=================================== #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2017-12-08) =================================== Meeting started by tyll at 16:05:46 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-12-08/fesco.2017-12-08-16.05.log.html Meeting summary --------------- * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1799 (orc_fedo, 16:07:22) * init process (tyll, 16:08:37) * #1799 The ProvenPackager rubric needs more formality (tyll, 16:10:01) * orc_fedo would be ok to table the issue since it was filed yesterday (tyll, 16:10:39) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1799#comment-483725 (tyll, 16:11:11) * AGREED: delay a week to discuss this and allow the proposal to be refined (+7, 0, 0) (tyll, 16:20:25) * Next week's chair (tyll, 16:21:22) * ACTION: dgilmore will chair next meeting (tyll, 16:22:19) * next two meetings will be December 15th then January 5th (dgilmore, 16:23:30) * Open Floor (tyll, 16:23:50) * elections are expected to be in January (tyll, 16:24:33) * all candidates for election please be on top of questions when they come up. report to #fedora-admin and/or https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/ any issues with infra when submitting (dgilmore, 16:32:36) * ACTION: everyone think about how to make sure the next election runs smoothly (tyll, 16:33:29) Meeting ended at 16:35:21 UTC. Action Items ------------ * dgilmore will chair next meeting * everyone think about how to make sure the next election runs smoothly Action Items, by person ----------------------- * dgilmore * dgilmore will chair next meeting * **UNASSIGNED** * everyone think about how to make sure the next election runs smoothly People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * tyll (36) * dgilmore (27) * orc_fedo (13) * jforbes (13) * zodbot (12) * nirik (10) * bowlofeggs (9) * kalev (8) * sgallagh (5) * steved (3) * jsmith (0) * maxamillion (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot 16:05:46 <tyll> #startmeeting FESCO (2017-12-08) 16:05:46 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Dec 8 16:05:46 2017 UTC. The chair is tyll. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:05:46 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:05:46 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2017-12-08)' 16:05:50 <tyll> #meetingname fesco 16:05:50 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 16:05:50 <bowlofeggs> .hellow2 16:05:53 <bowlofeggs> .hello2 16:05:54 <zodbot> bowlofeggs: bowlofeggs 'Randy Barlow' <randy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 16:05:56 <tyll> #chair maxamillion dgilmore nirik jforbes jsmith kalev sgallagh bowlofeggs tyll 16:05:56 <zodbot> Current chairs: bowlofeggs dgilmore jforbes jsmith kalev maxamillion nirik sgallagh tyll 16:05:59 <sgallagh> .hello2 16:06:00 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> 16:06:02 <kalev> .hello2 16:06:03 <tyll> I guess we could just try to start 16:06:04 <zodbot> kalev: kalev 'Kalev Lember' <klember@xxxxxxxxxx> 16:06:05 <jforbes> .hello2 16:06:06 <zodbot> jforbes: jforbes 'Justin M. Forbes' <jforbes@xxxxxxxxxx> 16:06:10 <tyll> .hello till 16:06:11 <zodbot> tyll: till 'Till Maas' <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> 16:06:28 <nirik> morning 16:07:00 * orc_fedo said, pre logging: I have no problem with my bug being held over to let it be considered by more attendees 16:07:16 <kalev> what's your bug? 16:07:22 <orc_fedo> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1799 16:07:30 <orc_fedo> only thing on the agenda 16:07:45 * kalev nods. 16:08:00 <orc_fedo> ... I just filed it yestarday pm, so it really has not 'aged' yet 16:08:36 <dgilmore> hey all 16:08:37 <tyll> #topic init process 16:09:08 <tyll> I count six members, so we have quorum 16:10:01 <tyll> #topic #1799 The ProvenPackager rubric needs more formality 16:10:14 <tyll> .fesco 1799 16:10:15 <zodbot> tyll: Issue #1799: The ProvenPackager rubric needs more formality - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1799 16:10:39 <tyll> #info orc_fedo would be ok to table the issue since it was filed yesterday 16:10:52 <orc_fedo> tyll: I suggested that in the bug 16:11:09 <orc_fedo> oops -- ment to but the post did not take 16:11:09 <tyll> orc_fedo: ah, ok 16:11:11 <tyll> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1799#comment-483725 16:11:33 <orc_fedo> I am fine with holding it over a week to let it be more thoughtfully considered 16:11:40 <kalev> this is being discussed extensively on the devel list right now 16:11:40 <orc_fedo> guess it DID take 16:11:48 <orc_fedo> kalev: I know 16:12:06 <sgallagh> Yup, just like it is roughly once a year... 16:12:13 <kalev> for what it's worth, I'm with zbyszek here and think that adding more process to doing distro wide cleanups makes them just too painful to do 16:12:43 <orc_fedo> some thoughts are tecninical workflow questions, but the real problem a PP is not considering what the maintainer might have in mind 16:12:43 <dgilmore> kalev: indeed 16:12:46 * steved to agrees with zbyszek with massive builds... if something gets in the way it has to be fixed 16:12:56 <bowlofeggs> yeah i also am not in favor of this proposal 16:13:30 <dgilmore> I am good with delaying discussion a week to aloow for more discussion and refinement of the proposal 16:13:32 <nirik> its hard to make it more narrow and still allow all the cases of changes we would hopefully want to allow. 16:13:41 * nirik is fine for more list discussion. 