summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
blob: b675645bcf5261bad2b57c7380393651af1a1adc (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
[19:05] *** You set the channel mode to 'moderated'.
[19:05] <Flameeyes> i suppose the timing decision can wait till vapier comes (if he's just late)
[19:05] <Kugelfang> there we got
[19:05] <Kugelfang> -t
[19:06] <Flameeyes> especially as he seems to need to change that :)
[19:06] <wolf31o2|mobile> yeah, we can hold that one off until near the end
[19:06] <-- GurliOnTheRoad has left this server (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
[19:06] <kingtaco|laptop> or just email it
[19:06] <Kugelfang> heh
[19:06] <kingtaco|laptop> should be a no brainer
[19:06] <kingtaco|laptop> anywho
[19:06] <wolf31o2|mobile> true... we don't need that to be done during the official meeting, really
[19:07] <Flameeyes> so we can either start with antarus|work's topic or with wolf31o2|mobile's, which one first?
[19:07] <Kugelfang> wolf
[19:07] --> ChrisWhite|Work has joined this channel (n=chris@gentoo/developer/ChrisWhite).
[19:07] <Flameeyes> ack wolf for me too
[19:07] <kingtaco|laptop> do it
[19:07] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: you have the floor
[19:08] <wolf31o2|mobile> err... well, there's probably two different questions... the first is; can the council make a decision without it being put on an agenda and have to wait for the monthly meeting?
[19:09] <kingtaco|laptop> that's why I suggested a 2nd meeting if there was something to discuss
[19:09] <Kugelfang> i say yes, while this decision should be only intermediate until a proper meeting takes place
[19:09] <kloeri> I'd say yes as long as we use some common sense, eg. don't rush GLEPs through without prior discussion
[19:09] <Flameeyes> i'd say yes, for urgent matters or non-controversial decisions
[19:10] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok... so what is considered an urgent matter?
[19:10] <Kugelfang> that's up to us :-)
[19:11] <Flameeyes> decisions that has to be discussed upon asap or they might "fly away"... probably depends on what the issue is
[19:11] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh... I'd be fine with that
[19:11] <kloeri> ditto
[19:12] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok... so we allow "impromptu" meetings, at our own request, to discuss possible time-sensitive issues?
[19:12] <Flameeyes> kingtaco|laptop, robbat2?
[19:12] <kingtaco|laptop> sure
[19:12] <Kugelfang> vote with yes or no
[19:12] <Kugelfang> yes
[19:12] <kloeri> yes
[19:12] <Flameeyes> yes
[19:12] <kingtaco|laptop> yes
[19:12] <robbat2> yes, common sense to delay things that have unanswered issues still, but be more flexible in allowing
[19:12] <wolf31o2|mobile> yes
[19:12] <Kugelfang> 6 of 7, vapier is late, this one passed
[19:12] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok... and how many should we require present to have one of these meetings?
[19:13] <Kugelfang> 5
[19:13] <wolf31o2|mobile> 4+? 5?
[19:13] <Flameeyes> Kugelfang, which one passed? both or just the first?
[19:13] <Kugelfang> more than the half and an odd number
[19:13] <Flameeyes> 5
[19:13] <kingtaco|laptop> 5+
[19:13] <robbat2> 5+
[19:13] <wolf31o2|mobile> agreed
[19:13] <Kugelfang> Flameeyes: the first one
[19:13] <-- GurliGebis has left this server (No route to host).
[19:13] <Flameeyes> what about the slacker rule for such meetings?
[19:13] <kloeri> 5+ sounds good
[19:13] <Kugelfang> i think we have consense of 5 council members
[19:13] <Flameeyes> should it still rule?
[19:13] <Kugelfang> Flameeyes: applies only to regular meetings
[19:13] <kingtaco|laptop> I don't think so
[19:14] <Flameeyes> Kugelfang, agreed
[19:14] <kloeri> no, regular meetings only imo
[19:14] <wolf31o2|mobile> I don't think the slacker rule shoudl count, since it is impromptu, and we don't allow the meeting if we have below the proper threshol
[19:14] <wolf31o2|mobile> +d
[19:14] <Flameeyes> so even the second one passed
[19:14] <Kugelfang> robbat2?
[19:14] <kingtaco|laptop> how much notice for one of these meetings?
[19:14] <kingtaco|laptop> 7days?
[19:14] <kingtaco|laptop> list 2 possible times?
[19:15] <robbat2> no slacker rule, because we do need time to get ourselves
[19:15] <wolf31o2|mobile> I would think "impromptu" means it should be possible on the spur of the moment
[19:15] <Kugelfang> let's say more than 5 days
[19:15] <Kugelfang> means: we can say on monday "We'll discuss it" and act on firday
[19:15] <Flameeyes> i'd say the time needed, after all if it's "on the fly", we might need it now
[19:15] <Kugelfang> friday... i think that's a good rule of thumb...
