17:00:00 #startmeeting IRC Support SIG (2012-05-24) 17:00:00 Meeting started Thu May 24 17:00:00 2012 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:00 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:00 #meetingname irc-support-sig 17:00:00 #topic init process 17:00:00 The meeting name has been set to 'irc-support-sig' 17:00:19 * N3LRX 17:00:23 * FranciscoD 17:00:24 #chair EvilBob dcr226 17:00:24 Current chairs: EvilBob dcr226 nirik 17:00:25 * EvilBob 17:00:55 * nirik waits for folks to come in 17:01:08 note that the go/no-go meeting for f17 is happening in #fedora-meeting-1 17:01:15 * dcr226 partys like its 1999 17:01:16 * FranciscoD is sitting in there too :P 17:01:19 * EvilBob hears the noon siren, time to get out of the mines... 17:02:07 * nirik will wait another minute for folks to wander in.. 17:02:29 * Sonar_Gal is partially here but may have to leave quickly so get it started or cancel till next week!!! 17:02:41 To much to do 17:02:48 ok, we can dive on in... 17:02:54 #topic Week in review 17:02:54 http://fedora.theglaserfamily.org/ircstats/fedora-weekly.html 17:02:59 anything for week in review? 17:03:15 bunch of f17 folks now... but otherwise pretty normal IMHO 17:03:28 A lot of people chomping at the bit for F17 is all 17:03:55 yeah. 17:03:55 Oh... 17:04:02 f17 is pretty nice...nothing to report here 17:04:06 aye 17:04:13 a few bugs, but been taken care of 17:04:16 apart from lxpanel turning me over at every available opportunity 17:04:54 New user from "downunder" He tries real hard and is not quite getting a few things. Lets try to give him a break as he is trying, he's been getting ganged up on a bit. 17:05:14 * FranciscoD notes that 17:05:40 yeah, one of the things we need to keep trying to improve on 17:05:47 ok, moving on. 17:05:51 Yup 17:05:59 #topic ticket 108 - Proposal for Ammendment to the IRC Support SIGPolicy 17:06:26 I liked the last draft I looked at with a few nitpicks. I think EvilBob made some changes for those nitpicks, but haven't had a chance to look super closely. 17:06:45 the current revision is here following nirik's input yesterday https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Dp67/sandbox/irc-sig&oldid=289330 17:07:26 EvilBob: yeah, N3LRX did a commit on the current page and backed it out so we could use diff on it. ;) But yeah, mostly looked good to me. 17:07:27 * Khaytsus 17:07:41 * Sonar_Guy 17:07:54 One question I have on it 17:08:03 * nirik hasn't heard much feedback from others. 17:08:16 In the past we had a probation for new ops, did we want to add that back in? 17:08:36 We should 90 days wasn't it 17:08:53 Sonar_Gal: Yeah 3 months/90 days 17:09:10 well, I'm not sure what that means... ? 17:09:19 The problem being, what does it mean 17:09:23 that their status can be removed by anyone for any reason? or ? 17:09:31 What are the expectations and repercussions 17:09:35 or at least removed more easily than voting them out? 17:09:41 nirik, sorry last week of school last week and this week so no time to reply to emails. Finished school yesterday and at school at 7am for rotc practice today 17:10:12 Sonar_Gal: we have until next week to vote on and work on this. 17:10:14 * nirik notes he also has been swamped, and would be fine with further discussion on this draft. perhaps we can get it so everyone is happy with it. ;) 17:10:16 Before it was 90 days of bot-ops and if they couldn't handle the situations correctly they were removed. 17:10:41 This gives time to see if these people can be an op in the channels they have bot ops in 17:10:55 or of they need to go full op or just stay bot op 17:11:03 Sonar_Gal: can we get together as a small group before next weeks meeting and work out the language for this? 17:11:34 EvilBob, Won't be till Tues or Wed with the holiday this weekend and graduation 17:11:36 Sonar_Gal: I agree with the 90days as long as we have a meaning to it. 17:11:53 Sonar_Gal: I can make myself available on Tuesday 17:11:55 ok 17:12:06 * nirik isn't sure it makes sense, but could be persuaded. 