1 |
dberkholz 07/11/08 22:22:25 |
2 |
|
3 |
Added: 20071108-summary.txt 20071108.txt |
4 |
Log: |
5 |
Add 8 November meeting. |
6 |
|
7 |
Revision Changes Path |
8 |
1.1 xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108-summary.txt |
9 |
|
10 |
file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108-summary.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup |
11 |
plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108-summary.txt?rev=1.1&content-type=text/plain |
12 |
|
13 |
Index: 20071108-summary.txt |
14 |
=================================================================== |
15 |
amne here |
16 |
betelgeuse absent (1 hour late) |
17 |
dberkholz here |
18 |
flameeyes here |
19 |
lu_zero here |
20 |
vapier absent (no show) |
21 |
uberlord resigned |
22 |
jokey here (replacing uberlord) |
23 |
|
24 |
Agenda: |
25 |
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/52772 |
26 |
|
27 |
Also continuing discussion on CoC enforcement. Proposal: |
28 |
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.council/82 |
29 |
|
30 |
============================================================================== |
31 |
|
32 |
Empty council slot: vote for Jokey to happen on gentoo-council list |
33 |
------------------------------------------------------------------- |
34 |
|
35 |
Jokey is the candidate to replace uberlord [1], and it requires a |
36 |
unanimous council vote [2]. Since not all council members are present, |
37 |
we'll do this vote on the gentoo-council list. All 6 present council |
38 |
members supported Jokey's addition. |
39 |
|
40 |
1. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070208-summary.txt |
41 |
2. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/voting-logs/council-2007-vote-distribution.txt |
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
Daylight savings change: no slacker marks |
45 |
----------------------------------------- |
46 |
|
47 |
In the US and Europe, 2000 UTC shifted by an hour in local time. The |
48 |
email announcement was wrong, so we will not give slacker marks to the |
49 |
two absent council members. |
50 |
|
51 |
vapier needs to fix his script before the next announcement. |
52 |
|
53 |
|
54 |
EAPI=1 approved for use in the main tree |
55 |
---------------------------------------- |
56 |
|
57 |
Stable portage version 2.1.3.12 supports EAPI=1. It's now officially OK |
58 |
to start using it in the main tree. From the ebuild ChangeLog for |
59 |
portage: |
60 |
|
61 |
This release is the first to have support for EAPI-1 (#194876), which |
62 |
includes SLOT dependencies (#174405), IUSE defaults (#174410), and |
63 |
ECONF_SOURCE support for the default src_compile function (#179380). |
64 |
Package maintainers should carefully consider the backward compatibility |
65 |
consequences before defining EAPI="1" in any ebuilds, especially if |
66 |
other packages depend on those ebuilds. See the ebuild(5) and emerge(1) |
67 |
manual pages for EAPI related documentation. |
68 |
|
69 |
EAPI=1 features are documented in PMS as well as the man pages, but they |
70 |
are not yet documented in the devmanual or the dev handbook. |
71 |
|
72 |
Code of Conduct enforcement proposal: generally positive feedback |
73 |
----------------------------------------------------------------- |
74 |
|
75 |
dberkholz sent out a proposal this morning [1], so we just discussed it |
76 |
today instead of voting. Initial feedback from council members was |
77 |
positive. Some concerns came up on the list about time zone differences |
78 |
and coverage, which were brought up again during the meeting. |
79 |
|
80 |
People generally agreed that although the environment is better now, it |
81 |
hasn't been before and won't always be good. |
82 |
|
83 |
lu_zero brought up the point that since things are fairly good now, we |
84 |
don't need to rush through this process and we can take our time and do |
85 |
things right. |
86 |
|
87 |
Council support for the team's actions should not be as controversial |
88 |
with the requirement that all actions be private. |
89 |
|
90 |
The team will need to create the tools to deal with the actions it needs |
91 |
to take (short-term moderation on IRC, mailing lists, and Bugzilla). |
92 |
This could happen during the initial training period suggested on the |
93 |
gentoo-council list. |
94 |
|
95 |
If there's already existing moderation somewhere (for example many of |
96 |
the #gentoo-* IRC channels or the forums), the team will first liaise |
97 |
with them rather than preempt them. All official Gentoo forums must |
98 |
adhere to the CoC, however; having their own moderation does not exclude |
99 |
them from following Gentoo's standards as a whole. |
100 |
|
101 |
The expectation is that successive actions against the same person will |
102 |
increase in length, eventually reaching the 3-day cutoff that requires |
103 |
council approval and forwarding to devrel/userrel. The idea is that if |
104 |
someone keeps violating the CoC after a given length of moderation, it |
105 |
apparently wasn't enough so it shouldn't be repeated. |
106 |
|
107 |
Next month, we will vote on a concrete proposal. |
108 |
|
109 |
1. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.council/82 |
110 |
|
111 |
|
112 |
Baselayout-2: uberlord will continue to maintain it |
113 |
--------------------------------------------------- |
114 |
|
115 |
lu_zero asked whether we had anything to do about baselayout-2 since |
116 |
uberlord resigned. He's continuing to maintain it in a git repository |
117 |
and will remain upstream for it. More details will emerge over time. |
118 |
|
119 |
kingtaco raised the question of trusting external releases and hosts. |
120 |
Some responses suggested that using git may prevent the malicious host, |
121 |
because of the possibility of GPG-signed tags. He mentioned the |
122 |
possibility of the infra team hosting Gentoo-critical repositories with |
123 |
access by non-Gentoo developers. It's just an idea at this point, but |
