[14:24] <cpaelzer> grml, I might need to go to IS office hours which is right on top of the MIR meeting
[14:24] <cpaelzer> I can lead, but somewhat distracted
[14:24] <cpaelzer> or someone else takes over
[14:24] <cpaelzer> up to you
[14:25] <didrocks> I can take over, but just a warning, it’s the last week I can (starting next week, I will have ongoing conflicts)
[14:25] <didrocks> and I spoiled my AOB :)
[14:25] <didrocks> (if anyone else wants to take it, I’m fine too)
[14:27] <cpaelzer> continuous conflict seems bad, someone didn#t check calendars much :-/
[14:30] <didrocks> ok, let’s start anyway
[14:30] <cpaelzer> thank you
[14:30] <eslerm> o/
[14:30] <didrocks> #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status
[14:30] <meetingology> Meeting started at 14:30:43 UTC.  The chair is didrocks.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[14:30] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[14:30] <didrocks> Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage ( eslerm dviererbe )
[14:30] <didrocks> #topic current component mismatches
[14:30] <didrocks> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[14:30] <cpaelzer> o/
[14:31] <didrocks> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg
[14:31] <didrocks> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg
[14:31] <didrocks> I don’t remember if we mention thirft last week?
[14:32] <eslerm> I don't recall it
[14:32] <cpaelzer> not that I'd remember
[14:32] <didrocks> from the package description, sounds like for foundation, anyone up to pinging them as slyon is away?
[14:33] <didrocks> even if it’s ceph importing it (which is more server)
[14:33] <didrocks> C++ and go, /me shakes
[14:34] <didrocks> I’ll bring it up to them
[14:34] <didrocks> nothing else on the list, apparently
[14:34] <didrocks> #topic New MIRs
[14:34] <didrocks> Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing
[14:34] <didrocks> #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
[14:35] <eslerm> \o/
[14:35] <didrocks> yeah, I’m glad with all this zen mode too :)
[14:35] <didrocks> #topic Incomplete bugs / questions
[14:35] <didrocks> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[14:35] <didrocks> #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
[14:37] <didrocks> so, a lot of perl, with incomplete status
[14:37] <didrocks> cpaelzer wrote this apparently, but that was some months ago: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libmail-dmarc-perl/+bug/2023971/comments/4
[14:37] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2023971 in libmail-dmarc-perl (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libmail-dmarc-perl" [Undecided, Incomplete]
[14:37] <cpaelzer> I think this is mirespace preparing some of them to become ready for us
[14:37] <didrocks> ok, so we consider incomplete as not ready yet, correct?
[14:38] <didrocks> and the one before was libde265, which was already marked as incomplete last week until it’s ready
[14:39] <didrocks> let’s move on then
[14:39] <didrocks> #topic Process/Documentation improvements
[14:39] <didrocks> Mission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues
[14:39] <cpaelzer> yes incomplete means "they still want to do something about it" or  "we have told them to do something"
[14:39] <didrocks> ok, just wanted to ensure that was not a status incorrectly set, thanks for confirming they are aware :)
[14:39] <didrocks> #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls
[14:39] <didrocks> #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues
[14:39] <cpaelzer> I've pinged the reporter to confirm if they are meant to be incomplete
[14:39] <didrocks> thanks!
[14:40] <didrocks> https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/40 is approved and ready to be merge by cpaelzer whenever there is time (what is this word?) :)
[14:40] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 40 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Clarify owning team requirement" [Open]
[14:40] <cpaelzer> yes I just wanted to wait for the meeting here to happen
[14:40] <cpaelzer> as a final cahnce to say no
[14:40] <cpaelzer> AFAICS I have addressed or answered all of the good feedback
[14:40] <didrocks> ok, last call for any other feedback! Please file in before the end of the meeting :)
[14:41] <didrocks> right, I did approve once I was happy with the answers
[14:41] <didrocks> you still have 5 minutes to protest :)
[14:41] <didrocks> #topic MIR related Security Review Queue
[14:41] <didrocks> Mission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable?
