11:59:32 #startmeeting Env and Stacks (2015-06-04) 11:59:32 Meeting started Thu Jun 4 11:59:32 2015 UTC. The chair is hhorak. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 11:59:32 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 11:59:32 #meetingname env-and-stacks 11:59:32 #chair bkabrda hhorak juhp ncoghlan vpavlin sicampbell walters ttomecek phracek 11:59:32 The meeting name has been set to 'env-and-stacks' 11:59:32 Current chairs: bkabrda hhorak juhp ncoghlan phracek sicampbell ttomecek vpavlin walters 11:59:37 #topic greetings 11:59:47 hi 12:00:14 hi, we have again meeting:) 12:01:03 hi 12:01:24 Good Afternoon 12:01:24 * juhp_ managed to find the room this time :) 12:02:10 hi all 12:02:29 #topic Elections and charter enhances 12:03:06 as you've probably encountered, fesco elections were already proposed, so we should think about elections for env & stacks again.. 12:03:29 * vpavlin says: yay 12:03:59 upsss. It seems that it is end of my time:) I did not do nothing ;) 12:04:31 s/nothing/anything/g 12:07:10 phracek: I don't think so, the initial members' turn this time (those who were not elected the last time) 12:07:28 ok, bye.. 12:07:40 lol 12:07:42 vpavlin: we need new members first :) 12:07:51 vpavlin: so no such hurry :) 12:08:22 vpavlin: We need a container responsible guy in E&S. 12:08:51 phracek: isn't that vpavlin? :) 12:09:11 speaking about that and actually couldn't remember when we needed to have quorum because of voting the last time, I kind of think about membership just to be just an impulse to join meetings.. 12:09:23 bkabrda: Yeah, byt he wants to leave. I hope that he is joking:) 12:09:31 vpavlin: bkabrda: both of you :) 12:09:35 s/byt/but/g 12:09:42 hhorak: and ttomecek as well 12:09:49 bkabrda: right! 12:09:57 and me :) 12:10:21 right, so basically we're bunch of docker people :D 12:10:28 * vpavlin nods.. 12:10:53 * ncoghlan is more an Ansible person 12:10:55 so, my point was whether not to change the charter to change the group to "any number of volunteers" and in case we have a disagreement in voting -- then to deffer to fesco/council 12:10:55 .hello langdon 12:10:56 langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' 12:11:21 hhorak: I think it's worth having the 9 nominated members 12:11:54 even if its just a way of recording that we've committed to showing up 12:12:12 plus I'm hoping we'll have some more concrete proposals this cycle :) 12:12:41 and I want to share the blame^^^^^credit before taking them to fedora-devel :) 12:14:11 ncoghlan: yeah, membership does make sense, but I'm not sure if we need to hold the voting every release.. or need to have exactly 9 members.. maybe changing just the election process to make it asynchronous and accept new members during the time..? and not bother about exact count? 12:14:53 well, we can do the standard way again and see what demand there is for being a member (I'm afraid not big) 12:15:05 and consider changing anything later.. 12:15:10 yeah 12:15:14 hmm there is that 12:15:40 I am definitely for unbinding elections from the fesco 12:15:46 yeah maybe have an election and then revisit? 12:16:07 seems a bit late to change now perhaps? 12:16:38 juhp_: Sure, probably a first thing we should vote about after elections;) 12:16:44 sure 12:18:23 yeah, I think vote on the current 5 openings this election, and then consider tweaking next time 12:18:37 +1 12:18:56 +1 sounds fine 12:19:21 hhorak: So what now? You'll send out an email to MLs about free seats? 12:19:56 vpavlin: I'll talk to jkurik, who seems to maintain the elections now.. 12:20:00 hopefully all the 5 members will nominate again!! 12:20:23 I certainly intend to :) 12:20:49 ok 12:20:51 I think it gives us better visibility to align with fesco this time again, doesn't it? 12:21:35 #action hhorak to talk to jkurik about WG elections 12:21:57 #info fesco elections nomination is scheduled to June 08-14 12:22:19 & council 12:22:43 hhorak, yes 12:23:25 * jkurik is expecting hhorak 12:24:18 Not to completely sidebar, but, it might be worth having an e&s level set meeting with, not only fesco , but base as well.. Might be a good time for it 12:24:32 jkurik: nice, so the plan seems fine from you PoV? 12:24:39 Discussion came up in the base meeting the other day 12:25:28 hhorak: to discuss the Elections policy after this Elections ? 12:25:59 langdon, regular meeting? 12:26:11 jkurik: I though more about aligning our elections with fesclo/council elections.. just to join them :) 12:26:36 langdon, I like the idea 12:26:59 langdon: makes sense to me - it became clear to me in writing that draft of the Aleph idea today that there's the lower levels are out of E&S's sphere of responsibility 12:27:16 langdon: I'm not sure I understand "level set meeting" -- just a to meet and talk together? or does it have some special meaning? 12:27:45 hhorak: "e&s level" "set meeting" 12:28:11 ncoghlan beat me to it 12:28:21 ncoghlan: this way it makes more sense :) 12:28:46 Hhorak a meeting to make sure u all think the same thing about what each group is responsible for :) 12:29:09 ok, got it :) 12:29:15 * langdon didn't understand ncoghlan's clarification :) 12:29:16 hhorak: yes, I think we can join WG elections with FESCo/Council elections as well 12:30:00 * langdon also thought u meant "charter" when you said align with fesco :) 12:30:12 hhorak: however I will need some background 12:30:41 hhorak: if you can step by and explain me some details, it will be helpfull 12:31:51 jkurik: sure, will pay you a visit :) 12:32:19 ah level-setting meeting? 