== Summary ==
Present from FESCo: thl, warren, f13, scop, mschwendt, jeremy, skvidal,
spot
* Kernel module standardization
* scop> | one kmodtool/yum interop issue was found, I just committed
some fixes for it
* thl still wants to improve some minor things but has no time for it
atm -- needs to wait
* Security SIG/EOL
* Updated proposal in the works; some discussions around details (see
full log for details)
* proposal will be posted to the list (it was actually posted to the
list on friday after the meeting)
* Broken deps report
* skvidal and mschwendt will work on getting it to run on extras64
* the script will be imported to cvs
* Weekly sponsorship nomination
* tibbs (Jason L Tibbitts III) nominated himself; FESCo will discuss
the nomination in the next meeting
* FESCO future
* we'll roughly proceed as suggested in the proposal for a elected
FESCO that was posted to the list
* some interesting quotes:
* < warren> | The point about democracy, I'm not entirely sure
we want democracy to be the top factor in governance. I mean, look at
what happened to Debian. We should instead promote meritocracy. In
practice, democracy tends to follow merit in a volunteer organization,
so it would just happen anyway.
* < mschwendt> | warren: meritocracy _and_ acceptance/approval by
the community
* < warren> | I think this is a little more complicated than
we're thinking now, and we shouldn't lock ourselves into any long-term
plan just yet.
* < thl> | any plans we do can be reverted later
* Members of cvsextras are eligible to vote
* self-nominations to fedora-extras-list and the wiki during the first
week of May and voting in the second week (if we have a solution how to
actually do the vote until then; help appreciated); people that want to
be in FESCo should (that's no must) lay down informations like "1)
Mission Statement 2) Past work summary 3) Future plans"
* Still discussions about the number of FESCo members in the future.
Remains undecided, we'll look at it again when we saw the nomination
results.
* some minor packaging guidlines changes
* modules for "erlang" and "R" shall follow the same naming scheme as
python in the future
* Free discussion
* yum problems "Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package
dependencies?" -> mschwendt will file a bug
== Full Log ==
{{{
19:00 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting in progress
19:00 * | thl looks around
19:00 * | warren here
19:00 < thl> | any FESCo members around?
19:01 * | scop here in a jiffy
19:01 < f13> | I'm here.
19:01 < thl> | okay, let's start slowly
19:01 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Kernel module standardization
19:02 < thl> | didn't have time for it
19:02 < thl> | it still needs some minor fixes afaics
19:02 < scop> | one kmodtool/yum interop issue was found, I just committed some fixes for it
19:02 < thl> | and I plan to reply to Axel's mail, too
19:02 < thl> | scop, k, thx
19:03 * | scop is trying hard to avoid feeding that discussion
19:03 < thl> | well, let's ignore it for now and proceed
19:03 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Security SIG
19:03 < thl> | I have a updated proposal
19:03 < thl> | and recevied some comments on the privatly
19:04 < thl> | but didn't found time yet to post it to the public list
19:04 < mschwendt> | have you posted it to fesco-list?
19:04 < thl> | do we want to wait another week to discuss this
19:04 < f13> | thl: I'm finally on fedora-extras-list so I'll see future discussion.
19:04 < thl> | mschwendt, nope, sorry
19:04 < warren> | I'd like to talk privately about the proposal
19:04 < mschwendt> | how "privately"?
19:04 < f13> | warren: planning on doing that any time soon, you know, like the last week (or 3) you were given ?
19:05 < thl> | warren, we should have at least one final round of discussion on fedora-extras-list
19:05 < warren> | I'm mostly satisfied by the current proposal.
19:05 < mschwendt> | thl: I don't find the fedora-extras-list discussion too fruitful
19:05 < warren> | mschwendt, yes.
19:05 < thl> | warren, mschwendt, that's often true
19:05 < mschwendt> | thl: it loops back to the "2nd class citizen" problem
19:06 < thl> | but I still want to show it to the public once
19:06 < thl> | before we ratify it
19:06 < warren> | how does Hans feel about the current proposal?
19:06 < warren> | the thl proposal was different from Hans
19:06 * | jeremy is here
19:06 < warren> | and I really think that everyone should really listen closely to what Bressers has to say. I feel strongly that copying Bressers' model is a good idea.
19:06 < thl> | warren, I got the impression that hans has a lot of other things to do atm
19:07 < warren> | One particular issue I'd like to discuss now.