[14:41] <didrocks> Some clients can only work with one, some with the other escaping - the URLs point to the same place.
[14:41] <didrocks> #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
[14:41] <didrocks> #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-mir
[14:42] <didrocks> Internal link
[14:42] <didrocks> - ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect
[14:42] <eslerm> thanks for the rustc/cargo dependency statuses last week didrocks
[14:42] <didrocks> eslerm: yw!
[14:42] <didrocks> - ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much
[14:42] <didrocks> #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594
[14:42] <didrocks> (sorry, it seems a recent mantic update broke my weechat multi-lines pasting plugin, bare with me)
[14:42] <cpaelzer> hehe
[14:43] <eslerm> two new security members are going to be trained using the perl MIRs, there is ~4k loc between them
[14:43] <didrocks> poor of them, training them on perl :)
[14:43] <eslerm> s390-tools needs a reviewer, I'll see what I can do post sprint
[14:43] <eslerm> :D
[14:44] <eslerm> we like writing fuzzers, perl might be useful for that :)
[14:44] <didrocks> right!
[14:45] <cpaelzer> s390-tools itself is in, it is just the extra rust vendored bits I think
[14:45] <eslerm> I may set openscap to Incomplete until owning team can help address upstream
[14:45] <eslerm> yeah, we would be focusing on rust. there is some older crypto tools that I would like a light re-review on as well
[14:46] <cpaelzer> ok
[14:46] <cpaelzer> thanks for closig out opensacp one or the other way
[14:47] <didrocks> ok, sounds like everything is covered, let’s move to…
[14:47] <didrocks> #topic Any other business?
[14:47] <didrocks> As I said, I will have a ongoing conflict starting next week for the meeting
[14:47] <eslerm> I'll put openscap on Security's Riga discussion too
[14:47] <didrocks> eslerm: +1
[14:48] <didrocks> I’m fine to do it like jamespage and have assigned items (one per meeting) that I do afterwards
[14:48] <cpaelzer> ok didrocks
[14:48] <didrocks> I will be able to read back at the end of the meeting
[14:48] <cpaelzer> we will miss your discussion input though
[14:48] <cpaelzer> can't we get rid of the others
[14:48] <cpaelzer> who is beating us in importance?
[14:48] <didrocks> cpaelzer: taking my children at school? :p
[14:49] <cpaelzer> ah
[14:49] <cpaelzer> ok, that is not a person I'd complain to :-)
[14:49] <didrocks> :p
[14:49] <cpaelzer> I thought some odd invite has caused this
[14:49] <didrocks> this is why it’s a short interruption, I’m back afterwards
[14:49] <didrocks> it’s just that it’s at THAT time
[14:49] <cpaelzer> didrocks: you can try to be the next one trying to find a new meeting slot that works for all
[14:49] <cpaelzer> not sure if you'll be successful, but you can try fishing for options
[14:49] <didrocks> challenge accepted!
[14:50] <didrocks> let me write it something and I will SPAM you all this week :)
[14:50] <cpaelzer> worst case, nothing changes and you become mostly an after-the.fact commenter :-/
[14:50] <cpaelzer> +1 on this kind of spam
[14:50] <didrocks> yeah, but I agree that would be better, however slyon being away, I will miss his input
[14:50] <didrocks> but let’s give it a try and we can always revisit anyway
[14:51] <eslerm> Seth will be away for at least two more weeks
[14:51] <didrocks> ok, so let’s keep current time for now
[14:51] <didrocks> I will email all of you
[14:51] <cpaelzer> eslerm: but you will cover or also unavailable?
[14:51] <didrocks> and I will bother Seth once he is back
[14:51] <eslerm> cpaelzer: yes, technically ooo today
[14:51] <eslerm> thanks didrocks
[14:52] <eslerm> err, yes I will be here those weeks
[14:52] <didrocks> anything else to mention?
