diff options
author | Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> | 2011-09-16 04:29:26 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> | 2011-09-16 04:29:26 +0000 |
commit | 3f31dfc76b43a9283b0e56ea9f73ad3891bd6691 (patch) | |
tree | 0fdcd568533eba4420cfb20b7272acec9f98a992 /meeting-logs/20110913.txt | |
parent | Forgot to commit the log. (diff) | |
download | council-3f31dfc76b43a9283b0e56ea9f73ad3891bd6691.tar.gz council-3f31dfc76b43a9283b0e56ea9f73ad3891bd6691.tar.bz2 council-3f31dfc76b43a9283b0e56ea9f73ad3891bd6691.zip |
Added last council meeting's log and summary.
Diffstat (limited to 'meeting-logs/20110913.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | meeting-logs/20110913.txt | 388 |
1 files changed, 388 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20110913.txt b/meeting-logs/20110913.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c7431af --- /dev/null +++ b/meeting-logs/20110913.txt @@ -0,0 +1,388 @@ +19:01 <@Chainsaw> Alright, let's get started. +19:01 <@Chainsaw> Roll call. +19:01 <@Chainsaw> Chainsaw is here. +19:01 * grobian is here +19:01 <@dberkholz> present and reporting for duty +19:01 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz, hwoarang, betelgeuse, jmbsvicetto, ulm: ping +19:01 * jmbsvicetto is here +19:02 * hwoarang here +19:02 <@Betelgeuse> hello +19:02 <@ulm> here +19:02 <@Chainsaw> That is everyone, thank you. +19:02 <@Chainsaw> Okay, we have 3 bugs with council involvement. +19:02 <@Chainsaw> Correction, 4. +19:03 <@Chainsaw> What do we need to do to move https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331987 along? +19:03 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I count 10 +19:03 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: I look forward to seeing your list. +19:04 <@jmbsvicetto> I think we never replied to Robin - https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331987#c9 +19:04 <@dberkholz> Chainsaw: i count 9, from assignee and CC +19:05 <@jmbsvicetto> Petteri replied on comment 10, but I don't think we decided anything (council) +19:05 <@Chainsaw> Can we make this decision now? +19:05 <@hwoarang> we did din't we? +19:05 <@jmbsvicetto> hwoarang: I mean about comment 9, not about closing the ml +19:05 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: We made a decision, but we did not follow up with robbat2. +19:05 <@ulm> we did in last meeting +19:06 <@grobian> bounce + send email people can subscribe to -project +19:06 <@hwoarang> ok +19:06 <@Chainsaw> post-merge, how should mails to -council be handled? (I suggest SMTP-level +19:06 <@Chainsaw> bounce since the address will not be valid anymore) +19:06 <@jmbsvicetto> ok, I didn't recall that. We should probably add a comment there then +19:06 <@Chainsaw> ^ This is the easy one, where "we concur" is an easy answer. +19:06 <@ulm> the archive of -council will be preserved I hope? +19:06 <@Chainsaw> - What should be done with the subscribers that are only on -council and not on +19:06 <@Chainsaw> -project? +19:06 <@Chainsaw> ^ That is the more interesting question. +19:06 <@dberkholz> i'd go with whatever's easiest w/ infra for mails to the list +19:07 <@dberkholz> autosubscribe but still send the confirmation email +19:07 <@dberkholz> that way people still have to opt in, but the barrier to entry is low +19:08 <@jmbsvicetto> hmm, I think autosubscribe will get them in, so they'll be able to opt-out, not opt-in +19:09 <@Chainsaw> Well, it sounds like we have consensus on the first matter, but not on the second. +19:09 <@jmbsvicetto> I do agree with the autosubscription +19:09 <@hwoarang> would be nice to know how many ppl are subscribed in -council +19:09 <@ulm> maybe send a last message to -council explaining that the list will be closed down and that people should subscribe to -project instead? +19:09 <@grobian> I'm flexible, if people want autosubscription, it's ok with me +19:09 <@hwoarang> would be the decision much easier +19:09 <@dberkholz> well, i want it to be treated as if they just sent an email to gentoo-project+subscribe +19:09 <@dberkholz> so they get the email saying "do you really want to sign up?" and have to reply +19:10 <@Chainsaw> Okay. Shall we reply that we agree with the SMTP-level rejection, but ask how many people are affected by the second question? +19:10 <@grobian> I prefer the way I wrote down first, but better explained by ulm +19:10 <@Chainsaw> That way we do not have to discuss the details until we know how big of an issue it really is. +19:10 <@Chainsaw> If we are talking about 3 people, we might as well e-mail them individually. +19:10 <@hwoarang> if the audience is small then autosubscribe them +19:10 <@hwoarang> otherwise be polite and let them decide what to do +19:11 -!