Started logging meeting in #ubuntu-meeting
[10:06:51] <nixternal> and let the meeting begin!
[10:07:15] <nixternal> did everyone vote via email that was supposed to vote after the last meeting?
[10:07:20] <nixternal> I am positive I did
[10:07:36] <nixternal> seems cjwatson and soren were the others along with me who were to vote via email
[10:07:53] <cjwatson> I did about ten minutes ago
[10:08:00] <nixternal> hehe
[10:08:23] <nixternal> [ACTION] Follow up: persia contacts Angel Abad about his application
[10:08:42] <nixternal> [TOPIC]Administrative Matters
[10:08:54] <nixternal> do we have any admin matters this week?
[10:09:02] <cody-somerville> I have one to quickly bring up.
[10:09:11] <nixternal> rock and roll cody-somerville
[10:09:34] <cody-somerville> I mentioned this briefly in #ubuntu-devel but membership on the DMB effectively grants Ubuntu core-dev.
[10:09:50] <cody-somerville> cjwatson mentioned this was a bug so we should probably fix it.
[10:10:03] <nixternal> so everyone who is on the DMB is now a core-dev?
[10:10:07] <cody-somerville> Yes.
[10:10:13] <cody-somerville> DMB is a member of core-dev team.
[10:10:31] <nixternal> well that was easy...no sweating while mdz grills ya
[10:10:41] <cody-somerville> lol
[10:10:47] * cjwatson reminds nixternal that the DMB grants core-dev now ;-)
[10:11:05] <cody-somerville> The solution is to make dmb the owner of ubuntu-core-dev instead of a member.
[10:11:07] <cjwatson> I believe Cody's suggestion was that the DMB should be the owner of teams but not a member
[10:11:08] <nixternal> heh, you would think I would have known that one :)
[10:11:15] <cjwatson> I have a follow-up question to that though
[10:11:31] <cjwatson> I think there are some other cases where the DMB is an administrator, and some other more closely aligned team is the owner
[10:11:33] * geser waves
[10:12:03] <cody-somerville> Agreed.
[10:12:09] <cjwatson> so while I think we can make this change for ~ubuntu-core-dev, we might have to be careful about doing it across the board
[10:12:30] <cjwatson> at least it would require some coordination
[10:12:35] <cody-somerville> If no one disagrees, I can remove dmb from ubuntu-core-dev immediately since its already an owner.
[10:12:49] <cody-somerville> s/an/the/
[10:12:59] <cjwatson> I think that's fine - if it causes a problem of some kind, I can put it back
[10:13:01] <nixternal> +1 - I was just looking at LP
[10:13:13] <stgraber> +1
[10:13:29] <nixternal> [ACTION]Remove DMB from Core Dev team - make it the owner and not a member
[10:13:41] <nixternal> dang, that was supposed to be agreed :)
[10:13:48] <nixternal> [AGREED]Remove DMB from Core Dev team - make it the owner and not a member
[10:13:51] <cody-somerville> Done.
[10:13:55] <nixternal> rock on
[10:14:20] <nixternal> before we get on to applications, who wants to chair the next meeting?
[10:14:44] <james_w> I have one thing too
[10:14:54] <nixternal> alrighty, go james_w
[10:15:04] <james_w> I would like a contact address to be set for ~ubuntu-dev and the DMB is the admin
[10:15:39] <james_w> covered on ubuntu-devel@ in the thread "Default reviewer for Ubuntu merge proposals?"
[10:15:59] <nixternal> what contact address should it use?
[10:16:10] <james_w> doesn't have to be covered in the meeting, but if I could get someone to volunteer, or be told to find another way to do this then that would be great
[10:16:19] <james_w> email@example.com
[10:16:36] <nixternal> everyone agree with james_w idea?