[14:52] <cpaelzer> not from me
[14:52] <eslerm> not from me
[14:52] <didrocks> ok, let’s close then! Thank you all :)
[14:52] <didrocks> #endmeeting
[14:52] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 14:52:52 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-09-26-14.30.moin.txt
[14:52] <eslerm> thanks all o/
[14:53] <cpaelzer> thank you all + didrocks especially
[14:55] <didrocks> yw!
[20:00] <madhens> o/
[20:00] <toddy> o/
[20:00] <guiverc> o/
[20:00] <mesebrec> o/
[20:01] <madhens> That's four of us so far!
[20:02] <mesebrec> How many were planning on coming?
[20:02] <toddy> I don't know
[20:02] <guiverc> thanks for reminder email madhens :)
[20:03]  * Eickmeyer watches from the shadows
[20:03] <toddy> Hi Eickmeyer :)
[20:03] <Eickmeyer> Hey everyone!
[20:03] <madhens> Hello there :)
[20:03] <Eickmeyer> Miss you all and hope to see you at Summit!
[20:03] <guiverc> G'day Eickmeyer
[20:04] <Eickmeyer> Hey guiverc !
[20:05] <madhens> For any of the more veteran CC people, is 4 out of 7 quorum?
[20:05] <toddy> I think so.
[20:06] <madhens> Great! Would anyone like to be chair?
[20:07] <mesebrec> This is my first meeting at all, so I'd rather not be it :)
[20:07]  * Eickmeyer pings teward because reasons
[20:08] <guiverc> ditto, but https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/how-to-lead-a-community-council-meeting/3432 maybe helpful
[20:08] <teward> *tactically nukes the channel*
[20:08] <teward> i just got off a call with Microsoft finally so ye
[20:09]  * guiverc has had sunrise occur outside my window (mins ago); alas cloud cover today...
[20:09] <madhens> Woot! Thomas, if you could lead this month I'll take the next meeting, promise.
[20:09] <teward> can we delay by 2 minutes while i go to the restroom quick?  8 coffees today and this is the first break i've had
[20:09] <madhens> Of course!
[20:10] <madhens> I need to add milk and honey to my tea.
[20:10] <mesebrec> Thomas is rebooting after a call with Microsoft :)
[20:10] <guiverc> ;0
[20:10] <guiverc> :) (sorry)
[20:12] <madhens> Hi @coolbhavi!
[20:12] <coolbhavi> Hello @madhens sorry for jumping in  late
[20:13] <madhens> No worries! We'll be starting in a few minutes
[20:13] <toddy> coolbhavi: hello. we are also just finding each other. nothing missed so far
[20:14] <teward> *burps*
[20:14] <teward> okay time to load it up
[20:14] <teward> #startmeeting Community Council meeting, 20230926
[20:14] <meetingology> Meeting started at 20:14:28 UTC.  The chair is teward.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[20:14] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[20:14] <coolbhavi> Ah ok 😃
[20:14] <teward> Greetings, and welcome to the Community Council meeting on September 26th, 2023.  It's been a long while since we had a true meeting!
[20:15] <mesebrec> \o/
[20:15] <toddy> \o/
[20:15] <teward> I do not see any topics in the Community Council category on Discourse that need our attention so I'm skipping that
[20:15] <coolbhavi> Hello to all the CC members
[20:16] <teward> CC members though, do me a favor and shout out if you're here or not
[20:16] <guiverc> Present
[20:16] <teward> because keeping an ID on who is or isn't present at each meeting is helpful for long term identification of activity
[20:16] <madhens> here!
[20:16] <toddy> here
[20:16] <mesebrec> here!
[20:17] <teward> and me makes five.  with two not present :)
[20:18] <teward> #info Present: Chris Guiver (cguiver), Monica Ayhens-Madon (madhens), Torsten Franz (toddy), Merlijn Sebrechts (mesebrec), Thomas Ward (teward)
[20:18] <teward> #topic Topics of Discussion
[20:18] <teward> Anyone got any specific topics to bring up at the meeting?
