[gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs: 20100208.txt

[Mart Raudsepp (leio)]

leio        10/02/08 21:32:54

  Added:                20100208.txt
  Log:
  Add raw log for February 8, 2010 meeting

Revision  Changes    Path
1.1                  xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20100208.txt

file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20100208.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup
plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20100208.txt?rev=1.1&content-type=text/plain

Index: 20100208.txt
===================================================================
22:00:44 <Calchan>	alright, woodpecker's clock says it's time
22:00:51 <Calchan>	do we have everybody?
22:01:01 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse will be late and is excused
22:01:02 <scarabeus>	yep
22:01:18 *	ulm is here
22:01:26 <leio>	here
22:01:28 <Calchan>	we had leio and solar just a few minutes ago
22:01:37 -->	FuzzyRay (~pvarner@gentoo/developer/FuzzyRay) has joined #gentoo-council
22:02:06 <Calchan>	can somebody please set +m whil I take care of some of the logistics?
22:02:12 ---	leio sets mode +m #gentoo-council
22:02:54 <Calchan>	oh, I'm just seeing tobias may not be with us today
22:03:17 <solar>	he voted already in case he can't make it. i take that as being present (not a slacker)
22:03:25 <Betelgeuse>	here
22:03:37 <Betelgeuse>	got intoo the car
22:03:43 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, wow, I hope you didn't lose your driver's license ;o)
22:03:50 <scarabeus>	:]
22:03:51 <Betelgeuse>	let's see how long the battery lasts
22:03:57 <Betelgeuse>	I am not driving :)
22:04:23 <Calchan>	ok
22:04:25 <Betelgeuse>	3G sucks phone battery like hell
22:04:31 <Betelgeuse>	and it's already low
22:04:42 <Calchan>	so we have everybodu except for tobias who will be excused
22:04:54 <Calchan>	who wants to chair?
22:04:57 <Betelgeuse>	no
22:05:11 <leio>	I don't think we have any excusing concept per our current rules, unfortunately
22:05:48 <Calchan>	leio, we don't, youre right
22:06:09 <scarabeus>	we might create some, because he at least cared about voting, (so he is not slacking)
22:06:23 <leio>	we have voted to not being able to change GLEP39 on our own
22:06:32 <Betelgeuse>	not do that now
22:06:53 <Betelgeuse>	get into the aganda please
22:06:59 <leio>	yes please
22:07:01 <Calchan>	before we go to deep in discussions ...
22:07:03 <Calchan>	who wants to chair?
22:07:07 <Calchan>	as usual I volunteer to chair if nobody doesn't, but don't let that stop you
22:07:11 <Betelgeuse>	so much on plate
22:07:28 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: with lack of vlunteers feel free
22:07:32 <Betelgeuse>	I would if I had a connection
22:07:37 <solar>	Calchan: just go. Betelgeuse is on limited phone battery.
22:07:42 <Calchan>	alright then
22:07:51 <Calchan>	any remarks regarding the agenda?
22:08:01 -->	Zorry (~zorry@fu/coder/zorry) has joined #gentoo-council
22:08:26 <Calchan>	ok, let's switch to the first topic then
22:08:36 <Calchan>	glep 58
22:09:00 <leio>	(as for 1.1, I'm logging and will be committing the raw log post-meeting before sleep)
22:09:01 <Calchan>	I hope you have all read the agenda items and the material that was linked in there in order to make that a quick vote if possible
22:09:16 <Calchan>	leio, thanks, I forgot abou tthat
22:09:25 <scarabeus>	i did read them
22:09:27 <Betelgeuse>	I always log
22:09:49 <Calchan>	so, does anybdoy have any comment regarding glep 58?
22:09:54 <Calchan>	if not we'll proceed to vote
22:09:55 <Betelgeuse>	I read allthe GLEPS during gregkh's talk
22:10:08 <Betelgeuse>	after which robbat2 committed some stuff
22:10:30 <leio>	can we change any grammatical things after acceptance or not? :)
22:10:32 <solar>	Calchan: only thing is that the timestamps seem to differ. You list 6-12 months while robin noted 18months .
22:10:33 <ulm>	Calchan: shouldn't we vote on 60 first?
22:10:42 <ulm>	it's a prerequisite of 58
22:11:49 <Calchan>	ulm good point
22:12:03 <Calchan>	so what's the general feeling, do you guys want to vote on 60 forst?