[19:15] <Kugelfang> Flameeyes: you mean: no limit at all?
[19:15] <robbat2> 3 days, or as long as every council member (all 7 of us) agree we need to meet on it immediately
[19:16] <kingtaco|laptop> that works
[19:16] <wolf31o2|mobile> sure
[19:16] <Flameeyes> i like robbat2's solution
[19:16] <Kugelfang> i like robbat2's proposal
[19:16] <Kugelfang> heh
[19:16] <robbat2> 3 days gives us space for the 5+ people, but if it's really urgent, people will find a way to get us
[19:16] --> dostrow has joined this channel (n=dostrow@gentoo/developer/dostrow).
[19:17] <wolf31o2|mobile> so... allow meetings outside of the schedule on time sensitive issues, the meeting needs more than 5 members, and it should be done with no less than 3 days notice, unless the council unanimously decides to hold it sooner?
[19:17] <Kugelfang> yes
[19:17] <robbat2> yes
[19:17] <wolf31o2|mobile> (that should cover everything)
[19:17] <Flameeyes> at least 5 members
[19:17] <wolf31o2|mobile> yes
[19:17] <Flameeyes> (>= rather than >)
[19:17] <wolf31o2|mobile> it says that
[19:18] <Flameeyes> and yes on that anyway
[19:18] <wolf31o2|mobile> err... ok
[19:18] <robbat2> good point Flameeyes
[19:18] <wolf31o2|mobile> 5+
[19:18] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh
[19:18] <Kugelfang> yes
[19:18] <kingtaco|laptop> yes
[19:18] <Flameeyes> kloeri, wolf31o2|mobile?
[19:19] <wolf31o2|mobile> <wolf31o2|mobile> yes
[19:19] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile said yes already
[19:19] <Flameeyes> okay, so kloeri?
[19:19] <Kugelfang> kloeri honey, we're waiting
[19:19] <kloeri> sounds good
[19:19] <Kugelfang> excellent
[19:20] <Kugelfang> i think this point is done then, isn't it?
[19:20] <Flameeyes> i'd say so
[19:20] <robbat2> yup
[19:20] *** You give antarus|work the permission to talk.
[19:20] <Kugelfang> i still wonder where vapier is
[19:20] <Flameeyes> antarus|work, are you here?
[19:20] <robbat2> unless wolf31o2 wanted to say more about the possible 4th thursday
[19:20] <kingtaco|laptop> we'll do this instead
[19:21] <kingtaco|laptop> works better
[19:21] <wolf31o2|mobile> yeah... doesn't restrict us to a time
[19:21] <robbat2> ok
[19:21] <wolf31o2|mobile> so we can be like "hey, friday at 5:30 works for me"
[19:22] <Flameeyes> strange tho that mike is this late
[19:22] <Flameeyes> kingtaco|laptop, not you :P
[19:22] <Kugelfang> does anybody have his cell phone number?
[19:22] <Kugelfang> oh, that reminds me, shall we exchange contact information via the alias?
[19:23] <robbat2> yes
[19:23] <Flameeyes> i suppose that's good
[19:23] <Kugelfang> robbat2: yes to what?
[19:23] <robbat2> yes to contact info
[19:23] <Kugelfang> good, let's do it right after the meetings :-)
[19:23] <Kugelfang> -s
[19:23] <Kugelfang> shall we proceed with antarus then?
[19:23] <wolf31o2|mobile> did Mike get a new cell phone? last I knew (LWE) his was somewhere in a gutter in Shanghai
[19:24] <wolf31o2|mobile> let's
[19:24] <Flameeyes> wolf31o2|mobile, ouch, that's bad
[19:24] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: you have have the floor
[19:25] * kloeri pokes antarus|work 
[19:25] <antarus|work> er
[19:25] <antarus|work> sorry
[19:25] * antarus|work is back!
[19:26] <Kugelfang> sure, just give us some beer and we'll forget about it :-P
[19:27] <Flameeyes> or just talk, that works too
[19:27] <antarus|work> Quiet you :p
[19:27] <antarus|work> Moreso I think the current QA policy doesn't work completely
[19:28] <kingtaco|laptop> explain
[19:28] <antarus|work> The current policy seems rather vague in areas; to both users and developers
[19:29] <Kugelfang> which areas
[19:29] <antarus|work> things like having packages build properly; releng will tell you that it should build properly with default USE flags; Ciaran will tell you it should build properly with the ebuild choosing sane flag defaults
[19:30] <Kugelfang> well, both sounds sane to me, we gotta find a way in the middle here
[19:30] <antarus|work> At least for me; the QA team should not be the guys who fix stuff; the team is too small and the amount of work too large.