[10:16:46] <cjwatson> oh, I thought that had already been agreed
[10:17:04] <cjwatson> that being the point of changing ubuntu-core-dev's contact
[10:17:26] <nixternal> ~ubuntu-core-dev or ~ubuntu-dev
[10:17:28] <james_w> (yes it's not a good address to actually contact the team, but there's no separation in LP between contacting them and sending them every detail of the action in LP related to the team)
[10:17:54] <nixternal> gotcha
[10:18:03] <cjwatson> james_w: are core-reviews and reviews aliases now, or duplicate lists?
[10:18:09] <james_w> aliases
[10:18:28] <cjwatson> ok, in that case there was no dissent on the list and the infrastructure has been prepared so I think we should JFDI
[10:18:35] <nixternal> [AGREED]Set contact address for ~ubuntu-dev to firstname.lastname@example.org
[10:18:43] <cjwatson> I'll go ahead and do that now
[10:18:46] <james_w> thank you
[10:18:48] <nixternal> OK
[10:18:54] <nixternal> thanks cjwatson, I was about to do it too :)
[10:19:00] <cjwatson> james_w: sigh
[10:19:01] <nixternal> glad you spoke up before I did :)
[10:19:18] <cjwatson> james_w: so now we run into the bug where you need to run bits of SQL to disentangle a contact address from a team
[10:19:25] <cjwatson> email@example.com is already registered in Launchpad and is associated with Ubuntu Core Development Team.
[10:19:33] <stgraber> nixternal: I'd volunteer as chair for next meeting though as I mentioned after the DST change it's now at a pretty bad time for me where I can only attend half of the meeting with a decent keyboard.
[10:19:38] <james_w> uh
[10:19:45] <cjwatson> james_w: you'll need to file a question on Launchpad to ask a LOSA to disentangle that - it's a known bug
[10:19:46] <nixternal> [ACTION]Set contact address for ~ubuntu-dev to firstname.lastname@example.org - done by cjwatson
[10:19:53] <james_w> cjwatson: will do, thanks
[10:19:54] <cjwatson> nixternal: not done, blocked
[10:19:59] <nixternal> err
[10:20:06] <nixternal> [ACTION]Set contact address for ~ubuntu-dev to email@example.com - not done, blocked
[10:20:22] <cjwatson> and that's ubuntu-reviews@, but hopefully whoever parses the agenda will notice :)
[10:21:52] <nixternal> [ACTION]Set contact address for ~ubuntu-dev to firstname.lastname@example.org - james_w to file a question on LP to ask a LOSA to disentagle the already registered address
[10:21:58] <nixternal> there, added the s :)
[10:23:10] <james_w> https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/106006 fwiw
[10:23:30] <cody-somerville> Shall we continue?
[10:23:35] <nixternal> cody-somerville: yes
[10:23:48] <nixternal> any volunteers for the next chair? seem stgraber can only do half a meeting
[10:24:06] <nixternal> if not, we shorten our meeting :)
[10:24:33] * soren wanders in, slightly confused that the meeting is going on right now
[10:24:39] <nixternal> hehe
[10:24:41] <cjwatson> soren: there was mail
[10:24:42] <soren> I thought this was supposed to be an hour ago?
[10:24:50] <soren> Ah.
[10:24:54] <nixternal> soren: by you wondering in, does that mean you will the next chair? :D
[10:25:14] <nixternal> should we set the meeting time an hour back, say 14:00 UTC?
[10:25:22] <soren> nixternal: I'll be traveling during next meeting, I'm afarid.
[10:25:25] <soren> afraid, even.
[10:25:28] <nixternal> 14:00 UTC would mean I really have to set my alarm :)
[10:25:39] <nixternal> 09:00 is way to early to be waking up :)
[10:26:04] <stgraber> 14:00 UTC would work perfectly for me and I'd be happy to chair that one then ;)
[10:26:13] <cody-somerville> Maybe we should defer picking the chair to the mailing list? I might be able to chair but don't want to commit at the moment.