- jbartosik [~jbartosik@gentoo/developer/jbartosik] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] +19:11 <@hwoarang> just my 0.02c +19:11 <@grobian> what are the different opinions here? +19:11 <@grobian> if we can all easily agree, we're done with it +19:11 <@jmbsvicetto> Robin asked we filed a bug to know those numbers, so let's just make the request on that bug and we can have a quite vote after we get the numbers +19:11 <@Chainsaw> grobian: Do we agree that we need to know the numbers affected? +19:12 <@dberkholz> 1) email them and tell 'em to switch. 2) autosubscribe w/ confirmation email 3) autosubscribe w/o confirmation +19:12 <@jmbsvicetto> s/quite/quick/ +19:12 <@dberkholz> is there another option? +19:12 <@grobian> Chainsaw: not important to me, if we want automigration, we don't care if it's 3, or 30000 people +19:12 <@Chainsaw> grobian: But do you agree to ask for numbers and postpone? +19:12 <@Chainsaw> grobian: I would like to move the discussion forward to other bugs. There's 9 more. +19:12 <@grobian> Chainsaw: if you all want that, then I agree if we then can make a "decision" before the next months' meeting +19:13 <@grobian> this takes way too long for a simple little issue +19:13 <@hwoarang> true +19:13 <@Chainsaw> grobian: I know, that is why I am asking you all to agree to a set of two answers. +19:13 <@Chainsaw> grobian: "1) Yes, that is fine. 2) Please give us the number of affected subscribers." +19:13 <@ulm> sounds good +19:13 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: let's vote on waiting for numbers before starting a mail vote +19:13 <@grobian> Chainsaw: ok, agreed +19:13 <@Chainsaw> ulm, grobian: Thank you. +19:13 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Agreed? +19:14 <@jmbsvicetto> yes +19:14 * Chainsaw posts +19:14 <@Chainsaw> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341959 +19:15 <@Chainsaw> The bug is still open. Is it clear what we need to do to close it? +19:16 <@ulm> Chainsaw: tove reopened it with comment #5 +19:16 <@hwoarang> the new patch is already merged to devmanual +19:16 <@hwoarang> i think the bug is fixed +19:16 <@grobian> tove: are you still around? +19:16 <@hwoarang> let me check the devmanual +19:16 <@grobian> let's ask him +19:16 <@Chainsaw> If tove agrees, it would be good to close this off. +19:17 <@hwoarang> ok +19:17 <@grobian> ok, he's not here, let's ask on the bug +19:17 <@jmbsvicetto> I think the mention about eclass deprecation could also be tied to the recent discussions on doing eclass bumps on major rewrites +19:17 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: Could you post to that bug please? +19:17 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: You were last to respond. +19:17 <@hwoarang> yes I will +19:17 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: Thank you. +19:17 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362803 +19:18 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Was that update done please? If it was, could you resolve the bug? +19:18 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I forgot to touch the xml. I'll try to do it this week, but if anyone wants to do it quickly, feel free to +19:18 <@Chainsaw> All: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374931 <- What is left to do? +19:19 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I'll take care of the bug in either case +19:19 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: tove implied he was willing to do it. Could you post a reply saying so? +19:20 <@grobian> Chainsaw: bug seems to suggest the system is up now +19:20 <@Chainsaw> grobian: So can it be resolved? +19:21 <@dberkholz> ask jbartosik whether it's fixed, since he reported it +19:21 <@grobian> Chainsaw: ask betelgeuse, he was mentoring +19:21 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: the app is up, but it's probably best to leave this one to Petteri +19:21 <@Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: Is that bug ready to be resolved? If not, could you post an update saying what is outstanding please? +19:21 <@Betelgeuse> Let's close that. +19:21 <@Chainsaw> All: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234706 <- With Halcy0n no longer on the council, is this dead? +19:21 <@Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: Thank you. Could you do that? +19:22 <@Betelgeuse> new bugs can be filed with https://bugs.gentoo.