22:12:31 <Betelgeuse>	fine b me
22:12:34 <Calchan>	now that ulm says it, it seems logical to me although I don't mind too much
22:12:50 <Calchan>	let's discuss/vote 60 first then
22:12:55 <leio>	yes, we can do 60 first as a prerequisite. As for comments about 60 I can't phantom a case where AUX would really have to be duplicated with a new type of entry
22:13:16 <leio>	as I don't see any of the new ones covering package directories
22:13:27 <leio>	any files in package directories*
22:14:03 <ulm>	leio: OTHER covers them
22:14:28 <ulm>	if they aren't in EXEC anyway
22:14:35 <leio>	"Choosing a file", point 5 suggests otherwise?
22:14:39 <Betelgeuse>	Were'n't comments supposed to be before the meeting
22:14:48 <Betelgeuse>	so that we an just vote today
22:15:00 <scarabeus>	yeah just voting was supposed
22:15:09 <Betelgeuse>	so let's do that
22:15:29 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse is right, leio and ulm if you consider the above to be a blocker then just vote no please, ok?
22:15:35 <Calchan>	and I vote yes
22:15:48 <ulm>	I vote yes for glep 60
22:15:50 <Betelgeuse>	yes
22:15:53 <scarabeus>	yes
22:16:18 <solar>	I vote yes on all of them
22:16:26 <Calchan>	leio?
22:16:42 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: Might be easier to ask if someone objects to any of them
22:16:44 <Betelgeuse>	I don't
22:16:51 <leio>	I see what is meant there, but it should be more clearly written
22:16:52 <leio>	I vote yes
22:16:59 <Betelgeuse>	Then we can use time more efficiently
22:17:18 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, technically we have to vote o each of then individually, and it can be done quickly so let's do it
22:17:25 <Betelgeuse>	Calchan: ok
22:18:03 <Calchan>	NeddySeagoon just reminded me that we hae a missing member who sent in his vote by mail
22:18:40 <Calchan>	but as we don't have a rule for that I told him we can't use votes by mail
22:18:48 <Calchan>	we'll have to discuss that someday though
22:18:52 <Calchan>	ok, 60 is go
22:18:57 <Calchan>	let's vote on 58 now
22:19:04 <scarabeus>	58 - yes
22:19:09 <ulm>	yes for 58
22:19:11 <leio>	58 - yes
22:19:14 <Calchan>	yes for 58
22:19:18 <solar>	yep
22:19:42 <Betelgeuse>	yes
22:19:50 <Calchan>	58 is accepted too
22:20:03 <Calchan>	let's vote on 59 now
22:20:09 <Betelgeuse>	yes
22:20:14 <solar>	yes to all
22:20:27 <scarabeus>	59 - yep
22:20:32 <ulm>	yes for 59
22:20:44 <Calchan>	yes here too
22:20:51 <leio>	yes
22:20:55 <solar>	Do any council ppl vote no on any of robins gleps? perhaps we can save some time per Betelgeuse suggestion?
22:21:06 <scarabeus>	solar: we have to actively name it anyway
22:21:15 <scarabeus>	due to proccess as i see it
22:21:27 <leio>	I'll be curious how zac will do whirlpool though :)
22:21:48 <Calchan>	leio, we talked of using external binaries
22:22:00 <leio>	not important for the meeting
22:22:01 <Calchan>	59 is go so we only have 61 left now
22:22:05 <Calchan>	yes on 61
22:22:28 <Betelgeuse>	yes
22:22:34 <scarabeus>	yup
22:22:36 <ulm>	abstain on 61
22:23:54 <Calchan>	yes from me
22:24:37 <leio>	no (due to the part covering per-package manifests)
22:25:11 <Calchan>	we already know solar wnated to vote yes on 61, although if you could confirm that would be nice
22:25:59 <Calchan>	so we have 4-2 for glep 61
22:26:17 <solar>	pita :p
22:26:18 <solar>	yes
22:26:29 <Calchan>	solar, that's my second name ;o)
22:26:48 <ulm>	Calchan: I see 4 yes 1 no 1 abstention
22:26:59 <Calchan>	ulm, indeed
22:27:27 <Betelgeuse>	I am almost home. Will move from car to apparatement
22:27:35 <Calchan>	ulm, I'll scan you a copy of my conting sheet to prove you I did note your abstention ;o)
22:27:42 <Calchan>	Betelgeuse, ok
22:27:57 -->	reavertm (~quassel@gentoo/developer/reavertm) has joined #gentoo-council
22:28:41 <Calchan>	alright, any comments about these gleps?