19:07 < thl> | warren, shoot
19:08 < warren> | I don't think it is a good idea to be completely inflexible in not letting new things in. We should have a process of approval that is a HUGE hassle, but at least it is *possible*.
19:08 * | Rathann|work is away: Home.
19:08 < thl> | warren, that's in the latest proposal I wrote
19:08 < warren> | Discourage people from adding things, and generally we say no, unless there is a good reason to allow something in.
19:08 < warren> | thl, sorry, I missed that, is that the private mail version?
19:08 < thl> | warren, a "FESCO can allow exceptions"
19:08 < thl> | warren, yes, the private mail version
19:08 < warren> | OK, sounds good.
19:09 < mschwendt> | hmm, what do we discuss a secret private mail version? Who knows it?
19:09 < mschwendt> | s/what/why/
19:09 < warren> | Let's discuss this in private and aim to post the proposal on fedora-extras-list on Monday?
19:09 * | Rathann|work is away: Home.
19:10 < thl> | mschwendt, sorry, I took this approach because it seemed the best way to driver things forward
19:10 < thl> | mschwendt, Josh, warren, and the people that showed interest in the Security SIG were in the "To:"
19:10 < f13> | warren: bressers' model is more about implimentation. The proposal was about framework.
19:10 < warren> | Do we have agreement on this basic idea? "Security team's role is mainly tracking and testing security. Maintainers are primarily resposible for fixing tracked issues. If they fail, then security team steps in."
19:11 < thl> | warren, "Monday" seems like a good idea
19:11 < warren> | thl, let's go for that.
19:11 < thl> | k
19:11 < thl> | anything else regarding EOL / Security SIG?
19:12 * | thl will move on in 15
19:12 < warren> | let's move =)
19:12 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Broken deps report
19:12 < thl> | skvidal, are you around?
19:13 < skvidal> | yes, I am now
19:13 < skvidal> | hiya!
19:13 < thl> | mschwendt, skvidal can you get this running on extras64?
19:13 < skvidal> | yep, we can do it now
19:13 < skvidal> | mschwendt: once more, I'm sorry, send me the script or check it into extras-buildsys/utils in fedora cvs
19:14 < mschwendt> | where can I learn more about "fedora cvs"? is it the same or different from Extras cvs?
19:14 < skvidal> | http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/?root=fedora
19:14 < skvidal> | right there
19:14 < skvidal> | it's the same cvs system
19:14 < skvidal> | just a different tree
19:15 < jwb> | it requires different auth too
19:15 < mschwendt> | is joining a special group in the account system needed?
19:15 < skvidal> | which I thought mschwendt had
19:15 < skvidal> | I'll check
19:15 < skvidal> | mschwendt: one sec
19:15 < jwb> | mschwendt, yes. cvsfedora
19:15 < mschwendt> | k
19:16 < skvidal> | ah, you are not in that group. sorry
19:16 < warren> | mschwendt, if you don't have access to that group, you definitely should have it.
19:16 < skvidal> | do you want to be?
19:16 < skvidal> | I can add you now, if you'd like
19:16 <-- | BobJensen has quit (Remote closed the connection)
19:16 < mschwendt> | well, if I shall keep the scripts there, yes
19:16 < skvidal> | okay doke
19:17 < skvidal> | mschwendt: done
19:17 < thl> | k, anything else regarding the scripts?
19:17 < skvidal> | you're in the group
19:17 < skvidal> | thl: we'll work out the rest in email, I suspect
19:17 < thl> | skvidal, mschwendt, tia
19:17 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Weekly sponsorship nomination
19:17 < thl> | anyone?
19:18 * | thl will move on in 15
19:18 < mschwendt> | no self-nominees? ;)
19:18 < ixs> | .oO( to be shot down in flames... ;)
19:18 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- FESCO future
19:18 < tibbs> | Crap.
19:19 < thl> | opinions on the ml-thread on fedora-extras-list?
19:19 --> | BobJensen (Robert 'Bob' Jensen) has joined #Fedora-Extras
19:19 < thl> | tibbs, any idea for a better solution?
19:19 < skvidal> | thl: I think we should progress with more-or-less your suggestion about elections.
19:19 < tibbs> | Sorry, I seem to have missed the start of this meeting.
19:20 < tibbs> | date -u is telling me it;s 17:20.
19:20 < warren> | Elections for the new members this time?
