17:01:18 #startmeeting FESCO (2012-07-23) 17:01:18 Meeting started Mon Jul 23 17:01:18 2012 UTC. The chair is jwb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:01:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:01:25 #meetingname fesco 17:01:25 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 17:01:29 #chair notting nirik mjg59 mmaslano t8m pjones mitr limburgher jwb 17:01:29 Current chairs: jwb limburgher mitr mjg59 mmaslano nirik notting pjones t8m 17:01:31 #topic init process 17:01:32 Hello 17:01:38 good evening 17:01:40 good morning. 17:01:50 hello. 17:01:52 notting is out today, but voted in most of the tickets 17:02:16 * nirik sees we have about a zillion features today. ;) 17:02:17 * limburgher here 17:02:51 ok, i think that's everyone that should be here. let's get going because we have a ton of stuf 17:03:03 #topic #892 F18 Feature: GNOME IBus Integration - 17:03:03 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GNOMEIBusIntegration 17:03:04 .fesco 892 17:03:06 jwb: #892 (F18 Feature: GNOME IBus Integration - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GNOMEIBusIntegration) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/892 17:03:09 +1 17:03:30 sure, +1 17:03:31 +1 17:03:35 +1 17:03:39 +1 17:03:42 (thanks for the clarification t0 Jens Petersen) 17:03:45 +1 17:03:47 +1 17:03:53 excellent 17:04:01 its available in rawhide too, now 17:04:23 #agreed GNOME IBus integration feature is approved (7, 0, 0) 17:04:38 mclasen: That's always nice. :) 17:04:44 in the interest of making some more progress, i'm going to propose we put the provenpacakger requests at the end 17:04:48 ok with everyone? 17:05:06 Seconded. 17:05:12 * mitr doesn't care 17:05:19 * nirik is fine either way 17:05:30 ok, let's head on to the new features 17:05:37 #topic #898 F18 Feature: Package Service Presets - 17:05:37 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PackagePresets 17:05:38 .fesco 898 17:05:39 jwb: #898 (F18 Feature: Package Service Presets - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PackagePresets) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/898 17:05:46 +1 17:06:20 So this still wants to announce presets as a feature without making presets _work_ for most packages 17:06:36 But could then be made to work for any? 17:07:00 FPC won't pass it unless we approve 17:07:05 We said it's an FPC issue 17:07:08 mitr: it's optional, nothing should be forced to use it, but it should be the way to carry out policy if needed to 17:07:27 I agree that this is ridiculous to put through the feature process, but in the name of permitting people who want to do work to get work done we should just +1 it 17:07:28 kay: How can we carry out policy using presets when the package scriptlets don't respect them? 17:07:52 mjg59: the infra work is done, but do we want to relnote and announce something that doesn't actually work for users? 17:07:53 I'm +1... even if there's not super big coverage. Perhaps feature owners could setup a tracking bug and try and get more coverage in this cycle? 17:08:04 i'm +1 as well 17:08:04 mitr: I don't see any reason to relnote or announce it 17:08:10 mitr: But this is what procedure wants 17:08:39 +1 17:08:40 mitr: nothing new in our world, we can always only use that what's supported. we need to start somewhere, and that here today is step #1 :) 17:09:18 kay: Given that we aren't nearly finished with the init.d->systemd migration, what is the ETA for this one? 17:09:46 yeah, +1 17:10:11 mitr: there is no specific target point, we need it for prefdm killing as the first major user 17:10:44 mitr: it will be used for whatever makes sense to support, and rpm macros should make it easy to port stuff 17:10:53 kay: right, and my election platform said "time-definite migrations". So I'm forced to be -1 17:11:06 * mitr counts +5 already 17:11:07 mitr: not that i'm surprised :) 17:11:50 mitr, you don't wish to vote? 17:12:06 mitr was -1. 