20:56:39 --- solar has changed the topic to: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-council/msg_9fac75691c9845051a8cef0fb9b24115.xml 21:00:03 Alright, roll call 21:00:11 * dertobi123 is here 21:00:14 yes 21:00:37 yep 21:00:38 here 21:00:52 I have booted my pen&paper computer so I'm ready to go ;o) 21:01:04 here 21:01:52 scarabeus and solar were here a few minutes ago and I'm sure they'll show up at some point 21:02:02 Calchan: what? 21:02:09 Calchan: i already replied to the roll call 21:02:10 :D 21:02:23 scarabeus, blame age ;o) 21:02:31 here 21:02:33 I mean my age, I'm geting blind 21:02:46 alright, we have everybody 21:03:11 Betelgeuse, I know you're logging, who else? just in case Betelgeuse has internet issues 21:03:22 as usual.. 21:03:27 good 21:03:39 who wants to chair this meeting? 21:04:12 as usual I volunteer but if anybody else wnats I'll be happy to let you do it 21:04:33 no candidates? 21:04:33 Calchan: I think it's assumed you will chair the rest of the council meetings 21:04:38 just do it, please :) 21:04:41 solar: ack :P 21:04:42 solar, heh thanks 21:04:43 :] 21:04:44 Calchan: You probably know best what you would like to accomplish with 2 21:05:29 Betelgeuse, I actually don't assume anything and have no pesonal agenda, what I want is us to talk about it 21:05:32 ok then 21:05:42 any comment abou tthe agenda before we go? 21:06:20 lets go. 21:06:21 as this is the last chance to change agenda, we should add the "Glep 39 change process/approach" to it, because now we have no chance to change it, and it kinda blocks numero uno 21:06:51 uhrm, no ... discuss stuff like that on-list please 21:06:53 scarabeus, agreed but we're not going to vote on anything today, so glep 39 doesn't get in the way yet 21:07:20 ok lets keep it on list then, i will sent mail after meeting :] 21:07:23 and changing glep 39 isn't something we can add to the agenda at the last minute, see my answer to vapier 21:07:51 scarabeus, since you joined us recently you might not rememebr that I was the one raising this issue at the beginning of our term 21:08:28 and the council decided that it couldn't change glep 39 on its own, which is silly because it had been done before 21:08:35 anyway, back to the agenda 21:08:36 #2 I'm in favor of allowing ppl to vote by email or use a www based app such as Betelgeuse proposed as long as the majority is present. 21:08:43 2. Voting by email (20 minutes) 21:08:58 I agree with solar. 21:09:21 I think the tool is irrelevant, but I agree voting by email should be allowed 21:09:22 i'm in favour of people voting before the meeting by email or to cast *all* votes after a meeting on web-based app 21:09:47 i would preffer the web-app after the meeting 21:09:55 so they can read last minute notes from meeting too 21:10:21 the problem for anything done after the meeting is as we tend to slack we need to be strict on deadlines 21:10:22 but it should be also limited somehow, so none can vote lets say 20 days after the meeting 21:10:28 and it delays all processes again 21:10:37 it should be 72 hours 21:10:46 thats enough to get connection at least somehow 21:10:48 scarabeus, we should limit it to like 48 hours no more 21:10:58 or even 48 :] i just tried to be nice 21:11:01 i can go with 2 days :] 21:11:03 after the notes are posted? 21:11:16 after the log is posted 21:11:23 solar, that would take too long, how about after the logs are posted 21:11:24 ? 21:11:33 I've seen long delays in the notes being posted however 21:11:41 48 hours just after the meeting ended 21:12:00 and it's the persons own responsiblity to find the notes? 21:12:19 If we use a web application, deadlines are easy to enforce. 21:12:20 you can read the raw log, summaries can't cover everything needed to know 21:12:34 solar, is there any way we can have the logs posted automatically right at the end of the meeting? 21:12:42 solar: as this only affects people which were absent, i see no problem with that 21:12:48 script-o-magic maybe 21:13:00 * solar is ok with that. stamp it/seal it and let move on. 21:13:24 no really. So it boils down to email vs web app. Either is fine with me 21:13:24 there are meeting bots that can do something like that. Other than that I've been commiting raw logs within hours of meeting end too the past couple meetings 21:14:05 Calchan: A bot. 21:14:11 now, we all seem to converge on an agreement on how to vote by email, although it might need a bit of polishing and working on some details, but how do we factor in the fact this is a change of what glep 39 says and that we have decided we can't change glep 39? 21:14:30 we are not 21:14:31 Calchan: 50% still needs to be there. 