[10:26:23] <nixternal> cody-somerville: I was thinking the same thing
[10:26:26] <nixternal> we can do that
[10:26:26] <soren> I have a meeting every day at..
[10:26:30] <soren> Err...
[10:26:35] <stgraber> nixternal: hehe, just need to move a bit eastern and you'd be good ;) it'd be 10am for me ;)
[10:26:40] * soren struggles with the $TZ arithmetic
[10:26:49] <nixternal> [ACTION]Decide next chair person via e-mail - nixternal will do that
[10:27:03] <nixternal> ok, application time it seems, unless there is any other admin stuff
[10:27:04] <soren> 1430 UTC, it must be.
[10:27:19] <cjwatson> let's please move on, we're nearly half-way through the meeting
[10:27:19] <nixternal> looks like we have 2 according to the agenda
[10:27:25] <soren> So I'd only ever be able to do the first 30 minutes of the meeting if it starts at 1400.
[10:27:42] <nixternal> ogasawara: you about?
[10:27:45] * ogasawara waves
[10:28:01] <soren> Oh, sorry, I thought we were wrapping up with all the talk about meeting times.
[10:28:04] <geser> soren: can you email you vote for cyphermox's application? your vote is the last missing and needed for the result
[10:28:09] <nixternal> [TOPIC]Leann Ogasawara Per Package Upload Application
[10:28:18] <nixternal> ogasawara: care to introduce yourself quickly?
[10:28:24] <ogasawara> nixternal: sure
[10:29:24] <ogasawara> hi guys. Leann Ogasawara here. Member of the Canonical kernel team. I've most recently been involved with security updates for the kernel but looking to take on the ubuntu-m kernel maintainership.
[10:29:37] <ogasawara> which is why I'm hoping to get upload rights :)
[10:30:16] <cody-somerville> When did you make the transition to the kernel team?
[10:30:32] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: right after the new year
[10:30:32] <geser> I think it's the first time I see GPG signed endorsements in an application :)
[10:30:37] * stgraber is switching to the n900 for the remaining part of the meeting
[10:31:20] <nixternal> geser: I was thinking the same exact thing
[10:31:38] * stgraber-n900 waves
[10:31:56] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: well the paper work was finalized after the new year. I'd sorta moved a bit before that.
[10:32:12] <cody-somerville> ogasawara, You have 5 uploads of linux type packages attributed to you, all for karmic. Why haven't you made any uploads to lucid yet?
[10:32:38] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: mainly because that's been apw's responsibility at the moment
[10:33:00] <cody-somerville> How many kernel uploads have you contributed to?
[10:34:05] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: I'd have to say with the CVE work it's been at least over 20 as it involves not on the linux package, but the meta's and lbm, lum, etc for all supported releases.
[10:34:17] <ogasawara> s/not on/not only/
[10:34:45] <cody-somerville> By ubuntu-m, do you mean ubuntu-mobile or something else?
[10:34:53] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: Lucid+1
[10:34:57] <cody-somerville> Ah.
[10:35:09] <nixternal> hrmm, I come up with a question and see it has already been answered in the app :)
[10:35:38] <cody-somerville> ogasawara, Who is the current maintainer?
[10:35:50] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: for Lucid, it's apw
[10:36:30] <stgraber-n900> +1
[10:36:32] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: I'll be working closely with him to make the transition from Lucid to Lucid+1 and I've already started on the git tree prep work
[10:36:44] <apw> yeah we usually have one maintainer per series kerenl while it is in development phase ... this is a limitation of our rebase based update between series
[10:37:07] <nixternal> ogasawara: seeing as I can't read the build logs for the PPA builds, can you explain the build failures on some of the packages you have comitted?