22:29:11 <Calchan>	if there aren't any we'll switch to the next topic
22:29:26 <Calchan>	here's how it will work though: it'
22:29:27 <solar>	only that he finish editing them to orig spec that we had agreed on
22:29:37 -->	antarus (~antarus@gentoo/developer/antarus) has joined #gentoo-council
22:29:38 <leio>	well, I'm supposed to keep my mouth shut, as I'm late with comments ;)
22:29:58 <solar>	leio: don't let that hold you back. If you have a concern raise it
22:30:08 <Calchan>	s an open ended discussion, I will ask you to conclude before 2100UTC since we are a few minutes late
22:30:24 <Calchan>	at which point we'll conclude the meeting wehatever the outcome of the discussion
22:30:27 <leio>	glep 60 is confusing about AUX
22:30:27 <Calchan>	agreed?
22:30:49 <Calchan>	leio, let's discuss that during the open floor
22:31:02 <Calchan>	ok, let's discuss the VDB issue
22:31:18 <Calchan>	I have proosed a few topics, but feel free to add more
22:31:37 <Calchan>	Do we care about VDB caches currently not being compatible across
22:31:38 <Calchan>	package managers?
22:32:09 <scarabeus>	would be nice to have it same, at least for us (read me) who have both pkgcore and portage :]
22:32:12 <solar>	While it would be nice. I would leave that up to the pkg-mgr maintainers
22:33:31 <Calchan>	the point is if we don't care there's nothing that prevents package manager maintainers to experiment with various stuff without needing a timestamp or other mechanism
22:33:46 <Calchan>	it would make many people lives easier though
22:34:24 <Calchan>	here ws another question, but we can still discuss the previous one at the same time
22:34:42 <Calchan>	Do we want to develop a way to work with more than one type of VDB cache (similar to Brian's proposal or not) or do we prefer investing our time into developing a new VDB?
22:34:54 <solar>	neither
22:35:04 <Calchan>	solar, can you expand a bit?
22:35:32 <solar>	if you read up to the last thing I said. It still holds true for this statement
22:36:13 <solar>	but to go into more details. The VDB is imo outside of our scope at this time. it's not PMS. The PMS ppl clearly don't want it in. I happen to think they are right.
22:36:44 <Calchan>	solar, talkig about PMS, is a VDB cache EAPI material, i.e. should it be defined in PMS?
22:36:59 <solar>	No I don't think so.
22:37:10 <leio>	how can it even be...
22:37:18 <leio>	(EAPI material)
22:37:19 <solar>	portage for example allows the use of more then one type of vdb backend.
22:37:31 <solar>	and I would hate to limit them to 1 type.
22:38:04 <solar>	so if we define anything at this time. I feel we would harm future growth more then help it
22:38:28 <Calchan>	leio, agreed, on the other hand I think it's worth thinking whether even not being EAPI material if it shouldn't be in PMS anyway
22:38:31 <leio>	We keep trying to slap things under EAPIs that can't be, they cover packages and to provide an upgrade path. That doesn't work for an uniform all-covering cache
22:38:49 <Calchan>	solar, on of the remark was about it not being versioned, meaning that it could be
22:39:19 <leio>	(nor profiles/ in my opinion, but that's some old somewhat never-ending discussion)
22:39:28 <Calchan>	leio, that all boild down to: should PMS only cover EAPIs or can it be broader?
22:39:34 <leio>	the movement is towards not relaying on VDB in packages, I think that's good
22:39:43 -->	PSYCHO___ (~scarabeus@gentoo/developer/scarabeus) has joined #gentoo-council
22:39:43 ---	ChanServ gives channel operator status to PSYCHO___
22:40:00 <leio>	to actually support these other types of VDB in portage (built_with_use == bad, etc)
22:40:07 <--	scarabeus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
22:40:43 ---	PSYCHO___ is now known as scarabeus
22:40:46 <leio>	I think package manager authors should be able to innovate to come up with the most efficient cache
22:40:48 <Calchan>	so another question now: what do you think about Brian's proposal in general?
22:41:01 <Calchan>	both form the necessity and implementation point of view
22:41:18 -->	[mrf] (~mrf@unaffiliated/mrf/x-6141039) has joined #gentoo-council
22:41:35 <scarabeus>	i think we need such thing
22:42:57 <Calchan>	scarabeus, thanks, any other opinions?