21:14:42 If someone-misses they can vote after. 21:14:42 50% still needs to attend 21:14:43 I think the glep39 doesn't say per se that we can't do vote in other places too 21:14:48 solar, can you please elaborate? 21:14:58 GLEP 39 doesn't require us to vote in meetings at all. 21:15:00 leio, but it doesn't say we can 21:15:07 Betelgeuse, ok, good point 21:15:15 leio: but it says that only those who show up can vote 21:15:34 "Council decisions are by majority vote of those who show up (or their proxies)." 21:15:40 another good point 21:16:03 well, if i don't vote in a meeting, but sent my votes before i'm somewhat proxying myself 21:16:06 yeah, I made and quoted it before, then thought that doesn't cover all votes, but "Council decisions" sounds broad 21:16:11 same if we're voting afterwards 21:16:35 I think the best approach is to move the whole vote after the meeting. 21:16:42 And do it in 48 hours after it. 21:16:43 well we should have the proccess of glep39 update and update the text to fit our needs 21:16:55 so it seems we first need to decide whether allowing vote by email requires a change of glep 39 21:17:17 scarabeus: get the discussion started and submit a proposal on which fellow developers can vote :P 21:17:19 GLEP 39 should be updated so that someone comes up with a new text. 21:17:37 scarabeus, again agreed, but it's a hot topic, please the logs and emails around the time of the first council meetings of this term 21:17:37 Then open it for comments and finally submit it for developer vote. 21:17:44 Don't have discussion first. 21:17:45 Betelgeuse, but who does that if council can 21:17:47 t? 21:18:04 Calchan: Anyone can. 21:18:19 foundation guys 21:18:23 woudl be sane choice 21:18:27 they should be our coutnerpart 21:18:37 or all devs 21:18:38 * dertobi123 sighs. 21:18:43 scarabeus, I'm guessing they don't care and don 21:18:47 t wan tto interfere 21:18:57 hey in that case why you voted we cant touch that glep :D 21:19:05 if none cares :] 21:19:18 the council can still come up with the new text 21:19:20 scarabeus, I voted for us to be able to change that glep, so don't look at me 21:19:23 we can't just approve it 21:19:38 question is, who approves it then 21:19:50 condorcet voting by elections team, probably 21:19:56 scarabeus: developer vote by elections team 21:20:03 please take a look at the July 20th 2009 summary 21:20:04 yes/no 21:20:16 leio: why condorcet? it's just yes or no 21:20:21 ulm: same results 21:20:25 ulm: doesn't matter 21:20:31 ok, so it seems that we need to prepare a change on glep 39, and as there are other things to change in there than just voting by email I suggest we batch them together 21:20:39 shrug, tradition. No need to argue then also what voting method it has to be ;p 21:21:10 Calchan: yes, throw out all the outdated cruft 21:21:21 especially in "Rationale" and "Motivation" 21:21:25 ulm, yes, and also see vapier's mail 21:21:40 and change the title ;) 21:21:52 so, do we have a volunteer to lead that effort? 21:22:16 <-- Ford_Prefect has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 21:23:04 mmmkay... so what I propose is I gather all required changes (voting by email, vapier's stuff, ulm's stuff) and submit it to you guys 21:23:38 and we work on it all together with me as your sexy secretary, and we submit that to a vote of all devs 21:23:50 --> Ford_Prefect (~ford_pref@gentoo/developer/ford-prefect) has joined #gentoo-council 21:24:21 Calchan: and i hope you will wear some nice gentoo t-shirt if you want to present yourself as sexy secretary :D 21:24:21 sounds good 21:24:23 sounds sane 21:24:50 Calchan: please make separate patches so developers can vote on each of the changes separately 21:25:08 dertobi123, interesting idea, ok will do 21:25:39 I think it should be intirely new GLEP 21:25:40 I will first gather an informal list before making patches though 21:25:45 and leave 39 as deprecated 21:26:09 Betelgeuse, we could do that to, it would make things easier 21:26:25 * solar thinks so as well. 21:26:52 we should implement it as approach for everything, expect typo changes all gleps would go to deprecated and presented as new glep 21:26:53 and on the voting by email subject it looks we all agree and only some details need to be worked out 21:27:14 scarabeus, that or we version them 21:27:43 we never agreed even on versioning eclasses :D how do you want us to version gleps :P 21:27:52 well, in general glep 39 shouldn't be a glep, but the council's constitution ... if we're creating a new one, make it the council's constitution, not yet another glep 21:28:01 scarabeus, we just do it, it isn't that difficult if we decide it 21:28:35 dertobi123, I've been wanting to do that for a long time but when I talked about it it was met with scepticism 21:28:45 whatever it's spelled in english 21:28:49 heh 21:28:55 we can haz constitution 21:29:23 ok, that can be one of the topics to discuss among all the others and we may have devs vote on that 21:29:54 anything else to add to that topic before we switch to thwe next one? 21:30:36 wow, we're right on schedule 21:30:48 3. Do we want of a policy for changes in metadata.xml? (20 minutes) 21:31:14 who starts? 