=== gboutry_ is now known as gboutry [15:31] good morning [15:31] o/ [15:31] morning everyone! [15:33] #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status [15:33] Meeting started at 15:33:45 UTC. The chair is sarnold. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [15:33] Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage pushkarnk ( dviererbe ) [15:33] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [15:33] #topic current component mismatches [15:33] Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams [15:33] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg [15:33] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg [15:34] in mismatches, esmtp and xterm both feel familiar, lets skip /. [15:34] proposed has some intel driver things [15:34] hey slyon [15:34] https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg [15:34] uh, here as well ( a bit) - sorry timezone madness [15:34] thanks sarnold [15:35] daylight stupid time [15:35] o/ (sorry having a meeting conflict) [15:35] libva -> intel-media-driver, from desktop, hopefully jbicha / seb128 can be on top of this [15:35] libva is an open case, drivfen by desktop [15:35] so yes, desktop is on this [15:36] we are actively working on it [15:36] I wasn't aware of the right side of this tree though [15:36] pcs -> ruby-rackup and ruby-rack -> ruby-rack-session are likely on server team, is that one for jchittum? [15:36] that is for us indeed [15:36] we looked at it [15:37] we would either need to move too much into the future (not happeneing so late) [15:37] and as usual, the kernel does kernel things, I hope apw and team are on top of the linux-realtime and linux-signed-realtime [15:37] (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libva/+bug/2104050) [15:37] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2104050 in libva (Ubuntu) "[FFe] move libva2 to Ubuntu main" [Undecided, New] [15:37] or we need to remove what is in proposed [15:37] the removal is what will happen soon [15:37] cpaelzer: ack, thanks [15:37] "newer versions require libva2" I thuoght we just put work into libva? heh [15:39] well, I think all from this graph is moving [15:39] #topic New MIRs [15:39] Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing [15:39] #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] empty? or broken? heh [15:39] #topic Incomplete bugs / questions [15:39] Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams [15:39] #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 [15:39] empty [15:39] if not in this phase of the cycle then when could it be empty [15:40] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glycin/+bug/2093182 [15:40] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2093182 in glycin (Ubuntu) "[MIR] glycin" [Low, Incomplete] [15:40] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glycin/+bug/2093182 is back to desktop but OK'ish [15:41] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rust-sequoia-sqv/+bug/2089690 [15:41] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2089690 in rust-sequoia-sqv (Ubuntu) "[MIR] rust-sequoia-sq" [Undecided, Incomplete] [15:41] all others are older or expires [15:41] the recent change is expires, odd, I haven't seen that in ages [15:41] because we got better and let rarley something expire [15:42] I think we can go on with the agenda [15:42] does it work if I paste it ... ? [15:42] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libsass-python/+bug/2095581 was waiting on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libsass/+bug/2095582 -- and nico finished that up just before leaving .. [15:42] #topic Process/Documentation improvements [15:42] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2095581 in libsass-python (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libsass-python" [High, Incomplete] [15:42] Mission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues [15:42] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2095582 in libsass (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libsass" [High, In Progress] [15:42] #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls [15:42] #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues [15:43] and a closing yes to the libsass case, thanks sarnold [15:43] oh hah I didn't notice the spelling fix needed for https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/81 [15:43] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 81 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Update README.md" [Open] [15:43] od to open an md file on libsass ... [15:45] is there anything else from the openstack side needed for libsass? We're just blocked on Horizon until libsass and python-libsass are promoted. [15:45] aye, but I wasn't going to harrass him about that on his final day here, heh [15:45] makes sense sarnold [15:45] hi mylesjp, I was just trying to read through to make that decision [15:46] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libsass-python/+bug/2095581 is fine [15:46] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2095581 in libsass-python (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libsass-python" [High, Incomplete] [15:46] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libsass/+bug/2095582 [15:46] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2095582 in libsass (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libsass" [High, In Progress] [15:46] is "Security team ACK for promoting libsass to main, with the considerations described in the paragraph above." [15:46] I need to find what the ask was [15:47] "In summary, for a package that hasn't been maintained in 2 years it seems to be in pretty good shape and, with the use case intended by openstack, it poses minimal risks. It should be noted that if the libsass API was exposed to untrusted input via custom themes or similar functionality served to users, crashes would be quite easy to occur given the nature of the library. Programs that use this library should take reasonable precautions when [15:47] using it." [15:47] mylesjp: is this in the openstack usage parsing only our own, or user controlled input? [15:47] aka "don't build the next squarespace with this" [15:47] I believe only our own [15:48] can you state that on the bug please mylesjp? [15:48] then I should be able to promote both tomorrow [15:48] Yep I'll confirm that. [15:48] thanks [15:48] sarnold: thanks for fixing the typo [15:48] I'm on https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/81/files now [15:48] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 81 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Update README.md" [Open] [15:48] makes sense, merging [15:49] there also is this : https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/82 [15:49] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 82 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "template: force the requester to think about all binary packages" [Open] [15:49] IMHO this makes sense [15:49] as Simon said, the rules were good on this [15:49] but the TODO forces them to state which way they think they want to go [15:49] any objection to it? [15:50] none here [15:50] I only think this should be TODO, TODO-A, TODO-B [15:50] not TODO-A, TODO-A, TODO-B [15:52] added a review [15:52] and a proposed change [15:52] I think we are good [15:52] all else is in draft [15:52] time to jump to the security queue? [15:52] https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/83 [15:52] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Issue 83 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "component-mismatches doesn't watch restricted" [Open] [15:53] this is a bug report [15:53] oh [15:53] how could I miss that [15:54] This needs someone to dive into it [15:54] i'd love to but I can't right now :-/ [15:55] open for debug-volunteers [15:55] poor launchpad is so hammered with things, I can't even get the source to have a look [15:56] poor little guy :( [15:59] I gave jbicha an acknowledgement so he does not think we ignore him [15:59] but I can't see an immediate "you debug this" I could assign it to [15:59] :-/ [15:59] let us go on with the agenda for today [15:59] I'm not expecting immediate action on that bug at all [15:59] bu tyou'd deserve it *sigh* [16:00] but we can't as of right now AFAICS [16:00] we can add it to the quirky(??) todo list :) [16:00] sarnold: time is up and also time for security queue [16:00] heh, yeah :/ [16:01] rodrigo spotted some stale crates in the rust-hwlib [16:01] I know there is some progress on other MIRs recently that is stuck on me to provide feedback before we post [16:01] alas it's been busy lately [16:03] #topic MIR related Security Review Queue [16:03] Mission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable? [16:03] Some clients can only work with one, some with the other escaping - the URLs point to the same place. [16:03] #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 [16:03] #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 [16:03] Internal link [16:03] - ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect [16:03] - ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much [16:03] #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594 [16:03] the jira board is pleasingly well sorted [16:04] oh looks like we got nghttp3 on our list [16:05] heh lp-to-jira is taking an eternity [16:05] yep [16:05] there always is one more [16:06] I wish I felt better about the path forward for http3 support in openssl3 vs curl (3?) vs all the servers .. [16:06] https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/SEC-6022 [16:07] #topic Any other business? [16:07] all good on my end [16:07] cpaelzer: could you review bug 2104050 to confirm that it is good to go, pending FFe approval then AA promotion? [16:07] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2104050 in libva (Ubuntu) "[FFe] move libva2 to Ubuntu main" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2104050 [16:07] I meant bug 2097800 [16:08] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2097800 in libva (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libva" [Undecided, In Progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2097800 [16:08] mylesjp: please make sure subscriptions by the team are in place [16:08] will do, thanks [16:08] that is the most common case something otherwise ready can#t be promoted [16:08] I'll check tomorrow and then do it [16:08] jbicha: looking ... [16:09] cpaelzer: you can check after the meeting [16:09] there is no time other than minimal sleep between now and my thu morning [16:10] and thu morning was already meant for 360, hiring, spec and copydocs