19:20 < warren> | Or are we talking about built-in timeout in FESCO membership with re-elections necessary?
19:21 < thl> | warren, I can't follow you completely
19:21 < warren> | I think nominations and election for the new FESCO members this round are a good idea.
19:21 < thl> | "built-in timeout in FESCO membership with re-elections necessary" seems like the way to go IMHO
19:21 < scop> | yes
19:21 < warren> | I don't think automatically timing people out necessitating re-election is a good idea.
19:22 < bpepple> | thl: +1
19:22 < warren> | I do support kicking people out if they haven't done anything. =)
19:22 < thl> | I would prefer if we could avoid kicking
19:22 < scop> | auto-timeout is much easier and less hassle
19:22 < warren> | The point about democracy, I'm not entirely sure we want democracy to be the top factor in governance. I mean, look at what happened to Debian. We should instead promote meritocracy. In practice, democracy tends to follow merit in a volunteer organization, so it would just happen anyway.
19:23 < thl> | warren, I'm fine with "meritocracy"
19:23 < ixs> | warren: the debian problem is not the democracy, it's the love for endless discussions.
19:23 < ixs> | and politics.
19:23 < mschwendt> | warren: meritocracy _and_ acceptance/approval by the community
19:24 < thl> | mschwendt, +1
19:24 < warren> | mschwendt, that sounds nice, but how do you codify that?
19:24 < mschwendt> | yeah, that's the hard part
19:24 < mschwendt> | we need to make FESCO work and see how the community reacts to FESCO's decisions
19:25 < thl> | warren, decisions have to be made in a meritocracy, too -- that's also a hard part
19:25 < mschwendt> | part of that will be a learning-by-doing process
19:25 * | spot agrees with mschwendt
19:25 < warren> | I think this is a little more complicated than we're thinking now, and we shouldn't lock ourselves into any long-term plan just yet.
19:25 < warren> | It would be simpler if we do a one-time election for these new members now and figure out what to do with the new leadership group.
19:25 < tibbs> | You have to be willing to try and fail and try again.
19:25 < thl> | any plans we do can be reverted later
19:26 < warren> | true
19:26 < mschwendt> | sounds good
19:26 < thl> | we just need to find a way to do it now "somehow"
19:26 < thl> | and we'll learn from the results
19:26 < warren> | one more thought along these lines
19:26 < warren> | Who is eligible to vote?
19:26 < thl> | cvsextras
19:27 < warren> | Democracies have not always created the best outcome in history.
19:27 < thl> | well, we can try something like the following
19:27 < thl> | (it was suggested on the list iirc)
19:27 < warren> | Democracy could mean someone joins without merit.
19:28 < thl> | we let people vote 7 (or 9)FESCo members
19:28 < skvidal> | warren: do you have a political science degree?
19:28 < thl> | and 6 (or 4) are elected by the old FESCo
19:28 < skvidal> | warren: history?
19:28 < skvidal> | warren: any social science at all?
19:28 < warren> | skvidal, no, but I studied it a lot.
19:28 --> | kimberly (kimberly) has joined #fedora-extras
19:29 < skvidal> | warren: trust me. given the userbase there's not much fear of a fesco dominated by people who are not qualified for the job
19:29 < warren> | Another issue, do we have agreement that we want FESCo to be larger in order to have some redundancy in membership, because not everyone attends meetings at any given time?
19:29 < warren> | I'm in support of 15 for this reason.
19:29 * | spot points out that meetings during the work week are very hard for him to attend
19:29 < mschwendt> | yes, because we need to reach a well-defined quorum
19:30 < thl> | there were a lot of people that prefered a smaller FESCo
19:30 < scop> | I still support a smaller number, like 9, and folks who are really active
19:30 < thl> | I don't want to go lower than 11
19:30 < thl> | and my vote are still 13
19:30 < warren> | I don't think there is a danger in FESCo of a larger group causing too much noise. FESCo is really about who gets things done.
19:31 < warren> | 13 or 15 is fine to me.
19:31 < warren> | If we have enough energized people who want to be there to number 15, I dont think we should deny two.
19:31 < warren> | Let's just go forward with nominations?
19:31 < tibbs> | What is the size of the voting pool?
19:31 * | warren looks...
19:32 < bpepple> | tibbs: Aren't there around a 100 or so folks in cvsextras?
