21:00:29 alright, woodpecker says it's time 21:00:34 * dertobi123 yawns 21:00:39 here 21:00:53 leio is logging, Betelgeuse is probably logging as always, so we should be OK 21:00:56 here 21:01:00 here 21:01:04 here 21:01:11 solar, oh great, nice you could make it 21:01:15 sorta 21:01:42 * jmbsvicetto looks in 21:02:12 so only scarabeus is missing right now 21:02:26 let's give him some time while we finish the intro 21:02:30 damn sorry 21:02:33 i am around 21:02:35 ah good 21:02:37 but eating dinner 21:02:42 i thought i have 5 more minutes :D 21:02:43 ok 21:02:44 so, who wants to chair? 21:02:45 we can go : 21:02:47 ] 21:03:21 no answer, should I do it then? 21:03:41 ko, I'll do it 21:03:47 just do it 21:03:55 any remarks on the agenda before we start? 21:04:32 dertobi123, did I correctly answer your worries about this meeting being useless in my email? 21:05:16 well 21:05:24 --> javaJake (~javaJake@unaffiliated/javajake) has joined #gentoo-council 21:05:32 dertobi123, ? 21:06:08 anyway, lets go on 21:06:14 2. Review of GLEP 39 overhaul propositions (30 minutes) 21:06:16 well, i still think it's quite useless do go through all proposed changes 21:06:29 but anyways, just move on ;) 21:06:39 let's not go though all of them but just talk a bou the ones that might not be OK then 21:07:01 I'll just iterate that voting should move to the web app after GSoC is over. 21:07:09 Otherwise doing the webapp is kind of pointless. 21:07:13 as I said in one of my emails some of the propositions are me interpreting what devs want 21:07:31 Betelgeuse, great, I'm looking forward to it 21:07:51 let's start with http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_79dc0c2dc7d8987a9c9ecaaa30e17bb2.xml 21:07:59 Calchan: put the proposed ballots up for review a week before voting starts and everyone is able to send in fixes 21:08:23 Calchan: maybe you want to link to the summaries instead? 21:08:37 leio, sorry that was the thread 21:08:50 http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_df5433a1e6cbe479462da8f5fe588299.xml 21:09:19 ^^^ the 5 choices that seem to appear from all the discussions we had 21:09:41 the current situation would be number 2 21:09:59 anything you want to add or delete from that list? 21:10:32 the last one is uttery dull, we should not be able to switch out votes 21:10:51 scarabeus, it was proposed by somebody, can't remember who though 21:10:54 --> NeddySeagoon (~NeddySeag@gentoo/developer/NeddySeagoon) has joined #gentoo-council 21:11:25 scarabeus, but agreed it looks weird 21:11:28 it should be number 3 21:11:34 take off the last two points 21:11:46 they make no sense 21:11:56 actualy no 21:11:59 even that is bad 21:12:15 ulm, number 4 is what was done a couple time this year and wasn't accepted so it makes sense to have it on the ballot 21:12:36 4. is most sane if we dont see the votes before we actualy vote 21:12:45 btw, the idea is not to discuss the propositions but decide which ones should go on the ballot. If you disagree with some of the propositions (hopefully), then just talk them down on the corresponding thread and vote against them 21:12:46 because it might affect our decision to see how others decided :] 21:13:07 scarabeus: so? 21:13:17 it's the same now 21:13:46 probably yea, since we dont have anonymous voting 21:13:55 but now the time you have to do it is bit shorter :] 21:14:13 anybody else against having 3 and 4 on the ballot? if not I'll consider we have a majority for keeping them 21:14:15 Calchan: this should also not be about what is on the ballot, since it's not us to decide what people want on the ballots. 21:14:39 Calchan: 3 and 4? or 4 and 5? 21:14:46 dertobi123, agreed in this case, you'll see later that some of the proposals are the result of my interpretation 21:14:51 ulm, sorry, 4 and 5 21:14:55 or do you start counting from zero 21:15:01 ;) 21:15:15 ulm, it's still monday morning here ;o) 21:15:46 i am definitely against last one and number 3 if i count from 1 21:15:56 noone should be able to affect council meeting after it ends 21:16:13 against having it on a ballot, or your opinion of what we should choose..? 