17:12:23 #info further discussion about a probation period for new ops 17:12:26 * dcr226 prepares the persuasion equipment 17:12:32 * nirik runs for his life 17:12:35 nirik: I think we can work on it in a small group and add it to the ticket for consideration 17:12:36 ;-) 17:12:46 sounds good to me. 17:12:55 that works 17:12:57 any other comments on this ticket? or should we move along? 17:13:03 next 17:13:09 Next 17:13:16 #topic ticket 107 - Mass Removal Of Stagnant Voting Members 17:13:36 so, are we ready to tally here? 17:13:40 or want more time? 17:13:58 I'll make a comment on the other ticket about the probation item 17:14:01 I thought we were not removing op's unless they wanted to be removed 17:14:11 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/107 17:14:26 If they have not been heard from should they be kept? 17:14:34 some bounce in and out when they have time and other's just have no time right now 17:14:37 Sonar_Gal: under the current rules ops can be removed if there are votes to do so. 17:14:44 oh ok 17:15:02 Some of those OPs might not even repond or pay attention anymore 17:15:19 I'm fine with removing everyone who didn't reply to the ticket indicating that they wished to remain/stay involved. 17:15:35 -1 to kanarip as he is in fedora and social and does help or chat when he has time 17:15:42 but I am -1 to any of those people who did reply saying they wanted to be involved. 17:15:44 He has a different nick in -social 17:16:06 Also in the case jsmith he was never elected in to an ops position and in the past we have never had a provision for honorary special privs 17:16:06 Yes, if anyone wants to remain on the list, I say remove them from the cut 17:16:35 He was only added to being an op as he was FPL 17:16:35 EvilBob: we never had a clear process for adding people in the past... 17:16:52 He is the only one on the list that I see keeping 17:16:53 nirik: we have always voted on ops 17:17:09 nirik: Since the start of the SIG 17:17:10 * dcr226 is -1 for thomasj and mharris 17:17:24 most were given op's by spot cause it was needed and most are not around now 17:17:54 kanarip, got op's before the sig but is around and helps and chats in -social 17:17:58 actually I don't see jsmith as an op anywhere 17:18:11 nirik, he's just a member of the sig afaik 17:18:12 he was only an op as the FPL 17:18:17 I'm cool with keeping thomasj, if mharris wants to be an op still I'm fine with that also, if he just want's a voice thenthere is the "voting memeber" option in the proposed changes. 17:18:27 Sonar_Gal: he's not in any of the access lists. 17:18:52 nirik, kanarip ? 17:18:56 or jsmith? 17:19:00 jsmith: 17:19:14 ah ok 17:19:26 nirik: So if jsmith not an op and only a "voting member" I am fine with that staying 17:19:32 so, where are we here. It's a bit of a muddle with all the people in one ticket. 17:19:44 EvilBob: that seems to be the case... 17:19:50 from what I can see. 17:19:58 nirik: How about I clean up the ticket and make it more clear who is what 17:20:16 nirik: we can vote things next week I would think. 17:20:19 EvilBob: could you add a running tally too? 17:20:37 nirik: Yeah that was my plan, who voted and what they voted 17:20:44 sounds great to me. 17:20:52 any objections or further ideas? 17:21:00 I'll try to work on that today 17:21:03 well....you can make it a bit easier: 17:21:04 We need to look at the -social list of op's also and remove a few that are inactive 17:21:08 #info will collect up the votes in ticket and clarify. 17:21:31 there are a couple of members who have already intinated that they have no issue with their removal....surely these can just go, with a view to making the list smaller? 