!proj council (council@gentoo.org) dilfridge, gyakovlev, patrick, slyfox, ulm, whissi, williamh agenda for today: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/a0566763e80a136251d039baf4acdd8e let's start it with 1) Roll Call yay! * slyfox here * ulm here * gyakovlev here * WilliamH here * dilfridge here * bonsaikitten here Whissi: ping * dilfridge asks the easter bunny to hunt down Whissi ok waiting til 12:04 till ping reply and going on. sounds good * Whissi here ok going on, all here agenda is kinda empty this time so moving on straight to bugs bug 662982 gyakovlev: https://bugs.gentoo.org/662982 "[TRACKER] New default locations for the Gentoo repository, distfiles, and binary packages"; Gentoo Linux, Current packages; CONF; zmedico:dev-portage still depends on bug 574752 where single comment was added after the friendly ping gyakovlev: https://bugs.gentoo.org/574752 "Rename portage-YYYYMMDD.tar* snapshots with gentoo-YYYYMMDD.tar*"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Other; IN_P; mgorny:infra-bugs * ulm wonders who uses diffs between snapshots any comments, suggestions? I mean, using diffs requires a recent snapshot, like less than a month old * WilliamH has no idea who is using diffs and wouldn't one just go with the existing snapshot then, followed by rsync? There are people just updating via webrsync i used emerge-delta-webrsync when i had dialup internet And rsync is a pain since verification for systems with slow disks yeah I used delta snapshots on metered connection in 200x, it was nice, but idk how many users we have today. infra should be able to handle it on their own maybe we should start providing git-bundle snapshots ;-) slyfox: Sure but the idea is that someone is watching those bugs because otherwise there is no progress ;-) i wonder if we should just close the tracker. All the locations already changed, no? btw I know some arch tarballs (ppc64) still use old locations, so probably we have more blockers actually, but amd64 tarballs are switched. But I don't understand why new tarballs are 100% larger. Maybe we should just do the switch to the new names. This way the new tarball would have the old new name and everything else would be the same. I pinged matts88 about it, not sure if he did anything worth filing a bug? including the date in the topdir name doesn't seem strictly necessary at least it had worked without it before I imagine that's the issue, the date in the top dir name. yes it is, there was a bug with discussion why it was required, but I can't find it right now. Let's work on this with infra until next meeting. No need to do it now. ok, I'll add another blocker and monitor the bug. moving on 3. Open floor anyone? ok, let's wait till for five minutes, till 19:20 UTC I can't type today properly, sorry for mistakes =) Easter too much celebrated? :-) no =), just broken sleep pattern due to being in the same place for 3 weeks in a row without going out really. feels weird. ok guys, nothing for open floor, meeting closed gyakovlev: thanks for chairing * gyakovlev bangs the gong