[19:30] <wolf31o2|mobile> well, I'd say that both should be true... ;]
[19:30] * antarus|work doesn't expect the council to come up with new policy ;)
[19:31] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: i think we should expand the QA team then
[19:31] <antarus|work> Kugelfang: How?
[19:31] <Flameeyes> i think one of the point should be that no qa should be enforced unless the policy is properly agreed upon
[19:31] * antarus|work would rather have QA policy that is followed; then qa that is ignored
[19:31] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: get people to search for QAcanfix keyword and fix it
[19:32] <antarus|work> Kugelfang: eh, and if that doesn't work?
[19:32] <kingtaco|laptop> why don't you revise/rewrite the policy to resolve these problems you see and then we can look at that?
[19:32] <wolf31o2|mobile> agreed... I think we need a policy to look at and agree to... we can still discuss, to help brainstorm some ideas, btu we can't really decide on a concept so much
[19:33] <wolf31o2|mobile> I mean, we'll all agree "we need good qa"
[19:33] <Flameeyes> agreed, we should have a policy to look at before decide on most of the matters there, or we're not making a point
[19:33] <antarus|work> wolf31o2|mobile: are you willing to sacrifice people for it?
[19:33] <kloeri> wolf31o2|mobile: right
[19:33] <Flameeyes> eh, what wolf31o2|mobile said basically
[19:33] <wolf31o2|mobile> antarus|work: sacrifice, meaning?
[19:34] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: you mean like: remove persistent offenders, or at least suspend them?
[19:34] <wolf31o2|mobile> if you mean have disciplinary action taken against repeated offenders, then absolutely... but that's not our job, perse
[19:34] <antarus|work> Kugelfang: yes
[19:34] <wolf31o2|mobile> but I would definitely back that action being taken
[19:34] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: write it up. i'm not against it per se
[19:34] <Flameeyes> agreed
[19:35] <antarus|work> wolf31o2|mobile: I think moreso the thought is 'I can break QA and essentially have no reprecussions"
[19:35] <kloeri> devrel would be happy to suspend or kick off repeat offenders based on proper complaints from qa
[19:35] <antarus|work> which is obviously a problem
[19:35] <wolf31o2|mobile> right
[19:35] <Flameeyes> antarus|work, i think the problem is we don't have an *official* policy
[19:35] <Kugelfang> Flameeyes: actually, we have, GLEP 39 iirc
[19:35] * antarus|work notes having a half-dead qa team for large amounts of time
[19:35] <kloeri> antarus|work: document the offences and complain to devrel after you warned the offender
[19:35] <antarus|work> Kugelfang: 48 you mean?
[19:35] <robbat2> i'm not sure that suspend/kick directly is the right solution - re-education first
[19:36] <Flameeyes> Kugelfang, no i mean, there are still obsure points
[19:36] <antarus|work> robbat2: I would agree; can't be too hasty ;)
[19:36] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: eh, yes
[19:36] <Flameeyes> devmanual wasn't updated in its entirety and there are still debatable points
[19:36] <Kugelfang> Flameeyes: devmanual was discusses on QA meeting, i attended there
[19:36] <kloeri> robbat2: qa would need to warn etc. before filing a devrel complaint or I'll bounce it back
[19:36] <Kugelfang> Flameeyes: the turnout was, unsatisfactory to say the least
[19:37] <Flameeyes> Kugelfang, can you summarise?
[19:37] <antarus|work> Flameeyes: I have the log..
[19:37] <Kugelfang> spb just asked for voice
[19:37] <Kugelfang> he can if you want
[19:37] <antarus|work> Flameeyes: it's not pretty :P
[19:37] <Flameeyes> antarus|work, that's why i asked a summary
[19:37] *** You give spb the permission to talk.
[19:37] *** kloeri gives spb the permission to talk.
[19:38] <Kugelfang> uh, i have op here...... forgot competely :-P
[19:38] <kloeri> Kugelfang: :)
[19:38] <spb> the summary, in short terms and based on what i remember, goes something like this
[19:38] <spb> first item devmanual. it's listed as a qa project yet qa has no access to it, we don't like this, but plasmaroo is resisting any change
[19:39] <spb> then there was the lack of any properly documented qa policy, which we would like to fix
[19:39] <Kugelfang> this has to be relevated: plasmaroo doesn'T want to give out SVN access to anybody.. he said he'd include patches as soon as he gets them
[19:39] <antarus|work> relevated?