[20:18] <madhens> LoCo Council rebooting
[20:18] <teward> #topic LoCo Council Rebooting
[20:19] <teward> madhens: you have the floor :)
[20:19] <coolbhavi> Yay!
[20:21] <teward> It's my understanding we have a request to reboot the LoCo Council and such to get a proper governance team set up for LoCos, but as I am inundated with a hundred items today, I don't currently have the full list of items necessary for us to talk about RE: this topic on hand, hence why I handed the table to madhens for leading that discussion
[20:21] <madhens> Hi! There has been a lot of interest in bringing new life into the LoCos, and some of our community members, like coolbhavi here, have been doing a lot of work in their areas. To help support them, and to enable them to help relaunch old LoCos, create new ones, and make it easier for people to find each other out in the real world, I support reviving the LoCo council, with the goal of having new elections by year's end.
[20:22] <madhens> I think that is at least where we need to start, and what action is most important for us to take as the CC.
[20:22] <madhens> And why I badgered you all with polls and e-mails :)
[20:23] <mesebrec> I think that's a great idea, and thank you madhens for working on this! <3
[20:23] <guiverc> likewise (great Idea & thanks madhens )
[20:23] <coolbhavi> Yes we the loco rebooters team are putting a lot of effort on rebooting the loco ecosystem over past few months
[20:23] <teward> I don't know if we ever defined the requirements for a LoCo council member and what their list of duties would be.  So the first thing we have to do as the CC is define the requirements for someone to qualify as a member and to enumerate the general tasks that a LoCo Council member would have to address.  From that, we then have to put out a call for nominations and ask people to put their names in for nomination.
[20:25] <madhens> Do we feel this can be something done by the CC and ask for feedback from the community on Discourse - or from the group of LoCo rebooters we have at present?
[20:25] <madhens> I feel this can be something done by next month.
[20:25] <teward> madhens: since it's a Leadership council, the CC has to determine the minimum requirements we have
[20:25] <toddy> I think we have done it in the past cause we have had call for nominations in the past.
[20:25] <madhens> (keep talking - a friend just buzzed in my apartment gate to pick up something. Back in 5!)
[20:26] <teward> toddy: if you can dig up one of those call for nominations that'd be great.
[20:26] <toddy> i seach for it
[20:26] <teward> if we can find that and the historic requirements then we only as the CC have to decide if those requirements make sense
[20:26] <coolbhavi> @teward: for me being a former loco council member the requirements can be simple like being an ubuntu member with an interest in local communities ecosystem
[20:26] <teward> and then put out a call for nominations on each mechanism we want to announce it on.
[20:26] <toddy> teward: https://fridge.ubuntu.com/2020/10/29/call-for-nominations-for-the-local-communities-council/
[20:27] <toddy> #link https://fridge.ubuntu.com/2020/10/29/call-for-nominations-for-the-local-communities-council/
[20:27] <teward> toddy: need to be chair for that, and i'm the only chair atm
[20:27] <guiverc> thanks toddy
[20:27] <teward> #link https://fridge.ubuntu.com/2020/10/29/call-for-nominations-for-the-local-communities-council/
[20:28] <teward> note that as we approach election we need to also get all the Ubuntu members' emails that're alive to send the CIVS poll out to, since they changed the CIVS poll system to require us to specify individual recipients now, but I can dredge up rbasak's scripts for doing something like that, I think rbasak had such a script package I can adapt for the CC's needs
[20:28] <mesebrec> How many council members do we need? It might be a good idea to add an additional point to the requirements "be willing to spend some time during the next year to get the loco council running again"
[20:29] <teward> I don't disagree, but it should be an Odd Number
[20:29] <coolbhavi> Same as the CC quorum would do
[20:29] <mesebrec> I volunteer to get the emails and do the poll, once we're there.  I already did it for another election using CIVS' new policy
[20:29] <madhens> 5 or 7 seems good?
