18:06:59 <jwb> #startmeeting FESCO (2013-05-08)
18:06:59 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May  8 18:06:59 2013 UTC.  The chair is jwb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:06:59 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:07:04 <jwb> #meetingname fesco
18:07:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco'
18:07:08 <jwb> #chair abadger1999 jwb mitr mmaslano notting nirik pjones t8m sgallagh
18:07:08 <zodbot> Current chairs: abadger1999 jwb mitr mmaslano nirik notting pjones sgallagh t8m
18:07:12 * notting is here
18:07:13 <jwb> #topic init process
18:07:20 * abadger1999 here
18:07:21 <nirik> morning.
18:07:25 <jwb> ok, my bad.  got distracted staring at bugs.  apologies
18:07:29 <pjones> hello.
18:07:36 <sgallagh> I'm here but I have a hard stop in 53 minute
18:07:43 <jwb> i hope this doesn't take that long
18:07:47 <t8m> I think the agenda is pretty short this time.
18:07:59 <jwb> ok, let's get rolling
18:08:04 <sgallagh> Yeah, just figured I'd mention it ahead of time
18:08:20 <jwb> #topic #1110 systemd preset for ipmi
18:08:27 <jwb> .fesco 1110
18:08:28 <zodbot> jwb: #1110 (systemd preset for ipmi) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1110
18:09:00 <jwb> so there were at least some answers in the ticket
18:09:12 <jwb> though it seems they weren't all that convincing?
18:09:18 <t8m> I second the last comment by mitr
18:09:29 <nirik> yeah, it seems like presets is the wrong thing here.. it should just be default?
18:09:45 <notting> i'd agree with mitr here... package-private preset files seem wrong
18:10:21 <pjones> yeah.
18:11:31 <Viking-Ice> is this not something that should be solved via udev rule?
18:11:43 <jwb> so, something like this proposal: FESCo does not believe a package-private solution to this is the correct method.  We suggest you file a bug against systemd to get it added to the default preset file
18:11:57 <t8m> jwb, +1
18:12:02 <abadger1999> <nod> mitr's comment is the standard method -- service start detects functionality and enables or disables then.
18:13:30 <pjones> jwb: +1
18:13:33 * nirik nods.
18:13:47 <jwb> ok, so that's 5
18:13:48 <notting> jwb: +1
18:13:49 <nirik> Viking-Ice: I think so yes, but there's some issue/bug being worked on to allow that. this is a in the mean time fix.
18:13:54 <abadger1999> "and rework the service to do detection of hardware to do the addional module loading and watchdog starting at boot time"
18:13:55 <abadger1999> +1
18:14:11 <sgallagh> jwb: +1
18:14:44 <jwb> #agreed FESCo does not believe a package-private solution to this is the correct method.  We suggest you file a bug against systemd to get it added to the default preset file and rework the service to do detection of hardware to do the addional module loading and watchdog starting at boot time
18:14:54 <jwb> ok, moving on
18:15:02 <jwb> #topic #1111 systemd preset for ipmievd
18:15:08 <jwb> .fesco 1111
18:15:09 <zodbot> jwb: #1111 (systemd preset for ipmievd) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1111
18:15:30 <jwb> i'm guessing we suggest something similar here?
18:15:37 <nirik> yeah, ditto
18:15:42 <t8m> sure
18:15:52 <notting> yep
18:15:58 <pjones> you betcha.
18:16:07 <jwb> i'll leave off the module loading part here, since this doesn't do that
18:16:17 <jwb> #agreed FESCo does not believe a package-private solution to this  is the correct method.  We suggest you file a bug against systemd  to get it added to the default preset file
18:16:22 <abadger1999> jwb: +1
18:16:29 <nirik> +1
18:16:34 <notting> +1
18:16:34 <sgallagh> +1
18:16:39 <t8m> +1
18:17:06 <jwb> ok, good.  i don't have to correct my jumping the gun there ;)
18:17:13 <jwb> anything else on these two before i move on?
18:17:37 <pjones> +1
18:18:13 <jwb> ok, moving on
18:18:32 <jwb> #topic #1109 change provenpackager join message?
18:18:36 <jwb> .fesco 1109
18:18:37 <zodbot> jwb: #1109 (change provenpackager join message?) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1109
18:18:58 <jwb> seems most people voted for nirik's boring and dry version: Please use your new privledges wisely
18:19:08 <jwb> (with proper spelling)
18:19:15 <pjones> I haven't voted yet, but I'm +1 to that spelled correctly.
18:19:21 * nirik is fine with that
18:19:38 <t8m> +1
18:19:43 * notting is as well
18:19:57 <sgallagh> I'm ok with nirik's version or my own (obviously)
18:20:31 <jwb> #agreed New provenpackager join message will read: "Please use your new privileges wisely."
18:20:48 <notting> ok, will do.
18:20:56 <jwb> nice, thanks
18:21:00 <jwb> #topic Next week's chair
18:21:24 <sgallagh> I will not be around next week.