[19:40] <Flameeyes> antarus|work, made notice of
[19:40] <Kugelfang> plasmaroo is resisting any change
[19:40] <Kugelfang> ^^^
[19:40] <antarus|work> Flameeyes: thanks ;)
[19:40] <spb> also the EAPI-0 spec / package manager standard / whatever you want to call it
[19:40] <wolf31o2|mobile> what is required to move the devmanual to gentoo infrastructure? and has there been a problem getting patches accepted, so far? (in other words, has the current process proven broken)
[19:41] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: the SVN repo is on halcy0n.org
[19:41] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: it could easily be moved
[19:41] <spb> wolf31o2|mobile: what's required is an svn repo and someone having access to whichever box hosts devmanual.g.o to pull updates from svn manually
[19:41] <Kugelfang> i think that can be automated
[19:41] <spb> at the moment the svn is external and only one person has the latter
[19:41] <wolf31o2|mobile> it would need to be...
[19:41] <wolf31o2|mobile> and what about my second question?
[19:42] <antarus|work> wolf31o2|mobile: No one has submitted actual patches; as far as I'm aware
[19:42] <Kugelfang> answer is no
[19:42] <Flameeyes> i think wolf's second question is the important one here
[19:42] <spb> there's a bug open with some needed changes; it had no response until he was asked in the qa meeting yesterday why that was, at which point he said he was waiting for patches
[19:42] <spb> which is fine as long as he says he's waiting for patches
[19:42] * antarus|work nods
[19:42] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok
[19:43] <antarus|work> communication was a bit slow there
[19:43] <wolf31o2|mobile> so now we all know
[19:43] <wolf31o2|mobile> =]
[19:43] <spb> we do
[19:43] <spb> what exactly it is that we know is left as an exercise for the reader
[19:43] <antarus|work> I guess my last question is; is there a better way to create policy besides doing it internally to QA
[19:43] <Kugelfang> i can understand that plasmaroo doesn't want every dev to have commit access, on the other hand i think that the Gentoo devmanual should be in Gentoo SVN
[19:43] <kloeri> there's another problem of backups that nobody have addressed afaik (which would point towards hosting it on gentoo svn)
[19:44] <spb> my assumption there is that qa drafts something and sends it to $other_party for review
[19:44] <Flameeyes> i think we shouldn't really try to force anything until it's proven broken, to use wolf's words
[19:44] <antarus|work> Flameeyes: I was thinking moreso; of making some kind of sub-project
[19:44] <robbat2> Kugelfang, on Gentoo SVN/CVS we do offer access restrictions if desired
[19:44] <antarus|work> where we invite people interested in forming poicy
[19:44] <wolf31o2|mobile> your second point... the qa policy... I think we all agree that we'd like to see one hammered down... what do you need for that to happen?
[19:44] <Kugelfang> robbat2: i know, i use them for eselect :-P
[19:44] <antarus|work> maybe thats just too gay
[19:44] <antarus|work> I dunno :p
[19:45] * antarus|work spices up the council logs
[19:45] <Flameeyes> antarus|work, you mean people not involved in the qa project itself?
[19:45] <antarus|work> Flameeyes: yes
[19:45] <Flameeyes> separating legislative from executive, basically
[19:45] <Kugelfang> antarus|work: well, as was already said: come up with a proposal and council can discuss
[19:46] <antarus|work> Flameeyes: Yeah, basically ;)
[19:46] <Flameeyes> agreed, we need something to look at to decide, we can only think of the concept this way
[19:46] <spb> wolf31o2|mobile: for QA policy i suspect just time and the right people
[19:46] <wolf31o2|mobile> actually... let's do this... for issue #1, the devmanual, there's not been anything shown to be necessarily broken, but points were brought up why moving it to gentoo infrastructure would be desirable... I say we defer on any decision regarding this until a plan has been put in place for migration, as well as any requirements from/for infra... as in, scripts to automate pulls from SVN and access restrictions that need to be p
[19:46] <wolf31o2|mobile> laced... agreed?
[19:47] <robbat2> yes
[19:47] <Flameeyes> yes
[19:47] * antarus|work was hoping to avoid the devmanual entirely in this meeting ;P
[19:47] <Kugelfang> yes
[19:47] <wolf31o2|mobile> yes
[19:47] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh
[19:47] <kloeri> yes
[19:47] <Kugelfang> kloeri: ?
[19:47] <Kugelfang> kingtaco|laptop: ?
[19:47] <Kugelfang> kloeri: sorry
[19:47] <Kugelfang> :-)
[19:49] <kingtaco|laptop> what are we voting on?
[19:49] <kingtaco|laptop> that qa needs to be defined?