for the release [16:10] heh, i'm pretty familiar with the idea of either something gets done now or it gets added to a queue that doesn't seem to shrink .. [16:10] I'll queue you up, but want to give no hard promises :-/ [16:11] jbicha: give me the TL;DR to motivate this - I assume your upload prepped for after beta resolves the findings I had? [16:11] I see Daniel explained some of my already [16:11] yeah I just need more than seconds while in two meetings to see [16:11] If you are confident all asks have been resolved I likely will come to the same conclusion [16:12] Will try to start earlier tomorrow [16:12] sorry jbicha , ... those are these days ... [16:12] anything else? [16:12] I'm sorry for contributing to the overload, I only pinged you in particular since you had done the initial review [16:13] nothing else from me [16:13] #endmeeting [16:13] Meeting ended at 16:13:40 UTC. Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2025/ubuntu-meeting.2025-03-25-15.33.moin.txt [16:13] thanks all :) [16:13] thanks, all! [16:14] thanks everyone! [16:20] thanks all and sarnold in particular [16:35] thanks all! === JanC is now known as Guest1706 [19:59] #startmeeting Technical Board [19:59] Meeting started at 19:59:46 UTC. The chair is mwhudson. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [19:59] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [19:59] seb128, rbasak, teward: ping [20:00] o/ [20:00] *burps* [20:00] o/ [20:01] i'm here, but i'm splitting some attention right now with a nuclear-grade issue that i'm still dealing with outside of Ubuntu and the Ubuntu space [20:01] (stuff that involves 10s of 1000s of dollars) [20:01] hey there! [20:01] ah we [20:01] 're all here, great [20:01] give me one min, just back from evening rush hours [20:02] #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda [20:02] ah, mwhudson is chair, for some reason I didn't remember we agreed to swap :) [20:02] seb128: ye this is why i put stuff on the agenda of who is to chair [20:02] i was backup chair so :p [20:02] yeah i don't want to chair next couple of times [20:02] you won't someone else is next ;) [20:03] right, you have a couple of months before it's your turn again :) [20:03] #topic action review [20:03] rbasak to follow up on https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2023-December/005859.html with the release team [20:04] I did follow up to the ubuntu-release@ mailing list. [20:04] you sent an email about this to which there was no reply? [20:04] Indeed but I did just follow up on Matrix. We can expect a reply by 18 April: https://matrix.to/#/!HIqUfDuodVisBWdrTr:ubuntu.com/$zxOAAo7_zaQXSKRZ09TgChQa44_oXOLNrxCFg2_5BxA?via=ubuntu.com&via=matrix.org&via=matrix.debian.social [20:05] ok [20:05] #link https://matrix.to/#/!HIqUfDuodVisBWdrTr:ubuntu.com/$zxOAAo7_zaQXSKRZ09TgChQa44_oXOLNrxCFg2_5BxA?via=ubuntu.com&via=matrix.org&via=matrix.debian.social [20:05] seb128 to continue the discussion with IS and propose the script from rbasak or its output to be integrated in their process [20:05] this is the leaver processing thing. any update? [20:06] I send a format-patch patch to the Canonical RT this week, but still ongoing [20:06] (they have a whitelist in a private repo where I don't have push access) [20:06] so carry over please [20:06] ack [20:06] seb128 to continue working with AA and Release teams to document their membership process and link to it from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard#Team_Delegations [20:06] carry over alsp [20:06] also [20:06] teward to follow up with "who can vote" and documentation at https://ubuntu.com/community/governance/technical-board with the CC [20:07] one moment on seb128's task i may have poked for the AA team to bring it up in their sync up next time ;) [20:07] mwhudson, (as a side note you are doing meetingology wrong) [20:07] mwhudson: relayed to CC, no response/action yet from CC [20:07] seb128: i'm sure i am! [20:07] i can help [20:07] #chair mwhudson teward [20:07] Current chairs: mwhudson, teward [20:08] #subtopic rbasak to follow up on https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2023-December/005859.html with the release team [20:08] #subtopic seb128 to continue the discussion with IS and propose the script from rbasak or its output to be integrated in their process [20:08] mwhudson, I usually use the previous meeting log as a script, https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2025/03/11/%23ubuntu-meeting.html [20:08] I usually use #action, not #subtopic, for the carry overs [20:08] teward, thanks :) [20:08] #subtopic teward to follow up with "who can vote" and documentation at https://ubuntu.com/community/governance/technical-board with the CC [20:08] Then they appear in the action list in the minutes [20:08] i can massage the minutes later i guess [20:09] sorry I didn't mean to disrupt the meeting [20:09] teward to report to the CC what we don't desire an election right now, and will reconsider in six months [20:09] seb128: no worries [20:09] mwhudson: relayed, though I think they already assumed this from discussions on leadership meetings, etc. [20:09] but yeah, we usually use # action for things that need to be carried over [20:09] #subtopic teward to report to the CC what we don't desire an election right now, and will reconsider in six months [20:09] so we