124 |
he's going to talk to the rest of the infra team. |
125 |
|
126 |
|
127 |
|
128 |
1.1 xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108.txt |
129 |
|
130 |
file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup |
131 |
plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108.txt?rev=1.1&content-type=text/plain |
132 |
|
133 |
Index: 20071108.txt |
134 |
=================================================================== |
135 |
20:01 <@dberkholz> anyone got a web link to the agenda thread? not a whole lot on it |
136 |
20:01 * jokey ties amne to $chair |
137 |
20:01 -!- nox-Hand [i=johnhand@unaffiliated/nox-hand] has joined #gentoo-council |
138 |
20:01 -!- Netsplit anthony.freenode.net <-> irc.freenode.net quits: cruxeternus, peper, koxta |
139 |
20:01 < nox-Hand> Am I too late to talk? |
140 |
20:01 < nox-Hand> And HAI by the way if I can talk |
141 |
20:02 <@dberkholz> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/52772 |
142 |
20:02 -!- Netsplit over, joins: cruxeternus, koxta, peper |
143 |
20:03 <@dberkholz> alright, roll call |
144 |
20:03 <@dberkholz> who's here? |
145 |
20:03 <@amne> amne: |
146 |
20:03 * Flameeyes present |
147 |
20:03 * jokey me |
148 |
20:03 <@amne> uberlord is absent due to his resignation, which also makes it a point for the agenda |
149 |
20:03 <@amne> ah, hi jokey :-) |
150 |
20:04 <@dberkholz> amne: yes, that's on the linked thread |
151 |
20:05 <@amne> dberkholz: yupp |
152 |
20:06 <@amne> so where's the rest? |
153 |
20:06 <@dberkholz> lu_zero, vapier, SpanKY, Betelgeuse: where are ya? |
154 |
20:07 < nox-Hand> Late reply to the roll call, I am here, but not sure if that matters any.. |
155 |
20:07 <@dberkholz> nox-Hand: just council members; feel free to chip in later on, when the discussion you're interested in is happening |
156 |
20:07 <+jokey> nox-Hand: erm nop, council people now... |
157 |
20:07 -!- NeddySeagoon [n=NeddySea@gentoo/developer/NeddySeagoon] has joined #gentoo-council |
158 |
20:08 < nox-Hand> jokey: dberkholz I Figured as much, cheers, I'll start chirping at my allocated chirpy time :] |
159 |
20:09 -!- uberpinguin [n=uberping@unaffiliated/uberpinguin] has joined #gentoo-council |
160 |
20:09 <@amne> hm |
161 |
20:10 * igli gags nox-Hand |
162 |
20:10 <@amne> due to the change to daylight savings in europe the meeting is an hour earlier today |
163 |
20:10 < NeddySeagoon> amne, everyone beaten by the hour change last week ? |
164 |
20:10 <@amne> i guess that could explain why lu_zero and Betelgeuse aren't here (both europeans, aren't they?) |
165 |
20:10 < fmccor> Even US has changed now. |
166 |
20:10 <@Flameeyes> amne, yeah they are, but as fmccor, us already catched up |
167 |
20:11 <@amne> ah |
168 |
20:11 <@dberkholz> can someone help me find the council summary link where it says the next highest voted person will fill an empty spot |
169 |
20:11 <+jokey> so should we delay another bit? ;) |
170 |
20:11 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, should be around february last year |
171 |
20:11 <@amne> council.g.o doesn't work for me right now, anyone else got the same problem? |
172 |
20:12 <@amne> http://c.g.o to be more accurate |
173 |
20:12 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070208-summary.txt |
174 |
20:12 < NeddySeagoon> dberkholz, I don't think it was ever written down in the process but its established as custom and practice now |
175 |
20:12 <+jokey> amne: WORKSFORME |
176 |
20:12 <@Flameeyes> NeddySeagoon, that link above |
177 |
20:12 -!- Netsplit anthony.freenode.net <-> irc.freenode.net quits: musikc, mpagano__, genone, zxy_64 |
178 |
20:12 <@amne> jokey: strange, but as long it works for everyone else :-) |
179 |
20:12 <@lu_zero> cough... |
180 |
20:13 * lu_zero is alive |
181 |
20:13 <@lu_zero> distracted but alive... |
182 |
20:13 < NeddySeagoon> Flameeyes, thank you |
183 |
20:13 -!- Netsplit over, joins: musikc, mpagano__, zxy_64, genone |
184 |
20:13 <@Flameeyes> [I remembered it easily, it was just before I left :)] |
185 |
20:13 <@amne> gentoofan23 just pointed out there still was some confusion: gentoofan23> amne, the time is 15:12 EST right now whereas the e-mail said 16:00 EST so maybe that explains it.. |
186 |
20:14 <@dberkholz> well, that means we'll have 5 of 7 people |
187 |
20:14 <@lu_zero> legal/solar time mismatch? |
188 |
20:14 <@Flameeyes> [21:10] [Whois] Betelgeuse has been idle for 20 hours, 0 minutes, and 20 seconds. |
189 |
20:14 <@Flameeyes> Betelgeuse seems not around |
190 |
20:14 <@dberkholz> the other two should've paid closer attention |
191 |
20:15 <@Flameeyes> mike will probably appear midway through the meeting as usual |
192 |
20:15 <@dberkholz> we might as well move on, today will be primarily discussion |
193 |
20:15 <@lu_zero> ok |
194 |
20:15 <@amne> works for me |
195 |
20:15 <@dberkholz> first item requires no voting |
196 |
20:15 <@Flameeyes> fine |
197 |
20:15 <@dberkholz> we're welcoming jokey to the council, filling the spot left vacant by uberlord |
198 |
20:16 <@Flameeyes> and I lost my liason :) |
199 |
20:16 <+jokey> poor Flameeyes ;) |
200 |
20:16 <@lu_zero> eh... |
201 |
20:16 <@dberkholz> so, welcome jokey! |
202 |
20:16 <@dberkholz> how do we get the ops status fixed? |
203 |
20:17 <+jokey> tomaw should be able to |
204 |
20:17 < tomaw> Hi |
205 |
20:17 <@Flameeyes> /tomaw access #gentoo-council add jokey 30 |
206 |
20:17 <@Flameeyes> :P |
207 |
20:17 < tomaw> You people should really equip yourselves to do this on your own. |
208 |
20:18 < tomaw> Let me check, as I probably shouldn't be doing it without a nod from the right people |
209 |
20:18 <@lu_zero> hmm |
210 |
20:18 <@amne> vapier is listed as channel contact, he should be able to do it |
211 |
20:18 < tomaw> yeah, he can do it, but noone else (bar staff) can |
212 |
20:18 <@dberkholz> tomaw: aren't we the right people? =P |
213 |
20:19 <@lu_zero> what about having all of us marked as contact/with an higher level? |
214 |