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Gentoo%20Hosted%20Projects +19:22 <@Chainsaw> MIPS & PowerPC appear to be back to life, so is it obsolete? +19:22 <@grobian> Chainsaw: I vote for yes on 234706 +19:22 <@Chainsaw> Thank you grobian. Other opinions on 234706 please? +19:22 <@Chainsaw> I would like to mark it RESO OBSOLETE. +19:22 <@grobian> agreed +19:22 <@ulm> yeah, it's obsolete +19:22 <@Chainsaw> Both for losing its champion, and for the situation having been more or less resolved now. +19:23 <@hwoarang> Betelgeuse: if we go to close that bug maybe it is time to use tha application? +19:23 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: that bug lead to the mail discussions of the previous council +19:23 <@hwoarang> it is not clear to me if the application is deployer or not :) +19:23 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: if there's no one "fighting" for that bug, I'd close it +19:23 <@dberkholz> maybe hwoarang wants to volunteer to be the first victim +19:23 <@Betelgeuse> hwoarang: hopefully +19:23 <@dberkholz> since he's chairing the next meeting +19:24 <@hwoarang> is it up and running? +19:24 <@hwoarang> i have to check first :) +19:24 <@jmbsvicetto> Betelgeuse: how's the bot doing? +19:24 <@Chainsaw> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234706#c9 +19:24 <@Chainsaw> "This proposal has lost its champion. On a personal note, I believe that the +19:24 <@Chainsaw> situation has improved since this bug was filed, and that the status quo is +19:24 <@Chainsaw> acceptable." +19:24 <@dberkholz> you're chairing, you can make the call. try it out and see if it meets your standards +19:24 <@hwoarang> kk +19:24 <@Betelgeuse> jmbsvicetto: I think the bot needs to be started manually atm +19:25 <@Chainsaw> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234711 <- There is mostly PM discussion here, is there more that is required of us? +19:25 <@jmbsvicetto> but is it working? Last time I tried it, it wasn't working that well +19:25 <@Betelgeuse> hwoarang: you probably want to email jbartosik and ask what he thinks +19:25 <@hwoarang> ok +19:25 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: But isn't that a new issue then? +19:26 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: GLEP54 and GLEP55 bugs never got "resolved". I think the argument has been that there never was a final decision about them +19:26 <@Betelgeuse> jmbsvicetto: jbartosik did work on QA towards the end of the project so hopefully better +19:26 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Yes. So is there more that we can do to move them along? +19:26 <@grobian> sdeems like portage + pms work +19:26 <@grobian> for the next EAPI +19:26 <@ulm> jmbsvicetto: IIRC, 54 was accepted but 55 was declined by some previous council +19:26 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I think we should probably push them back +19:27 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: No is a valid answer. But I do not want it to linger out of apathy. +19:27 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Push back? +19:27 <@jmbsvicetto> ulm: yes, 55 was declined +19:28 <@Chainsaw> And 55 is RESO LATER. +19:28 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: handle it back to pms or the proponents and tell them they need to work on it or drop it +19:28 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: "The council believes that this GLEP is not ready for implementation as-is, and invites proponents to reopen this bug with suggestions to move it forward." +19:29 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: RESO LATER? +19:29 <@Betelgeuse> RESO LATER is gone +19:29 <@Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: RESO OBSOLETE? +19:29 <@jmbsvicetto> iirc, 55 ended up as RESO LATER because of the discussion on how to allow major changes to repo format +19:29 <@ulm> GLEP 54 was "Conditionally approved on whether GLEP 55 is approved." +19:29 <@ulm> 20090514 meeting +19:29 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: RESO CANTFIX ? +19:29 <@jmbsvicetto> or OBSOLETE +19:30 <@grobian> NEEDINFO +19:30 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: "Because this GLEP is dependent upon GLEP 55, which was not accepted by the council, we believe that the current proposal can not be implemented. We would respectfully request that a new GLEP is filed for this matter." RESO CANTFIX +19:30 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: ? +19:30 <@jmbsvicetto> The final discussion on 55 isn't obsolete, imho +19:30 <@jmbsvicetto> seems ok to me (54) +19:30 <@Chainsaw> grobian, ulm: Does that sound acceptable please? +19:31 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: new GLEP or that the GLEP is revised +19:31 <@grobian> Chainsaw: yes, ok with me +19:31 <@ulm> Chainsaw: sounds like the best we can do about it, for the time being +19:31 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: New GLEP is