21:16:38 scarabeus, make sure you make the difference between your personal opinion and whether it makes sense on the ballot 21:16:54 Calchan: well, put them all on the ballot. we can trust devs not to vote for the stupid ones 21:16:58 leio, was that for 4 and 5? 21:17:19 Calchan: that was directed to scarabeus, same meaning what you said 21:17:25 ulm, that's also my opinion for the ballot, as for voting yeah, I think some are wrong or don't make sense 21:17:27 keep them all indeed, if we can see how they can break transparency devs are smart enough too 21:17:30 3 & 4 are fine. 21:18:06 ok, so let's make it simpler: anybody against having all these on the ballot, and if so which one? 21:18:33 I'm ok with all of them on the ballot, scarabeus and ulm too it seems, others? 21:18:33 "- There should be no vote by email." imo should not be there 21:19:22 I don't think the option for developers to choose to keep the status quo should be removed from the ballot 21:19:27 solar, I agree that it may be stupid, but some think we should only vote on meetings, thus I put it on the ballot draft, vote will sort them out 21:20:01 so solar you're against 1 and 5 or just 1? 21:20:01 we are not required to vote via IRC. Only to hold a monthly meeting 21:20:40 giving ppl the option to choose on something we already decided on seems silly. 21:20:57 solar, what we're required to do now and what we'll do in the future based on devs wishes are different things 21:21:04 and as Betelgeuse pointed out there is a webapp in development. 21:21:39 Betelgeuse, can you associate the webapp with any of these choices or do you want to add another one for it? 21:21:51 me would like webapp that would make things more fluent 21:21:55 Calchan: It should talk about voting during a meeting and outside it. 21:22:20 Betelgeuse, OK, so am I understanding in think this is orthogonal? 21:22:30 also i would maybe prefer votes to be anonymous and displayed after we voted, so we cant theoreticaly affect each other :] at least most governments does it that way... :] 21:22:43 scarabeus: the web application can do that 21:23:11 I still need an answetr for the ballot from Betelgeuse solar and leio 21:23:42 Calchan: put everything suggested there 21:23:51 Betelgeuse, ok 21:23:59 so we have a majority for keeping them all 21:24:02 next 21:24:11 what answer do you need from me? 21:24:14 Is the ballot going to be condorcet of each of these, so developers can put a preference list of all these? 21:24:31 leio, most probably yes, but we'll discuss that inthe second part 21:24:46 second topic: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_76311b25ccb18fff4764955db55ad0ea.xml 21:25:20 I don't think any of the options present allow to replace e-mail with webapp, but that's also somewhat covered next in regards to who and how the rules can be changed later 21:25:33 (re: first topic) 21:25:44 I wouldn't hardcode any media. 21:26:20 so there's 3 main ideas here 21:27:13 Calchan: can you add a point without any glep? 21:27:16 keep the text as a glep, make it as some sort of consitution to make it clear that council can't change it (unlike gleps), or split it so that it's easy for us to update practical aspects of how council works 21:27:23 ulm: there is, the last one 21:27:35 ulm, right I forgot that one 21:27:40 scarabeus: not really 21:27:48 ulm: disregard that, i now read it once again 21:28:22 IMO this vote is beyond the scope of a glep, and I don't konw why it was a glep before 21:28:26 indeed, thare should be one item which says (or something along this): The new text should be a "constitution" 21:28:27 *know 21:28:29 (anybody feel free to propose a better word here) which can only be 21:28:34 updated with an all developer vote 21:28:56 I'll add that, thanks ulm 21:29:09 anybody else with a comment about this ballot? 