17:12:11 jwb: -1 as said above. If it was +5, shall we move on? 17:12:25 We can talk about large-scale changes later, perhaps 17:12:28 oops, missed that sorry. 17:12:59 #agreed feature Package Service Presets is approved (+: 5, -: 1 (mitr) 0:0) 17:13:03 kay: to clarify, this is -1 to "being a feature", I can't -1 existing code in systemd 17:13:12 #topic #883 F18 Feature: Display Manager Infrastructure Rework - 17:13:12 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DisplayManagerRework 17:13:13 .fesco 883 17:13:14 jwb: #883 (F18 Feature: Display Manager Infrastructure Rework - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DisplayManagerRework) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/883 17:13:16 +1 17:13:18 this was dependent on presets 17:13:21 +1 17:13:26 +1 17:13:27 notting was +1 in the ticket 17:13:28 +1 17:13:29 +1 17:13:31 +1 17:13:33 +1 17:14:03 #agreed feature Display Manager Rewrk is approved (+: 7, -: 0, 0: 0) 17:14:08 #topic #909 F18 Feature: Heat - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Heat 17:14:11 .fesco 909 17:14:13 jwb: #909 (F18 Feature: Heat - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Heat) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/909 17:14:24 +1 17:14:26 seems to be a version bump feature. +1 17:14:28 +1 17:14:36 sure, +1 17:14:43 hello, sorry for being late 17:14:45 #agreed feature Heat is approved (+: 7, -: 0, 0: 0) 17:14:48 oops 17:14:52 copy/paste fail 17:15:33 Late +1 17:15:56 seeing python-crypto does not make me happy at all 17:16:00 so late -1 17:16:18 Hm, python-crypto again? :( 17:16:21 t8m: can you expand on that? whats wrong with it? 17:16:32 * nirik doesn't know the history there 17:16:33 nirik, that's a long story 17:16:53 nirik: absolutely horrible and security bug-inducing API, separate implementation => high risk of unfixed side channel attacks 17:16:58 nirik, the api is not too good and I simply do not like proliferation of independent crypto implementations 17:17:16 But we don't generally manage package existence this way I think 17:17:37 does zodbot have a retract command? 17:17:44 jwb: #undo 17:17:48 #undo 17:17:48 Removing item from minutes: 17:17:54 thanks nirik 17:18:12 sounds sad, but I would not block on that, just perhaps share your concerns with the Heat folks and suggest they use something else? 17:18:39 I think that's the only way to go as well 17:18:44 we're at +6, -1, right? 17:19:38 +5/-1? /me recounts 17:19:47 notting was +1 in the ticket 17:19:52 ah, right 17:20:00 ok, moving on 17:20:05 #agreed feature Heat is approved (+: 6, -: 1 (t8m), 0: 0) 17:20:11 I don't like it either, but they're using one that isn't awesome, not introducing a new one. I know long term we'de like to consolidate, but I don't think blocking things that use things other than, say, NSS, is the way to go. 17:20:41 limburgher, NSS, openssl, libgcrypt are ok 17:20:45 #info the Heat team might want to look at using something other than python-crypto 17:21:01 anything else on Heat before i roll on? 17:21:11 t8m: Right, I was generalizing, the sentence was nearly tl;dr as it was. :) 17:21:37 #topic #910 F18 Feature: Network Team driver - 17:21:37 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TeamDriver 17:21:37 .fesco 910 17:21:39 jwb: #910 (F18 Feature: Network Team driver - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TeamDriver) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/910 17:22:01 notting was +1 in the ticket. suggested NM integration, which i believe the feature was updated for 17:22:07 +1 17:22:16 +1 17:22:19 +1 17:22:23 +1 17:22:27 sure, +1 17:22:33 +1 17:22:36 yeah, I see NM suggested for next release 17:22:42 +1 17:23:14 +1 17:23:41 #agreed feature Network Team driver is approved (+: 9, -: 0 , 0: 0) 17:23:53 #topic #902 F18 Feature: IPython 0.13 - 17:23:54 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/IPython_0.13 17:23:57 .fesco 902 17:23:58 jwb: #902 (F18 Feature: IPython 0.13 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/IPython_0.13) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/902 17:24:08 notting was +1 in the ticket as well 17:24:18 sure, +1 17:24:20 +1 17:24:26 +1, not sure it needs a feature but that's another arg. 17:24:37 +1 17:24:42 +1 17:24:52 +1 17:25:04 +1 with the feature process disclaimer 17:25:09 +1 17:25:24 #agreed feature IPython 0.13 is approved (+: 9, -: 0 , 0: 0) 17:25:32 #topic #903 F18 Feature: Riak - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Riak 17:25:35 .fesco 903 17:25:36 jwb: #903 (F18 Feature: Riak - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Riak) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/903 17:25:51 notting was +1 in the ticket because apparently he was in a happy mood that day 17:25:58 +1 17:26:07 +1 17:26:08 sure, +1 more packages, silly featurelist. ;) 17:26:12 again +1 with the feature process disclaimer 17:26:18 +1 17:26:19 +1 FEATUREZ 17:26:58 +1 17:27:16 Beats a BZ filed with subject "Riak is in Fedora 18 and no one told me OMGWTFBBQ!" Definitely more than relnotes worthy, though. 17:27:28 pjones, ? 17:27:44 +1 17:27:48 #agreed feature Riak is approved (+: 9, -: 0 , 0: 0) 17:27:53 #topic #904 F18 Feature: Syscall Filters - 17:27:53 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Syscall_Filters 17:27:54 .fesco 904 17:27:55 jwb: #904 (F18 Feature: Syscall Filters - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Syscall_Filters) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/904 17:28:05 i actually like this one a lot. +1 17:28:06 +1 17:28:09 notting was +1 as well 17:28:14 +1 17:28:20 +1 17:28:21 * abadger1999 notes that the Presets was more along the lines of "FPC has approved this -- but it seems like FESCo has the ability to say no to it via the Feature process so we'll hold off on publishing it until FESCo says it's okay too" 17:28:22 yeah, neat. +1 17:28:25 +1 17:28:36 +1 17:29:02 limburgher, ? 17:29:06 +1. 17:29:08 #agreed feature Syscall Filters is approved (+: 9, -: 0 , 0: 17:29:23 damn. open paren. oh well 17:29:30 #topic #888 F18 Feature: UEFI Secure Boot - 17:29:31 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SecureBoot 17:29:31 .fesco 888 17:29:32 jwb: #888 (F18 Feature: UEFI Secure Boot - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SecureBoot) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/888 17:29:46 * nirik wonders how much discussion there will be. 17:29:50 to get it out of the way, notting was +1 17:29:50 Heh 17:29:51 +1 17:29:53 meh, +1 17:29:56 heh 17:30:05 But obviously we can answer any questions 17:30:18 I'm +1. I think there is a small loss of freedom, but it's the best we can do with the way the world works right now. 17:30:36 * nirik would also like to thank mjg59 and pjones for spending all the time working on this and seeking a way forward. 17:30:47 * mitr needs to point out that we may be required to revoke signatures on kernels with known vulnerabilities (or known in-the-wild exploits?) 17:30:48 * gholms agrees with nirik 17:30:53 Yes, thank you. 17:30:54 +0 as Fedora Board did not make clear statement and I decided that I won't give +1 unless a clear statement from Board is heard 17:30:55 i believe everyone has expressed that this isn't a perfect solution, but seems to be a minimal compromise. i'm +1 17:31:02 +1 to the idea. 17:31:07 mitr: The expectation is in-the-wild exploits that are being used against other operating systes 17:31:15 It's the worst solution, except for all the others currently available. 17:31:35 * nirik nods. 17:31:36 Are we voting on scheme the first or the second, to clarify? 