12:33:15 anyway I think having occasional cross-WG meeting sometimes would be useful/productive 12:33:45 though I already personally have alotofmeetings... 12:33:55 Juhp_ +1 12:34:18 when finding a time for this whatever-it's-called meeting between groups, I think we should wait after elections, so we choose the time that fits the new members.. but it sounds like great idea generally.. 12:34:42 even if its one per release cycle say 12:34:58 that's still a lot of meetings though WG x WG.... 12:35:22 juhp_: I don't think it would need to the full cross-product of groups 12:35:24 though it could be quite fruitful I feel 12:35:33 juhp_: but each group with Base at least could be good 12:35:59 so there's at least one group in a position to spot overlaps 12:36:26 I think also with some of the edition WGs would be interesting - to hear more about what they want/need - but digressing probably :) 12:36:28 juhp_: I think it's worth trying it.. if it doesn't work, we'll think about another channel.. 12:36:33 ncoghlan, yeah Base makes sense 12:36:43 hhorak, ok sure 12:37:17 Perhaps with a member of fesco present? 12:37:23 yes 12:37:27 And/or council? 12:37:40 why not 12:38:01 sounds fine 12:39:18 anybody able to take responsibility to set up when is good and send the other group(s)? (that's the only thing I came to that is needed to be done to make it happen( 12:42:31 * juhp_ thinks someone in a Westerly timezone might be better... kind of doubts his timezone will work... but I can do it if noone else volunteers i guess 12:43:22 start with Base WG ? 12:44:04 yeah, probably the best shot 12:44:21 okay let me take it then 12:44:27 juhp_: thanks 12:44:42 might increase my chances of re-election ;o) 12:44:49 np 12:45:11 oh, the time goes quickly.... 12:45:11 #topic Council Engineering update 12:47:05 two things here -- we need to gather some content + a volunteer that would do the presentation 12:48:31 hhorak: Just a question. What content should be in the presentation? 12:48:42 For user level package management, I see two possible additions (one F23, one F24) 12:49:54 phracek: basically what we plan to focus in next year 12:50:07 For F23: provide the nix package manager for language independent user level package management (using the upstream Nix repos, as we do with language specific tools). 12:50:15 hhorak: I see 12:50:32 there were already some ideas the last meeting, but we should come up with more.. 12:50:36 For F24: actually the mammoth email I sent today into a real proposal 12:50:42 *actually turn the... 12:50:58 ncoghlan: thanks, that seems like quite challenging task :) 12:51:15 yeah 12:51:21 #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/env-and-stacks/2015-May/000786.html 12:52:09 * bkabrda has to run, since he has another meeting in 5. see you guys 12:52:16 ncoghlan, +1 for nix 12:52:31 and btw +1 for nix 12:52:33 ncoghlan: +1 (why not to set high expectations :) 12:52:46 hhorak: If it is not urgent case then I think I can make a proposal till end of this month. Is it ok? 12:53:00 Of course I would be happy If anybode can help me. 12:53:09 I can start communication via ML. 12:53:13 phracek: basically yes, we need to have some input for the meeting 7th July 12:53:17 hhorak: the Aleph proposal is the one that would need a *lot* of discussion with other WGs :) 12:53:39 hhorak: but I think it fits in well with langdon's Fedora Modularisation objective 12:55:07 ncoghlan: +1 12:55:33 thinking about where to track this -- the task list is almost the place (with links to more detailed description than just a subject) 12:55:33 Sorry guys, I need to go - another meeting:-) 12:55:46 btw roughly when do you want to have the meeting with Base? 12:56:15 this month/ next month / post -election ? 12:56:48 juhp_: it makes me the best sense shortly after elections.. 12:56:55 okay 12:57:13 when are they expected? 12:57:50 okay I may discuss details more on list - people may ask upfront about agenda etc 12:58:50 juhp_: the elections results are announced June 29 12:58:58 okay 12:59:15 then maybe the call should be after that? 12:59:28 juhp_: I think so.. 12:59:28 call for the meeting I mean 12:59:32 okay 13:00:05 sorry to change the topic 13:01:43 no problem.. I think we've already lost enough members to call it the end anyway.. 13:01:53 unless anybody has something special to tell.. 13:02:05 meanwhile I'll do some better minutes.. 13:02:19 ncoghlan, your proposal looks pretty interesting btw just wanted to add 13:02:25 #idea ncoghlan for F23: provide the nix package manager for language independent user level package management (using the upstream Nix repos, as we do with language specific tools). 13:02:48 * hhorak admits haven't read it O:-) 13:02:53 yet 13:03:15 hhorak: it's not clear enough in my own mind for me to make it shorter yet :) 13:03:41 ncoghlan: I see :) 13:05:14 #info Aleph proposal is the one that would need a *lot* of discussion with other WGs 13:05:43 #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/env-and-stacks/2015-June/000796.html 13:06:25 well, we're over already, so will skip the rest of topics.. thanks for the discussion! 13:06:48 g'night folks! 13:06:50 thanks hhorak and all! 13:07:11 thanks hhorak for leading. 13:07:30 #endmeeting