21:31:23 Not sure about a policy. But shoving that info into metadata.xml is just flat out wrong 21:31:27 it looks weird 21:31:31 how about solar, you had an interesting proposal? 21:31:32 and definitely not in metadata 21:31:35 dammit, slow fingers 21:32:01 reason for that being is the end user gets this data and it provides them zero advantage. It bloats the tree. 21:32:12 agreed here 21:32:28 solar: Easy to filter out in CVS --> rsync 21:32:31 it would be a technical solution for a social problem 21:32:45 Betelgeuse: not if it's in metadata.xml (any other file is fine) 21:32:56 is there any way we can have such changes help us getting toward less territoriality? 21:33:02 antarus suggested owners.xml 21:33:05 one cookie for ulm :o) 21:33:17 I sometimes find myself touching some dev-java/ stuff that's not maintained by me so repoman reminding me would be useful in that case 21:33:22 Calchan: you should keep the calendar up-to-date with council meetings 21:33:50 just use common sense, we don't need more complicated rules 21:33:57 vapier, can we discus that in the open floor session? 21:34:37 yeah 21:34:38 ask the maintainer, and if he doesn't answer within reasonable time then just fix it 21:34:46 i think the rule "You dont maintain -> ask first" is quite clear 21:35:05 I could write a repoman check for checking against metadata.xml and herds.xml disabled if only changing KEYWORDS 21:35:08 and only thing we should implement is some repoman warning "I hope you ask since you dont maintain this" 21:35:12 Should remind people enough 21:35:14 ulm: yes. So far it's only one questionable seed in this entire mix. Seeing as devrel/QA or other did not slam the hammer down. it would be nice to make this overcomplex. But Betelgeuse has a good point about repoman. 21:35:16 scarabeus, indeed and it makes sense, the problem occurs when maintainers are slow to answer due to real life 21:35:27 ulm: agreed ... besides having a tard or two every other year screwing up that one did work for years .... 21:35:35 Calchan: well i always wait at least 10 days 21:35:44 Calchan: expect security fix, nothing need more rush 21:35:55 scarabeus, and some will think that 2 days is enough, some will think it's one month 21:36:07 We could also write some common time to devmanual 21:36:07 they can always ask us in QA 21:36:08 dertobi123: and for that case metadata information wouldn't help I guess 21:36:13 so we could always set a time limit but that's one more rule, do we need it? 21:36:15 ulm: indeed ... 21:36:15 about how soon you can commit if there's no response 21:36:17 to look over that fix 21:36:18 currently it's fuzzy 21:37:00 Betelgeuse: one week? 21:37:09 sounds like sensible time 21:37:14 because it always contains weekend 21:37:15 :] 21:37:23 this topic is somewhat useless ... there's no problem to solve. if someone screws up -> get their account locked. 21:37:28 how about letting anybody touching anything as long as it is masked? 21:37:40 dertobi123, unfortunately it isn't that easy 21:37:50 it is ... 21:37:52 ok so policy. 21:37:52 Lot of people are well reachable so allowing touching is not good. 21:37:59 dertobi123, we have to leave people a certain margin for error, they 21:38:01 re not robots 21:38:16 having loads of policy just for some tards is just plain bullshit 21:38:20 policy proposal. No useless data in metadata.xml (that's what #3 is about right?) 21:38:33 Betelgeuse, ok, (I was raising an hypothetical idea here, not pushing anything) 21:38:43 solar, right 21:38:45 yeah lets stop that bikeshed on -dev about that metadata changes 21:38:45 where useless is stuff that does not help the end user in anyway. Ie internal stuff only. 21:38:48 solar: right, it's useless in the users' tree 21:39:54 can we keep it that simple then? 21:40:41 solar, didn't you propose we keep this in another file at some point? 21:41:00 that policy is complicated, so i would vote against it anyway 21:41:00 I propose we vote on the week timeline? 