19:32 < thl> | bpepple, no, there are more iirc
19:32 < mschwendt> | 238
19:32 < warren> | easy things to agree upon: We want nominations.
19:33 < bpepple> | Boy, that a bunch more than I thought.
19:33 < tibbs> | Tough to regularly find 15 people from that.
19:33 < warren> | cvsextras should vote for people who are nominatd
19:33 < thl> | warren, self-nominations imho
19:33 < warren> | ok, that's fine
19:33 < thl> | we can go for the proposed plan
19:34 < thl> | self-nominations to fedora-extras-list during the first week of May
19:34 < thl> | and voting in the second week
19:34 < warren> | thl, +1
19:34 < thl> | (if we have a solution how to actually do the vote until then)
19:34 < warren> | I move that we decide the number of spots only after we see the nomination results.
19:35 < thl> | warren, yeah, might make sense
19:35 < thl> | any "-1" for the "self-nominations to fedora-extras-list during the first week of May" solution?
19:36 < thl> | otherwise we'll go for it
19:36 < warren> | Should we suggest that nominees put information about their work and plans on their Wiki page?
19:36 < thl> | mschwendt, scop, jeremy, skvidal ?
19:36 < bpepple> | warren: That's not a bad idea.
19:36 < thl> | warren, +1
19:36 < warren> | We can have a FESCOCampaign page with links to nominee pages.
19:36 < spot> | sounds good to me.
19:36 < skvidal> | thl: announce the call for nominations to a couple of lists, too
19:36 < skvidal> | otherwise I'm down with that
19:36 < thl> | skvidal, will do
19:37 < skvidal> | oh and one more thing
19:37 < skvidal> | you do NOT have to self-nominate
19:37 < skvidal> | if someone else wants to they can nominate another person
19:37 < warren> | but you do have to accept a nomination =)
19:37 < skvidal> | but the other person has the right to decline
19:37 < skvidal> | fuck that noise
19:37 < thl> | and write a mission statement
19:37 < warren> | on each person's wiki page
19:38 * | spot goes to write a mission statement on each person's wiki page...
19:38 < thl> | skvidal, I really want to hear goals, plan from those that want to be in the next FESCO
19:38 < skvidal> | okay, that's cool
19:38 < warren> | how about...
19:38 < skvidal> | but if someone is nominated
19:38 < skvidal> | and they don't want to do it
19:38 < skvidal> | they can decline the nomination
19:38 < skvidal> | that's all I mean
19:39 < thl> | sure
19:39 < warren> | 1) Mission Statement 2) Past work summary 3) Future plans 4) links to good posts or reviews and other examples
19:39 < mschwendt> | 4?
19:39 < warren> | I don't know, just ideas.
19:39 < warren> | #4 is really the same as #2
19:40 < mschwendt> | except you don't really want anyone to look up "links"
19:40 < warren> | eh?
19:40 < mschwendt> | is bugzilla.fedora.us still alive?
19:40 < mschwendt> | are you serious about "links to good posts"?
19:41 < warren> | actually, for the moment it is still up
19:41 < warren> | the other server died
19:41 < thl> | I don't think we need to formalize the format of the "mission statement" to much
19:41 < skvidal> | thl: +1
19:41 < warren> | If you're serious about getting votes, you have the option of putting information on your wiki page.
19:42 < thl> | k, anything else?
19:42 * | thl will move on in 20
19:43 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion
19:43 < thl> | anything else releated to Extras?
19:43 < mschwendt> | The topic I started on fesco-list yesterday.
19:43 < tibbs> | I had wanted to self-nominate for sponsorship but it seems my clocks are wrong.
19:43 < mschwendt> | I really seek for more feedback from other FESCO members.
19:44 < skvidal> | mschwendt: file a bug
19:44 < tibbs> | I'll catch the next meetin for that.
19:44 < jwb> | mschwendt, what is that topic?
19:44 < warren> | skvidal, the last time a bug was filed it was closed NOTABUG, are you saying your mind changed?
19:45 < skvidal> | I'm saying i'm not sure it is the same thing at all
19:45 < warren> | skvidal, your attitude here is a bit upsetting.
19:45 < skvidal> | more importantly the rule is the same no matter what
19:45 < mschwendt> | jwb: The thread "Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package dependencies?" on extras-list is related.