17:21:40 warren was one iirc 17:22:04 sure, I'm fine with that... no reason to keep someone against their will 17:22:12 dcr226: Agreed 17:22:16 agree 17:22:36 I can clean those up as they appear. 17:22:48 #agreed will remove folks who no longer wish to be involved and say so 17:22:51 nirik: Is it OK if I go with the classifications of members as in the proposal? 17:23:06 op vs voting ? or ? 17:23:10 Yeah 17:23:24 I wonder if this would be better as a temporary page on the wiki? A table of members maybe? 17:23:29 op and/or Voting member 17:23:39 dcr226: Damn good idea 17:23:57 dcr226: I'll set up a sandbox to play in 17:24:01 * dcr226 avoids any wiki-wrangling usually 17:24:16 dcr226: As long as I get input I can handle it 17:24:17 EvilBob: so, folks who are not ops but have been invited to help out/provide feedback in the -ops channel, are voting members? or is there another state there/ 17:24:51 nirik: I think that invitees to -ops are different than the "voting upper class" 17:25:11 Thought we decided only Sig/Fas could vote 17:25:23 Sonar_Gal: Right 17:25:26 ok, so then there needs to be another state for that? invitee? 17:25:29 that is something else we need to get worked out 17:25:36 nirik: I think it is covered 17:25:49 I will review the draft and make sure 17:26:12 I think we can move on and work on this in the sandbox and on the ticket 17:26:22 ok, so, clean up the current ticket and add a vote tally, I will remove people who want to be removed this week, and the rest we can finish up next week? 17:26:36 Sounds fair to me 17:26:38 +1 17:26:43 +1 17:26:47 cool. 17:26:57 #topic ticket 105 - #fedora-social and #fedora channel nomination N3LRX 17:27:10 shall we vote on this? or do we want further discussion? 17:27:23 THis is a discussion meeting on this ticket 17:27:36 * dcr226 +1, don't think this will need discussion 17:27:36 as noted in the ticket 17:27:41 to clarify: I can't see anyone objecting 17:27:50 oh...ok, my bad...pre-emptive +1 then ;-) 17:27:59 * nirik is +1, but if we want to wait another week for voting I don't care. 17:28:12 I have no problems with N3LRX getting op's in those channels he is level headed and normally fun to be around 17:28:14 from the ticket "I'm going to change the vote date to 2012-05-31 to allow discussion on 2012-05-24. Both the nominee and I can not make the meeting (discussion) this week, 2012-05-17." 17:28:35 ok 17:28:50 I think it's fair that we follow that as I posted it last week 17:29:09 * dcr226 is cool with that 17:29:11 sure, fine with me. 17:29:12 ok 17:29:17 N3LRX: anything to add? ;) 17:29:21 NEXT! 17:29:58 I enjoy working with the sig and look forward to becoming more involved. 17:30:02 ok, moving along. :) 17:30:08 thanks N3LRX 17:30:11 #topic ticket 112 - Improper use of zodbot op abilities in #fedora (nb) 17:30:22 N3LRX: You are an asset 17:30:29 I've removed zodbot from the autoop list, so it shouldn't have any op privs anymore. 17:30:37 EvilBob, you are an ass 17:30:40 asset* 17:30:45 With that, I personally am fine saying 'don't do this' and closing the ticket. 17:30:46 damn you key 17:30:47 ;-) 17:30:48 dcr226: Tell me something I don't know? 17:30:51 LOL 17:31:04 * dcr226 couldn't resist that one 17:31:28 nirik: So zodbot can not get or give ops in any of our channels, correct? 17:31:44 yep. 17:31:48 it was set to 'auto op' 17:31:54 so when it rejoined chanserv would op it 17:32:05 that is no longer the case 17:32:05 it is still capable of getting +o on -ops 17:32:17 oh? did I miss one? 17:32:19 * nirik fixes 17:32:38 nirik: while we are on the access list item 17:32:52 no, it was just voiced there. 