16:13:50 <steved> there has to be way to not allow anybody and every body change anything they want with no review 16:13:52 <bowlofeggs> yeah i'm fine with more discussion and refinement too 16:13:54 <jforbes> I think there needs to be some more discussion perhaps on proven packagers, but this proposal as is bothers me. 16:14:03 <orc_fedo> so ... is a 'second' on a motion to table needed? 16:14:21 <dgilmore> orc_fedo: no. 16:14:23 <steved> jforbes: what is the bother? 16:14:32 <orc_fedo> dgilmore: ty 16:14:47 <bowlofeggs> proposal: delay a week to discuss this and allow the proposal to be refined 16:15:07 <dgilmore> proposal: table for a week to allow discussion and the proposal to be refined 16:15:14 <dgilmore> +1 to bowlofeggs 16:15:24 <tyll> +1 to bowlofeggs 16:16:09 <kalev> I think we could just as well decide to reject it now, not sure it needs an extra week 16:17:19 <sgallagh> kalev: Well, I think it's fair to reject it either for revision or with prejudice. Right now the proposal is "let them try to revise it for a week" 16:17:21 <sgallagh> Which I think is fair. 16:17:28 <sgallagh> So +1 to defer 16:17:31 <kalev> fair enough. +1 then to defer 16:17:35 <nirik> +1 16:17:37 <tyll> we could also decide to explicitly state in the policy that small mass changes can applied when e.g. two provenpackagers agree or something 16:17:40 <jforbes> steved: well more discussion needs to happen because there have been several threads lately. Clearly people aren't happy with what is happening, but overall proven packager is worded as it is to faciltate particular workflows 16:18:19 <tyll> jforbes: afaics your vote is missing 16:18:28 <jforbes> tyll: +1 to defer 16:19:14 <tyll> is there a template for the aggreed message somewhere? 16:19:57 <nirik> just agreed: thing (number of votes for, number against, number abstain) 16:20:09 <bowlofeggs> dont' forget the # on agred 16:20:25 <tyll> #agreed delay a week to discuss this and allow the proposal to be refined (+7, 0, 0) 16:20:59 <tyll> afaics there are no other open meeting issues 16:21:22 <tyll> #topic Next week's chair 16:21:39 * nirik will be on vacation next week. 16:21:46 <tyll> Are there any volunteers? 16:21:48 * dgilmore can do next week 16:21:53 <dgilmore> its been awhile 16:21:55 * tyll will not be there, too 16:21:56 <jforbes> I am on vacation as well next week, I can take the week after 16:22:17 <dgilmore> sounds like the meeting probably will not have enough people next week 16:22:19 <tyll> #action dgilmore will chair next meeting 16:22:33 <bowlofeggs> so far it's possible for there to be 6 16:22:37 <dgilmore> the week after is a company holiday for Red Hat 16:22:49 <dgilmore> bowlofeggs: indeed 16:23:16 <bowlofeggs> i actually can't make the 3 after next week 16:23:22 <tyll> so no meeting on 2017-12-22? 16:23:30 <dgilmore> #info next two meetings will be December 15th then January 5th 16:23:38 <bowlofeggs> so i can do next week, and then i can't be here again until jan 12 16:23:42 <tyll> dgilmore: thank you 16:23:44 <dgilmore> tyll: nor the week after 16:23:50 <tyll> #topic Open Floor 16:23:57 <dgilmore> Elections 16:24:00 <jforbes> dgilmore: shutdown starts the 22nd? 16:24:11 <jforbes> dgilmore: elections are cancelled/postponed 16:24:21 <dgilmore> jforbes: right 16:24:28 <dgilmore> which is why I wanted to bring them up 16:24:33 <tyll> #info elections are expected to be in January 16:24:56 <dgilmore> jforbes: shutdown is 22nd to Jan 1 16:25:17 <dgilmore> is there anything we can do to make sure they go off without a hitch? 16:25:20 <jforbes> Oh cool 16:26:20 <tyll> we could maybe limit the number of questionsin the questionnaire to make it less effort to write them 16:26:24 <jforbes> Candidates fill out the questions when you get them I suppose. Not sure exactly what the issue was this time around, it was confusing from the ticket 16:26:59 <dgilmore> jforbes: I think that the infra move had the portal up and down 16:27:29 <jforbes> Oh, quite possibly. I had mine filled out before the move really started 16:27:50 <nirik> I got email asking me to fill out the questionare friday afternoon. 16:28:03 <nirik> and the election was supposed to start monday night. 16:28:21 <dgilmore> nirik: saME 16:28:23 <dgilmore> same 16:28:27 <tyll> I guess it depends on when you nominated yourself 16:28:28 <nirik> and I was doing other things over the weekend... then DC work monday 16:28:34 <jforbes> nirik: me too, I think that's when they all went out 16:28:38 * dgilmore was not self nominated :D 16:28:39 <tyll> or maybe not 16:28:45 <orc_fedo> there was also a moving part that 'over the transom' submission of questions was held open until pretty close to the deadline for FECSO answers 16:28:47 <jforbes> tyll: no, I nominated on the day of 16:30:26 * kalev has to drop off irc. 16:32:05 <tyll> maybe we can just think about what to improve and discuss during next meeting? 16:32:28 * nirik nods. 16:32:30 <jforbes> sounds reasonable 16:32:36 <dgilmore> #info all candidates for election please be on top of questions when they come up. report to #fedora-admin and/or https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/ any issues with infra when submitting 16:32:43 <dgilmore> sure 16:32:50 * dgilmore has nothing else for open floor 16:33:29 <tyll> #action everyone think about how to make sure the next election runs smoothly 16:33:39 <dgilmore> till++ 16:33:39 <zodbot> dgilmore: Karma for till changed to 1 (for the f27 release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 16:33:45 <tyll> dgilmore: would you file a ticket to discuss this on the next meeting? 16:33:52 <dgilmore> tyll: sure 16:34:04 <tyll> If there is nothing else I will end the meeting in 1 minute 16:34:15 <tyll> dgilmore: thank you 16:35:17 <tyll> Thank you everyone, have a nice Friday and weekend and holidays! 16:35:21 <tyll> #endmeeting _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