20:19 < tomaw> No, freenode requires that the group contact ask staff. group contacts are currently phreak, christel and whoever your recruitment lead is now |
215 |
20:19 <@dberkholz> you can only add people to levels below your own |
216 |
20:19 <@Flameeyes> lu_zero, beside owner and staff, anyone else can add up to (hislevel-1) |
217 |
20:19 < fmccor> tomaw, Betelgeuse is. |
218 |
20:19 <@amne> uhm |
219 |
20:20 <@amne> dberkholz: If they accept and the current Council unanimously accepts the new person, they get the position with a 'reduced' term such that the yearly elections still elect a full group. |
220 |
20:20 < tomaw> fmccor: that's the guy! |
221 |
20:20 <@Flameeyes> fmccor, let's get someone who's around, don't we? :P |
222 |
20:20 <@amne> dberkholz: doesn't that mean we actually need to vote on jokey? |
223 |
20:20 < fmccor> tomaw, phreak might be. |
224 |
20:21 < tomaw> I pinged him already :) |
225 |
20:21 <@dberkholz> amne: it certainly reads that way. i wonder if we already effectively did so on the mailing list thread about it |
226 |
20:21 <+jokey> just do again so we're set ;) |
227 |
20:21 <@Flameeyes> if we were all around we could vote on it, but I doubt Betelgeuse is around now |
228 |
20:22 <@lu_zero> we could just use the email... |
229 |
20:22 <@amne> works for me |
230 |
20:22 <@lu_zero> next item? |
231 |
20:23 <@dberkholz> the daylight savings change mentioned |
232 |
20:23 <@dberkholz> announcement email was wrong, so i say we don't give slacker marks this week |
233 |
20:24 <@amne> yupp |
234 |
20:24 <@lu_zero> fine |
235 |
20:25 <@Flameeyes> oky doky |
236 |
20:25 <@amne> vapier: plz fix your announcement mail kthx :-) |
237 |
20:25 <@dberkholz> alright, next item |
238 |
20:26 <@dberkholz> approving EAPI=1 for use in the main tree |
239 |
20:26 <@dberkholz> i wish Betelgeuse were here for this because he had some points |
240 |
20:27 <@lu_zero> dberkholz which portage version won't be able to handle it? |
241 |
20:27 <@dberkholz> portage has supported the EAPI variable for more than a year, and stable portage (2.1.3.12) now has EAPI=1 support. |
242 |
20:27 <@lu_zero> and how old would it be? |
243 |
20:27 <@lu_zero> fine to start using it then |
244 |
20:28 <@dberkholz> documentation is in PMS, ebuild and emerge manpages, but it should be added to the devmanual and dev handbook |
245 |
20:28 <@lu_zero> I see |
246 |
20:28 <@Flameeyes> what were the finalised features in EAPI=1? |
247 |
20:28 <@dberkholz> This release is the first to have support for EAPI-1 (#194876), which includes SLOT dependencies (#174405), IUSE defaults (#174410), and ECONF_SOURCE support for the default src_compile function (#179380). |
248 |
20:29 <+jokey> slot deps and iuse defaults being the more important parts |
249 |
20:29 <@Flameeyes> I'm fine for it just at slot deps |
250 |
20:29 <@dberkholz> what EAPI=1 means is already finalized, we're just saying it's fine to start using it in gentoo-x86. |
251 |
20:30 <@Flameeyes> yeah |
252 |
20:30 <@dberkholz> i talked to zmedico yesterday and he thought it would be a good idea for the council to approve it |
253 |
20:30 <@lu_zero> it's fine |
254 |
20:30 <@amne> ++ |
255 |
20:30 <+jokey> ack |
256 |
20:31 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, your vote? |
257 |
20:31 <@dberkholz> yes from me |
258 |
20:31 <@Flameeyes> so it's fine for five out of seven (two missing) |
259 |
20:33 <@dberkholz> alright, last agenda item is discussion of the CoC enforcement proposal |
260 |
20:33 <@dberkholz> i got it together too late for a vote |
261 |
20:33 -!- phreak`` [n=phreak``@gentoo/developer/phreak] has joined #gentoo-council |
262 |
20:33 <@lu_zero> dberkholz I read it and seems fine |
263 |
20:34 <@lu_zero> probably I should take a bit of time to rethink it |
264 |
20:34 <+jokey> the idea of it is good imho |
265 |
20:34 <@amne> i also like it |
266 |
20:35 <@Flameeyes> I join lu_zero |
267 |
20:37 -!- mode/#gentoo-council [+o jokey] by ChanServ |
268 |
20:37 <@lu_zero> oh =) |
269 |
20:37 <@amne> duck and cover! |
270 |
20:38 <@amne> so, which points from the proposal need specific discussion? |
271 |
20:38 -!- phreak`` [n=phreak``@gentoo/developer/phreak] has left #gentoo-council ["................. do I need to say anything else ?"] |
272 |
20:39 -!- Netsplit anthony.freenode.net <-> irc.freenode.net quits: musikc, mpagano__, genone, zxy_64 |
273 |
20:39 <@dberkholz> amne: you're probably in the best position to talk about whether my understanding of the situation was correct |
274 |
20:39 <@jokey> I think one valid point was the timezone problem |
275 |
20:39 -!- Netsplit over, joins: musikc, mpagano__, zxy_64, genone |
276 |
20:39 <@dberkholz> yeah, but there are distinct times of day that are much more active than others |
277 |
20:40 <@amne> yeah, i think that's the main point, i'll take a quick look at the mails agani |
278 |
20:40 <@dberkholz> i don't think we need to try for 100% coverage of people watching everywhere every second |
279 |
20:40 <@amne> i also like the idea of having a test run as suggested - during that time we can also evaluate how the coverage works |
280 |
20:40 <@dberkholz> we just need to show that we will enforce it if it's violated |
281 |
20:40 <@lu_zero> there were violations lately? |
282 |
20:41 < fmccor> lu_zero, off and on --- some things devrel sees now are really CoC issues in my opinion. |
283 |
20:42 <@amne> fmccor: agreed |
284 |
20:42 < fmccor> lu_zero, but rather low volume to us. |
285 |
20:42 <@dberkholz> i'm not sure how closely y'all read it for devrel/userrel connections, i did add a line about that |
286 |
20:42 <@lu_zero> fmccor so there isn't a dire need for them |
287 |
20:43 <@lu_zero> _so_ nobody would start talking about us putting them up in hurry because of crisis |
288 |
20:43 <@amne> lu_zero: still things may explode again some day, so we shouldn't wait until then |
289 |
20:43 <@jokey> lu_zero: just that history has proven we could use it from time to time |
290 |
