:18
vorlonotherwise, skimming the recent differences, it looks fine to me19:18
rbasakamurray: ah yes, sorry. This is related to the process for eg. adding a new snap, right? Not about making changes to an existing one?19:18
amurrayyes, we ended up saying that the package should have a review by some other (MIR-like) team19:19
rbasakOK. That's also for the snap appendix, right?19:19
amurrayI would prefer it to be in the main document as a proposed requirement19:19
rbasakOK. Let me take an action to get that in. I think I was supposed to do it last time, like you said.19:20
rbasakThen I'll check with you out of band.19:20
seb128in fact the stability point is also requirement A and not only in the appendix...19:20
amurrayie like an issue/bug tracker, we/I also want it to be reviewed to approve that it is "maintainable" / "testable" etc when updates need to be done19:20
rbasakIf amurray is happy with that edit, then I'll go ahead and open wider discussion. Does that sound OK?19:20
vorlondo we want to take 'Proposed' out of the 'Proposed requirement'?19:21
rbasakSure, if you like. The whole thing is proposed :)19:21
vorlonright that's what I was thinking19:21
amurrayre stability - having a requirement that something remain stable is not the same as saying "it needs to be testable" so that if/when someone has to do an update we can have some confidence that it is not going to break on delivery to users19:22
vorlonmade that edit19:22
rbasakseb128: it is requirement A in the main body, but I think it should remain there as the baseline, with an exception either in general or specifically for snaps under some more specific criteria. Doesn't matter which since snaps are the only approved "third party type" at the moment.19:22
rbasakamurray: you're talking about QA?19:23
seb128ack19:23
amurrayyep19:23
rbasakI'm not sure we're in a position to be able to dictate anything about QA really, because we already delegate that to snap publishers entirely. What sort of assurance do you think we could define?19:24
rbasakThis might fit under:19:24
rbasakRequirement C: the package maintainer agrees to maintain the package for the lifetime of the Ubuntu release.19:24
rbasakWhat that means exactly, including QA, is down to them I think.19:25
amurraymy personal preference would be that for each approved third-party package, there should be a documented test plan that can be exercised by other Ubuntu members if / when they need to make an update to the package in question19:25
rbasakOr, maybe we could require as part of snap-MIR for some QA plan to be written down and committed to by the snap maintainer?19:25
rbasakOK. I think that would be great to have.19:26
rbasakBut I'm concerned it might be too much friction.19:26
rbasakI don't feel strongly about whether or not the requirement should be in there initially though.19:26
vorlonhaving firefox document a test plan for their binary releases would not mean it's particularly practical for Ubuntu to reproduce it19:27
sil2100hm, it's an interesting idea, but seeing that we don't require such things for packages we have in the archive, seems a bit 'much'19:27
rbasakIMHO MIR process goes a bit further actually by requiring automated testing, which is de-facto a test plan.19:27
seb128MIR also give the alternative option of a manual testplan19:28
vorlonit does? eew19:28
vorlon:)19:28
seb128(most desktop applications don't have automated testing because we don't have a good framework to automate UI testing in our infra)19:29
amurrayI don't think this is too much to ask - we want everyone to have confidence in whatever third-party packages they are consuming from us19:29
amurraymy real concern here is that someday the security team will have to patch one of these snaps and we won't have a good way to test the thing at the end of that before releasing it19:30
seb128it's a bit unfair to require more there than what we require today for things we ship by default though no?19:30
rbasakI wrote this down here so we don't forget it's outstanding: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1apUKR4gtOrfPGCWmtoebaQUhoy-fG8Cyo3VKJyhnpD0/edit#heading=h.v2cstw9iikqj19:30
amurraythanks rbasak19:31
sil2100We also need to remember that other flavors might want to pre-install their own snaps too, and they can build out of universe - so even if in main we do have some requirements, we need to make sure that we don't go instantly over-board. But I do agree the more emphasis we can have on quality, the better19:31
sil2100Anyway, it's certainly an idea worth thinking about19:32
rbasakOK I think this needs some further discussion. Let me document the ideas there at least, before we try to establish consensus19:32
rbasakSo leave that with me for now.19:33
vorlondoes that need resolved before we push this out for wider discussion?19:33
rbasakI was about to ask that.19:33
rbasakCan we do both simultaneously?19:33
rbasakIt's fine for there to be some documented loose ends IMHO19:33
vorlon#action rbasak to follow up on finding consensus on question of test plans for third party apps19:33
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to follow up on finding consensus on question of test plans for third party apps19:33
rbasakI need to restructure the docs a bit to make the status clearer19:33
vorlonis that also an action?19:34
rbasakBut once done I think we can open wider discussion if others are OK with it.19:34
sil2100+119:34
rbasakvorlon: yes, sure19:34
amurray+119:34
vorlon#action rbasak to restructure the third-party repo doc to make the status clearer19:34
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to restructure the third-party repo doc to make the status clearer19:34
vorlonare those the actions for now?19:34
rbasakAnd maybe another for me to open wider discussion?19:35
rbasakNow that you wrote that I'm not sure what the others +1'd :)19:35
vorlon#action rbasak to open wider discussion on third-party repo policy19:35
meetingologyACTION: rbasak to open wider discussion on third-party repo policy19:35
vorlon:)19:35
rbasakEveryone happy with that plan?19:35
seb128+119:35
rbasakThat's a bad question.19:35
rbasakAny objections to that plan? :)19:35
amurrayyes, thanks :)19:35
amurraysorry I mean, yes I am happy, no objection from me19:35
rbasak:-P19:35
vorlonexcellent, moving on19:35
vorlon#done seb128 to resend the 'core teams governance' email to the public techboard list19:36
rbasakI'll reply shortly19:36
vorlonper previous discussion, it's now on the rest of us to replay our responses19:36
vorlonI don't know how soon I'll get to that on my part, so maybe an action there19:36
seb128I just did today, sorry for the delay but I was waiting on getting ack from people I'm quoting in the email (since there was some extract from private emails)19:36
vorlon#action rbasak, vorlon, amurray to replay their responses to Key Ubuntu teams discussion19:37
meetingologyACTION: rbasak, vorlon, amurray to replay their responses to Key Ubuntu teams discussion19:37
vorlon#topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item)19:37
vorlon#link https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2023-June/thread.html19:37
vorlonnothing there which we haven't already addressed19:37
vorlon#topic Check up on community bugs and techboard bugs19:38
vorlon#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bugs?field.assignee=techboard19:38
vorlonclear19:38
vorlon#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/techboard19:38
vorlontwo bugs that are also both captured in our actions19:38
vorlon#topic Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members)19:38
vorlonI believe the rotation is chair: sil2100, backup: amurray19:39
sil2100ACK o/19:39
vorlon#agreed next meeting chair: sil2100, backup: amurray19:40
meetingologyAGREED: next meeting chair: sil2100, backup: amurray19:40
vorlon#topic AOB19:40
vorlonanything else for today?19:40
amurraynothing from me19:40
rbasakNothing from me.19:40
rbasakThank you for chairing!19:41
rbasakAnd thank you everyone for the productive discussion.19:41
vorlon#endmeeting19:41
meetingologyMeeting ended at 19:41:51 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-06-13-19.01.moin.txt19:41
vorlonthanks, all!19:41
sil2100Thanks vorlon! Thanks everyone o/19:41
amurraythanks vorlon19:42
seb128thanks!19:42

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