[20:29] <toddy> than we take 5?
[20:29] <teward> 7 seems like a lot, 3 is too small, so 5 is a good target number.  Unless we want it to be an even number with a CC member also serving on it as any tie breakers
[20:29] <mesebrec> ok for 5
[20:29] <guiverc> I like 5
[20:29] <madhens> go for 5
[20:30] <coolbhavi> +1 @teward
[20:30] <teward> #info CC has determined LoCo Council will consist of 5 members.
[20:30] <teward> #info Previous info item had unanimous acceptance by present members when teward proposed that value
[20:31] <teward> do we want to add a requirement as mesebrec suggested, adding a requirement of "be willing to spend some time to get the loco council running again"?
[20:31] <teward> and do we have any issues with a 2-year term for LoCo Council Members?
[20:31] <toddy> I have no issue with the 2 year term
[20:31] <mesebrec> +1 for two year term
[20:32] <guiverc> I'm not sure the requirement would gain much (would people put name forward if not willing to spend time)... no issue with 2 year term
[20:32] <madhens> +1 two year term
[20:32] <teward> #info CC has identified LoCo Council Member terms will be a 2-year term.  (unanimous acceptance by all present CC members at this meeting)
[20:32] <madhens> I would be willing to work on the wording for that requirement - I think it's necessary context for the first LoCo council back after such a long absence
[20:33] <mesebrec> I also propose to remove the "be available during typical meeting hours". The loco council can decide new meeting hours themselves.
[20:33] <mesebrec> and async contributors are still valuable.
[20:33] <madhens> Agree, mesebrec
[20:33] <guiverc> I agree
[20:33] <coolbhavi> @teward:  +1 as interest in local communities ecosystem can help speed up the activities of reeboot
[20:33] <teward> agreed, but we will require certain things to be done within a reasonable timeframe after the council is restaffed
[20:33] <madhens> Especially since LoCo Council might have huge range in time zones
[20:34] <teward> so post-election I would want to put up a requirement for the elected members to decide regular meeting times among themselves on a consistent schedule within 30d of election, for example
[20:34] <madhens> Agreed
[20:34] <madhens> Could that be async or two meetings to cover time zones as needed?
[20:34] <guiverc> i have no problem with that; +1
[20:35] <coolbhavi> +1 can we have each member representative of different time zones? and meet 2 times a month?
[20:35] <teward> madhens: if they need to decide something they need to be quorate each meeting
[20:35] <teward> even if we have different timezones, etc.  (see: Membership Boards)
[20:35] <teward> and offset meeting times
[20:35] <teward> (also see DMB schedules)
[20:36] <coolbhavi> 3 on 5 for quorum then!
[20:36] <teward> madhens: if they aren't quorate then they can move to lists, DIscourse, etc. for voting as long as it's logged/indexed somewhere (probably a case for a mailing list either via lists.u.c or launchpad)
[20:36] <madhens> Excellent!
[20:36] <mesebrec> indeed
[20:36] <teward> i'm not against two meetings that are offset from each other to cover different time zones
[20:36] <madhens> That settles any issues I have
[20:36] <coolbhavi> +1
[20:36] <teward> it's why the DMB and such have multiple meetings a month, offset by 2 weeks and different times
[20:36] <guiverc> +1
[20:36] <mesebrec> What is DMB?
[20:36] <teward> mesebrec: Developer Membership Board
[20:37] <teward> sorry i wear a bazillion hats ;)
[20:37] <mesebrec> :)
[20:37] <teward> mesebrec: Devel Membership Board - delegated decisions of whether to grant upload privs to the archives to developers from the TB, with TB ultimately being its governance group (with the CC being TB governance though it's rare we do anything with the TB)
[20:38] <teward> ok let me add these notes
[20:38] <mesebrec> That's clear, thanks!