18:21:33 <notting> i can do it
18:22:15 <jwb> excellent
18:22:22 <jwb> #info notting will chair next week's meeting
18:22:28 <jwb> #topic Open Floor
18:22:54 <notting> elections?
18:23:05 <jwb> what about them?
18:23:29 <notting> nomination period is may 18 - may 25. 5 seats up for election.
18:23:31 <sgallagh> Proposal: eliminate elections and declare all currently-seated FESCo members dictators for life (I am of course kidding)
18:23:46 <pjones> sgallagh: what have I done to deserve that?
18:24:04 <sgallagh> pjones: I'd answer that, but I have to leave in a half hour
18:24:33 <t8m> sgallagh, democracy is hard let's skip it! :D
18:24:33 <jwb> notting, do you have which 5 on hand?
18:24:51 <notting> nirik, notting, pjones, jwb, t8m
18:25:21 <jwb> #info FESCo election nomination period is May 18 - May 25.  5 seats are up for election.  The seats up for election are currently occupied by nirik, notting, pjones, jwb, and t8m
18:25:27 <jwb> notting, gracias
18:25:28 <nirik> fun times.
18:25:43 <jwb> anyone planning on running for re-election?
18:25:51 * t8m is still undecided
18:25:59 * nirik probibly will...
18:26:06 * pjones probably will, but hasn't decided for sure yet
18:26:20 <jwb> i'm likely not to
18:26:45 * notting is planning to
18:27:48 <jwb> ok.  anything else on this or other topics?
18:27:59 <nirik> I'll note we have a calendar now.
18:28:04 <nirik> folks should look at using it. ;)
18:28:08 <jwb> fedocal?
18:28:14 <nirik> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/
18:28:18 <nirik> yep
18:28:37 <nirik> the fedora release calendar needs a bunch of things added.
18:28:45 <nirik> and meetings should get added to the meeting channel ones.
18:28:49 <jwb> #info Fedora now has a calendar app, Fedocal.  Take a look and use it!
18:28:54 <jwb> #link FESCo does not believe a package-private solution to this  is the correct method.  We suggest you file a bug against systemd  to get it added to the default preset file and rework the service  to do detection of hardware to do the addional module loading and  watchdog starting at boot time
18:28:59 <jwb> sigh
18:28:59 <jwb> #undo
18:28:59 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x24f87e50>
18:29:07 <jwb> #link https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/
18:29:30 <sgallagh> nirik: Any plans to extend fedocal with CalDAV support so meeting rooms can effectively be booked via Thunderbird/Evolution/foo?
18:30:00 <nirik> sgallagh: not sure, but that would be great I agree.
18:30:05 <nirik> will pass that along for sure.
18:30:25 <nirik> openid and a better front/landing page will be in short term updates.
18:30:31 * sgallagh nods
18:31:22 <abadger1999> Just an fyi: fpc has been getting requests to bundle lua due to the fedora package not updating to 5.2 yet... I'm recommending the people wanting to bundle start the AWOL maintainer process, instead -- might come to fesco for the fast track process
18:31:32 <notting> lua maintainer isn't panu anymore?
18:31:40 <abadger1999> .whoowns lua
18:31:40 <zodbot> abadger1999: timn (rmyers in Fedora EPEL)
18:31:53 <abadger1999> notting: yeah, not panu.
18:32:03 <pjones> seems like the sort of package we need more than one version of at once - why not just get them to package a lua52 ?
18:32:21 <pjones> since a) it's designed to be bundled and we dislike that, and b) code has deps on specific versions
18:32:48 <t8m> pjones, can they be easily made non-conflicting?
18:32:53 <abadger1999> <nod>  I thin the current problem is that we have patches to update but hte maintainer isn't responding.
18:33:09 <pjones> t8m: I haven't checked - I expect it can't be that hard, lua isn't /large/
18:33:10 <abadger1999> but having a lua51 package if not all dependencies can move to 5.2 is reasonable to me.
18:33:18 <pjones> but it may still be a fair amount of work
18:33:29 <jwb> i keep reading <nod> as a paste of something nod said in irc somewhere else
18:33:53 <abadger1999> heh. sorry jwb
18:34:01 <jwb> my brain is broken.  no worries.
18:34:23 <notting> jwb: he works on the team with wynken and blynken
18:34:38 <jwb> ha
18:35:23 <sgallagh> I thought he transfered to the v8 team to work on Javascript...
18:35:49 <sgallagh> That was funnier in my head
18:36:36 <jwb> ok, anything else?
18:37:01 <sgallagh> Do we want to propose any FESCo-related talks for Flock during CFP?
18:37:37 <jwb> not sure.  i'm not sure what a talk would consist of for FESCo.  maybe a hackfest session
18:37:59 <pjones> Well, we did a meet-your-fesco last time.