22:43:10 <scarabeus>	the proposal sounds ok to me (thats why i wanted to talk about it :P) but i am not exactly what you would call expert in that area :]
22:44:11 <Calchan>	mine is that there doesn't seem to be any harm caused by it, so if it helps some of us I would tend to say why not
22:45:33 <solar>	it's outside of our scope. But personal feeling is there is no harm in updating the mtime of /var/db/pkg
22:46:03 <leio>	yes, why not, while we are sort of stuck with current VDB and if it increases performance, but not sure if I'd want to decide on that if package manager/tool authors could just agree on it :)
22:47:13 <Calchan>	leio, agreed here, I'm looking forward to the day they can all talk without us, on the other hand I consider them disagreeing a healthy thing
22:47:53 <leio>	if that leads to a best solution with discussions..
22:48:00 <Calchan>	so I didn't think we could reach that stage, but are we ready to make a decision on Brian's proposal?
22:48:11 <solar>	no
22:48:15 <--	reavertm has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
22:48:26 <Calchan>	solar, I was going to add the following:
22:48:42 <solar>	still no. This is an open discussion. Not a vote :p
22:49:31 <scarabeus>	solar: he dont want to hear yes/no i guess :] that is not point of open floor :D
22:50:03 <Calchan>	scarabeus, this isn't the open floor it's topic 6
22:50:44 <scarabeus>	i am bit slightly off :P
22:50:49 <scarabeus>	dont bite me :P
22:50:51 <scarabeus>	mea culpa
22:52:42 <scarabeus>	not open floor but open discussion
22:52:44 <scarabeus>	:]
22:53:13 <solar>	Calchan: did you have something else to add?
22:53:39 <Calchan>	to conclude with this my opinion is that I would be happy that any package manager who wants to join in this vdb timestamp feature is welcome to do so
22:53:51 <Calchan>	solar, I was typing, I'm a bit slow today ;o)
22:54:04 <scarabeus>	ok so my statement on the matter is that: If zac implemented it in portae and was the same implemented in pkgcore i would be happy person so i would like to see that happen
22:54:06 <solar>	The question was "but are we ready to make a decision on Brian's proposal" (for that statement alone. I'm saying no. No as it's outside of the scope.) If the VDB is going to be documented it's on a per pkg mgr basis at this point. We cant impose rules unless all the VDB equivs get a unified format.spec. Then that brings us back to hampering innovation.
22:54:25 <Calchan>	if any of you want to summarize his opinion now it would help the poor guy who is going to make the meeting summary
22:54:58 <Calchan>	solar, thanks, that's a nice summary from you
22:55:19 <Calchan>	solar, and btw it's perfectly ok to answer no to any of my questions ;o)
22:55:20 <leio>	on the other hand, if some package manager isn't participating in the vdb timestamp feature, it means it is not usable if user is using both a package manager not doing it, and one doing it
22:55:45 <solar>	but it's not a bad idea. Zac and ferringb are welcome to do it. think they are even already
22:55:48 <Calchan>	leio, I would say then it's up to the users of this package manager to lobby the maintainers to ad the feature
22:56:15 <leio>	meanwhile it breaks everything for the participating package manager or something
22:56:34 <ulm>	it's only a problem if they use more than one pkg manager at the same time
22:57:28 <Calchan>	ulm, in the future it would only be a problem if they use one package manager that doesn't have the feature alibng with others
22:57:47 <ulm>	right
22:57:49 <Calchan>	ulm, as long as they use only package managers that have the feature they can use as many as they want
22:58:25 <Calchan>	are we done on this topic?
22:58:59 <leio>	not sure how one would summarize this topic in a meeting summary, indeed :)
22:59:17 <Calchan>	leio, if you want I'll take care of it
22:59:37 <Calchan>	let's conclude the meeting then
22:59:49 <Calchan>	actions
23:00:05 <Calchan>	leio, do you want to investigate this AUX issue?
23:00:12 -->	PSYCHO___ (~scarab@gentoo/developer/scarabeus) has joined #gentoo-council
23:00:13 ---	ChanServ gives channel operator status to PSYCHO___
23:00:20 <Calchan>	although we did accept the glep we can always ask for some minor tuning
23:00:30 <leio>	what kind of acceptance we gave to these gleps? Can they be changed anymore at all?
23:00:50 <Calchan>	leio, we are the council, we have powerz ;o)
23:00:51 <solar>	leio: yes. That was one of our conitions
23:00:59 <Betelgeuse>	leio: even GLEP 1 should be updated
23:01:28 <solar>	they have to be fixed up before changes are pushed around in the tree.