20:43 <@Flameeyes> agreed with amne |
291 |
20:43 <@dberkholz> my earnest hope is that we can create a group of people who spend 99% of the time taking no actions |
292 |
20:43 * jokey resyncs brainlink with amne |
293 |
20:44 <@amne> jokey: get out of my head! :-P |
294 |
20:44 <@amne> dberkholz: yes |
295 |
20:44 <@lu_zero> amne the main point is the second |
296 |
20:44 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, and 1% doing drills organised by us councilers? |
297 |
20:44 <@dberkholz> heh. they could look over old irc logs. =P |
298 |
20:44 < fmccor> lu_zero, remember, devrel typically does not watch for these very quick things unless we happen to see them in passing. |
299 |
20:44 <@lu_zero> since there isn't need we can approve/appoint them |
300 |
20:45 <@lu_zero> s/need/immediate need/ |
301 |
20:46 < NeddySeagoon> My hope is that the council will back the body while they work - and hold a 'lessons learned' after every incident |
302 |
20:47 <@amne> good idea |
303 |
20:47 <@jokey> I don't see a reason to not back stuff up atm, but we'll how stuff goes |
304 |
20:48 <@amne> otherwise the people execute CoC don't know what the council wants in the first place |
305 |
20:48 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: An important point about userrel, Is that userrel hasn't been doing the "user control" role for a long time |
306 |
20:48 <@lu_zero> why not? |
307 |
20:48 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: userrel can definitely have that role, but it's something that has been lost for some time |
308 |
20:48 <@dberkholz> that makes me think of a couple of points. first, the council won't back up decisions it disagrees with. second, the council needs to be careful not to overreact |
309 |
20:48 <@Betelgeuse> hmm it's winter time |
310 |
20:48 <@Betelgeuse> damn it |
311 |
20:48 <@lu_zero> hi Betelgeuse |
312 |
20:48 <@Betelgeuse> stupid UTC |
313 |
20:49 <@amne> Betelgeuse: welcome |
314 |
20:49 <@jokey> heya Betelgeuse |
315 |
20:49 <@dberkholz> Betelgeuse: http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/summary-20071108.txt |
316 |
20:49 <@dberkholz> summary so far |
317 |
20:49 -!- Netsplit anthony.freenode.net <-> irc.freenode.net quits: musikc, mpagano__, genone, zxy_64 |
318 |
20:49 <@amne> dberkholz: agreed, but they still should back up the team doing the work, even if they disagree with a single decision |
319 |
20:50 <@dberkholz> and on the other side of that, the team needs to handle its actions appropriately |
320 |
20:50 -!- Netsplit over, joins: musikc, mpagano__, zxy_64, genone |
321 |
20:50 <@dberkholz> doing the right thing in the wrong way will ruin it |
322 |
20:50 * amne nods |
323 |
20:50 < NeddySeagoon> dberkholz, My point is that the council supports any action in progress until its concluded, so we don't have incidents like the one that killed proctors |
324 |
20:50 < igli> amne's point is critical though, imo |
325 |
20:50 <@Betelgeuse> dberkholz: Did you want my input on something? |
326 |
20:50 <@dberkholz> Betelgeuse: nah, was just mentioning some points you brought up about EAPI=1 |
327 |
20:51 <@amne> i guess a --dry-run phase would help a lot with these issues |
328 |
20:51 < jmbsvicetto> lu_zero: I think that role hasn't been carried by userrel because the current members have focused more on other projects |
329 |
20:51 < NeddySeagoon> dberkholz, The council 'interfering' in a work in progress will undermine the team |
330 |
20:51 <@Betelgeuse> dberkholz: Well it's documented in the current PMS version so that's good. |
331 |
20:52 <@dberkholz> NeddySeagoon: i think that will be difficult if not impossible with the change to only private actions |
332 |
20:52 -!- Tabasco [i=rhcp@gateway/tor/x-91a87846c415d662] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] |
333 |
20:53 <@dberkholz> all the team would do release is anonymous statistics; X people modded for 6 hours; Y for 12 hours; etc |
334 |
20:53 <@dberkholz> s/ do// |
335 |
20:53 < NeddySeagoon> dberkholz, Thats a change I welcome - much procting was done in private anyway |
336 |
20:55 <@dberkholz> Betelgeuse: while you're here; do you support just adding jokey to council? we need unanimous |
337 |
20:55 <@Betelgeuse> dberkholz: sure if he is the next one on the list |
338 |
20:55 <@Betelgeuse> I thought that was already decided by the last counci |
339 |
20:56 <@amne> i think we should also discuss which tools are available for moderation or even needed to implement |
340 |
20:56 <@dberkholz> Betelgeuse: the last council said that the next person would be offered the spot, contingent upon unanimous council approval |
341 |
20:56 <@dberkholz> amne: yes that's very true, i thought about that and didn't add anything to the proposal |
342 |
20:57 <@Betelgeuse> dberkholz: okay |
343 |
20:58 <@amne> last proctors had some mailing list interface (which was done by robbat2 iirc) to block emails from people, was there anything else? |
344 |
20:59 <@jokey> I'm with the mail that stated we don't need another set of moderation for irc and forums where it is in place already |
345 |
20:59 <@jokey> so we don't need more than this interface imho |
346 |
20:59 <@amne> other stuff (that's not implemented, but i think was planned) would have been delaying messages until someone approves they are flame free |
347 |
21:00 <@amne> well, that feature could be potentially useful - otoh if mailing list bans are short term it may not be worth the effort to implement |
348 |
21:00 <@jokey> ack |
349 |
21:00 -!- gentoofan23 [n=gentoofa@gentoo/contributor/gentoofan23] has quit [Client Quit] |
350 |
21:01 <@lu_zero> ++ |
351 |
21:02 <@Flameeyes> [I'm not saying anything because I'm fine for what you're saying :)] |
352 |
21:02 * Philantrop wonders what jokey and lu_zero ack'ed - "potentially useful" or "not worth the effort". |
353 |
21:02 <@amne> also the bans would need to be unset manually after the time of ban/silencing/foo is over |
354 |