[10:37:30] <ogasawara> nixternal: the most recent is for the 2.6.34-rc2 Lucid+1 kernel
[10:37:49] <ogasawara> nixternal: and it's actually the linux_doc package of all things that is failing
[10:38:01] <ogasawara> nixternal: I'm planning to find out why after this meeting
[10:38:12] <nixternal> i don't see a failure for 2.6.34 but for Jaunty's linux-meta 126.96.36.199.23
[10:39:15] <ogasawara> hrm, jaunty meta failing? could likely be the ABI
[10:39:34] <ogasawara> but I'd need to see the log to know for sure
[10:39:39] <cody-somerville> ogasawara, It appears you're requesting upload permissions for packages you've not uploaded before. Do you have experience working with all of those packages? If so, where and what kind?
[10:39:47] <nixternal> looks like it occurred 2010-01-27 in the Private PPA for Ubuntu Security Team
[10:40:10] <cjwatson> cody-somerville: that's just the kernel package set, FWIW
[10:40:31] <cjwatson> I wouldn't expect people necessarily to have uploaded every single package in a set before asking for access to that set
[10:41:03] <cjwatson> in fact, with most sets, I'd be quite surprised if they had
[10:41:04] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: I unfortunately haven't uploaded every single package in that list, but I've touched on a good majority (like all the linux-*)
[10:41:15] * soren hasn't exactly uploaded every package in main (much less universe) :)
[10:41:34] <cody-somerville> ah, wasn't aware this was a package set.
[10:41:49] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: and linux-firmware I haven't touched as well
[10:42:10] <nixternal> soren: well you need to get to it then :)
[10:42:13] <ogasawara> cody-somerville: and as usual it involved the CVE work
[10:42:47] <soren> nixternal: I'm confident it's in everybody's best interest if I keep my hands off of, say, Kubuntu :)
[10:42:54] <nixternal> good point
[10:43:02] <nixternal> probably the same goes for me though :)
[10:43:28] <nixternal> I think I am ready to vote, any more questions?
[10:43:34] <cjwatson> none from me
[10:43:51] <cody-somerville> I find this a difficult application because of the lack of traditional indicators.
[10:44:06] <stgraber-n900> none here
[10:44:07] * soren has no questions and is ready to vote
[10:44:32] <geser> no questions
[10:44:48] <nixternal> [VOTE]Leann Ogasawara Per Package Upload for Linux Kernel Packages
[10:44:51] <nixternal> +1
[10:44:55] <geser> +1
[10:45:09] <stgraber-n900> +1
[10:45:11] <soren> +1
[10:45:37] <cjwatson> +1 - I've worked with ogasawara before and have no qualms
[10:45:38] <cody-somerville> +0 - I'm going to abstain.
[10:46:00] <nixternal> [ENDVOTE]
[10:46:04] <soren> This silly keyboard almost made me vote -1 :)
[10:46:05] <maco> awesome!
[10:46:08] <nixternal> lol
[10:46:15] <nixternal> groovy, congrats ogasawara \o/
[10:46:18] <ogasawara> thanks guys!
[10:46:22] <cody-somerville> ogasawara, Congratulations! :)
[10:46:24] <soren> ogasawara: Thank /you/!
[10:46:25] <apw> yay ogasawara
[10:46:48] <maco> ogasawara: \o/
[10:46:54] <cjwatson> implemented in LP
[10:46:59] <nixternal> cjwatson: rock on!
[10:47:03] <ogasawara> sweet!
[10:47:30] <nixternal> hrmm
[10:47:35] <stgraber-n900> congrats !
[10:47:48] <nixternal> I just called in the core-dev app dude
[10:47:50] <nixternal> there he is
[10:47:53] <JontheEchidna> o/
[10:48:12] <nixternal> [TOPIC]Jonathan Thomas Core Developer Application
[10:48:18] <nixternal> jon the enchilada
[10:48:26] <nixternal> JontheEchidna: care to quickly introduce yourself?
[10:48:30] <JontheEchidna> sure
[10:49:16] <JontheEchidna> I'm a Kubuntu contributor. I do KDE packaging most every KDE release, as well as take care of bugs and such for the KDE packages
[10:49:37] <JontheEchidna> Need links to my application?