21:41:22 Betelgeuse, we could do that, yes 21:41:26 I bet cvs->rsync can strip the tags with a simple xml tool. Having them in there or not is a different question, which we don't know if we should put our nose in it or not right now 21:41:38 anybody opposed to us voting on this? 21:41:46 * dertobi123 21:42:04 Calchan: that was antarus. But I think that is somewhat outside the scope. 21:42:16 leio: it would break the Manifest files 21:42:41 repoman in theory could check it from any dir. 21:43:07 dertobi123, you're opposed to us voting on making it official that after one week of warning one could touch any package? 21:43:40 Calchan: Just have a vote. If people don't want a policy they vote no. 21:43:45 To stay in status quo. 21:43:56 Calchan: i'm opposed to randomly put things up to vote just somewhen during the meeting 21:44:02 Betelgeuse, I'd agree with that but I wanted to hear his reasons, it could be intersting 21:44:22 Betelgeuse: it is another topic, the change for the devmanual, i would say first we close this topic and then lets vote on open floor 21:44:25 we can do that no? 21:44:29 sorry i bit disappeared 21:44:50 dertobi123, good point, so we should think this over a bit more, and if needed put it on the agenda for net time? 21:45:08 correct 21:45:12 scarabeus, open floor isn't for voting 21:45:18 Calchan: yeah ... 21:45:23 or put it before the open floor 21:45:23 Calchan: right, we shouldn't rush into such a vote. put it on the next meeting's agenda 21:45:36 scarabeus, it's to let users and devs interact with us directly 21:45:38 but it is 3 minutes to vote, so we can do that next month 21:45:58 just one thing, we should really somehow punish people not obeying that rule 21:46:09 scarabeus: use current process 21:46:26 scarabeus: devrel will act if evidence is presented 21:46:44 scarabeus, and bugs filed, and a chance to correct behavior given 21:46:58 I'm talking yoda style more and more, I'm getting worried 21:47:19 force use, you must stop 21:47:27 heh 21:47:46 :D 21:48:11 ok, so does any one of us volunteer to lead that topic on mailing lists and if needed make a proposition for next time? 21:48:31 about the devmanual change of the packages changes? 21:48:34 yeah i will do it 21:48:54 scarabeus, thanks 21:48:56 pachages touching 21:48:58 you volunteering to do something and don't know what to do? :P 21:49:05 you're 21:49:06 * 21:49:08 nah just making sure 21:49:17 heh 21:49:29 anybody wwants to add something? 21:49:39 I'm having a hell of a time following you guys. It sounds like you got way off topic of #3. Has that ended? 21:50:08 solar, I was making sure everybody had a chance to say whatver they wanted to say 21:50:14 solar: you want to vote about it? most of us said no :] 21:50:18 so go ahead if there's anything you want to add 21:51:20 I understood the question is if we want to have policies for changes in metadata.xml at all, not if we support tag or file 21:51:35 leio, indeed 21:51:48 I've already made my basic proposal related to #3 "No useless data in metadata.xml where useless is stuff that does not help the end user in anyway. Ie internal stuff only." 21:51:48 scarabeus, ^^^ 21:51:49 --> nirbheek|netboo (~nirbheek@gentoo/developer/nirbheek) has joined #gentoo-council 21:51:52 as a random comment, I see nothing wrong with territorialism 21:52:22 if exercised by an always available team 21:52:23 leio: the question is not even related to metadata.xml strictly - it is more about "do we want to solve a social problem with a technical solution?" 21:52:46 dertobi123: it's not purely social as I pointed out 21:53:09 Betelgeuse: well i think the devmanual update is better than load of new xml tags 21:53:26 scarabeus, you mean devmanual or dev handbook? 21:53:36 demanual/dev handbook 21:53:40 scarabeus, not the same 21:53:46 they are two different things 21:53:50 Betelgeuse: well, make it 95% social then - doesn't really change my pov 21:54:27 ok dev handbook is about policies so i speak about that one :] 21:54:33 The deadline might be better in CVS part of dev handbook than devmanual. 21:54:54 yep 21:55:00 http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=2 21:55:02 Maybe here 21:55:07 --> blueness (~hnsctq40@2001:470:1d:170:224:8cff:fe54:4052) has joined #gentoo-council 21:55:09 scarabeus, anyway don't bother about making a patch for the dev handbook yet, once we have the answer to our question it will be easy to do, let's work on the answer first, and maybe on the question too as douglas adams would say 21:55:25 :] 21:55:46 I'm not kidding, finding out exactly what problem we are trying to solv eis essential here 21:55:55 yes i get it 21:56:26 ok, do we leave it at that or does anybody have anything to add? 21:57:09 no, trying to find the problem to solve ... that sums it up quite good 21:57:32 the current conclusion