21:02 <@dberkholz> jokey: yep, mailing lists and #gentoo-dev are the main things |
355 |
21:02 <@amne> this means people should also be there to unban people in a timely manner |
356 |
21:02 <@dberkholz> might be able to script that sorta thing |
357 |
21:03 <@amne> dberkholz: atm the mailing list has a web-interface for that |
358 |
21:03 <@amne> but that's all technicalities that i think can be solved. i think it would be best to ask robbat2 about these things, too |
359 |
21:03 <@jokey> if needed, scripting it shouldn't be too hard iirc |
360 |
21:03 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: I think that would require some sort of cron for that |
361 |
21:04 <@amne> perhaps he can easily implement a self-destruct timer for bans |
362 |
21:04 < igli> at would be better |
363 |
21:04 <@amne> ban amne@g.o for 12 hours -> done |
364 |
21:04 <@dberkholz> that's really just a detail that can be figured out after we decide whether to do this at all |
365 |
21:04 <@amne> nod |
366 |
21:04 <@dberkholz> let whoever's doing the work deal with it |
367 |
21:04 <@jokey> yup |
368 |
21:05 < NeddySeagoon> amne, it directs mail to /dev/null just now |
369 |
21:05 <@amne> NeddySeagoon: ack |
370 |
21:05 <@amne> is anyone aware of any other big issues that we haven't discussed yet? |
371 |
21:06 <@dberkholz> regarding CoC, or in general? |
372 |
21:06 <@amne> CoC |
373 |
21:08 * jokey assigns silence to None ;) |
374 |
21:08 <@dberkholz> i wrote down all my ideas, so i'm waiting for others to respond. =) |
375 |
21:08 < fmccor> Is bugzilla covered by it? |
376 |
21:09 <@dberkholz> anywhere without existing moderation should be, so i'd say so |
377 |
21:09 <@dberkholz> which i would interpret as "anything gentoo except for #gentoo and forums" |
378 |
21:09 * fmccor had guessed that, but did not recall. |
379 |
21:09 <@amne> dberkholz: i like the proposal (including the things that have been discussed now) |
380 |
21:09 < igli> i don't think having one strong leader is a good idea. better a strong collective imo. |
381 |
21:09 * fmccor wanted to hear "yes" :) |
382 |
21:10 <@amne> i think it would be good to continue in that direction and finalize it |
383 |
21:10 < NeddySeagoon> dberkholz I was expecting your paper to be discussed on -project rather than -council. As an ex proctor, I intend to provide the benefit of my experiance. I've just been reading the thread |
384 |
21:11 <@amne> discussing it further on -project sounds like a good idea to me |
385 |
21:11 <@lu_zero> we could try -project if the noise ratio increase we'll fallback on -council |
386 |
21:11 <@lu_zero> deadlines for it? |
387 |
21:11 < NeddySeagoon> amne, That was what the last council meetting decided |
388 |
21:11 < igli> project is pretty quiet ;-) |
389 |
21:12 <@dberkholz> project list had an opportunity to express its interests, which it did |
390 |
21:12 <@dberkholz> from those interests i created a concrete proposal |
391 |
21:12 <@dberkholz> i don't think that concrete details are well-designed by committees |
392 |
21:13 <@dberkholz> i do think basic interests are, though |
393 |
21:13 < NeddySeagoon> dberkholz, agreed |
394 |
21:13 <@dberkholz> so if any of the basic interests are incorrect or need refinement, i'd be happy to hear about that wherever |
395 |
21:13 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: One word of caution, your comment of everything gentoo except #gentoo and forums caused a lot of grievance for proctors |
396 |
21:13 <@dberkholz> jmbsvicetto: could you expand on that? |
397 |
21:14 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: Most #gentoo-* irc channels feel they already have a moderation team and are not to keen on having outside interference |
398 |
21:14 <@dberkholz> if they want to be an official channel, they have to deal with the CoC |
399 |
21:14 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: Also, no one has ever been able to come up with a consensous list of official #gentoo-* channels |
400 |
21:15 <@dberkholz> whatever's on the IRC channels page |
401 |
21:15 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: all #gentoo-* is official |
402 |
21:15 <@Flameeyes> ##gentoo-* should be the unofficial ones |
403 |
21:15 <@jokey> amne: I don't think so, some are driven by users |
404 |
21:15 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: if you want it to be non-official, it's ##gentoo-* |
405 |
21:15 <@dberkholz> but certainly this team would need to work with the existing moderation, it doesn't need to take direct action to preempt them |
406 |
21:15 <@Flameeyes> [like we have ##gentoo-anime] |
407 |
21:15 < jmbsvicetto> dberkholz: I agree, but for instace, #gentoo-userrel, #gentoo-devrel, #gentoo-sparc or #gentoo-pt, just random examples, are not likely to welcome that interpretation |
408 |
21:16 <@lu_zero> Flameeyes we should have #gentoo-anime |
409 |
21:16 <@dberkholz> are they part of gentoo? if so, the CoC affects them. |
410 |
21:16 <@Flameeyes> lu_zero, let's keep it unofficial ;) |
411 |
21:16 <@dberkholz> we just need to figure out the best way to deal with that |
412 |
21:16 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, regional channels are a problem though, that I agree with |
413 |
21:16 <@Flameeyes> [it so happens I'm one of the #gentoo-it moderators btw] |
414 |
21:17 <@dberkholz> that's why the team would liaise with existing moderation |
415 |
21:17 <@amne> yes |
416 |
21:17 < jmbsvicetto> amne: ok, though question then, is #gentoo-xeffects an official gentoo channel? Also, has freenode changed their policy? Last time we had this discussion the gentoo contacts left it very clear that is was impossible to refuse anyone from registering #gentoo-my-channel |
417 |
21:18 <@jokey> tomaw: have some up-to-date details there ^^ |
418 |
21:18 <@lu_zero> jmbsvicetto if they have the gut to register it as different project |
419 |
21:18 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: yes; not that i am aware of; i've seen channels being removed because they were not official and used # instead of ## |