[20:38] <teward> #info CC will require post-election the LoCo Council to decide within 30d a regular meeting schedule to replace the 'old' and irrelevant schedules
[20:38] <coolbhavi> So until what time does the call for nominations be open? Perhaps a month maybe?
[20:39] <teward> #info LoCo Council will have to decide whether to have one meeting a month or twice a month with timezone offsets.  Such meetings must have at least 3 of 5 members to be quorate at the time of the meetings selected.
[20:39] <teward> coolbhavi: typically I'd say two months or six weeks at the discretion of our choice, but unless we want to move the election completion to end of January and just get the processes started now, I'd say that 6 weeks is the lower limit of how long we should run this, unless we all agree 1 month is sufficient.
[20:40] <teward> my opinion, obviously, but still a valid one
[20:40] <teward> thoughts from the rest of the Council members?
[20:40] <coolbhavi> We were planning to announce results in the ubuntu summit :)
[20:40] <teward> remind me when the summit happens?
[20:41] <madhens> November 3-5
[20:41] <toddy> 1 month is ok for me. but we can also take six weeks.
[20:41] <teward> well it's September 26 now, a month gets us to October 26, elections typically run 2 weeks in general for all elections
[20:41] <teward> so that schedule puts us beyond the timeframe requested
[20:41] <guiverc> we only have ~1 month to meet Summit
[20:41] <teward> as i said
[20:42] <madhens> I agree with Toddy. It would be great if we could have results by the summit, but I also don't want to rush
[20:42] <mesebrec> Honestly, closing nominations _after_ summit is a good idea, I think.
[20:42] <teward> I'm actually in favor of using the Summit as a mechanism to announce that we're reopening the LoCo Council
[20:42] <mesebrec> That way, we can poke people at the summit to nominate themselves
[20:42] <teward> and we are accepting nominations.
[20:43] <madhens> With actual poking!
[20:43] <guiverc> :)
[20:43] <toddy> :)
[20:43] <coolbhavi> +1 :)
[20:43] <teward> and then we run the vote *after* the Summit so we can give the Ubuntu Members enough time to actually vote *in* the election
[20:43] <teward> rather than rushing it
[20:43] <mesebrec> Good idea!
[20:43] <coolbhavi> Fine by me 😊
[20:43] <guiverc> I like idea of no rush
[20:44] <teward> if we're all OK with that, then we can operate on a six week operation for the nomination period, and then the CC will have an internal discussion or meeting (perhaps not here but in a private channel or such as needed) for deciding who in the nominations list IS eligible and then get the election started after that.
[20:44] <coolbhavi> Have a session on loco reboot where we can actually catch the pulse of the people
[20:45] <coolbhavi> At the summit
[20:45] <guiverc> What you suggest sounds good to me teward
[20:45] <coolbhavi> So +1 for this
[20:45] <toddy> teward: +1
[20:45] <teward> coolbhavi: that's something I'd recommend, yes, because if we get a lot of positive input that'll help get more nominations
[20:45] <teward> so six weeks after we announce opening of nominations for accepting, a day or two for the CC to review nominations and eliminate anyone who isn't qualified or who we wish to reject/veto because of sane reasons (like they do too many things and there's an assumption of time conflict, etc.) or such, and then two weeks for running the election.
[20:45] <madhens> Agreed, teward
[20:46] <teward> #info Schedule: 6wk nominations period after opening and announcing call for nominations, 2-3 days for CC to review nominations list, 2 weeks for (expedited) election vote runtime via CIVS.
[20:47] <teward> toddy: you're OK with handling the emails, etc. for this?
[20:47] <teward> and are we all OK with people submitting their nominations to community-council@lists.u.c?
[20:47] <teward> (part of the email is telling them where to submit nominations, self or otherwise)
[20:47] <madhens> Yes
[20:48] <guiverc> sounds appropriate to me; +1
[20:48] <toddy> yes
[20:48] <mesebrec> yes
[20:48] <teward> #info Nominations will be emailed to community-council@lists.ubuntu.com for review.