21:29:48 let's switch to the next one then: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_6009db554b00ae9de67047206c7698be.xml 21:30:36 depending on how people interpret glep 39 the current situation is either 1 or 3, and I comment in the summary that I'm not sure 3 makes sense 21:30:52 that's one of those I'm particularly intersted in your opinion 21:31:10 it's all very vague 21:31:45 we should be 2 or 4 if we have time :P, but its all really not well worded 21:31:55 it does not state exact powers and capabilities 21:32:00 ulm, indeed, but unfortunately it's hard to draw the line for this kind of matter, any better idea? 21:32:25 scarabeus, again it's not about what the result should be but about the choices we suggest to devs for the vote 21:32:55 "the council only reacts to requests from developers" doesn't make much sense, because council members are developers too ;) 21:32:55 thats why i put the smiley there, second part of my sentence is important :] 21:32:59 does it make sense to have on the ballot the possibility of a council responsible for being proactive but with rather limited powers? 21:33:24 if people want it that way ... 21:33:37 Calchan: possible new option: Each council should set its mode of operation after being elected. 21:34:11 Betelgeuse, I'll add that to the list 21:34:19 --> chithead (~chithead@gentoo/developer/chithanh) has joined #gentoo-council 21:34:20 if nobody is against it 21:34:29 no objections 21:34:55 Betelgeuse, do we want it with and without the trustees thing? I'd say yes to both 21:35:24 Calchan: The trustee option could be a separate vote 21:35:45 Betelgeuse, indeed, with this many choices it would make it simple, let's do that 21:35:56 I'll update the ballot on the list 21:36:16 are we ok with this one? any more comments? 21:37:09 ok, next one then: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_3806fe4e42dc8ce013e247a081e3d4a0.xml 21:37:29 I know solar might have things to say about this one 21:38:17 so, anybody objects to any of this? 21:38:35 it corners all cases for devs to vote upon 21:39:09 scarabeus, ok, so at least from this point of view we should be covered 21:39:11 <-- comprookie2000 has quit (Quit: Heading home) 21:39:47 solar and I discussed yesterday about some like number not being pertinent, does anybody else think this way? 21:40:02 - Unlike other projects the council does not need a lead. 21:40:11 that is what I agree with. 21:40:14 expect i think it is bad idea having the 3rd option, really that one should not be even thinked upon 21:41:12 scarabeus, it's similar the way devrel operates for example, the lead can break ties which avoids the possibility of procrastinating on decisions 21:41:46 well that is why there is 7 of us 21:41:52 not 6 or 8 21:41:53 :] 21:42:03 scarabeus, but someone could be missing 21:42:27 or we could be in the process of re-electing a new member, which happened 21:42:44 ok 21:43:34 so, apart from solar who (it seems) would like to remove all but number one, anybody else wnats to remove any of these propositions? 21:44:03 I agree with solar on this one 21:44:33 i agree with solar, too ... but again, every proposed item should be added to the ballot 21:45:05 ulm, dertobi123, so are you against having those on the ballot? please be explicit 21:45:26 we dont like idea of having lead, yet we respect devs that they want to vote about it themselves 21:45:30 dertobi123 was pretty explicit 21:46:13 solar, actually no, he says he doens't want them in the ballot and that he does want them in the ballot in the same sentence 21:46:22 Betelgeuse, scarabeus ? 21:46:46 Calchan: anything goes, the more options the better 21:47:00 Calchan: jesus ..... i agree with solar, that the council doesn't need a lead. but once again, every proposed item should be added to the ballot. 21:47:06 that's explicit enough? 21:47:13 Betelgeuse, dertobi123, ok thanks 21:47:43 and I'm for leaving those options to devs too so we have a majority 21:48:02 anybody with anyhting to add before we switch to the second part? 21:48:05 same as Calchan for me 21:48:54 ok, then: 3. Scheduling and voting issues (20 minutes) 21:49:11 so here's the issue 21:49:29 devs will likely want to vote on the final text so that leaves us with 2 votes 21:49:32 nothing regarding the second part (how lead is elected if a lead is chosen in the vote)? 