420 |
21:18 <@lu_zero> and we aren't knocking them with a trademark hammer |
421 |
21:18 <@lu_zero> sure |
422 |
21:19 <@amne> lu_zero: yeah, it were some special cases where people used the official #gentoo-* to be abusive |
423 |
21:19 <@amne> lu_zero: don't remember the exact details any more |
424 |
21:19 <@amne> i don't think anyone who does some good work will get slapped by us for not being official enough or whatsoever |
425 |
21:19 < jmbsvicetto> So I'm not misunderstood, I do agree that #gentoo channels should be official channels, but that is not the case currently and freenode doesn't seem to be willing to support that claim |
426 |
21:20 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: how come? |
427 |
21:20 < jmbsvicetto> amne: well, if they will allow anyone to register any #<whatever> channel, how can you enforce that #gentoo-* channels are official gentoo channels? |
428 |
21:21 <@jokey> from what I know, at least within europe you can't enforce trademark over channel names, I think there was something with #debian.de in the past... |
429 |
21:21 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: freenode staff can get it back |
430 |
21:21 < jmbsvicetto> amne: But I think that working with existing teams and working with people that are doing "good work" is the best way |
431 |
21:21 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: yes |
432 |
21:22 <@lu_zero> agreed |
433 |
21:22 < jmbsvicetto> However, I urge you to have a "crystal clear" definition of where you want/expect that team to work |
434 |
21:22 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: i think the only problem would be someone managing an official (#gentoo-*) channel and refusing to accept CoC at all by allowing attacks and other nasty stuff |
435 |
21:23 < NeddySeagoon> amne, like in -dev ? |
436 |
21:23 < jmbsvicetto> amne: You were on the proctors team, so you know the answer to that ;) |
437 |
21:23 <@amne> NeddySeagoon: #gentoo-dev? |
438 |
21:23 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: heh |
439 |
21:23 < NeddySeagoon> amne, yes. With everone an op, its impossible to enforce |
440 |
21:24 < tomaw> jmbsvicetto: it's difficult to refuse them being registered, but a contact could reclaim it if they felt they should |
441 |
21:24 < tomaw> jmbsvicetto: that's freenode policy - I have no idea of gentoo policy |
442 |
21:24 <@amne> NeddySeagoon: #gentoo-dev has no clearly defined people in charge, does it? (so it's up to the new team to manage it imho) |
443 |
21:25 <@lu_zero> everybody should be in charge |
444 |
21:25 < NeddySeagoon> lu_zero, everbody == nobody |
445 |
21:25 <@dberkholz> in general it's sort of devrel, since they're the ones who add/remove ops |
446 |
21:26 < jmbsvicetto> tomaw: At least that's what I gathered from my talks with some gentoo contacts while I worked on the proctors |
447 |
21:26 < NeddySeagoon> Its a detail to think about |
448 |
21:26 <@jokey> indeed |
449 |
21:26 < jmbsvicetto> amne: I agree, but you should expect resistance to a "controlled" #gentoo-dev |
450 |
21:27 <@amne> i think #-dev should fall under the same treatment as the mailing list |
451 |
21:27 < tomaw> jmbsvicetto: yes, the gentoo project registered with freenode and claimed #gentoo-* channels. Currently, it's possible for anyone to register a channel in that namespace, but it can still be turned over the to gentoo project on request. |
452 |
21:27 < kingtaco|laptop> not really, tell them to go somewhere else |
453 |
21:27 < kingtaco|laptop> freedom of speech(if we even have it) is the freedom to say what you want, not where you want |
454 |
21:27 < jmbsvicetto> tomaw: Thanks for clearing that |
455 |
21:27 <@amne> jmbsvicetto: i told you :-P |
456 |
21:28 < jmbsvicetto> amne: :) |
457 |
21:28 < tomaw> jmbsvicetto: note that a single project cannot own #gentoo-* and ##gentoo-*, so gentoo has no control over ##gentoo-* channels |
458 |
21:30 <@jokey> despite talking on details, are there big points we missed? |
459 |
21:31 <@amne> seems everyone's happy (or fallen asleep) |
460 |
21:31 <@amne> perhaps it hasn't been said explicitely, but from my understanding, if someone gets into trouble frequently, issues will be escalated to devrel, right? |
461 |
21:32 <@lu_zero> I think it's sane |
462 |
21:32 <@jokey> amne: devrel or userrel |
463 |
21:32 <@amne> jokey: right |
464 |
21:33 <@dberkholz> my presumption is that successive actions against the same person will eventually extend to the 3-day cutoff that means they need council approval and forwarding to devrel |
465 |
21:33 <@amne> dberkholz: ack |
466 |
21:33 <@dberkholz> but i didn't really allow for someone getting a million 6-12 hour blocks |
467 |
21:33 <@amne> heh |
468 |
21:33 <@dberkholz> maybe i should expressly disallow that, as it's the same "warnings go on forever" problem that means nothing ever gets fixed |
469 |
21:34 <@amne> hm |
470 |
21:35 <@amne> personally i'd prefer loose guidelines and individual treatment depending on the situation |
471 |
21:35 <@amne> but if someone is warned and repeats his behaviour, action should follow |
472 |
21:36 <@lu_zero> ok |
473 |
21:36 <@dberkholz> http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/summary-20071108.txt has my summary of the discussion so far |
474 |
21:36 <@dberkholz> we should wrap it up soon and send back to the -council list |
475 |
21:38 <@lu_zero> do we have anything to discuss about baselayout2 and uberlord? |
476 |
21:39 <@amne> dberkholz: summary looks good to me |
477 |
21:39 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: Not much if Uberlord contains to maintain it externally |
478 |
21:39 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: Otherwise we do need to find someone who works on it. |
479 |
21:39 <@lu_zero> Betelgeuse BSD license switch included? |
480 |
21:39 <@dberkholz> it wasn't a switch, it was an addition |
481 |
21:39 <@dberkholz> so dual GPL/BSD |
482 |