17:31:45 t8m: We're still discussing it. Sorry. :( 17:31:52 As to the practical questions, $somebody will need to take care of rel-eng changes (signing, key generation & storage etc.) mjg59, do you need/want help with that? 17:32:00 mitr: I'm working on that internally, yes 17:32:04 mitr: as mjg59 was saying; the expectation currently is that we won't revoke kernels /unless/ they've got exploits being used to pivot to another OS 17:32:09 mitr: There's hardware that needs to be bought and hosted 17:32:19 limburgher: both I think? the feature does both... 17:32:54 limburgher: *both* are to be supported 17:32:54 pjones: sure. I just felt necessary to point out this aspect of the feature, as we discussed earlier. 17:33:02 nirik: 1==shim, 2==shim+pesign? 17:33:09 AhhhAAAhhh. Got it. 17:33:17 no, 2 == roll your own with your own trust root locally 17:33:54 pjones: do you also plan software which will help with signing our keys? 17:33:57 pjones: I see. 17:34:10 um plan to write it... 17:34:13 in case i lose count later, i currently have pjones, mjg59, notting, nirik, mitr, jwb +1. t8m 0 17:34:28 mmaslano: I've already written software to sign with an individual's key. 17:34:34 pjones: ok, thanks 17:35:01 +1 with hopes for better options down the road, and thanks to M and P for getting us this far. 17:35:19 mmaslano: We still need to do work on documentation 17:35:27 mmaslano: We do consider that a priority 17:35:28 Lots of it. 17:35:33 jwb: 0 from me, I don't feel we can decide now about it 17:35:37 I'm happy to help from the infra side... if we need to host hardware, let me know when and what. 17:35:45 mjg59: your articles on your blog were great. 17:35:51 mmaslano: Thanks! 17:35:59 mmaslano: We'll be aiming for that level of detail 17:36:00 mmaslano, why is that exactly? 17:36:03 * gholms agrees with mmaslano. Thanks, mjg59! 17:36:40 jwb: well I asked at first to board because its not about technical issues. Thanks to mjg59 and pjones we have a solution 17:37:18 so, the current count is 6:+1, 2:+0, 0:-1 17:37:25 #agreed feature UEFI Secure Boot is approved (+:7, -:0 , 0:2 (t8m, mmaslano) ) 17:37:42 pjones, notting was +1 in the ticket 17:38:16 ok, let's keep moving. lots of other things to discuss 17:38:20 #topic #897 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AvahiDefaultOnDesktop 17:38:23 .fesco 897 17:38:27 jwb: #897 (F18 Feature: Avahi by Default on the Desktop - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AvahiDefaultOnDesktop) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/897 17:38:30 +1 17:38:31 +1 17:38:33 (Finally!) 17:38:38 sure, +1 17:38:39 +1 17:38:46 +1 17:38:46 one hting I want to get into discussion here 17:38:47 +1 17:38:54 twoerner, ok? 17:39:17 Right - twoerner! _please_ just set the port as open, don't open it on service start. That doesn't help anything, let's not start doing that. 17:39:20 for this I think FESCO should also decide on how we do this 17:39:38 mitr, completely agree 17:39:48 with firewalld a special zone could be added for desktop 17:39:50 s 17:40:03 or should all zones be open for this? 17:40:37 is this a default for desktop only? 17:40:50 I would say yeah... 17:40:58 although... 17:41:25 We didn't historically change the firewall based on installed package set. 17:41:50 IIRC the Network zones feature hasn't been proposed for F18, has it? 17:41:55 mitr: but maybe we should depending on machine-type 17:42:16 mitr: it is alredy part of firewalld and NM since F-17 17:42:19 twoerner: Like laptop, dekstop, etc? 17:42:23 twoerner: I don't think we really have that concept. 17:42:25 only firewalld-default was postponed 17:42:31 twoerner: ah 17:42:52 yeah. I would say desktop. If other usecases/firewalld names would fit it, add them as requested? 17:42:59 limburgher: maybe something like this 17:43:16 * jwb steps afk from just a few seconds 17:43:24 twoerner: But how would we know? 17:43:45 I'm fine with opening the Avahi port for everyone. 