[10:50:09] <nixternal> we got it :)
[10:50:09] <cjwatson> we have it on our agenda, thanks
[10:50:15] <cjwatson> from your application: "the powers that be are opposed to making any changes to the package set that a Kubuntu Dev can upload to" - FWIW, speaking as probably the most relevant "power that be", this is a very very misleading statement
[10:50:23] <nixternal> yeah, I should have probably tossed in the links via MootBot
[10:50:28] <cjwatson> I described the actual state of affairs in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2009-November/029623.html
[10:50:35] <nixternal> [LINK]https://wiki.kubuntu.org/JonathanThomas/CoreDevApplication
[10:50:43] <JontheEchidna> cjwatson: Ah, I was basing that off of what ScottK said
[10:50:52] <cjwatson> I have *never* said that I was opposed to making any changes in that package set - what I said was that it was difficult to add core things like qt to it right now
[10:51:09] <cjwatson> largely because of software inadequacies
[10:51:27] <JontheEchidna> Yeah, I feel for ya. Software inadeqaucies suck
[10:52:00] <cjwatson> we can go through the application anyway, but I want it clearly understood that it isn't intended for Kubuntu uploaders to be permanently unable to upload (say) kdebase-workspace
[10:52:01] * rgreening looks forward to updated kubuntu-dev package set in future
[10:52:10] <JontheEchidna> But as it stands, the package set is limiting my usefulness, so I think that being a core-dev would be an appropriate fix
[10:52:22] <cjwatson> well, let's review that on its merits then
[10:52:29] <Riddell> I fully support JontheEchidna's application, he's a first rate packager with a good knowledge of what needs to be done and when
[10:52:57] <rgreening> and we need to add additional persons who can upload when Riddell is not around
[10:53:02] <rgreening> :)
[10:53:10] <nixternal> oh lord, here come all of those whacky kubuntu folks
[10:53:27] <rgreening> ;)
[10:53:34] <JontheEchidna> I will change my app to properly reflect the current kubuntu-dev upload rights right now
[10:54:09] <maco> nixternal: pointy clicky windows user!
[10:54:17] <nixternal> as it seems I am bad at leaving endorsements on people's applications, or jon the enchilada doesn't like me, I support his app, I know his plans, and the only thing he can break is kubuntu, which is now apachelogger's fault if that occurs...he is a good packager, i know he is testing his stuff now because he doesn't want to hear me complain in #kubuntu-devel about this or that :)
[10:55:21] <cody-somerville> JontheEchidna, Being a core developer is more than just being a good packager. How often do you work with developers outside of the Kubuntu community?
[10:55:35] <nixternal> JontheEchidna: by being core dev, you are getting access to what? I can't remember off hand, Qt and kdelibs are the 2 big ones right? were there any other ones as well?
[10:56:35] <JontheEchidna> cody-somerville: KDE is the major upstream I work with. Just the other week I submitted a bugfix for the Plasma Netbook shell after consultation with Marco Martin, who works on that component
[10:56:54] <JontheEchidna> I also co-maintain the shared-desktop-ontologies with the Debian Qt KDE team
[10:56:58] <cody-somerville> JontheEchidna, How often do you work with other Ubuntu developers on Ubuntu that has nothing to do with Kubuntu or KDE?
[10:57:17] <nixternal> there are other people outside of Kubuntu or KDE? :p
[10:57:23] <JontheEchidna> heh
[10:57:24] <rgreening> ouch
[10:57:26] <nixternal> this damn basement!
[10:57:33] <maco> haha
[10:58:21] <JontheEchidna> cody-somerville: Not too much really. I know I submitted an acpid patch once, and some core-dev-ish person sponsored it.
[10:58:35] * soren has a hard stop in 1? minute
[10:58:56] <cody-somerville> JontheEchidna, If the kubuntu package set covered all the packages you need, would you apply for core dev?