21:40 <@dberkholz> both of which are FSF free, fwiw, so fits our social contract fine |
483 |
21:40 <@lu_zero> held on git on our infrastructure? |
484 |
21:40 <@dberkholz> not sure about the infrastructure bit. anyone know? |
485 |
21:41 <@Flameeyes> I think the idea was to use our git |
486 |
21:41 <@Betelgeuse> I think infra does not allow commit access to non devs but I could be wrong. |
487 |
21:41 <@dberkholz> i'm also unsure how much it matters; i suspect other distros use init systems they don't personally keep on their infra |
488 |
21:42 <@jokey> imho it doesn't matter where it resides as long as someone packages it for gentoo ;) |
489 |
21:42 <@Betelgeuse> dberkholz: yeah like upstart |
490 |
21:42 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, yeah doesn't really matter, it just means we have to split baselayout (base files) from the rc system |
491 |
21:42 <@Flameeyes> and that was probably a good idea to begin with |
492 |
21:42 <@lu_zero> as long it doesn't break for us... |
493 |
21:43 <@dberkholz> Flameeyes: i'm sure upstream would be glad to include distro files for any distros that wish to use it. =) |
494 |
21:43 <@Flameeyes> dberkholz, I think Roy's idea was splitting them, anyway I'll certainly follow up with him about it as I do have interest in it |
495 |
21:43 <@dberkholz> sure, i don't know the details |
496 |
21:43 <@lu_zero> ok |
497 |
21:44 <@dberkholz> anyway it seems that baselayout-2 remains in good hands and maintained |
498 |
21:45 <@dberkholz> anyone got another open floor topic? |
499 |
21:46 <@jokey> nox-Hand: you wanted? |
500 |
21:46 < kingtaco|laptop> what about infra? |
501 |
21:46 <@dberkholz> kingtaco|laptop: is there something in particular about infra you'd like to bring up? |
502 |
21:47 < kingtaco|laptop> nope, just cought my eye |
503 |
21:47 < kingtaco|laptop> you guys were talking about infra |
504 |
21:47 <@dberkholz> kingtaco|laptop: oh, we're just not exactly sure where baselayout-2 repository will end up |
505 |
21:47 <@amne> kingtaco|laptop: we decided infra needs to provide the ice cream machine i promised in the election :-) |
506 |
21:47 < kingtaco|laptop> amne, sure, just send me the money |
507 |
21:47 <@amne> heh |
508 |
21:47 <@lu_zero> kingtaco|laptop we were thinking about overhauling one of the boxes |
509 |
21:47 < kingtaco|laptop> dberkholz, yeah, thats a problem. |
510 |
21:48 < jmbsvicetto> amne: Please put it next to bender. kthxbye :P |
511 |
21:48 < kingtaco|laptop> lu_zero, ? |
512 |
21:48 <@dberkholz> kingtaco|laptop: i see it as an open question, certainly |
513 |
21:48 <@lu_zero> kingtaco|laptop for the icecreams |
514 |
21:48 <@dberkholz> it's fine on any site that hosts git, as far as i'm concerned |
515 |
21:48 < kingtaco|laptop> lu_zero, no recycled icecream please |
516 |
21:49 <@lu_zero> dberkholz so far repo.or.cz |
517 |
21:49 < kingtaco|laptop> dberkholz, tbh, I don't know if that's good |
518 |
21:49 <@dberkholz> kingtaco|laptop: why? |
519 |
21:50 < kingtaco|laptop> well, put something as critical as baselayout on anything other than our hardware and it's hard to trust. that said the guy who write the stuff is no longer a dev so it's hard to trust him as well |
520 |
21:50 <@lu_zero> kingtaco|laptop solutions? |
521 |
21:50 <@jokey> it's open source so you take a look at the diffs |
522 |
21:50 <@dberkholz> kingtaco|laptop: how about all the other code on your system? |
523 |
21:50 < kingtaco|laptop> whoever is importing it into gentoo is going to have to keep a close eye on whats going on |
524 |
21:50 <@lu_zero> beside abducting roy |
525 |
21:50 < kingtaco|laptop> lu_zero, sadly, no |
526 |
21:50 < kingtaco|laptop> dberkholz, well, baselayout is critical |
527 |
21:50 < kingtaco|laptop> other stuff is not |
528 |
21:51 <@dberkholz> baselayout is just as critical as glibc, gcc, coreutils |
529 |
21:51 <@jokey> ack |
530 |
21:51 < jmbsvicetto> I agree with kingtaco|laptop in particular if we take into account the decision regarding the PMS |
531 |
21:51 <@lu_zero> still we can keep a local git |
532 |
21:51 <@lu_zero> and pull from roy from time to time |
533 |
21:51 <@dberkholz> and yes, it's git so we can do whatever we want |
534 |
21:51 <@dberkholz> we can maintain our own patchset on top, we can track his branch, we can fork off, whatever |
535 |
21:52 < kingtaco|laptop> I'm not saying not do it, I'm saying whichever gentoo dev is the one who is importing it is going to have to audit each and every import. there is just too much chance for an exploit. projects like coreutils/gcc/glibc have built up a reputation which is why they are different |
536 |
21:52 <@jokey> and not trusting him because he just is no longer a dev tastes very very bad imho |
537 |
21:52 <@dberkholz> that's disgusting |
538 |
21:52 <@Betelgeuse> I would trust Uberlord lot more than new devs. |
539 |
21:53 <@dberkholz> roy's built a reputation too, and quitting gentoo does not affect my view of it in any way |
540 |
21:53 < kingtaco|laptop> would you trust whatever random host he hosts the repo on? |
541 |
21:53 < kingtaco|laptop> I know I wouldn't |
542 |
21:53 <@dberkholz> i trust sha512 |
543 |
21:53 <@jokey> if he uses git ans signs it, then yes |
544 |
21:53 <@jokey> *and |
545 |
21:53 < kingtaco|laptop> SCM doesn't matter here |
546 |
21:53 < kingtaco|laptop> signs it perhaps |
547 |
21:54 < kingtaco|laptop> however, you're still trusting uberlord to audit his own code before he releases |
548 |
21:54 <@dberkholz> how's that different? =) |
549 |
21:54 <@amne> (i have to slack off and take care of some stuff, hope no one minds) |
550 |
21:54 < kingtaco|laptop> it's where you put the trust |
551 |
21:55 < igli> isn't that what the testing releases are for? |
552 |
21:55 -!- desultory [n=dean@gentoo/developer/desultory] has joined #gentoo-council |
553 |
21:56 < kingtaco|laptop> when it was on gentoo hardware developed by a gentoo dev there was a lot of trust. now it's on random hardware by a (trusted) ex dev |
554 |