can consider this done? [20:09] mwhudson: yep [20:09] hooray [20:09] seb128: i'll do a last minute "task cleanup" item before we end meeting [20:09] and we'll assign tasks there [20:09] ack [20:09] teward to write up a proposal for how the move away from the wiki will work [20:10] #subtopic teward to write up a proposal for how the move away from the wiki will work [20:10] i guess! [20:10] that's being carried over. [20:10] this is for minutes [20:10] #subtopic tsimonq2 to study "look into scripting for packages in flavor-specific overlays" from https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/02/13/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t20:24 and suggest to the TB what needs doing there [20:10] missed an item first [20:10] #undo [20:10] Removing item from minutes: SUBTOPIC [20:10] #action teward to write up a proposal for how the move away from the wiki will work [20:10] ACTION: teward to write up a proposal for how the move away from the wiki will work [20:10] #subtopic tsimonq2 to study "look into scripting for packages in flavor-specific overlays" from https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/02/13/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t20:24 and suggest to the TB what needs doing there [20:11] tsimonq2: ? [20:11] I was able to gather some initial feedback from most of the flavors, both publicly and privately. I'm working on scripting a few things to make this easier to work through, but I've also been caught up with general Plucky work, so unfortunately that specific tooling has gone to the backburner. That being said, it's now something that people are starting to actively think about, which is a good [20:11] (sorry by the way) [20:11] sign, so by next meeting I will have that tooling taken care of, so we can start actually triaging some of these items. Thanks for delegating this to me. [20:11] Thank you for working on it! [20:12] #action tsimonq2 to study "look into scripting for packages in flavor-specific overlays" from https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/02/13/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t20:24 and suggest to the TB what needs doing there (carried over for status update by next meeting) [20:12] ACTION: tsimonq2 to study "look into scripting for packages in flavor-specific overlays" from https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/02/13/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t20:24 and suggest to the TB what needs doing there (carried over for status update by next meeting) [20:12] yes thanks [20:12] #topic Should we endorse the Open Source AI Definition? [20:12] i still haven't done my background reading on this [20:13] neither did I [20:13] (peanut gallery wonders what other distros are saying) [20:13] juliank: part of the background reading i guess! [20:13] If TB members aren't in the Ubuntu Governance channel, you should be (and we can get you invites ASAP). Lots of recommended reading there on this specific topic. [20:13] i did some very basic cursory research on this [20:14] and i think we need to have a larger discussion on this internally before we make any decisions [20:14] not only because not everyone is in Governance channel on matrix but because I'm tempted to see what other distributions think [20:14] * juliank can help and start a GR in Debian about it :D [20:14] yes, i think it is something the techboard should have an opinion on but i'm not in a place to have an intelligent discussion now [20:14] especially since I'm not 100% sure we *SHOULD* endorse this definition, as I'm not sure Ubuntu has a say in whether we should or shouldn't endorse it. [20:15] teward: That, in and of itself, is up for debate too, heh [20:15] but again that requires deeper discussion [20:15] (i am in the governance matrix but i can't claim i keep up with it terribly closely) [20:15] mwhudson: (it's the most recent text wall, easy to find ;) ) [20:15] teward: i think i am a little confused about who the 'we's are in your statements btw [20:15] as none of us on the TB have seemed to do any research on it or not yet to even approach an answer, I say we table this as a future items. [20:15] mwhudson: "we" as in Ubuntu in general [20:16] ack [20:16] i have my own opinions RE: AI and definitions that have bias at play beyond my Ubuntu hats [20:16] so we should have an action along the lines of "all: read up on open source ai definition" [20:16] ? [20:17] #action all TB members (teward, mwhudson, rbasak, seb128) to read up on Open Source AI Definition and consideration of proposal to endorse the definition. [20:17] ACTION: all TB members (teward, mwhudson, rbasak, seb128) to read up on Open Source AI Definition and consideration of proposal to endorse the definition. [20:17] +1 [20:17] thanks [20:17] i only remember a handful of nicks at a time so :P [20:17] I did look into this, and did already reply to the ML. [20:17] I don't think I have any further action on this right now, pending involvement from others. [20:17] rbasak: Which list did you reply on? [20:18] The TB list I think. [20:18] Ah sorry, yes, it was a month later, I was in the wrong archive [20:18] Two weeks later, but yes, it was in a different month :) [20:18] ok well the rest of us need to catch up then! [20:18] point not withstanding, we don't have any consensus on this at the