19:45 < skvidal> | what attitude - he claims there is a bug or a problem
19:45 < thl> | jwb, that'S https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg01620.html
19:45 < skvidal> | he refuses to file it to get looked at
19:45 < jwb> | thank you
19:45 < warren> | If you insist this is a different issue, then he should file the bug and we'll see where this goes.
19:46 < thl> | warren, agreed
19:46 < mschwendt> | skvidal: do you accept bug reports in bugzilla.redhat.com or only upstream where I don't have an account?
19:46 < warren> | But everyone else has been under the impression that this was the same bug, if that is the case then your stance has been frustrating.
19:46 < tibbs> | I started that thread; I was just checking to make sure that it was allowable
19:46 < skvidal> | mschwendt: I have hundreds of bugs opened at rh bugzilla
19:46 < scop> | I'm pretty sure it's the same one
19:46 < skvidal> | mschwendt: feel free
19:46 < tibbs> | to include those kinds of obsoletes to cover pre-extras package history.
19:46 < skvidal> | warren: how is it that you help in this discussion?
19:46 < skvidal> | warren: scurry on your way
19:47 < warren> | skvidal, I'm pointing out that your typical attitude is demeaning towards others.
19:47 < warren> | skvidal, including this.
19:47 < skvidal> | not really
19:47 < skvidal> | just you
19:47 < skvidal> | not others
19:47 < mschwendt> | skvidal: okay, I'm going to file a bug in the next 1-2 hours
19:47 < skvidal> | mschwendt: cool
19:47 * | spot wants to propose some minor packagingguidlines changes
19:47 < scop> | mschwendt, put me in Cc, will you?
19:47 < mschwendt> | scop: yes
19:48 < skvidal> | yay, progress
19:48 < thl> | okay, I'll move on
19:48 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- spot: some minor packagingguidlines changes
19:48 < f13> | warren: um, I think you're misguided. skvidal needs a bug filed so that he can examine the issue to see if they are in fact the same issue or not.
19:48 < spot> | specifically, i want to append "erlang-*" and "R-*" to the python naming scheme
19:48 < f13> | warren: not a hard concept to understand.
19:48 < skvidal> | spot: append or prepend?
19:48 < warren> | f13, stay out of this, this isn't your problem.
19:48 < skvidal> | warren: nor is it yours
19:48 < f13> | *cough*
19:49 < spot> | skvidal: either or. add.
19:49 * | spot is pretty dosed up on cough medicine
19:49 < warren> | f13, quite frankly, I'm annoyed that you NOW join fedora-extras-list despite being on FESCO for how long? really...
19:49 < jeremy> | spot: you mean "have erlang-* and R-* follow the same" ?
19:49 < spot> | jeremy: yeah.
19:49 < spot> | same as python
19:49 < jeremy> | seems sane
19:49 < f13> | warren: I was dragged into FESCO due to Legacy, and I've been trying to get OFF fesco for a while now.
19:49 < jwb> | warren, skvidal, f13: /msg each other with bitching please
19:49 < skvidal> | spot: it makes sense from a consistency standpoint
19:49 < skvidal> | jwb: :)
19:49 < tibbs> | Stricter than python would be good
19:49 < thl> | skvidal, yeah, seems sane
19:49 < skvidal> | tibbs: stricter?
19:50 < tibbs> | Python has the "py" exception; no need for that.
19:50 < skvidal> | oh
19:50 < nirik> | spot: did you follow the elisp issue ? ( muse review )... thoughts on elisp namespace?
19:50 < thl> | s/skvidal/spot/
19:50 < warren> | What about the emacs sub-package namespace?
19:50 < skvidal> | tibbs: you don't want erfoo :)
19:50 < jeremy> | skvidal: I want erlfoo ;)
19:50 < skvidal> | jeremy: my name is erlfoo
19:50 * | warren fought the Java namespace battle last year and lost.
19:50 < tibbs> | The initial problem was "efoo".
19:50 < tibbs> | Not a lot of uniqueness in "e".
19:50 < skvidal> | tibbs: ejabberd is an example
19:50 < skvidal> | it's not a erlang module
19:50 < skvidal> | but it is written in erlang
19:51 < tibbs> | I assume we're talking about add-on modules
19:51 * | ixs pipes up, I have ejabberd in the extras queue
19:51 < spot> | yeah, only add-on modules
19:51 < skvidal> | tibbs: okay
19:51 < tibbs> | not standalone packages that happen to be written in something.