[10:59:02] <geser> JontheEchidna: would you upload this patch yourself if you were core-dev at that time?
[10:59:03] <cody-somerville> *needed
[10:59:23] <nixternal> JontheEchidna: by being a core-dev, what benefits can you bring outside of the Kubuntu community?
[10:59:38] <cody-somerville> JontheEchidna, What is your opinion on this blog post: http://apachelog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/kubuntu-is-not-ubuntu/ ?
[10:59:55] <JontheEchidna> cody-somerville: Probably not, for your first question.
[11:00:29] <JontheEchidna> geser: The patch was a fairly straight-forward one-liner (a missing include). For anything bigger I would have consulted with the maintainer
[11:00:35] <nixternal> guess that kind of answers my question too then :(
[11:00:38] <cjwatson> if I'm actioned to do so by the DMB, I'm prepared to see what I can do to add support for specific exceptions to the seed-based rules for generating package sets
[11:01:00] <nixternal> cjwatson: I can [ACTION] ya :)
[11:01:12] <cjwatson> I hadn't planned to do so for lucid because I have a ton of other things to do, but if it's blocking people to the extent that they're prepared to apply for core-dev to workaround it, I guess I should change my mind
[11:01:32] <JontheEchidna> cody-somerville: Ah, I would like to direct you to the comment I made in that post: http://apachelog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/kubuntu-is-not-ubuntu/#comment-68
[11:01:44] <cody-somerville> Would PPU rights be a suitable work around if you don't have time cjwatson?
[11:02:34] <cjwatson> cody-somerville: I think exceptions in package set generation might actually be less effort
[11:02:55] <cody-somerville> JontheEchidna, Do you agree with apachelogger's statement that "Kubuntu is not Ubuntu"?
[11:03:45] <JontheEchidna> cody-somerville: Well, in that the Kubuntu derivative of Ubuntu Linux is not the same as the main Ubuntu desktop, yes. I do still feel that it is part of the Ubuntu family
[11:03:49] <nixternal> cody-somerville: I think "Kubuntu is not Ubuntu" is a bit vague without reading into what apachelogger said. That statement along could be answered yes or no without any further justification and be correct
[11:04:43] <JontheEchidna> Here's a list of packages that Kubuntu-dev would need to have for it to be useful to me (may not be complete): qt4-x11, akonadi, soprano, libattica/attica, phonon-backends, kde4libs, kdebase-runtime, kdebase-workspace
[11:05:13] <nixternal> DMB: what do we want to do here, process the core-dev application or fix it so that kubuntu-dev has access to the packages not previously covered?
[11:05:13] <JontheEchidna> ^these are all updated upstream at or around new KDE releases
[11:06:04] <cjwatson> I think we should process the core-dev application on its merits, and the package set fixes would be a fallback position
[11:06:14] <cody-somerville> JontheEchidna, The reason I ask is because I'm a firm believer that 'Kubuntu is Ubuntu' and I think this is an important understanding that needs to exist between developers, especially core developers, so that we all work together in harmony instead of inadvertently working against each other.
[11:06:47] <cjwatson> cody-somerville: apachelogger is a core developer; are you saying we should expel him? ;-)
[11:06:56] <geser> I prefer fixing the package sets permissions and use core-dev as a callback
[11:07:00] <JontheEchidna> cody-somerville: For that meaning, I agree. We should all be one big family.
[11:07:06] <geser> s/callback/fallback/
[11:07:09] <nixternal> hehe
[11:07:20] <cjwatson> (I think it's odd to bring up "do you agree with this other core developer" as a question in a core-dev application to which the expected answer is "no")
[11:07:41] <JontheEchidna> What I think he was saying was that there isn't a definied level of commerical support that we are entitled to receive from Canonical
[11:07:47] <JontheEchidna> I do agree with that
[11:09:06] <cody-somerville> I think what apachelogger meant to say was that Kubuntu is not Canonical. This is why I wanted to get clarification from JontheEchidna to ensure the issue wasn't segregation within the Ubuntu community.