21:49:45 leio, oh sorry 21:49:54 so guys go ahead with that 21:50:14 I have nothing (like objections or whatnot) on it though 21:50:19 obviously that question applies only if some for of lead is decided to the previous question 21:50:31 this is a waste of my time 21:50:40 solar++ 21:51:01 solar, dertobi123 feel free to leave the meeting now, you don't have to stay 21:51:18 I'm looking for a proxy for the rest of the council. 21:51:45 my term. If any dev plans to run next year and you don't suck. let me know so I can make you my proxy 21:52:17 ok, back to 3. Scheduling and voting issues (20 minutes) 21:52:35 devs will likely want to vote on the final text so that leaves us with 2 votes 21:52:48 and that the schedule will be tight for that before the next election 21:53:24 so one question is: do we want to do everything possible to be done before the next election, or we want to take whatever time it takes to do it 21:53:44 well, what solar said ... basically the same for me, especially the "if you don't suck" part ... 21:54:19 we should not rush things before the end of our "time" 21:54:28 scarabeus++ 21:54:35 we're not in such a hurry 21:54:36 Calchan: such important things shouldn't be waived through in about some weeks or so ... so it's not practically doable to do "the right way" when rushing things through 21:54:46 +it 21:54:58 scarabeus, at first I though it would have been nice to finish before the end of our term, but I think more and more it will be impossible without rushing it 21:55:14 dertobi123, agreed here 21:55:45 Calchan: there should be enough time for discussion on MLs 21:55:47 i think it will be impossible. and we should not push through something half baked on such important topic 21:56:17 has the discussion in mailing lists been going on for enough and is quieting down? 21:56:26 so we have dertobi123 scarabeus ulm and me for doing it right and not rushing it 21:56:38 no hurry for me either 21:56:38 I'm with not rushing too 21:56:42 come on, everyone will say that 21:56:47 the current GLEP doesn't really impede that much 21:56:51 leio, yes, no progress in like a couple weeks, but not a good neough reason to stop it there 21:57:45 I think if we get somewhere with this from a well timed vote, then after this is in effect we don't need to wait for the whole year of the next term 21:57:59 another point raised on the ml is we could vote on that (and I'm guessing it's only for the first part, i.e. voting on all the propositions) on the forums instead 21:58:04 --> darkside_ (~darkside@gentoo/developer/darkside) has joined #gentoo-council 21:58:19 and frankly I don't like that much 21:58:37 and I have not been participating in any discussion as I didn't even notice any was going on, as I admit to not having been subscribed to gentoo-project. I imagine many other developers aren't as well (there was a dev-announce starter though). 21:58:56 maybe migrate to -core 21:58:59 everyone will get the mail 21:59:03 leio, I sent a tracker to dev-announce 21:59:23 scarabeus, no point to hide that in core, not what it's intended for 21:59:42 well i didnt want to hide it 21:59:48 If someone doesn't read -dev-announce that's their problem 21:59:49 that is only list every dev is getting 21:59:50 leio, but that's ok, it's always time to jump in the discussions 21:59:57 but yea Peteri is right 22:00:01 scarabeus, no 22:00:01 people should read d-a 22:00:10 <-- blueness has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat) 22:00:17 scarabeus, devs *have* to be subscribed to -dev-announce 22:00:42 scarabeus: you're better off with Betelgeuse (it's Petteri) 22:00:53 so, about voting on forums? 22:01:13 It's easier to write with tab too :) 22:01:14 Calchan: forums would imply voting by non-devs? 22:01:21 ulm, indeed 22:01:22 yeah, we'll just assume the discussion will be happening in a mailing list that we aren't subscribed to, instead of thinking there's silence, based on the To and Reply-To being something and we look closely at that to know that we are missing a subscription :) 22:01:32 Calchan: doesn't make sense to me 22:01:41 Betelgeuse: i tried, somehow quassel didnt complete so Petteri is shorter if you write it out :P 22:01:49 can we please get proposals for topic #3 for the next meeting? or on the council mailinglist ... that's kinda pointless do start a discussion now and here 22:02:31 dertobi123, ok, no emergency on that 22:02:58 ulm: btw. there's a forum restricted to developers, but i guess not every developer has an account on f.g.o 22:03:15 I think forums have any added benefit. 