19:51 < skvidal> | ixs: yay
19:51 < skvidal> | tibbs: okay, then I agree
19:51 < skvidal> | anyone against erlang-* and R-*?
19:51 < warren> | Add-on modules that are libraries and not applications should follow namespace guidelines. Typically the applications at the end of the chain don't.
19:52 < spot> | nirik: i'll have to look at elisp seperately.
19:52 < ixs> | skvidal: first successfull build happened yesterday. the openssl stuff was tricky.
19:52 < skvidal> | ixs: cool
19:52 < warren> | +1 Just go for erlang-* and R-*
19:52 < skvidal> | spot: sounds like a winner
19:52 < scop> | elisp needs to be emacs-* and xemacs-* in binaries due to incompatibilities with byte-compiled code
19:53 < scop> | unless the Debian way that tagoh suggested makes its way in in one form or another
19:53 < nirik> | spot: yeah, it's diffrent. I don't think it's worth doing a specific namespace for it... not enough packages, and confusing since there is emacs and xemacs to deal with.
19:53 < spot> | Other item I'd like to do is add a section to the Guidelines covering find_lang, why and how to use it.
19:53 < spot> | We've got a MUST in the reviewguidelines about it, but no text in the Guidelines
19:53 < f13> | spot: please do!
19:53 < tibbs> | Yes, I don't understand %find_lang.
19:54 < tibbs> | At least, not completely enough to tell submitters how to handle it.
19:54 < warren> | Regarding elipse, I move that scop writes a summary proposal for policy to fedora-extras-list, we discuss it, then aim for ratification next Thursday.
19:54 < warren> | elisp*
19:54 < nirik> | scop: yeah, but base packages are currently mostly %name... not emacs-%name or elisp-%name or anything.
19:55 < scop> | warren, I'd rather not
19:55 * | jwb smiles at ratification
19:55 < warren> | scop, what do you want to happen?
19:55 < scop> | no time, nor much interest here, and tagoh's approach should to be discussed first
19:55 < warren> | hmm
19:55 < tibbs> | Yes, this is a complicated issue.
19:55 < warren> | Or we could just continue to ignore the problem.
19:56 < tibbs> | We need to dissect Debian's approach to elisp packages.
19:56 * | nirik doesn't see a problem with no namespace for base packages for elisp and emacs- and xemacs- subpackages for them...
19:57 < warren> | nirik, like what happened to muse?
19:57 < spot> | well, since elisp issues aren't going to be decided now, thats all i have.
19:57 < nirik> | warren: yeah... and mew, and others already in extras. ;)
19:58 < f13> | spot: did we want to talk about a new 'governing' body over the Package Guideliens and such?
19:58 < f13> | now that more than just Extras is invovled?
19:58 < spot> | f13: i do, but lets get FESCO sorted out first.
19:58 < warren> | f13, thl, me and Max began a plan for that
19:58 < f13> | warren: oh?
19:58 < spot> | warren: yeah, thanks for CC'ing me on that btw.
19:59 < thl> | spot, I think we covered evrerything for today
19:59 < warren> | f13, we need to figure it out before posting it wider
19:59 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- nearly done
19:59 < warren> | spot, this began literally last night with Max pushing, I suspect he is not aware of you, don't worry you'll be included.
19:59 * | warren nudges mspevack
20:00 * | mspevack met spot at LinuxWorld. If I left him out of a thread, I apologize
20:01 < spot> | life goes on. are we about done? i need to go rest, still very sick.
20:02 < thl> | warren, spot, f13, let's get back to it another time
20:02 < warren> | thl, yes, this is in progress.
20:02 < warren> | I move that we adjourn.
20:02 < thl> | k, anything else?
20:02 < spot> | second
20:03 < warren> | pretty good, lots of ground covered in roughly an hour.
20:03 * | thl will close the meeting in 60
20:03 * | thl will close the meeting in 30
20:03 < thl> | tibbs, btw, consider yourself nominated
20:03 < thl> | tibbs, we'll discuss this next week
20:04 < tibbs> | Thanks.
20:04 * | thl will close the meeting in 10
20:04 < thl> | MARK meeting end
20:04 < tibbs> | BTW, the Wiki page says the meeting starts about now.
20:04 < warren> | tibbs, URL?
20:04 < tibbs> | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee
20:04 < tibbs> | Unless it isn't 18:05 UTC right now.
}}}
--
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