[11:09:07] <ScottK> cody-somerville: The problem is the term Ubuntu is overloaded and depending on what meaning you pick, it's either true or not.
[11:09:17] <cjwatson> JontheEchidna: your endorsements are all from Kubuntu folks, although that's certainly understandable. If you had asked for comments from non-Kubuntu folks, whom would you have asked? That is, whom do you think you've worked with most outside Kubuntu?
[11:09:55] <JontheEchidna> cjwatson: I've contributed to jockey, software-properties and language-selector, so probably mvo or pitti
[11:10:10] <JontheEchidna> though that was more in a coding sense than a packaging sense
[11:10:29] <JontheEchidna> and KDE code at that
[11:11:42] <cjwatson> well, yeah, KDE code is spread out through all sorts of packages
[11:12:40] <JontheEchidna> As a core-dev I would sponsor packages in the sponsor queue that fell under my skill set to review
[11:12:49] <cjwatson> I have no further questions
[11:13:02] <nixternal> everyone ready to vote?
[11:13:08] <cjwatson> yes
[11:13:31] <cody-somerville> Are we going to vote on core-dev or are we going to investigate the seed exceptions for JontheEchidna first instead?
[11:14:06] <cjwatson> I think we should vote on core-dev anyway; exceptions will take longer, and are moot (for this application anyway) if we think that he is suitable for core-dev in any case
[11:14:43] <nixternal> geser, stgraber-n900, soren: any further questions?
[11:14:49] <geser> no
[11:14:52] <stgraber-n900> nope
[11:14:52] <soren> no
[11:14:55] <nixternal> [VOTE]Jonathan Thomas Core Developer Application
[11:15:03] <nixternal> +1
[11:16:11] <cjwatson> +1 - I was unsure at first, but I spent some time looking over JontheEchidna's changes to non-KDE packages and they're the same type of thing that make it useful for Riddell to be a core developer - extensions of KDE frontends in core packages, that sort of thing - and I think his breadth of experience is suitable at this point
[11:17:05] <soren> +1. Sorry, I'm slow, I'm in a meeting right now.
[11:17:25] <cjwatson> soren: I think you need a space after the voting characters in order for mootbot to parse it
[11:17:34] <soren> MootBot: fascist
[11:17:35] <soren> +1
[11:17:40] <geser> +0 - I see fixing the package sets the better solution, but believe JontheEchidna would be a responsible core-dev
[11:17:58] <cody-somerville> +0 - For the same reasons as geser.
[11:18:06] <stgraber-n900> +0 same as geser
[11:18:31] <nixternal> [ENDVOTE]
[11:19:01] <geser> hmm, what does result mean?
[11:19:17] <cody-somerville> It means we need to defer to ML I think.
[11:19:49] <nixternal> i am kind of confused, as we were voting on a core developer application, and 3 made it a vote on solution instead of the fact at hand
[11:20:21] <cjwatson> I think it means persia's vote governs
[11:20:29] <nixternal> but yes, it needs to go to the ml so persia can vote
[11:20:39] <soren> Really? It's a +3.
[11:20:51] <soren> Does one need +4 to "win"?
[11:21:00] <maco> soren: 3/7 is not a majority...
[11:21:06] <JontheEchidna> just as a note, I have to go to lunch really soon here...
[11:21:35] <soren> maco: I understand. It just seems odd that the fact that people abstain rather than vote against makes no difference.
[11:21:54] <nixternal> right, if persia was to vote +0 or -1, the vote is still positive
[11:22:02] <cjwatson> a vote against would make it more difficult to reach +4
[11:22:27] <soren> cjwatson: Understood as well. I just wasn't aware that it had to be +4.
[11:22:31] <nixternal> roshambo?