moment so we should push that item / topic to later. [20:18] ack [20:19] #topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item) [20:19] We were subscribed to https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2103528 which seems to have been a heated dispute at the time, judging from conversation on Matrix [20:19] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2103528 in ubuntu-kylin-software-center (Ubuntu) "Remove apt-xapian-index" [Undecided, Triaged] [20:20] this is where i realize i am not subscribed to the ml (i thought i had submitted a request last time) [20:21] I think we cooled down and resolved the conflict, but there may be interesting questions to consider, but it may be more for the archive team [20:21] you shouldn't have to submit a request, I though that was part of the election/having the new board... [20:22] i'm not sure i want to have an opinion on this bug [20:22] the relevant points where in #8/#10 [20:22] um [20:22] #11 [20:22] seb128: technical-board@ is just a regular public mailing list, so there's no special subscription status for TB members there [20:22] I do have an opinion here that I'd like to state [20:23] rbasak, sorry, I guess I got confused with DMB and by the fact that mwhudson mentioning submitting a request which I assumed that he meant he was waiting for approval [20:24] i suppose the general issue of whether to remove something from the archive because it is kind of old and crufty _is_ a techboard topic [20:24] Yeah, so... [20:24] > Technical Board to make adequate communication and documentation a policy for removal bugs. [20:25] I consider it standard policy to follow Debian for crufty package removals; but also I did the removals in both so it would have been helpful to also communicate on both sides [20:25] I disagree with that for the record, I see those policy more an archive admin topic than a TB one... [20:25] In general my view is that if somebody wants to maintain something in the archive, and it's for the benefit of Ubuntu users at large (and not just themselves), _and_ they take reasonable care of any consequences for the rest of the archive, then they should be OK to do it. [20:26] I'm not sure if this should be an AA or a TB concern, but I'm just sharing my opinion here as an Ubuntu developer. [20:27] i think i agree with seb that the requirements for the removal bugs should be set by the AA team as its the AA team that will be processing the bugs [20:27] This also came up here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/git-ubuntu/+bug/2091859/comments/2 [20:27] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2091859 in git-ubuntu (Ubuntu) "RM: remove git-ubuntu [source, binaries]" [Undecided, Incomplete] [20:27] but i can see some of the higher level policy being TB stuff [20:28] (the cleanliness vs inclusivity dial) [20:28] Separately, and while related it may not apply to apt-xapian-index itself, I'm concerned about Ubuntu delta in Ubuntu-specific package additions and removals that seem opinionated but are a surprise to Ubuntu developers when they find out about them. [20:29] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/add-nvidia-repositories/+bug/2089830 and related bugs are a recent example [20:29] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2089830 in add-nvidia-repositories (Ubuntu Noble) "[SRU] Make add-nvidia-repositories available in jammy and noble" [Undecided, Won't Fix] [20:29] So I wonder if we can be better about communicating Ubuntu-specific additions and removals that are being made for opinionated reasons rather than regular package processing. [20:29] rbasak, firefox in that message was a bad example but I agree on the fact that there is no reason to remove a deb if it is actively maintained by someone [20:30] OK thanks. I might disagree with you on my Firefox example theen, but it might not be worth getting into right now. [20:31] My point is that if Ubuntu is going to take an opinionated stance, perhaps we should be better about communicating that. [20:31] For example, we could make it mandatory for that type of addition or removal to at least be announced somewhere, rather than just being seen by the one AA who happened to process it. [20:31] Currently it's often file bug, ping AA, removal done, bug to removal in minutes [20:31] Someone suggested that this might be seen as parallel to Debian ITPs, which get announced to debian-devel@, allowing for discussion, but not being a process blocker itself. [20:32] Often removals are obviously correct and I wouldn't want to block those. [20:32] So I'm not suggesting that we should do this for all the regular removals that happen for regular maintenance purposes, such as because it's breaking something else in the archive from migrating. [20:33] Anyway [20:33] That's my opinion [20:33] I've now shared it :) [20:33] I'm not sure how much I want to drive such a change right now - I've got enough things on my plate [20:33] (slippery slope when you think libept which was the apt-xapian-index synaptic feature integrator, was ftbfs with the new apt [just did the removal ahead of time]) [20:33] But if the question of an individual addition or removal comes up, that's my current opinion. [20:34] juliank: right - so if there's a specific issue that needs fixing, then I think it's fair to say that the person who