[20:49] <teward> #action Prepare and send emails out for the call for nominations, etc. for the election runs according to approved schedule. - toddy
[20:49] <meetingology> ACTION: Prepare and send emails out for the call for nominations, etc. for the election runs according to approved schedule. - toddy
[20:49] <teward> anything else on this topic?
[20:49] <mesebrec> Just a clarification: does the call for nominations start at summit or before?
[20:50] <teward> that's a good question, thoughts madhens, guiverc, toddy?
[20:50] <teward> and what's your opinion on it mesebrec?
[20:50] <toddy> mesebrec: before
[20:50] <teward> six weeks from Today(TM) puts us closing the election on Nov 7th, so maybe we wait two weeks before we open the election
[20:50] <guiverc> I understood it as nominations start BEFOPE summit, with summit within the 6 week period (so actual poking etc can occur)
[20:50] <toddy> we can start it one or two weeks before
[20:50] <madhens> Before, and elections after. I like that timeline, teward.
[20:50] <coolbhavi> I would be fine with before just to get the ball rolling at the summit
[20:51] <mesebrec> Ok for doing call in two weeks
[20:51] <mesebrec> *starting call
[20:52] <teward> #info Additional timeline notes: Call for Nominations and established timeline will be sent starting on Monday, October 16, 2023, in order to have the middle of nomination period be directly in mid-nomination-period overlap with the November Ubuntu Summit, ending post-summit, with election after that.
[20:52] <teward> closing the nominations*
[20:52] <teward> (where I said closing the election before oops)
[20:52] <teward> I don't have any objections to any of this, any other objections or concerns?
[20:53] <guiverc> none.
[20:53] <toddy> noone
[20:53] <madhens> none
[20:54] <teward> mesebrec: any objections, concerns, or questions?
[20:54] <mesebrec> none, if toddy is OK with doing emails
[20:54] <teward> yep, we're all set :)
[20:54] <toddy> yes, that's okay for me :)
[20:54] <teward> nice, now a short little topic from me
[20:54] <mesebrec> great! :)
[20:54] <teward> #topic Issues with Certain Contributors and Various Teams
[20:55] <teward> It has been brought to my attention by members of Canonical through several mechanisms that we have ongoing issues with a certain person attempting to contribute in a poor way, with an attitude towards it that is grating to various teams and processes
[20:56] <coolbhavi> A word of thanks to CC members for pushing ahead the loco ecosystem
[20:56] <teward> Both the Security Team members and members of other Canonical teams (Desktop, etc.) have independently approached me regarding a few different contributors I will not name here, but I will be sending an email within the next three days that needs all CC members to review regarding this, and it will end up in our private processing queue on the mailing list.
[20:56] <teward> Including what we will need to determine in regards to this contributor.
[20:56] <teward> so just an FYI to the rest of the members, that's coming in the chain.
[20:57] <teward> #topic AOB
[20:57] <guiverc> ack & thanks for notice teward
[20:57] <teward> I have no other items on my list.
[20:57] <teward> coolbhavi: thanks for the thank you!  We're happy to support the wider community!  :)
[20:57] <mesebrec> A few topics were proposed on discourse, but I don't think we have time for them.
[20:57] <guiverc> there were some responses to madhens agenda post; https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/call-for-agenda-topics-september-2023/38589/4
[20:57] <teward> mesebrec: we can add them as future items, let me dredge that up
[20:57] <toddy> It is also late in my time zone. :)
[20:58] <mesebrec> 23:00 here, cats are complaining they have not yet received dinner ;)
[20:58] <teward> # Future Topics for Discussion (deferred by CC to future meeting or ML)
[20:58] <madhens> It also could be possible to do some async prep. I also think the Matrix issue is for IRC Council, at least initially.
[20:58] <teward> oops
[20:58] <toddy> mesebrec: :P
[20:58] <teward> #topic Future Topics for Discussion (deferred by CC to future meeting or ML for async discussion)
[20:58] <madhens> Oh no! Feed those kitties mesebrec !
