14:00:38 #startmeeting Council (2019-04-10) 14:00:38 Meeting started Wed Apr 10 14:00:38 2019 UTC. 14:00:38 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 14:00:38 The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:38 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:00:38 The meeting name has been set to 'council_(2019-04-10)' 14:00:40 #meetingname council 14:00:40 The meeting name has been set to 'council' 14:00:49 #chair jonatoni bexelbie contyk dgilmore dperpeet langdon mattdm sumantrom tyll bcotton pbrobinson stickster 14:00:49 Current chairs: bcotton bexelbie contyk dgilmore dperpeet jonatoni langdon mattdm pbrobinson stickster sumantrom tyll 14:00:51 #topic Introductions, Welcomes 14:01:08 gday 14:01:12 * contyk is confused about the time again; thought this was in an hour 14:01:20 but hi 14:01:27 .hello bexelbie 14:01:30 bexelbie: Sorry, but you don't exist 14:01:30 contyk: it is at the time it has always been 14:01:32 .hello bex 14:01:33 .hello psabata 14:01:34 bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' 14:01:37 contyk: psabata 'Petr Šabata' 14:02:19 dgilmore: well, it's at the same US clock time 14:02:25 .hell02 14:02:29 mattdm: right 14:02:29 .hello2 14:02:30 langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' 14:04:23 okay, well we have 1/4 objective leads here at the moment 14:04:35 so i guess langdon gets to go first 14:04:40 ha 14:04:43 #topic Modularity objective 14:04:58 * langdon must collect his notes 14:05:26 arggh.. which seem to have deleted themselves :( 14:05:39 ok.. so .. doing dnf bug fixes/rfes 14:06:10 scratch module builds in progress.. very close to complete .. deployment will take a bit longer as we need some other upgrades on the builders AIUI 14:06:30 finally put to rest the naming conventions question 14:06:47 #info Scratch module builds are in progress and near complete. Deployment still has some dependencies on the builders 14:06:47 #link https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/128 14:07:03 langdon: can you #info a summary of that resolution? 14:07:16 (the naming conventions) 14:07:31 i can cheat! 14:07:36 #info There will be two streams named "rolling" for the user-focused builds and "unstable" for the preview/master/pre-release things, and this will be just a suggestion to the packagers, but using whatever is established upstream is also a good option. We'll not rename nor enforce renaming of anything, we'll leave it to packagers and mandate a good use of the description summary field for this purpose. +4 0 -0 14:07:44 yay! 14:07:49 thats the #agreed from the meeting yesterday 14:08:35 #info various bug fixes/enhancements to dnf still ongoing 14:09:03 one more thing... digging 14:09:56 ohh right.. 14:10:16 #info we have also put to bed the scoping/agreement on EOL articulation for modules 14:10:25 let me see if i can find a quote 14:10:26 as? 14:11:00 bexelbie: i am not sure i understand your question 14:11:21 what was the final answer on EOL scoping/agreement 14:11:40 ahh.. yes.. thats what i was looking for a quote for 14:11:41 #info We'll store the information as a metadata to module branches in dist-git — a functionality that we'll implement as a Pagure plugin. We'll provide a computed value for package branches as an API call. 14:11:56 #link https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/131 14:12:12 thats about all i have unless there are more questions 14:12:56 i have one that we don't necessarily need to answer today 14:13:42 the objective as written is for F28/F29 timeframe. what's the plan for the future of this objective? Is it essentially done, or do we need an updated objective to cover whatever the next steps are? 14:13:58 (i feel like we talked about this at the hackfest, but I apparently didn't take specific enough notes) 14:14:16 bcotton: we need an updated one.. there was a proposal to do that over a hackfest.. but that didn't happen.. 14:14:29 so I don't think any of the new objectives have been written 14:15:12 ah yes, that was it :-) 14:15:20 I am worried that the objective writing is being viewed as a formal writing exercise 14:15:43 I think we want the data, the formality is less critical - do we know what we want to do next? Perhaps we can start with that in a ticket and build it the unanswered questions that way? 14:16:17 bexelbie: well.. for the modularity one.. it isn't "formal writing" it is "formal thinking".. thats what needs some time 14:17:07 the existing modularity objective is fairly informal. an updated set of deliverables in list form is probably all we need, but like langdon said that takes some thinking 14:17:19 .hello till 14:17:20 tyll: till 'Till Maas' 14:18:19 i can try and prioritize it for the next update.. however, this is a VERY busy time for me... as we have a big conference coming up 14:18:26 ok 14:19:26 langdon: i don't think there's a rush necessarily, but we'd probably want it sometime reasonably after the f30 release, i'd think (mattdm might have other opinions) 14:20:29 bcotton: yeah... i am concerned, as i was when I proposed the hackfest, that there is a lot of overlap with the other objectives.. so that is another wrinkle.. but Ill see what I can come up with 14:21:03 it's a little bit of a chicken and egg problem. we need to know what the other potential objectives are thinking, but no one wants to write it out until it's coordinated 14:21:11 langdon, feel free to use your writing as a forcing function for others :D 14:21:38 i wonder if an hour or two on a bluejeans session would be enough coordination to shake things loose? 14:22:36 bcotton: maybe? but i doubt it.. maybe if we all had strawmans first 14:23:16 * bcotton sings "do you want to build a strawmaaaaaan?" 14:23:20 anyway 14:23:34 lol 14:23:35 any other questions or comments for langdon? 14:23:47 +1 to the thing bex said at 10:15 14:24:35 dude that was 6 hours ago :P 14:24:49 * bexelbie notes that timezone jokes are NEVER out of date 14:25:02 okay, did dperpeet or stickster sneak in while I wasn't paying attention? 14:25:12 i know pbrobinson_PTO is, as the nick implies, on PTO 14:25:31 yes, much deserved 14:26:01 anyone want to speak on behalf of the leads re: Lifecycle, CI/CD, or IoT? 14:26:27 pingou: can you be dperpeet for a few minutes? 14:28:31 okay, i guess that's all the updates we get this time 14:28:33 #topic Open floor 14:29:06 #info Still need another +1 for the channel-specific bans policy 14:29:08 #link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/247 14:29:36 #info Docs FAD for internationalization is approved with in-ticket votes 14:29:44 #link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/250 14:30:22 we need to settle on a timeline for the logo rollout. do we want to discuss that now or continue to discuss in-ticket? 14:30:33 and does anyone else have business that needs to be brought up today? 14:30:39 on the logo.... 14:30:39 I think we need to wait on some clearances on the logo first 14:30:46 lets get that settled before we try to put a calendar on it 14:30:47 imho 14:31:00 bcotton: consider the channel specific bans approved 14:31:01 Legal tells me that filing all the trademarks is going to be quite expensive. This may mean we need to push back until FY21 14:31:18 mattdm: that sounds not fun 14:31:33 that....stinks 14:31:36 dgilmore: ack 14:31:43 Yeah. Like, at least an order of magnitude more than I had blithely assumed. 14:31:59 Ben you're invited to a future meeting about this :) 14:32:13 mattdm: yes! i love meetings! 14:33:51 okay, so we'll leave the logo to the side for now 14:33:59 anything else for this week? 14:34:18 I see we canceled the prioritized bugs meeting 14:34:28 we did 14:34:40 excellent. :) 14:35:22 okay, i think we'll call that a meeting. 14:35:34 #info Next week's meeting is Tickets and Ongoing 14:35:44 thanks bcotton! 14:35:51 thanks for coming, everyone! 14:35:56 * bcotton bangs gavel 14:36:00 #endmeeting