is scarabeus will look at the thread on ml, identify what the problem is and how we can solve it if there's anything to solve, and report back next month 21:57:53 and it's not forbidden to help him, whoever you are 21:58:16 alright, final topic then 21:58:26 4. Conclusion (10 minutes) 21:58:31 4.1 Action list. Who does what and when? 21:58:49 see above for scarabeus, and I'll work on the glep 39 thing 21:58:56 anything else? 21:59:06 no 21:59:22 4.2 Who takes care of the summary and log for this meeting? When? 21:59:48 I can do that in the next 2 days, it's no big deal 21:59:53 Log I will commit within a couple hours 21:59:57 unless somebody else wnats to do it 22:00:10 leio, thanks 22:00:22 4.3 Next meeting date/time. 22:00:35 how about april 8th? 22:00:44 april 1st is risky ;o) 22:00:47 no 22:00:55 sorry, wrong calendar 22:00:57 8th seems like a Thursday ;p 22:00:57 not a monday 22:00:58 8th is on the Thursday. How about the 12th? 22:01:03 How about 5th 22:01:10 I was just testing you guys ! ;o) 22:01:13 leio: easter monday ;) 22:01:18 is there a rush of topics for next month? 22:01:19 5 or 19 are ok with me 22:01:21 not 12 22:01:23 5th is easter monday, prefer 12th ... 22:01:28 12th ok for me too 22:01:31 I need a calendar with comments and special days or something 22:01:32 or 19th 22:01:50 5th and 12th are ok with me 22:01:54 19th might work as well 22:02:30 it seems it's one of those complicated ones, how about we settle that on the alias? 22:02:57 just makes it even more difficult ... 22:03:08 dertobi123, not untrue 22:03:22 what about the 19th? ok for everyone? 22:03:39 is everybody ok with the 19th? 22:03:42 I am 22:04:03 I am. We shouldn't make the meeting after that another 6 weeks interval then, but 4 or so. 22:04:21 yes 22:04:29 leio, but some are not available on the 5th and some others on the 12th 22:04:41 leio, and as long as we have a meeting amonth we're ok 22:05:13 yes, I'm saying hopefully the May meeting can then happen on 17th (4 weeks after 12th April), not a longer interval again 22:05:30 ah ok, I misunderstood 22:05:36 10th might work as well 22:05:42 we'll see then, all of 5th, 12th and 19th April are OK for me 22:05:44 (10th may that is) 22:06:17 so let's tentatively settle for the 19th then, those who haven't spoken have say 48 hours to do so 22:06:34 4.4 Who will follow-up discussions and prepare the agenda for the next meeting? 22:07:03 Calchan: I can prepare the agenda, unless you want to do it again ;) 22:07:14 ulm, thanks a lot 22:07:47 anything to add before open floor? 22:08:23 thank you 22:08:43 thanks solar 22:08:44 the floor is open then 22:09:04 vapier? 22:09:27 I'm running to the microwave, I'll be back in a couple minutes 22:09:56 Calchan: you should keep the calendar up-to-date with council meetings 22:10:04 i dont have anything else to add :P 22:10:15 :D 22:10:18 haha. He waited all that time to repeat himself :) 22:10:35 no, meanwhile he watched us dance 22:11:00 vapier: you cant do this, now i have to clean up the table with spit coffee, laughter is disaster at some points :D 22:11:34 vapier, what calender are you talking about? 22:11:50 --- solar has changed the topic to: Tentative Next Council meeting Apr 19th at 1900UTC, i.e. 2000CET, 1400EST, 1200MST, 1100PST. 22:12:10 guys on web page lu_zero is still marked as slacker 22:12:16 and elections where i was elected are missing 22:12:21 just now spotted 22:12:59 scarabeus: what web page? 22:13:06 http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ 22:13:38 scarabeus: Oh, some weird section that has been added at some point 22:13:42 Calchan: it's linked from gentoo.org frontpage 22:13:46 it's on the left side 22:13:58 if you dont have access, i can add you now ... just tell me your gmail account 22:17:18 same for any other Gentoo dev 22:17:38 >vapier< mart.raudsepp 22:20:36 ok, anyone else for open floor speak? 22:20:42 vapier: first name . last name at gmail dot com 22:21:10 --> NeddySeagoon (~NeddySeag@gentoo/developer/NeddySeagoon) has joined #gentoo-council 22:22:00 done 22:22:13 vapier, thanks 22:22:41 there's an old recurring event on there i guess will need updating/deleting 22:24:16 <-- Ford_Prefect has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat) 22:25:16 vapier, I'll look into that, also I'm just now think that we'll switch to summer time and we might want to take that into account 22:28:51 i guess we are over meeting right? i am going to disappear if none wants something from me :] 22:29:11 scarabeus, yes, thanks for your participation 22:29:47 we should more thank you for coordination, we just do what others elected us to do (at least try best to do so) :]