21:56 <@jokey> kingtaco|laptop: re trust... we had exploitable code for year(s) on packages. and we controlled the repo and had a gentoo dev maintaining it. so I really don't see a point |
555 |
21:56 < kingtaco|laptop> I think you need to consider how it can be attacked before you decide on trivialities like git |
556 |
21:56 <@dberkholz> git supports gpg-signed tags and the whole thing is based on sha1 sums |
557 |
21:57 < kingtaco|laptop> jokey, packages is not an attack vector for each and every single gentoo install |
558 |
21:57 < kingtaco|laptop> baselayout is |
559 |
21:58 < kingtaco|laptop> dberkholz, I don't know enough about git to comment on it's trustworthness |
560 |
21:59 -!- leio_ is now known as leio |
561 |
21:59 < igli> hang on; uber signs it so it's verifiably his code. base-system bring it in and sign off on review, then it goes thru testing. where's the vector? |
562 |
21:59 <@dberkholz> the suggestion is that nobody will audit the code, either roy or ebuild maintainers |
563 |
21:59 <@dberkholz> and the git host will somehow be the vector |
564 |
21:59 <@dberkholz> i'm just asking in #git about that |
565 |
22:01 < kingtaco|laptop> when it was on gentoo hardware, you could trust the repo as much as you trusted a combination of gentoos security, arch, and infra teams. when it's somewhere random, you can't trust that git doesn't have a bug or that the host of the git repo isn't doing something malicious |
566 |
22:01 <@dberkholz> i don't think malicious hosts are possible with how git is implemented |
567 |
22:02 <@dberkholz> but i'm asking for clarification |
568 |
22:02 -!- uberpinguin [n=uberping@unaffiliated/uberpinguin] has quit ["Leaving"] |
569 |
22:02 < Philantrop> kingtaco|laptop: Would infra allow non-devs to commit to the repository if it was on Gentoo hardware? |
570 |
22:02 < bonsaikitten> apart from bugs in git itself the signing should be as tamper-resistant as any other system |
571 |
22:02 < igli> sorry i don't see it; only vector is a bug in gpg, which i agree has happened before |
572 |
22:02 < kingtaco|laptop> dberkholz, this is a package that's so important that infra would entertain allowing a baselayout repo for uberloard to use |
573 |
22:02 -!- fmccor_ is now known as fmccor|home |
574 |
22:03 -!- Ingmar^ [n=ingmar@83.101.12.48] has joined #gentoo-council |
575 |
22:03 < kingtaco|laptop> Philantrop, normally no, this is an extrodonary case where I would bring it up with the other infra folks |
576 |
22:03 -!- Ingmar [n=ingmar@83.101.12.89] has quit [Nick collision from services.] |
577 |
22:04 <@jokey> anyway there are no full rewrites near so a diff shouldn't be hard to look into (at least when looking at last updates) |
578 |
22:05 < Philantrop> kingtaco|laptop: Well, if I had anything to say about it, I'd prefer the Gentoo hardware under that circumstances even though I don't think there are any attack vectors but gpg itself. |
579 |
22:05 < igli> would be better |
580 |
22:05 < kingtaco|laptop> Philantrop, on the surface, I would prefer that too, but infra has to have a pow-wow to look deeper |
581 |
22:06 < kingtaco|laptop> dberkholz, jokey can you table this until next month so I have time to talk to infra peeps? |
582 |
22:06 <@dberkholz> repo.or.cz is a git hosting site from the git developers, so i guess if you trust git, you can trust the site |
583 |
22:06 <@dberkholz> kingtaco|laptop: we're not making any decisions so we have nothing to table |
584 |
22:06 < kingtaco|laptop> if we can't do it, then I'll shut up |
585 |
22:06 < eroyf> kingtaco|laptop: infra is willing to let uberlord work on baselayout even though he's not a developer? |
586 |
22:06 < kingtaco|laptop> eroyf, not exactly |
587 |
22:06 < eroyf> then what exactly |
588 |
22:07 < kingtaco|laptop> what I proposed is that infra might create a seperate repo for him to use for the sole purpose of his baselayout development |
589 |
22:07 < eroyf> so he's going to stay as a developer or what? |
590 |
22:08 < kingtaco|laptop> afaik, he quit |
591 |
22:08 < kingtaco|laptop> if he's intending on coming back, I don't know about it |
592 |
22:08 <@dberkholz> basically the proposal is that we'd become a very limited project-hosting site for non-gentoo devs working on critical gentoo packages |
593 |
22:08 < eroyf> or do you create a repo for him to work on and then let someone with an @gentoo.org commit it to the *right* repo? |
594 |
22:08 < eroyf> with svn support? |
595 |
22:09 < kingtaco|laptop> I don't care about the scm |
596 |
22:09 < igli> which other packages are so critical, and not dev'ed by gentoo? |
597 |
22:09 < kingtaco|laptop> if I had my way everyone would still use RCS :p |
598 |
22:09 < eroyf> PMS for example. |
599 |
22:09 < eroyf> which is not a package. |
600 |
22:09 < eroyf> but infra simply refused to let non-developers get access to that repo |
601 |
22:09 < eroyf> so this is somehow interesting. |
602 |
22:09 < igli> if moot |
603 |
22:10 < kingtaco|laptop> extremely moot |
604 |
22:10 < eroyf> well, i'm looking forward to see what you decide |
605 |
22:10 < kingtaco|laptop> ok... |
606 |
22:10 <@dberkholz> since we're not going to make any progress at this meeting, let's just adjourn the meeting |
607 |
22:11 <@dberkholz> feel free to keep talking about it afterwards |
608 |
22:11 -!- igli [n=igli@unaffiliated/igli] has left #gentoo-council ["Have a good one ;-)"] |
609 |
22:11 < kingtaco|laptop> I don't have much more to say, I need to talk to my team about it and work out the details. I'll send you guys an email when infra agrees on something |
610 |
22:16 < fmccor|home> A final thanks to dberkholz for his CoC proposal, which I view as great progress. |
611 |
22:17 <@dberkholz> thanks fmccor|home, i'm glad it went over fairly well |
612 |
22:17 -!- windzor [n=windzor@84.238.69.202] has quit [Remote closed the connection] |
613 |
22:18 < fmccor|home> In my opinion, better than "fairly well". :) |
614 |
|
615 |
|
616 |
|
617 |
-- |
618 |
gentoo-commits@g.o mailing list |