17:43:54 limburgher: by the default package set for example - desktop / dcevelopment/ minimal... 17:44:21 if you decide to open for everyone.. then this has to be part of the default zone or all zones? 17:44:30 twoerner: Fine for initial, but doesn't help for later changes. 17:44:40 I got a pretty uniform negative response when I tried to sell network zones as a user-visible concept in the desktop last year 17:44:41 all zones, that can be changed.. :-) 17:46:07 so does anyone have a strong recommendation for twoerner ? 17:46:50 I don't feel strongly about it, but I would say desktop and such other zones as make sense... but if folks want it on by default thats ok I guess. 17:47:20 I'd suggest either letting twoerner decide what he thinks best, or postponing this aspect to next meeting. 17:47:48 nirik: zones are "home/work/untrusted public" and the like 17:47:53 this isn't going to change anyone's vote, correct? 17:47:57 I'm on the fence, but if it's needed to work completely out of the box I'm in favor. 17:48:01 * jwb notes pjones and i have not voted 17:48:18 mitr: yeah, sorry, mixing terms there. 17:48:30 Yeah, to be honest I'd rather vote on a proposal than a request for advice. 17:49:04 i ask because as of right now the feature has enough for approval if nobody is changing their vote 17:49:12 * limburgher with pjones 17:49:38 I'd leave it up to twoerner to decide. 17:49:45 so no vote change from me 17:49:55 limburgher, is that changing your vote from +1 to 0? 17:50:37 jwb: No, simply expressing the relationship between my understanding and a possible vote on a possible proposal. In a slightly complicated way. 17:51:28 ok, then i'm going to second mitr's suggestion that we follow up with twoerner on this aspect of the feature later 17:52:17 #agreed feature AvahiDefaultOnDesktop is approved (+:7, -:0 , 0:2 (jwb, pjones) ) 17:52:36 #info FESCo to follow up with twoerner on the opening of the port aspect 17:52:59 #topic #899 F18 Feature: Virt Guest Suspend/Hibernate support - 17:53:00 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virt_Guest_Suspend_Hibernate 17:53:01 .fesco 899 17:53:02 jwb: #899 (F18 Feature: Virt Guest Suspend/Hibernate support - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virt_Guest_Suspend_Hibernate) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/899 17:53:05 +1 17:53:47 +1 17:53:49 +1 17:53:54 honestly, i'm kinda hesitant 17:54:09 +1 17:54:14 mostly because hibernate is horrible on real machines. but i guess there's hope virt is easier to control 17:54:17 There's a chance hibernate will actually work in virt 17:54:22 yeah 17:54:29 hopeful +1 17:54:30 +1 17:54:37 And if it's also horrible on VMs, then it's an accurate real-world test. :) 17:54:39 +1 17:55:15 pjones, ? 17:55:52 yeah, I'm +1 I /guess/. 17:56:02 #agreed feature Virt Guest Suspend/Hibernate support is approved (+:9, -:0 , 0:0) 17:56:07 #topic #900 F18 Feature: Virt Live Snapshots - 17:56:08 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virt_Live_Snapshots 17:56:09 .fesco 900 17:56:10 jwb: #900 (F18 Feature: Virt Live Snapshots - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virt_Live_Snapshots) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/900 17:56:19 +1 17:56:21 +1 17:56:23 +1 17:56:27 +1 17:56:28 +1 17:56:32 +1 17:56:49 +1 17:56:56 +1 with some difficult to address worries about crypto 17:57:25 #agreed feature Virt Live Snapshots is approved (+:9, -:0 , 0:0) 17:57:38 mitr, will you follow up with the virt team on that? 17:58:07 jwb: I mentioned this at the talk page and they acknowledged it, and as mentioned above it's difficult to address :) 17:58:18 ah, i see now, yes. thanks 17:58:24 Let's hope the users know what they are doing 17:58:25 #topic #905 F18 Feature: System Storage Manager - 