[19:49] <Kugelfang> 19:46 <@wolf31o2|mobile> actually... let's do this... for issue #1, the devmanual, there's not been anything shown to be necessarily broken, but points were brought up why moving it to gentoo infrastructure would be desirable... I say we defer on any decision regarding this until a plan has been put in place for
[19:49] <Kugelfang> migration, as well as ny requirements from/for infra... as in, scripts to automate pull s from SVN and access restrictions that need to be p
[19:49] --> iluxa has joined this channel (n=anonymou@gentoo/developer/iluxa).
[19:49] <kingtaco|laptop> yes
[19:49] * antarus|work will talk to qa about creating a subproject for policy authoring then
[19:50] <antarus|work> a cross-project subproject ;P
[19:50] * spb doesn't see the point
[19:50] * antarus|work nods
[19:50] <wolf31o2|mobile> re: qa policy... from the discussion here, we'd really like something that we can look at and say that we'd stand behind it 100%... I would say that the best thing would be to try to come up with a somewhat representative (and informal) group to assist in writing/modifying existing policy...
[19:50] <Flameeyes> wolf31o2|mobile's decision is then agreed upon, 
[19:50] <Kugelfang> spb, antarus|work: please get in contact with infra to work out details of a possible migration
[19:50] <antarus|work> Kugelfang: I'll do that
[19:50] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: that one needs no vote :-P
[19:51] <wolf31o2|mobile> qa heads it up... and again, it doesn't have to be formal... since i'm not sure I see the point... but, for example, you'd probably want to grab a bug-wrangler or two... and some toolchain people, etc
[19:51] <Flameeyes> and arches
[19:51] * antarus|work nods
[19:51] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: don't forget releng!
[19:51] --> nephros has joined this channel (n=nephros@gentoo/userrep/nephros).
[19:51] <wolf31o2|mobile> Kugelfang: right... heh... I'm just trying to rephrase some stuff that's spread over lots of lines into something coherent
[19:51] <antarus|work> wolf31o2|mobile: you've been doing a great job too ;)
[19:52] <wolf31o2|mobile> spb: you had something to say about the EAPI thing? it kinda got lost
[19:52] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: that was part of the QA meeting summary
[19:52] <spb> i think the conclusion there was that it's probably best as it is for the moment, since the bulk of the work has been/is being done by a non-current-developer
[19:53] <spb> once it's got some substance to it i'm thinking in terms of forming it into a glep that you guys can vote on
[19:53] <kingtaco|laptop> wfm
[19:53] <wolf31o2|mobile> WFM
[19:53] <wolf31o2|mobile> =]
[19:53] <Kugelfang> i can say it looks promising already
[19:53] <robbat2> works
[19:53] <spb> if nothing else, the introduction of it would be a fairly major change to the way we do things
[19:53] <Flameeyes> wfm2
[19:53] * kloeri agrees
[19:54] * antarus|work shall go poof now
[19:54] <spb> there's a slight question of who would maintain it once that happens, but we can deal with that later
[19:54] <antarus|work> unless you need more from me?
[19:54] <Kugelfang> if you guys want to look at it: http://svn.pioto.org/viewvc/paludis/scratch/eapispec/EAPI-0.txt?view=markup
[19:54] <wolf31o2|mobile> antarus|work: I think we're good
[19:54] <antarus|work> wolf31o2|mobile: cool, thanks for the input.
[19:55] <wolf31o2|mobile> spb: hopefully, it would be a joint operation between QA and the portage team (or $package_managers, if you prefer)
[19:56] <spb> that's certainly one of the options, yeah
[19:56] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok... so was there anything else?
[19:56] <Kugelfang> yeah, the slacker mark for vapier
[19:56] <Kugelfang> :-/
[19:56] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh
[19:57] <spb> nothing i can think of
[19:57] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok
[19:57] <wolf31o2|mobile> anything else on the agenda?
[19:57] <Flameeyes> i can update the project page
[19:57] <Flameeyes> who's going to do the summary?
[19:57] <wolf31o2|mobile> Flameeyes: please do
[19:57] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: can you do the summary?
[19:57] <spb> in which case i shall move myself down the road and reappear in a few minutes
[19:57] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: you had some good summaries in between already :-)
[19:57] <vapier> hrm
[19:57] <vapier> meeting today huh
[19:57] <vapier> that's what i get for getting up late
[19:57] <Kugelfang> vapier: hehehe
[19:57] <wolf31o2|mobile> Kugelfang: I can try... I'll need to log it
[19:58] <robbat2> now that vapier is here
[19:58] <Kugelfang> so no slacker mark for vapier?
[19:58] <kingtaco|laptop> what about open discussion
[19:58] <kingtaco|laptop> or whatever
[19:58] <robbat2> can we decide quickly on times for the meeting?
[19:58] <Kugelfang> yes please
[19:58] --> eroyf|out has joined this channel (n=eroyf@gentoo/developer/eroyf).