22:03:21 +don't 22:03:36 anything else to add to this before we move on? 22:03:54 --> jsbronder (~jsbronder@gentoo/developer/jsbronder) has joined #gentoo-council 22:04:22 ok then 22:04:24 <-- billie has quit (Remote host closed the connection) 22:04:29 4.1 Action list. Who does what and when? 22:04:53 I will update the propositions and prepare the ballot list 22:05:31 4.2 Who takes care of the summary and log for this meeting? When? 22:05:46 I have exams for this week so rather not. 22:06:04 I can do it, or maybe we can ask tanderson 22:06:16 raw log, me as usual, before next sleep 22:06:24 anybody opposed to him doing the summaries btw? 22:06:34 --> ABCD (~abcd@gentoo/developer/abcd) has joined #gentoo-council 22:06:59 ok, so I'll see with him whetehr he wants to do it, if not I'll do it 22:07:03 4.3 Next meeting date/time. 22:07:28 how's june 14th for what should be our last meeting? 22:07:32 when is our term ending exactly? 22:07:57 should work for me 22:07:59 leio, I'd say late june early july 22:08:02 According to http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev-announce/msg_20ba6ea38ae349fc57470bd8a78f4b5f.xml it should end at the end of June / early July 22:08:26 jmbsvicetto, so the election process shuold have started 22:08:48 NeddySeagoon, or soon will, are we late already? 22:08:53 NeddySeagoon: no 22:08:55 NeddySeagoon: election process should start in early in june 22:09:02 It should start around June 1st 22:09:20 2 weeks nomination + 2 weeks voting 22:09:28 ok 22:09:47 anyways, june 14th should work for my last council meeting, just in case i don't find a proxy 22:09:49 with 1 or 2 days in between - depends on how much time the infra contact require to setup the election 22:10:15 Betelgeuse, dertobi123 and I are available on june 14th, how about the others? 22:10:20 fine 22:10:30 dertobi123, not much usually happens on the last meeting though 22:10:45 fine with me too 22:10:57 works ok 22:11:10 Calchan: we'll see ... already today and for quite some time nothing happened ... so that's quite ok for me. 22:11:51 ok, for the 14th then 22:12:01 who does the agenda? 22:12:05 any volunteers? 22:13:17 sigh, I'll do it then 22:13:28 5. Open floor 22:13:33 Calchan / dertobi123: We'll be ready for any ideas about a "Coup d'état" ;-) 22:13:38 thanks all for your participation 22:13:56 jmbsvicetto, meh? 22:13:58 We shouldn't be trying to rush a voting about GLEP39 "reform" 22:14:08 jmbsvicetto: lol ;) 22:14:13 Calchan: about the "quiet" last meeting ;) 22:14:57 all glep39 stuff should be voted on by all developers, so they should've the options they want - nothing to rush a vote on in the next meeting 22:15:26 jmbsvicetto, the "quiet" last meeting wsn't organized by me so I'll abstain from criticizing (in the goold old "do it or shut up" fashion) 22:15:31 we weren't creating ballots for our next meeting vote, but for a vote to be done by all developers 22:15:48 yes, but we should first establish some agreements 22:16:17 leio: yes, but that's too early 22:16:39 jmbsvicetto: I don't necessarily disagree that, clarifying dertobi123 22:16:44 with that* 22:16:45 there haven't been concrete proposals yet. People were talking about general concepts before Calchan did the summaries 22:16:51 ok 22:18:05 Calchan: I was joking about your (council members) expectation that the last meeting of your term would be "quiet" 22:21:14 --> billie (~billie@gentoo/developer/billie) has joined #gentoo-council 22:24:59 anything else for the open floor? 22:25:19 <-- darkside_ (~darkside@gentoo/developer/darkside) has left #gentoo-council 22:25:28 guess not 22:25:34 I hope that developers will comment on the summaries too with further stuff then 22:31:04 leio: I'll take further comments to the project ml 22:32:40 ok, I'll consider this the cut point for raw log then, meeting done unless todays chair says otherwise and I cut from later :)