17:32:56 nirik: nb was given ops in the access list for -social 17:33:27 yeah. and the bot. 17:33:36 Sonar_Gal: You remember the probation bit better than most of us, would this be incorrect he should be on the bot only? 17:33:47 bot only for 90 days 17:34:02 Then if he is voted to be a full op after the 90 days 17:34:03 * nirik notes thats no where in our current policies. ;) but I don't care much 17:34:13 I will vote +1 to agree with Sonar_Gal 17:34:23 That's what it was before the last write up 17:34:35 hopefully We can get all that fixed next week 17:34:40 nirik: lets not get in to the lackings in the "current policies" 17:34:44 ;) 17:34:50 how about we wait on that until we approve the new stuff... 17:34:59 then we can also apply it retroactively 17:35:02 if we like 17:35:20 Sonar_Gal: That good with you? 17:35:38 ok 17:35:53 I'm cool with that 17:36:02 ok, shall we move on then? 17:36:11 Sorry for adding things to the ticket discussion 17:36:16 NEXT! 17:36:22 2 more tickets. ;) 17:36:22 #topic ticket 110 - Release ban requested for user OzBorne in #fedora 17:36:38 I am naturally +1 to banning him 17:36:50 I would be against the ban if the user would appologize or say they were going to improve or anything really... 17:36:51 EvilBob, that means you are -1 to the ticket 17:37:13 he was trying to comment there this morning, but couldn't get logged in. 17:37:15 nirik: they have done so in the past and gone back on it 17:37:22 yep. 17:37:37 so, I'm sadly +1 and hope next release they will be better. 17:37:43 nirik: calling ops from the french channel on the phone is a perfect example 17:37:44 * dcr226 thinks the user isn't currently banned 17:37:55 he isnt 17:37:55 dcr226: they aren't. They had a week and it just expired. 17:37:59 dcr226: no, the one week ban just expired 17:38:04 ok, let me break this down a sec 17:38:11 and if it happens they get banned for the remainder of the life cycle 17:38:20 the ticket is to request the removal of a ban, which has actually expired 17:38:22 He only had a week ban that was lifted this morning 17:38:32 dcr226: no, it is for a Fedora™ release 17:38:32 so the ticket is null and void, close... WONTFIX 17:38:38 ahhhhh 17:38:50 ok ok, I grokked "Release" as, release the ban 17:38:55 it is a release ban not a ban release 17:39:00 I'll note the first thing they did this morning was to come in and complain about this ticket. 17:39:28 I'm not sure what they said this morning 17:39:35 I just know they said it to me 17:39:38 in the interests of "policy", I'm -1 to the ticket...and I'll explain why. The user has just expired a 1 week ban, and hasn't gotten themselves re-banned as yet 17:39:46 my shout would be, the next ban is a release ban 17:39:54 +1 17:39:56 * dcr226 hopes that made any sort of sense 17:39:58 dcr226: They were release banned in the past 17:40:17 It's a "preemptive strike" 17:40:20 yeah 17:40:31 has happened what 2 or 3 releases now 17:40:32 I'm not sure I'm personally +1 for a pre-empt 17:40:46 but obviously I won't loose sleep over it, just voicing an opinion :) 17:41:10 * nirik is ok either way. I'm sure they will mess up again and get the ban, but if we don't want to wait... 17:41:18 nirik, I agree...it will be within days 17:41:29 As they said in the movie industry, No redeeming social value, so it gets X and not R 17:41:29 We'll leave the rope out for them 17:42:14 so... whats the consensus here then? 17:42:24 So who here is +1 for the ban? 17:42:29 vote tally time :) 17:42:31 * dcr226 -1 17:42:38 or -1 for not ban (yet) 17:42:38 +1 17:42:43 +1 17:42:44 -1 let him hang himself again 17:42:56 ooer...deadlock....lets wrestle!! 17:43:06 Khaytsus, ? 17:43:07 Fair enough, let him swing 17:43:11 * dcr226 gets his clothes off....ready! 17:43:17 +1 why waste our time with it 17:43:24 its gold :) 17:43:31 blind! 17:43:39 Heh 17:43:40 at 3-2 we have not reached a "broad consensus" IMO 17:43:48 yep, good for me 17:44:28 nirik: Add a final warning note to the ticket if you would please. 17:44:32 so, close the ticket taking no action? ask for more voting? 17:44:55 I can try... I don't suspect they will listen... ;) 17:44:58 nirik: Just close it, time will handle it I think. 17:45:08 ok. 17:45:09 * dcr226 doesn't think it will last long either fwiw 17:45:10 Listen or not, we documented it 17:45:25 #agreed will wait and see if they require more banning for further actions 17:45:32 #topic ticket 111 - Improve handling of unregistered users 17:45:42 so, I don't think there's much we can do here. 17:45:55 technically speaking the ideas aren't really possible. ;( 17:45:55 agreed...close WONTFIX imho 17:45:55 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/111 17:45:58 Can't fix stupid. 17:45:58 I actuallly helped 2 users get set up this week 17:46:10 No system is slow also 17:46:14 Khaytsus: "Here's your sign" 17:46:25 They don't get the emails as fast as they think they should 17:46:52 The user that filed the ticket that was not the case however 17:47:00 Correct 17:47:06 their client was joining too fast 17:47:08 I too get dumped into unreg even with server password AND a delay. Annoys me too. But it's a freenode problem as far as I can tell. Some people have more trouble than others. 17:47:12 I helped 2 and neither or them filed a ticket 17:47:13 I helped them with that 17:47:17 Can't fix it on our end, and I do _not_ want to remove the +r 17:47:40 Khaytsus: from the channel topic "Depending on your client "/set irc_join_delay 10" to delay joining 10 seconds" 17:47:41 yeah, we have gone over this. 17:47:49 and over.....and over 17:47:58 nirik: close it "dead horse" 17:48:01 ;) 17:48:03 we could kill the redirect and make people not be able to speak until registered... but then they just get confused 17:48:16 We need that as a ticket option 17:48:16 anyhow, yeah, +1... sorry, not a way to fix. 17:48:22 heh 17:48:25 #topic Open Floor 17:48:29 anything for open floor? 17:48:53 quick recap 17:48:57 I really hope to get feedback on the amendment item 17:49:11 We are going to work on the sig this week. 17:49:18 Tuesday 17:49:22 hold up...weren't we going to do something with the feedback spammer? 17:49:29 Yup the "probation" bit 17:49:43 EvilBob, and a few other things that need to be added 17:49:54 dcr226: Yeah we were going to drop it two weeks ago IIRC until the release 17:50:05 Sonar_Gal: Right 17:50:09 dcr226: who? 17:50:21 nirik: fedbot 17:50:22 oh yeah. 17:50:24 nirik, the fedbot feedback spammer...we were going to switch it off for a bit 17:50:26 we should do that now. 17:50:29 hello guys did the meting started yet? 17:50:29 I just forgot. 17:50:30 It's kind of late now 17:50:36 cyberworm54: which meeting are you looking for? 17:50:46 lets stop it now and turn it on release night eve. 17:50:54 nirik, +1 17:50:58 nirik infrastructure 17:50:58 nirik: +1 17:51:05 cyberworm54: in 9minutes here. 17:51:11 cyberworm54: no this is the IRC SIG 17:51:12 cyberworm54: so you are early. ;) 17:51:13 nirik thank you 17:51:30 Sonar_Gal: back to your recap 17:51:41 #agreed will stop feedback now and re-enable before release. 17:51:41 Anything else? 17:52:06 EvilBob, the sig for op's powers 17:52:28 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/108 Work on this week, vote on Thursday 17:52:35 correct 17:52:55 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/107 Vote next week I will work on a wiki page for voting 17:53:15 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/105 vote on Thursday 17:53:28 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/112 Handled 17:53:34 Gotta run, meeting 17:53:49 that should cover it 17:53:51 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/110 Let'em swing 17:54:10 https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/111 Closed, Dead Horse 17:54:18 Put a bow on it 17:54:33 yeah 17:54:37 Lots to do this week 17:54:47 ok that should cover it 17:54:55 s/this/every 17:54:57 ;) 17:54:58 ok, thanks for coming everyone! 17:55:01 #endmeeting