[19:58] <Kugelfang> vapier: YOU ARE LATE!
[19:58] *** spb is now known as peer.
[19:58] <wolf31o2|mobile> well... my availability is pretty simple... 10am-6pm UTC -5
[19:59] <wolf31o2|mobile> mon-fri
[19:59] <robbat2> while 1900UTC does work presently for me, I'd prefer it 2-3 hours later
[19:59] <robbat2> wolf31o2|mobile, could you state as UTC for the moment please?
[19:59] <Kugelfang> yeah, please only UTC times
[19:59] <Flameeyes> that's 15-23 utc
[19:59] <wolf31o2|mobile> umm... 1500-2300
[19:59] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh... the -5 made it kinda easy
[19:59] <kingtaco|laptop> that works for me too
[19:59] <Kugelfang> for me too
[20:00] <kingtaco|laptop> pretty much any time as long as it's not sundays
[20:00] <Kugelfang> i'd like to keep the thursday
[20:00] <robbat2> my availability is reliably 2000-0300UTC weekdays, and mixed on weekends
[20:00] <Flameeyes> 15-23 for me too
[20:00] <Kugelfang> so, thursdays at 2000UTC ?
[20:00] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok... so thursday... maybe at 2000?
[20:00] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh
[20:00] <kloeri> 2100UTC would probably be the latest for me - unless I'm planning to be late for work once a month :)
[20:00] <kloeri> 2000 wfm
[20:00] <robbat2> 2000 Thursdays yes
[20:00] <Flameeyes> 2000 utc, second thursday then?
[20:00] <Kugelfang> 2000UTC wfm2
[20:00] <Kugelfang> yes
[20:00] <wolf31o2|mobile> vapier: how about you?
[20:01] <vapier> whatever
[20:01] <vapier> i dislike sleep
[20:01] <-- inc_ has left this channel.
[20:01] <wolf31o2|mobile> (now that you're awake)
[20:01] <wolf31o2|mobile> ok
[20:01] <wolf31o2|mobile> heh
[20:01] <wolf31o2|mobile> vapier: care to change your little script?
[20:01] * g2boojum notes that DST ends fairly soon; does that affect anybody's times?
[20:01] <vapier> was not aware that devmanual wasnt on gentoo hardware
[20:01] <wolf31o2|mobile> g2boojum: not mine... I took it into account
[20:01] <robbat2> g2boojum, that's why 1900UTC isn't ideal for me presently ;-)
[20:02] <wolf31o2|mobile> vapier: devmanual (the page) is... devmanual's repo isn't
[20:02] <vapier> ah
[20:02] <wolf31o2|mobile> so I guess that's it?
[20:02] <wolf31o2|mobile> open floor?
[20:02] <robbat2> yup
[20:02] <kingtaco|laptop> sure
[20:02] *** wolf31o2|mobile sets the channel mode to 'unmoderated'.
[20:02] <kloeri> nod
[20:02] <Kugelfang> so, outside of DST, 2000UTC is the same as 1900ZUTC in DST, right?
[20:02] <vapier> i dont think anyone commented on my "review" clause
[20:02] <vapier> we're talking just GLEPs right
[20:02] <welp[lap]> but thursday's a school night! :o
[20:03] <robbat2> vapier: when the meeting is over, email the alias with your contact details
[20:03] <wolf31o2|mobile> Kugelfang: 2000utc is always the same
[20:03] <nox-Hand> Hey! I can talk again?
[20:03] <GurliGebis_> I got a little thing I would like the council to have a look at
[20:03] <Kugelfang> wolf31o2|mobile: :-)
[20:03] <nox-Hand> vapier: they've missed you! :o
[20:03] <nox-Hand> welp[lap]: poke?
[20:03] <vapier> what contact details
[20:03] <welp[lap]> nox-Hand: unforunatly, yes you can
[20:03] <wolf31o2|mobile> brb... boss
[20:03] <nox-Hand> welp[lap]: lol
[20:03] <Flameeyes> vapier, phone number, mostly
[20:03] <nox-Hand> Interesting meeting. Very.....diplomatic
[20:04] <robbat2> vapier, real world ones, so we can phone you next time you're late
[20:04] <vapier> `jwhois wh0rd.org`
[20:04] <kloeri> GurliGebis_: state your question please
[20:04] <GurliGebis_> is it possible to get you to have a look at the bug about the wildcard ssl cert, and come to a conclusion? ( https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117837 )
[20:04] <GurliGebis_> it's holding back the new bugday site
[20:05] *** GurliGebis_ is now known as GurliGebis.
[20:05] <Flameeyes> shouldn't that be a question for foundation?
[20:05] <christel> GurliGebis_: i thought we were waiting for the trustees on that one?