[20:58] <teward> #subtopic Discussion on Introducing New Technologies: Discuss the potential introduction and adoption of new technologies for better collaboration and efficiency within the community.
[20:59] <teward> #subtopic Updates on Projects : Provide updates on ongoing projects within the community. This will keep everyone in the loop and can help identify areas where additional support may be needed
[20:59] <teward> #subtopic Onboarding: Turning a new volunteer into an active contributor usually requires a lot of time, effort, and patience. Do the CC Members see any low-hanging fruit to increase successful integration and retention of new volunteers among the Flavors and the technical Teams?
[20:59] <teward> also quick note on this topic:
[20:59] <teward> #topic #subtopic Modern Communication Platforms - Call for Feedback
[20:59] <teward> blah oops
[20:59] <teward> #topic Modern Communication Platforms - Call for Feedback
[21:00] <teward> I've been in contact with Canonical about the various platforms that have been requested
[21:00] <teward> and proposed old-style bridging like we use on Lubuntu or other teams/groups to bridge all chats together (using Matterbridge as the mechanism).  You can see cross-talk in #ubuntu-quality between Telegram and IRC, etc. as an example
[21:01] <teward> I said that the CC doesn't need to weigh in on a decision for this, as this is less a requirement for CC decision/discussion and more a "How do we handle the multiple chat platforms thing", but we can async discuss this on the ML
[21:01] <coolbhavi> Yes I had a post on the Ubuntu beginners team and ubuntu developer advisory team for the contributing member conversion :)
[21:01] <teward> so nothing more there.
[21:01] <mesebrec> For the record: Snapcrafters is working on improving onboarding for new contributors to the snap ecosystem. Contact me if you want to be included and/or are interested to help out building a better process.
[21:01] <teward> #topic AOB (again)
[21:01] <teward> Any other business or are we good?  I know all of us are hitting hard-limits
[21:01] <mesebrec> Good ^o^
[21:01] <guiverc> i'm happy.
[21:02] <teward> madhens: make sure to schedule the next meeting.  We can have private ad-hoc meetings if we need to discuss things as well
[21:02] <madhens> No other business I can think of.
[21:02] <madhens> Will do.
[21:02] <rbasak> You mentioned me above. https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/how-to-create-an-election/1387/2 and that thread links to everything you need I think.
[21:02] <toddy> From me no other things
[21:02] <teward> #topic Next Meeting: TBD (check emails from madhens for next meeting, and next meeting announcement call for topics on Discourse)
[21:02] <teward> Great, then I think we're golden!
[21:02] <teward> rbasak: ack, thanks, though I think toddy has the process down pat :)
[21:02] <teward> #endmeeting
[21:02] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 21:02:45 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-09-26-20.14.moin.txt
[21:02] <teward> There we go, thank you everyone!
[21:02] <madhens> Great meeting everyone!
[21:02] <teward> Food time for me now.
[21:03] <guiverc> Thank you teward
[21:03] <mesebrec> Thanks everyone!
[21:03] <teward> you're welcome :)
[21:03] <guiverc> Thanks everyone
[21:03] <madhens> Have good food and sleeps, everyone, and I'll  e-mail about the October meeting by the end of the week. :)
[21:03] <teward> it's been the first CC meeting in a long time so apologies for the more 'informal' start of the meetings
[21:03] <toddy> Thanks teward
[21:03] <teward> we'll be better structured tomorrow :)
[21:03] <teward> s/tomorrow/next time/
[21:04] <madhens> teward thanks so much for chairing
[21:04] <toddy> thanks rbasak :)
[21:04] <madhens> We'll be sure to rotate and all get the hang of it.
[21:05] <madhens> I need to head out too but good night, all!
[21:05] <teward> o/
[21:05] <guiverc> o/
[21:05] <toddy> Good night, madhens
[21:06] <coolbhavi> Good night all
[21:06] <toddy> Good night, coolbhavi