clearer, it prevents a new lingering state. +19:31 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: And avoids the dependency on the dead 55. +19:31 <@jmbsvicetto> ok +19:32 <@Chainsaw> Posted, thank you. +19:32 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=237381 <- What can we do about this one? +19:32 <@dberkholz> anyone feel like pushing on glep 55? +19:32 <@dberkholz> or is it just going to sit there? +19:32 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: It is RESO LATER, which means I am not considering it in this review. +19:33 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: (As I am reviewing open bugs with the council) +19:33 <@Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316401 <- I believe this is resolved, if you agree, could you please close it? +19:33 -!- darkside_ [~darkside@gentoo/developer/darkside] has joined #gentoo-council +19:33 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: someone needs to describe / document the appeals process +19:34 <@dberkholz> i think that's fixed +19:34 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I've been meaning to take care of that one for a long time, but I keep getting distracted with other stuff +19:34 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: But "someone" is not a person on this council, so we need to be more specific. +19:34 <@dberkholz> see http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/#doc_chap3 +19:34 <@Betelgeuse> Chainsaw: see the last comment +19:34 <@Betelgeuse> Chainsaw: I will ask idl0r if it can be closed +19:35 <@dberkholz> can we just close the appeals bug? +19:35 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz, Betelgeuse: So you would vote RESO FIXED; "This has been adequately documented in http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/#doc_chap3. This issue has been resolved." +19:35 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Are you willing to join in on that? +19:35 <@jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: I think the bug was asking for a more detailed description and was mostly directed towards disciplinary appeals +19:36 <@dberkholz> i'm pretty sure that description was actually posted after the bug was filed +19:36 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: If the reporter accepts that, sure +19:36 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: The reporter is not present at this time. +19:36 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: let me rephrase, yes, let's close it and see if the reporter is fine with that +19:36 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: But if we as the council feel that the matter is resolved, I feel the bug should be closed. +19:36 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Thank you. +19:36 <@Chainsaw> Is my summary agreed? +19:36 <@Chainsaw> If so, I will post that now. +19:36 <@jmbsvicetto> yes +19:37 <@grobian> yes +19:37 <@ulm> yes +19:37 <@Chainsaw> Cheers guys. Posted. +19:37 <@dberkholz> the bug was filed in late 2008, i added the appeal description in early 2009 +19:37 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362803 -> This is with tove then? +19:38 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: with me +19:38 <@Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: You were last to post in https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330361 +19:38 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: If he doesn't take care of it, I will +19:38 <@Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: Is there an action point for the council? +19:38 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Thank you. Could you post a chase on the bug? +19:38 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: In the interests of transparency, etc. +19:38 -!- jbartosik [~jbartosik@gentoo/developer/jbartosik] has joined #gentoo-council +19:39 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: you skipped 316401 which should be done for us +19:39 <@Chainsaw> <Chainsaw> Betelgeuse: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316401 <- I believe this is resolved, if you agree, could you please close it? +19:39 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I added a note to that bug +19:39 <@Chainsaw> I did no such thing. +19:39 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Thank you. +19:39 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: sorry, it seems it were my eyes who skipped your comment +19:40 <@grobian> python3, isn't the stage building fine in that regard by now, jmbsvicetto ? +19:40 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Not to worry. Betelgeuse says it is in hand. +19:40 <@jmbsvicetto> grobian: it is building fine, but the "request" was to drop python3 from stage3 (it's still there) +19:41 <@jmbsvicetto> You should be able to read my opinion (and that of releng) about that bug in my comments there +19:41 <@Betelgeuse> Chainsaw: probably not +19:41 <@Betelgeuse> Chainsaw: hopefully people can solve what's left among themselves +19:41 <@grobian> my feeling is that bug can be closed +19:41 <@jmbsvicetto> basically, we won't add manual hacks to fix an issue with the tree - python3 is in the stage3 because the system set pulls it in +19:41 <@grobian> right +19:42 <@grobian> I vote for WONTFIX then +19:42 <@jmbsvicetto> for what is worth, I'm sure no one in releng will "fix this" even if council were to "push" a decision about it +19:43 <@jmbsvicetto> grobian: I'd vote WONTFIX, but I should probably excuse myself from this bug +19:43 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: "The council feels it is inappropriate to manually filter dev-lang/python-3 from the tree as it is marked stable." RESO WONTFIX? +19:43 <@grobian> jmbsvicetto: heh +19:44 <@Chainsaw> ^ grobian, Betelgeuse? +19:44 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I'd be more happy if the decision was "the council considers there's nothing to gain from intervening on this issue and defers to releng" +19:44 <@grobian> Chainsaw: I'm thinking +19:44 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: That kicks the can further down the street. +19:44 <@grobian> Chainsaw: what jmbsvicetto said +19:44 <@hwoarang> i agree +19:44 <@Chainsaw> That is a majority, so I will post that. +19:45 <@grobian> Chainsaw: I like that Council has nothing to decide here, it's in the end just a package that is added, and stable now +19:45 <@ulm> +1 +19:45 <@Chainsaw> "The council feels there is nothing to gain from interfering on this issue. We defer to Release Engineering and consider their vote binding." +19:45 <@Chainsaw> RESO WONTFIX +19:45 <@Chainsaw> Agreed? +19:45 <@ulm> or reassign +19:46 <@Chainsaw> Leave open, assign to releng@gentoo.org? +19:46 <@ulm> yes +19:46 <@Chainsaw> grobian, hwoarang, jmbsvicetto? +19:46 <@hwoarang> yes +19:46 <@ulm> releng can close it if they want +19:46 <@grobian> Chainsaw: reassign releng with your message +19:47 <@Chainsaw> releng@gentoo.org did not match anything +19:47 < darkside_> it is actually release@g.o iso releng@ +19:47 <@Chainsaw> Right, thank you. +19:47 <@Chainsaw> That has been posted. +19:48 <@Chainsaw> That leaves us with 4 open bugs. +19:48 <@Chainsaw> And active work going on within them. +19:48 <@grobian> good job so far +19:48 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: yes +19:48 <@Chainsaw> I would like to open the floor for community involvement, unless there is any other business from the council members at this time? +19:48 * Chainsaw looks round the room +19:49 <@dberkholz> there's the one thing i mentioned beforehand +19:49 <@dberkholz> regarding changelog autogeneration +19:49 <@grobian> dberkholz: suggested to continue voting on the changelog points +19:49 <@Chainsaw> grobian: It seemed to be in the discussion phase still, with no clear set of points to vote on. +19:49 <@dberkholz> the remaining point, which was unclear to some of us (at least me) at the last meeting, was whether we should require that autogenerated changelogs have a way to edit them afterwards to fix typos and such. +19:50 <@ulm> I don't think that we should vote on it now, if it wasn't in the agenda +19:51 <@grobian> it preferably should have been discussed, so have to agree with ulm here +19:51 <@dberkholz> sigh. +19:51 <@dberkholz> can we just start adding a template field to the agenda that says "old business" then? +19:51 <@dberkholz> it's clearly an unresolved issue from the previous meeting that could have been voted upon then, but whatever +19:51 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: It is any other business, so I am happy to discuss it. But I do not believe we have a clear-cut set of vote items. +19:52 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: Could you put it up for next month please? +19:52 <@Chainsaw> It is unfortunate, but I have been set a time limit of 1 week for the draft agenda. +19:52 <@grobian> I don't thing we need a meeting per se, if it were to be discussed and all of us would agree +19:53 <@dberkholz> i might wait a couple more meetings just to see how absurdly long the council can take to vote on this minor issue. =P +19:53 <@jmbsvicetto> ulm / grobian: we could vote on this matter +19:53 <@Chainsaw> That limits what I can add to it. I wanted less notice so we could be more flexible, but I was not in majority on that. +19:53 <@jmbsvicetto> we did leave