[20:05] <robbat2> could we consider StartCom for certs instead?
[20:05] <robbat2> they'd be free for the Class 1 CA
[20:05] <nox-Hand> Night folks, and thanks for an interesting meeting :P
[20:05] <robbat2> and have better inclusion than CACert
[20:05] <vapier> we leave funding as a foundation exercise ?
[20:05] <GurliGebis> christel, the bug has been standing still for a while
[20:06] <-- nox-Hand has left this server ("leaving").
[20:06] <GurliGebis> maybe they have forgot it
[20:06] <kloeri> funding is a foundation issue
[20:06] <robbat2> their Class 2 CA is not free, but still very cheap
[20:06] <christel> GurliGebis: i know :/
[20:06] <-- nephros has left this channel ("A trap door opens under you!").
[20:06] <kloeri> but I thought some company donated a wildcard cert a while back?
[20:06] <kingtaco|laptop> GurliGebis, you just got a new foundation, try talking to them
[20:06] <vapier> then there isnt much for the council to say other than "the trustees should be notified"
[20:07] <GurliGebis> okay, I'll try and contact them
[20:07] <GurliGebis> wasn't sure who to ask about it ;)
[20:07] <vapier> there is a nfp list
[20:07] <vapier> please use that rather than e-mailing the trustees alias
[20:07] <GurliGebis> nfp list?
[20:07] <g2boojum> We're waiting on -infra, incidentally, because a wildcard cert was donated.
[20:08] <agaffney> GurliGebis: gentoo-nfp (not for profit)
[20:08] <g2boojum> If -infra would rather we just buy one, I'm okay w/ that.
[20:08] <kloeri> g2boojum: that's my understanding as well
[20:09] <GurliGebis> hmm, waiting on -infra :(
[20:09] <GurliGebis> should I poke them?
[20:09] <vapier> seems to be the common theme
[20:09] <vapier> yes, infra needs much poking before something happens
[20:09] <g2boojum> GurliGebis: Go right ahead.
[20:09] <GurliGebis> :)
[20:10] <-- beu has left this server ("brb").
[20:10] <antarus|work> not like we don't have the cash :0
[20:10] <antarus|work> wihch reminds me...we have a few grand in SoC money coming
[20:11] <kloeri> cash could have been squandered away since the last report :)
[20:11] <robbat2> vapier: you may poke us, but we are working on things
[20:11] --> beu has joined this channel (i=beu@freenode/developer/gentoo.developer.beu).
[20:11] <Flameeyes> okay leaving a part the certificate issue
[20:11] <antarus|work> robbat2: you hiring? :)
[20:11] <vapier> where's my image gallery :p
[20:11] <Flameeyes> [that's now infra/foundation matter]
[20:11] <Flameeyes> any other question for the council?
[20:12] <kloeri> robbat2: make sure to let people know about that - that would probably reduce frustrations quite a bit
[20:12] <fmccor> I have an unfair one, if there's no one else.
[20:12] <Kugelfang> fmccor: shoot :-)
[20:12] <kloeri> robbat2: infra has been good about bugzie updates lately btw
[20:12] <robbat2> kloeri, yup, that's where I'm working at the moment
[20:12] <fmccor> As I say, this is unfair, because it's a new council.
[20:13] <robbat2> fmccor, vapier is still here, you can try to blame him
[20:13] <Flameeyes> robbat2, i was going to say that
[20:13] <fmccor> Now, necessarily, you all wear several hats, because you are all developers, in some cases, leads.
[20:13] <-- rhican has left this channel ("Ik ga weg").
[20:13] <frilled|home> robbat2: could you make kind of an "official" statement on how things are going with bugzie, then? I guess that would interest a lot of people :)
[20:14] <Kugelfang> fmccor: sooo?
[20:14] <kloeri> frilled|home: there's been several statements regarding bugzie the last few weeks
[20:14] <robbat2> frilled|home, let fmccor finish his point
[20:14] <fmccor> Which means situations can arise where there are conflicts of interest.  (E.g., voting on your own GLEP, considering an appeal from devrel, or whatever).
[20:14] <frilled|home> I know ^^
[20:14] <Kugelfang> fmccor: the previous council members didn't vote on their own stuff
[20:14] <fmccor> Well, no.
[20:15] <kloeri> we just have to abstain from voting in cases of conflict of interest
[20:15] <fmccor> My question is if there is a policy on that, or should there be?
[20:15] * robbat2 doesn't intend to vote on his own GLEP on signing in the tree when he finally gets it much closer to ready
[20:15] <Kugelfang> fmccor: i think we can handle that
[20:15] <fmccor> Fair enough.