17:58:25 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SystemStorageManager 17:58:26 .fesco 905 17:58:26 jwb: #905 (F18 Feature: System Storage Manager - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SystemStorageManager) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/905 17:58:41 +1 17:58:44 +1 17:58:44 +1 17:58:49 +1 17:58:50 +1 17:59:13 +1 17:59:16 +1 17:59:20 +1 17:59:36 #agreed feature SystemStorageManager is approved (+:9, -:0 , 0:0) 17:59:42 #topic #906 F18 Feature: firewalld - default firewall solution - 17:59:43 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/firewalld-default 17:59:43 .fesco 906 17:59:44 jwb: #906 (F18 Feature: firewalld - default firewall solution - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/firewalld-default) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/906 17:59:51 +1 18:00:09 +1, but a little worried that the F17 situation will replay 18:00:18 There was remarkably little progress since 18:00:27 +1 with the same worries 18:00:29 * nirik nods. What mitr said. +1 but I hope it's not in the same boat as f17 18:00:40 +1 18:00:42 yeah, pretty much the same: +1 18:00:48 mitr: pushed some more patches today.. more to come.. 18:00:49 +1 Will be happier when the mostlys are banished. 18:00:54 someone can explain what happened in f17 to me later. i apparently wasn't paying attention then 18:01:03 twoerner: that's great to hear 18:01:12 +1 18:01:26 #agreed feature firewalld - default firewall solution is approved (+:9, -:0 , 0:0) 18:01:34 #topic #907 F18 Feature: Features/Liberation Fonts 2 - 18:01:34 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Liberation_Fonts_2 18:01:35 .fesco 907 18:01:36 jwb: #907 (F18 Feature: Features/Liberation Fonts 2 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Liberation_Fonts_2) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/907 18:02:07 +1 18:02:15 +1 18:02:15 +1 here 18:02:19 +1 18:02:20 +1 18:02:23 +1 18:02:24 +1 18:02:46 +1 18:02:57 #agreed feature Liberation Fonts 2 is approved (+:9, -:0 , 0:0) 18:03:02 #topic #908 F18 Feature: Fontconfig Enable Autohinting - 18:03:03 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FontconfigEnableAutohinting 18:03:03 .fesco 908 18:03:04 jwb: #908 (F18 Feature: Fontconfig Enable Autohinting - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FontconfigEnableAutohinting) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/908 18:03:23 +1. 18:03:27 jreznik has pointed out that this interacts with Liberation 2.0 - Liberation advertises better hinting, but autohinting would override this 18:03:54 Yeah 18:04:02 AFAICT the feature owners are aware, so there may be changes, but I have no interest in micromanaging that. 18:04:04 If necessary I guess it can ship a fontconfig fragment? 18:04:13 So +1 to the general idea 18:04:16 SHould be fine. 18:04:17 +1 18:04:21 mjg59: I think something like that is the plan 18:04:31 yeah +1 18:04:49 notting was looking for more input from the desktop teams. only mccann replied 18:05:01 though he was in favor in general 18:05:16 +1 18:05:17 +1 18:05:24 +1 18:05:37 t8m? 18:05:51 I thought that the autohinting is already enabled. 18:05:59 but +1 anyway 18:06:07 #agreed feature Fontconfig Enable Autohinting is approved (+:9, -:0 , 0:0) 18:06:24 ok, that was the last feature on the schedule for today. lets get to the provenpackager stuff quickly 18:06:31 #topic #879 rishi: requesting provenpackager 18:06:32 .fesco 879 18:06:33 jwb: #879 (rishi: requesting provenpackager) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/879 18:06:40 +1 18:06:49 +1 18:06:51 +1 18:06:56 +1 18:07:03 +1 18:07:07 +1 here as well. 18:07:13 weak +1 18:07:30 limburgher, ? 18:07:38 +1, I think. 18:07:51 #agreed rishi is accepted as a provenpackager 18:07:59 #topic #881 jcwillia: request for provenpackager status 18:08:00 .fesco 881 18:08:01