it for a voting in the mls +19:53 <@grobian> jmbsvicetto: I'm prepared for the issue, so no problem to vote from my side, but technically speaking I think we should have everyone prepared on this +19:54 <@jmbsvicetto> iirc, this issue was also considered "obsolete" since the decisions made implied that we would still have a file and so it would be possible to edit it +19:55 <@Chainsaw> It, like many things, hinges on a git conversion. +19:55 <@ulm> jmbsvicetto: that was my understanding too +19:55 <@grobian> I'm reinterpreting what's written down, and I now think it doesn't force that ;) +19:55 <@Chainsaw> So, do we want to spend time on this? We can if you want to? +19:55 <@grobian> but yes, I believe that was the intention last meeting +19:55 <@grobian> which I think is a shame +19:56 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I think we should try to clarify whether the decisions imply the existance of a file or not +19:56 <@dberkholz> i need to get going in a few minutes here +19:56 <@grobian> Chainsaw: I still think the discussion needs to be opened, since jmbsvicetto had new ideas last meeting +19:56 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: if so, then we don't need to vote about this issue. If not, we can quickly vote +19:56 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: If there is an ambiguity, we should vote on a set of points that clarifies the earlier decision. +19:56 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: And I am happy to do that now, as it is a continuation of what we voted on before. +19:57 <@jmbsvicetto> I'm ready to discuss vote +19:57 <@jmbsvicetto> + / +19:57 <@grobian> I want: ChangeLog file being generated completely from VCS log, nothing stored +19:57 -!- _AxS_ [~axs@gentoo/user/axs] has joined #gentoo-council +19:57 <@Chainsaw> grobian: But do you want that now? Can we do that with CVS? +19:57 <@grobian> yes +19:57 <@grobian> Prefix is doing it +19:57 <@grobian> for both CVS and SVN by the way +19:57 <@ulm> I want to be able to correct mistakes +19:58 <@Chainsaw> ulm: That is what I like about having a file, yes. And I have made mistakes in Changelogs before that I fixed. +19:58 <@grobian> right, for simplicity, I just take mistakes for granted +19:58 <@Chainsaw> ulm: But at least that is a clear A/B vote. Do we want to move, in the current CVS tree, towards automatically generated Changelogs, removing the files from the tree? +19:58 <@grobian> people suggested using git notes for making fixes to commit messages +19:58 <@hwoarang> errr git is a long-shot atm +19:59 <@Chainsaw> grobian: That means running patch in your mind, rather than on a file. +19:59 <@hwoarang> i think the solution should be based on the current $VCS +19:59 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: automatic generation was already voted for +19:59 <@ulm> grobian: if git will allow such a thing, I'm fine with it +19:59 <@grobian> ulm: which implies, we only do it when git comes +19:59 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Then we do not appear to have a clear A/B vote that we can work on now. +19:59 <@jmbsvicetto> I agree with voting on an implementation that is not tied to a particular VCS +20:00 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: As such I suggest that this is moved back to the mailing list for discussion, well in advance of the next draft agenda being set. +20:00 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: it was approved by the previous council and wasn't reverted by this council on the previous meeting +20:00 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: We are nearing 1 hour of meeting now, and dberkholz will have to leave. +20:00 <@grobian> I think if we want commit messages to be edited somehow, we make it hard for ourselves, and echangelog being called automatically from repoman is the closest option to "autogeneration" +20:00 <@jmbsvicetto> ok, I'm fine with that +20:00 <@hwoarang> the discussion in ML has already moved to git specific stuff +20:01 <@hwoarang> i am not sure if it makes sense to keep that discussion +20:01 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: Then I suggest that it is steered with an appropriate comment. +20:01 <@jmbsvicetto> hwoarang: I never started the discussion - my fault :\ +20:01 <@hwoarang> Chainsaw: well yes +20:01 <@Chainsaw> I would like to open the floor at this point? +20:01 <@jmbsvicetto> hwoarang: The current discussion on the dev ml was started on a parallel issue +20:01 <@hwoarang> but the git discussion will kick in eventually at some point +20:01 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I'm fine with that +20:01 <@hwoarang> someone has to constantly drive this