[20:16] <Flameeyes> i agree with the others
[20:16] <robbat2> as an addenda to fmccor, could each of us perhaps have stated on the council page what our areas are that might be considered conflict of interest
[20:16] <fmccor> It's worth mentioning, though.
[20:16] <Flameeyes> robbat2, that's not an easy one
[20:16] <robbat2> Flameeyes, just generally, not specifically
[20:17] <robbat2> eg for myself, infra is my main involvement outside of development
[20:17] * g2boojum thinks that conflict-of-interest recusals are silly, since you folks are there to advance your (and your team's) interests.  That's why there's six other council members to outvote you if necessary.
[20:17] <vapier> that was part of the voting process
[20:17] <Kugelfang> *nod*
[20:17] <Kugelfang> there is just a slight move to AMD64 in here :-)
[20:17] <vapier> you werent supposed to run for council if you are unable to handle conflicts of interest
[20:18] <Flameeyes> vapier has a point, too
[20:18] <robbat2> g2boojum, I ask for the disclosure so that we can see for ourselves at least that there isn't any strange cabal here where a majority of council is also part of some other group
[20:18] <vapier> iirc, when the council was first formed, the conflict issue was much bigger as the devrel shakeup was going on at the sametime
[20:19] <vapier> which is why in the nomination list, we show all the groups each person is part of
[20:19] <Flameeyes> robbat2, it's a difficult one to decide what has to be put there and what not, what's a big involvement? lead? member? founding member?
[20:20] <g2boojum> robbat2: I'm not opposed to disclosure, but in general I'm w/ vapier.  It's not like what any of you do is secret, so if people voted you in w/o doing their research that's their problem.
[20:20] <Flameeyes> also, our roles aren't secret, there's the roll-call
[20:20] <Flameeyes> but might require updating
[20:20] <kingtaco|laptop> and ldap
[20:20] <robbat2> Flameeyes, a lot of updating
[20:20] <Flameeyes> robbat2, indeed
[20:21] <Flameeyes> robbat2, what would you think of updating at least the councilers' roles in the next days?
[20:21] <robbat2> g2boojum, ok, so you would say it's ok for us to vote on our own GLEPs by that then?
[20:21] <robbat2> Flameeyes, sure, I'll update mine
[20:21] <kloeri> I can update all the council members in ldap + roll-call
[20:21] <g2boojum> robbat2: Yep.
[20:21] <vapier> if you truly cant get over a personal conflict, then you are free to obstain over a point
[20:22] <Flameeyes> vapier, you forgot the prefix for the number tho
[20:22] <vapier> it's a US number
[20:22] <christel> Flameeyes: 001/+1
[20:22] <vapier> Flameeyes: arent you an american ? :p
[20:22] <kloeri> I'm more worried about appeals for devrel disciplinary actions than GLEPs personally
[20:22] <Flameeyes> vapier, >_<
[20:22] <Flameeyes> christel, yeah i knew that
[20:22] <g2boojum> Flameeyes: Most USians (myself included) have no idea what our prefix actually is.
[20:22] <kingtaco|laptop> 001
[20:22] <g2boojum> s/prefix/country code/
[20:22] <robbat2> actually the 00 depends where you are
[20:23] <kingtaco|laptop> it's 1!!!
[20:23] <robbat2> the + in +1 indicates whatever you outbound international prefix is
[20:23] <robbat2> '1' is the code for north america
[20:23] <Flameeyes> okay, done with the country code thing too
[20:25] <Flameeyes> by the way, do we want this in the log, should i cut it over it, or should leave it unedited?
[20:25] <robbat2> the above stuff about conflict-of-interest should probably be included
[20:26] <Flameeyes> robbat2, i meant the country code discussion, the conflict should be included for sure
[20:26] --> ferringb has joined this channel (n=bharring@c-24-21-135-117.hsd1.mn.comcast.net).
[20:26] <robbat2> maybe just leave the log up to the defined end of meeting unedited
[20:26] <robbat2> and let a summary come together
[20:27] <Flameeyes> acknowledged
[20:27] <Flameeyes> so?
[20:27] <Flameeyes> other questions, topics, or we end up here?
[20:28] <kloeri> I have no more for today
[20:28] <Kugelfang> i think we're done
[20:28] <kingtaco|laptop> done
[20:28] <robbat2> done
[20:28] <Flameeyes> vapier, wolf31o2|mobile?
[20:29] <Flameeyes> actually, wolf called a brb because of his boss a while back, so he's probably afk
[20:30] <Flameeyes> remains vapier, if he's still awake :)
[20:30] <vapier> ?
[20:30] <vapier> you asking me if i have any other topics ?
[20:30] <Flameeyes> vapier, yeah
[20:30] <vapier> i got nothin
[20:30] <Flameeyes> so the council meeting for 14 september 2006 closes here