23:01:38 <leio>	I will talk with Robin
23:01:42 <Calchan>	any other actions for next meeting that I'm not seeing?
23:01:47 <solar>	we really rushed them. It's sad robin was not here
23:02:19 <Betelgeuse>	I wouldn't say the time available for people to discuss rushing.
23:02:49 <Calchan>	7.2 Who takes care of the summary and log for this meeting? When?
23:02:58 <Calchan>	I can do the summary if that helps
23:03:10 <Calchan>	unless leio or anybody else wnats to do it
23:03:15 <solar>	Betelgeuse: rushing as in robin did not finish documenting everything in the gleps. Some of the data needs to be yanked etc.
23:03:58 <Calchan>	wo will commit the logs and when?
23:04:03 <leio>	as said before, I will commit the log today
23:04:09 <Calchan>	leio, ok thanks
23:04:12 <leio>	(well, after midnight my time)
23:04:37 <Calchan>	next meeting: can we already agree on a date/time or do we discuss it off-list?
23:05:00 <scarabeus>	1 or 8
23:05:07 <scarabeus>	i cant 15.
23:05:16 <scarabeus>	and then 22 and 29 again i can
23:05:20 <Betelgeuse>	I don't have travelling schedule for Mars
23:05:27 <Calchan>	I'd prefer 8, 3 weeks to organize a meeting is short
23:05:40 <solar>	I like the 8th next month. It's a full 4 weeks away.
23:05:43 <scarabeus>	yeah 8 i can
23:05:46 <Calchan>	although I did it this time I had to rush it
23:05:50 <ulm>	8 ok for me too
23:06:19 <Calchan>	ok let's put 8 as a tentative date and confirm that on list during this coming week but no later, ok?
23:06:25 <scarabeus>	ack
23:06:31 <Betelgeuse>	8 is fine
23:06:38 <Calchan>	same time as usual I guess, which is 1 hour earlier than today
23:06:50 <Calchan>	i.e. 1900 UTC
23:07:02 <Calchan>	Who will follow-up discussions and prepare the agenda for the next meeting?
23:07:34 <Calchan>	as usual I volunteer
23:07:44 <Calchan>	but feel free to take that off my plate
23:07:50 <scarabeus>	if is it just reading the mails and putting it together i can help (hey i can at least try :])
23:08:08 <Calchan>	scarabeus, ok thanks, let's be in touch about this then
23:08:46 <scarabeus>	ok my mail is obvious i live in CET and i am on irc most of the time expect monday and thursday :]
23:09:01 <Calchan>	scarabeus, there's a lot of dicussing with people in the background too though, if only to make sure they'll answer on the lists
23:09:19 <solar>	scarabeus: but mondays around 1900 UTC work ok for you in general?
23:09:32 <scarabeus>	yep, basicaly yes
23:09:40 <scarabeus>	i have 3 hours gap there :]
23:10:04 <Calchan>	are you guys ok with opening the floor and ending the meeting?
23:10:12 <Betelgeuse>	yes
23:10:14 <scarabeus>	yep
23:10:39 <ulm>	yes
23:10:39 <leio>	is that open floor discussion not part of a meeting anymore? (for what to commit as raw log)
23:11:15 <Calchan>	leio, feel free to commit whatever's relevant to your eyes, bytes aren't that expensive these days
23:11:52 <leio>	well, that's just why I ask right now, it has more meaning (are council members supposed to try to stick around and participate, etc)
23:12:04 <leio>	anyway, yeah, lets remove moderation, you are chair and say when meeting is over :)
23:12:16 <scarabeus>	:]]
23:12:44 *	solar declares it lunchtime then cya.
23:13:08 ---	scarabeus sets mode -m #gentoo-council
23:13:14 <scarabeus>	so lets see :]
23:13:28 <antarus>	we need tree signing like yesterday
23:13:33 <antarus>	plz2make it happen
23:13:41 <antarus>	I don't even care if it is osprey signing post commit
23:13:43 <antarus>	I'll take anything
23:14:11 <solar>	done
23:19:12 <scarabeus>	its quite quiet open floor
23:19:21 <scarabeus>	i hear the pin to drop :P
23:19:47 <ulm>	scarabeus: don't disturb the silence
23:20:31 <NeddySeagoon>	scarabeus, close the meeting and do a runner
23:21:14 <scarabeus>	:]