wants to keep a particular package can either fix the issue or not object to the removal. [20:34] One cannot demand that others do work for their own preferences [20:34] One cannot demand that others do work for one's own preferences [20:36] sorry getting distracted here [20:36] (I had a system outage sorry) [20:36] I also don't think there is much for us to resolve there so we should probably get the meeting back on tracks [20:36] so we have some opinions but noone with the energy to concretely work on things here [20:36] is *not* much [20:36] Is there anything more to do on that bug? [20:37] Maybe we can unsubcribe ~techboard from it if not [20:37] (and ignore my fix comment) [20:37] rbasak: +1 to unsubscribing [20:37] +1 [20:37] Done [20:37] thanks [20:38] the other email since the meeting was about https://code.launchpad.net/~rkratky/ubuntu-governance-docs/+git/ubuntu-governance-docs/+merge/482863 [20:38] which seems reasonably routine [20:39] maybe i can just merge it [20:39] If they don't materially change the text, we should just merge changes from the Canonical technical authors IMHO [20:39] I'm not familar with ubuntu-governance-docs ... could someone explain what it is and why that's a TB topic? [20:39] Subject to whatever peer review process they might have [20:39] seb128: ~techboard owns the branch it seems [20:39] seb128: it's a place for us to place our own policy documentation that we control [20:39] It was created last year, afaik that was never discussed with the board though? [20:40] (instead of the wiki, which people are looking to retire, AIUI) [20:40] or I missing the memo/meeting where it was introduced [20:40] I needed somewhere to put the agreed text, so with help from Canonical's technical authors, that's where we agreed to put it. [20:40] I did announce it somewhere I'm sure [20:40] is this the branch behind https://ubuntu.com/community/governance/technical-board ? [20:41] No, that's Yet Another Thing, unfortunately :-/ [20:41] ah. that seems suboptimal [20:41] I sort of followed on from the SRU docs here. [20:41] (There may potentially be some rumors about Markdown support in the RTD stuff... not sure how far that is yet.) [20:41] That was public, somewhere... [20:42] There have been at least two cases that I know about where non SRU members have materially "changed" documented SRU policy in the wiki. [20:42] So I very much wanted that kind of documentation maintained somewhere where there's a solid audit trail and review process for changes. [20:42] Sphinx+RTD seemed like the appropriate way to do that. [20:42] (+git) [20:42] i have merged the MP by the way [20:42] Thanks! [20:43] we can talk about docs in AOB perhaps [20:43] #topic [20:43] Check up on community bugs and techboard bugs (standing item) [20:43] blah [20:43] #topic Check up on community bugs and techboard bugs (standing item) [20:43] nothing new here [20:43] @AOB, if there is time / no topics which are more important sure [20:44] #topic Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members) [20:44] tsimonq2: RTD can accept ReST OR MyST, which is a Markdown variant. [20:44] mwhudson: next on the list after you is rbasak, then seb128 after unless seb wants it next. you can keep me as backup [20:44] rbasak: The latter of which isn't supported (in some way), yet... [20:45] (for the chair topic) [20:45] rbasak: ok to do next one? [20:45] I think it works, no? Although I'm not keen on it, since to do anything useful you inevitably have to look up the syntax which is basically ReST embedded into Markdown, so what's the point? [20:45] mwhudson: sure, thanks [20:45] #agreed rbasak to chair next meeting. teward as backup [20:45] AGREED: rbasak to chair next meeting. teward as backup [20:45] #topic AOB [20:46] seb128: got something? [20:46] teward, hum [20:46] i have one thing, not very high priority though [20:46] teward, no, but on the chair, today was supposed to be me and you as backup, I swapped with mwhudson so I would expect next to be you and me as backup [20:46] seb128: i chaired the previous meeting though [20:47] but i'm happy to be standby backup and put you as backup [20:47] ok so I'm getting confused and ignore me :) [20:47] :P [20:47] seb128: i have no issues changing it i've just been going over rotation (which is why i skipped myself) [20:47] (because I got it last, and you and mwhudson swapped positions [20:47] I though we had swapped before DTS for some reason [20:48] so my AOB is that i noticed that ~techboard is a member of ~launchpad-buildd-admins. what's the reasoning there? does it make sense today? [20:48] anyway, let's not spend time on that now, we had people agreeing so let's stick to what was decided before [20:48] yep yep we can always change it up :) [20:48] mwhudson, I've no idea about that... [20:48] #subtopic ~techboard is a member of ~launchpad-buildd-admins [20:48] mwhudson: might be something we follow up with #launchpad or the IS team about [20:49] mwhudson: What jurisdiction does ~launchpad-buildd-admins fall under, is that more Launchpad administration, or is it something the TB is actively meant to monitor/administer? [20:49] ~launchpad-buildd-admins> I suspect the people who might know aren't here right now. It might be best to see if they would be so kind as to brief us before we change anything [20:49] i agree with rbasak [20:49] wait [20:50]