[11:22:34] <soren> If so, what's the point of being able to abstain?
[11:22:47] <soren> nixternal: Over TCP? Sounds like fun.
[11:22:58] <Riddell> isn't it a quorum of three? I've not heard of a majority needing to be positive
[11:22:58] <cjwatson> at some point we should codify all this as I think we make it up as we go along too much. For now, let's defer until persia's vote, and let JontheEchidna go to lunch
[11:23:12] <nixternal> cjwatson: +1
[11:23:14] <DarkwingDuck> I thought to Abstain a vote was not to vote. Thus allowing the 4 remaining to do the voting. Instead of it being 3/7 it is not 3/4
[11:23:31] <JontheEchidna> Thanks. I gotta go now.
[11:23:33] <DarkwingDuck> s/not/now
[11:24:15] <cjwatson> DarkwingDuck: unfortunately, we never established a sufficiently precise set of rules; we ought to, but in the meantime there appear to be varying interpretations among the voting body
[11:24:17] <nixternal> [ACTION]Jonathan Thomas' Core Developer Application - take it to the mailing list as persia needs to vote - currently 3 for, 3 abstain
[11:24:46] <nixternal> [ACTION]Any other business
[11:24:51] <geser> yes
[11:24:54] <nixternal> do we have any other business that needs to be taken care of?
[11:24:55] <DarkwingDuck> cjwatson: ahh, Okay.
[11:24:58] <cjwatson> nevertheless, if persia votes other than +1, I'll make sure to get the seed exception stuff done
[11:25:05] <geser> nixternal: you can now recount the votes for cyphermox
[11:25:08] <cjwatson> so that either way JontheEchidna can get his work done
[11:25:26] <geser> all have voted now
[11:25:43] <nixternal> geser: do you have the count off hand?
[11:26:09] <geser> one moment
[11:26:42] <nixternal> geser: I count +1
[11:26:57] <maco> crimsun says you need at least $QUORUM positive votes
[11:26:58] <maco> so if quorum is 3, then +3 is enough
[11:26:59] <geser> 2x +1, 1x -1 and 4x 0
[11:27:17] <nixternal> geser: hrmm, so what does that mean?
[11:27:19] <nixternal> hahaha
[11:27:24] <nixternal> does he get it or no
[11:27:33] <geser> nixternal: you are the chair :)
[11:27:42] <cjwatson> that seems far too weak for acceptance to me
[11:28:00] <cjwatson> but, well, I'm not the chair :)
[11:28:03] <nixternal> cjwatson: yeah, I was thinking the same thing, however +1 is a positive vote, oh this is fun
[11:28:19] <nixternal> great, I either get to make or break someones day
[11:28:23] <cjwatson> if you're really stuck, appeal to sabdfl for a ruling
[11:28:26] <cyphermox> doesn't sound like a pass to me ;)
[11:29:08] <nixternal> I am going to have to say, with the comments left in abstention and the vote against, I would have to say no at this time
[11:29:14] <nixternal> anyone want to email him and let him know?
[11:29:38] <geser> nixternal: you can tell cyphermox directly, he is here
[11:30:43] <nixternal> oh, cyphermox don't take this as a bad thing, i think after touching some more packages, and getting your hands a bit more dirty, you will be golden...i would say you should apply again probably the month after lucid+1 opens, that way there you can touch more packages and fix the things people either voted +0 or -1 said
[11:30:59] <cyphermox> indeed
[11:31:21] <cyphermox> figured as much, hence why I didn't harass persia more about letting me know of the results
[11:31:35] <nixternal> groovy, sorry for breaking the bad news, but it really isn't bad news, it is just a "hey, come back again soon, we need ya!"
[11:31:51] <cyphermox> yep
[11:31:59] <nixternal> any other business?
[11:32:25] <nixternal> meeting adjourned in 10 seconds....
[11:32:27] <nixternal> going once
[11:32:53] <nixternal> #endmeeting