18:38:14 <pjones> It wasn't a bad idea I don't think.  The... situation made it not go as well as it could have.
18:39:09 <jwb> i think i missed that
18:39:27 <t8m> I think a meet-your-fesco should always be a good thing - if not for anything else then for democracy
18:39:35 <pjones> yeah
18:39:54 <jwb> but yeah, we could put that in as a proposal.  not sure if the CFP/election conflict hinders that
18:40:03 <jwb> if most of the new FESCo isn't going to be there...
18:40:11 <nirik> the only things I can think of might be something to clarify/finish refining the 'changes' process.
18:40:14 <notting> "meet whomever of fesco happens to e here"
18:40:22 <pjones> notting: yeah, but with a "b"
18:40:29 <sgallagh> notting: I think that's all we can ever expect.
18:40:43 <sgallagh> I doubt all of the Brno FESCo members will come over, for example.
18:41:08 <notting> pjones: as long as we're not using the conference title to pose for flock-of-seagulls pictures
18:41:58 <sgallagh> nirik: Regarding the "Changes" process: Maybe a live tutorial?
18:42:13 <nirik> sure.
18:42:40 <jwb> we can use "Kill i686" for the tutorial.
18:44:06 <jwb> #info Considering doing some Flock presentation/hackfest proposals
18:44:09 <jwb> ok, anything else?
18:44:21 <sgallagh> Ooh, are we really killing i686?
18:44:27 <sgallagh> Can I drive the getaway car?
18:44:44 <jwb> sadly, probably not.
18:45:03 <sgallagh> Perhaps the word "euthanize" would be more appropriate here?
18:45:11 * notting still has one. also, olpc.
18:45:29 <pjones> oh no, we'd be putting it out of our misery, not its.
18:45:33 <jwb> i mean... if we get a 100 email thread on something as trivial as not using bullets on passwords, i can't imagine the shitstorm that would come from killing an entire class of machines.
18:45:47 <jwb> i just wouldn't have the strength.
18:46:09 <nirik> hey we did it with dropping install cd's. ;)
18:46:17 <nirik> /split media
18:46:34 <jwb> jlk is stronger than i.
18:46:45 <notting> nirik: ... which multiple people suggested bringing back in the dvd size thread
18:46:55 <nirik> yeah, crazy
18:47:08 <sgallagh> notting: There will always be people trying to raise the dead. It's a *written* rule of the world
18:47:54 <abadger1999> nirik: we need an Orpheus Badge for the Fedora badge implementation
18:48:17 <t8m> there were already some flame/heated debates over the i686 support on fedora-devel years before if I remember that correctly
18:48:22 <sgallagh> Ok, so I'll file two proposals, a "Meet Your FESCo" and a "Change Process Tutorial"
18:48:46 <t8m> sgallagh, +1
18:48:53 <sgallagh> abadger1999: I feel I should get the reference, but it's eluding me
18:48:56 <jwb> #action sgallagh to file two flock proposals: "Meet Your FESCo" and "Change Process Tutorial"
18:48:59 <jwb> thanks sgallagh
18:49:52 <abadger1999> sgallagh: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orpheus#Death_of_Eurydice
18:50:23 <abadger1999> Tried to raise his wife from the dead
18:51:02 <sgallagh> abadger1999: Gotcha
18:51:20 <jwb> right.  before we wander off into discussion zombies, should we close the meeting?
18:51:24 <Viking-Ice> I got one question for the open floor but I cant wait any longer since I got to run on a evening lecture so excuse me for throwing this out there but I ask of you to seriously looking into this since this is one of the bottle neck in project processes...
18:51:25 <pjones> please.
18:51:26 <Viking-Ice> has fesco considered disassemble fpc and pick up ack/nack/patch approach for guidelines changes proposal on the packaging list to make that process more efficient? If not I suggest "you look into it" and what benefits the fpc brings to the project over that approach
18:51:31 <t8m> jwb, +1
18:51:42 <jwb> Viking-Ice, no, we've never considered that afaik.
18:51:45 <pjones> Well, that was sudden.
18:52:11 <pjones> Having now considered that, I'm not inclined to dissolve the FPC.
18:52:15 <jwb> nor i
18:52:22 <pjones> Nor to tell them how to do their jobs.
18:52:32 <jwb> however, you can file a ticket in the FESCo tracker if you really want.
18:52:40 <pjones> he left.
18:52:41 * abadger1999 also doesn't wantto but may be biased
18:52:50 <t8m> Well I could imagine a better process for fpc membership, but dissolving it? no
18:52:51 <jwb> oh good.  then i'm closing the meeting
18:53:09 <jwb> you have 45 seconds
18:53:17 * nirik is in general happy with the FPC.
18:53:25 <sgallagh> Flock proposals filed, FWIW
18:53:50 <sgallagh> And yeah, the FPC does a sufficiently good job of keeping those issues out of my hair that I don't think it needs changing :)
18:54:07 <jwb> #endmeeting