thread :) +20:02 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: Perhaps the initial message will need to be more stern on what is and isn't appropriate for the discussion? +20:02 <@hwoarang> ok +20:02 <@hwoarang> i will take care of that since I chair the next meeting +20:02 <@Chainsaw> hwoarang: Thank you. +20:02 <@jmbsvicetto> hwoarang: I suggest you start a new thread +20:02 <@hwoarang> will reset(?) the discussion as soon as possible +20:02 <@hwoarang> yes +20:02 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: I second that. +20:03 <@grobian> git reset --hard :) +20:03 <@jmbsvicetto> hehe +20:03 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Would you be willing to do a summary of this meeting please, to make sure that it is impartial? +20:03 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: me doing the summary and it being impartial? ;) +20:04 <@grobian> since dberkholz is leaving, can we round up? +20:04 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I can take care of it later +20:04 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: It would be more impartial than if I wrote it. I was planning to do this during the meeting, but I got carried away with the discussion. +20:04 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: I would rather admit this now then post a sub-par summary. +20:04 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: I'll take care of it +20:04 <@Chainsaw> grobian: I am happy to round up. I believe we can open the floor to the community at this time. +20:04 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: It is most appreciated. +20:05 <@Chainsaw> Do we agree that the next meeting is on the second Tuesday of next month please? +20:05 <@dberkholz> i'd like to see us start sending summaries to -dev-announce again, too, so that everyone gets some visibility into what the council is doing. +20:05 <@hwoarang> yes +20:05 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: I second that. +20:05 -!- zmedico [~zmedico@gentoo/developer/zmedico] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] +20:05 <@grobian> yes +20:05 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: right, we need to set the date for the next meeting +20:06 <@Chainsaw> The second Tuesday of the next month works well for me. +20:06 <@hwoarang> dberkholz: +1 +20:06 <@dberkholz> why do we need to agree on a yearlong policy that we set a meeting or two ago? +20:06 <@grobian> that is the 11th? +20:06 <@jmbsvicetto> October 10th? +20:06 <@Chainsaw> That would be the 11th of October, indeed. +20:06 <@dberkholz> tuesday 11 october, 1900 utc +20:06 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: Yes. That works for me. +20:06 <@jmbsvicetto> sorry, 11th, not 10th +20:06 <@grobian> ok, 11th +20:07 <@jmbsvicetto> btw, the daylight savings only kick in at the end of the month, correct? +20:07 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: Because we are all human, and our circumstances may change? +20:07 <@grobian> jmbsvicetto: 30th of october +20:07 <@Chainsaw> dberkholz: And because it is a nice harmonious "we all agree" moment for the end of the meeting? +20:07 <@jmbsvicetto> grobian: Europe, right? iirc, US does it on a different weekend +20:08 <@grobian> jmbsvicetto: Europe/Amsterdam +20:08 <@jmbsvicetto> grobian: Europe/Portugal too, iirc +20:08 <@grobian> Chainsaw: thank you mister chairman for this productive meeting +20:08 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Thankfully we plan meetings for UTC, which means we are blissfully unaffected. +20:08 <@dberkholz> i'm just getting all cranky in my old age +20:08 * Chainsaw bows to grobian and closes the meeting, so dberkholz can leave +20:09 <@dberkholz> thanks Chainsaw, nice meeting +20:09 <@jmbsvicetto> Chainsaw: well, I won't be surprised if we want to push it back 1 hour after the day light savings +20:09 <@ulm> jmbsvicetto: I think that's the plan indeed ;) +20:09 * grobian nods +20:09 <@jmbsvicetto> Thanks Chainsaw for taking care of the meeting +20:09 <@Chainsaw> Any time. Willing to do it again if there's a slot later in the year. +20:10 <@Betelgeuse> thanks and sleepy time +20:10 <@Chainsaw> Good night. +20:10 <@grobian> gnight +20:10 <@jmbsvicetto> night, I'm heading out +20:11 <@Chainsaw> jmbsvicetto: Thanks again for the summary. +20:14 <@dberkholz> oh btw everyone, the chair schedule is on the council webpage now +20:15 <@grobian> dberkholz: seen, thanks +20:16 -!- Chainsaw changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Next meeting: October 11, 1900UTC | http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/utctolocal.html?time=1900 | http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ |