path: root/meeting-logs/20220508.txt

[2022-05-08T20:00:08+0100] <@sam_> ok!
[2022-05-08T20:00:27+0100] <@sam_> hi all, and welcome to the 225th meeting of the Gentoo Council
[2022-05-08T20:00:30+0100] <@sam_> agenda: https://marc.info/?l=gentoo-project&m=165203621508561&w=2
[2022-05-08T20:00:42+0100] <@sam_> apologies for sending it out late; I'd got confused because I'd sent out the call-for-requests delayed
[2022-05-08T20:00:45+0100] <@sam_> and then got mixed up
[2022-05-08T20:00:50+0100] <@sam_> it's a simple lot today though
[2022-05-08T20:00:53+0100] <@sam_> so..
[2022-05-08T20:00:57+0100] <@sam_> roll call!
[2022-05-08T20:01:02+0100] • dilfridge: here
[2022-05-08T20:01:02+0100] <@sam_> dilfridge: gyakovlev: Marecki: mattst88: mgorny: ulm:
[2022-05-08T20:01:03+0100] • sam_: here
[2022-05-08T20:01:05+0100] • Marecki: here
[2022-05-08T20:01:06+0100] • mattst88: here
[2022-05-08T20:02:27+0100] • ulm: here
[2022-05-08T20:02:37+0100] • gyakovlev: here
[2022-05-08T20:02:41+0100] <@sam_> mgorny: 
[2022-05-08T20:03:34+0100] <@sam_> we'll give him 5 minutes
[2022-05-08T20:03:45+0100] <@gyakovlev> agenda on our archives, for log purposes:
[2022-05-08T20:03:45+0100] <@gyakovlev> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/654cbd7be9e3d8544ed21259be08be9c
[2022-05-08T20:05:56+0100] <@mgorny> sorry
[2022-05-08T20:05:57+0100] • mgorny: here
[2022-05-08T20:05:59+0100] <@sam_> \o/
[2022-05-08T20:06:03+0100] <@sam_> ok, let's proceed
[2022-05-08T20:06:04+0100] <@mgorny> trying to figure out qmake
[2022-05-08T20:06:18+0100] <@sam_> the agenda is in a slightly unusual order but let's go with it (I did bugs before the pkgdev item)
[2022-05-08T20:06:29+0100] <@sam_> 2. Open bugs with council participation
[2022-05-08T20:06:41+0100] <@sam_> https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=CONFIRMED&bug_status=IN_PROGRESS&email2=council%40gentoo.org&emailassigned_to2=1&emailcc2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailtype2=substring&list_id=2625664&query_format=advanced
[2022-05-08T20:06:46+0100] <@sam_>  
[2022-05-08T20:06:48+0100] <@sam_> the main thing is bug 835165
[2022-05-08T20:06:49+0100] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/835165 "Reimbursement for SSD purchase for Infra 3/14/2022"; Gentoo Foundation, Reimbursements; CONF; antarus:trustees
[2022-05-08T20:06:57+0100] <@sam_> Marecki: dilfridge: you still need to vote on it, unless you want to discuss it here
[2022-05-08T20:07:17+0100] <@dilfridge> done
[2022-05-08T20:07:34+0100] <@sam_> the gist is just that antarus had to emergency pay from his pocket for infra costs
[2022-05-08T20:08:07+0100] <@sam_> robbat2, antarus, and IIRC some other members did some shopping around, and couldn't find any better deals
[2022-05-08T20:08:16+0100] <@sam_> it was also quite critical given it impaired woodpecker and other core services
[2022-05-08T20:09:05+0100] <@mattst88> 6 votes in favor. let's move on and if Marecki has comments we can discuss it later
[2022-05-08T20:09:08+0100] <@sam_> anyway, looks like Marecki has voted
[2022-05-08T20:09:12+0100] <@sam_> mattst88: patience
[2022-05-08T20:09:17+0100] <@sam_> I was just giving him a moment to speak here on IRC too
[2022-05-08T20:09:37+0100] <@sam_> but anyway, he's commented, and voted yes, so sounds good - 7 votes in favour
[2022-05-08T20:09:42+0100] <@sam_> passes
[2022-05-08T20:09:50+0100] <@sam_>  
[2022-05-08T20:09:52+0100] <@sam_> bug 176186
[2022-05-08T20:09:53+0100] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/176186 "Gentoo projects file hosting"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Other; IN_P; dsd:infra-bugs
[2022-05-08T20:10:11+0100] <@sam_> We discussed this in the last meeting; the gist is that we wanted to go with kup if possible
[2022-05-08T20:10:34+0100] <@sam_> robbat2 reached out to kernel.org to find out the missing glue for gitolite authentication with kup
[2022-05-08T20:11:01+0100] <@sam_> we've had a reply with a dump of their internal code
[2022-05-08T20:11:10+0100] <@sam_> we just need to process it and try wire it up
[2022-05-08T20:11:21+0100] <@sam_> so, nothing for us to do there, just wanted to keep us informed
[2022-05-08T20:11:27+0100] <@sam_>  
[2022-05-08T20:11:33+0100] <@sam_> bug 835152
[2022-05-08T20:11:34+0100] <@mattst88> cool
[2022-05-08T20:11:35+0100] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/835152 "Mirror pkgcore/* repos from github"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Git; CONF; sam:infra-bugs
[2022-05-08T20:11:40+0100] <@sam_> I think we're making progress on gitlab, nothing more to say there really
[2022-05-08T20:11:53+0100] <@sam_> I think the intention is to host everything for pkgcore on gitlab if possible
[2022-05-08T20:11:59+0100] <@sam_>  
[2022-05-08T20:12:02+0100] <@sam_> bug 786105
[2022-05-08T20:12:03+0100] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/786105 "access to manage projects on GH"; Gentoo Infrastructure, GitHub; CONF; vapier:github
[2022-05-08T20:12:11+0100] <@sam_> the latest ML discussion fizzled out, with no reply from vapier again
[2022-05-08T20:12:24+0100] <+antarus> vapier wanted to have lunch, but I am not on the east coast
[2022-05-08T20:12:27+0100] <@sam_> we could argue it's blocked on gitlab but I don't think this is for council anymore
[2022-05-08T20:12:31+0100] <@sam_> unCC for now?
[2022-05-08T20:12:42+0100] <@mattst88> sounds fine to me
[2022-05-08T20:12:49+0100] <@sam_> great
[2022-05-08T20:12:52+0100] <@dilfridge> unCC
[2022-05-08T20:13:19+0100] <@sam_> done
[2022-05-08T20:13:30+0100] <@sam_>  
[2022-05-08T20:13:31+0100] <@sam_> finally, bug 834997
[2022-05-08T20:13:33+0100] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/834997 "Missing summaries for 20211114 and 20211212 council meetings"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; ulm:dilfridge
[2022-05-08T20:13:39+0100] <@sam_> looks like it's for you dilfridge 
[2022-05-08T20:13:40+0100] <@dilfridge> yeah, soon
[2022-05-08T20:13:45+0100] <@sam_> nothing for us to discuss there
[2022-05-08T20:13:51+0100] <@sam_> alright
[2022-05-08T20:13:54+0100] <@sam_>  
[2022-05-08T20:13:56+0100] <@sam_> 3. Signoff behaviour of the pkgdev tooling (proposed change is to =
[2022-05-08T20:13:56+0100] <@sam_> disable signoff by default, but allow opt in via configuration)
[2022-05-08T20:14:00+0100] <@sam_> arthurzam: ^^
[2022-05-08T20:14:11+0100] <@sam_> I think this is essentially about us consenting to the change or raising any significant concerns
[2022-05-08T20:14:33+0100] <@sam_> ulm started the discussion in #gentoo-qa and it went from there; the gist being that some feel the sign-off part should be opt-in rather than opt-out, or it's meaningless
[2022-05-08T20:14:36+0100] <@mattst88> have we had people submit patches, and then when we ask them for a sign-off and agreement to the DCO they say no?
[2022-05-08T20:14:41+0100] <@dilfridge> honestly, whoever pushes to gentoo.git should be able to handle a change in default behaviour
[2022-05-08T20:15:05+0100] <@sam_> mattst88: the only time people say no in my experience is if I ask for real name, not for giving a DCO
[2022-05-08T20:15:11+0100] <@mattst88> yeah, same here
[2022-05-08T20:15:14+0100] <@dilfridge> and yes it makes sense to have the SOB off or undefined by default and to make it a conscious decision out of principle
[2022-05-08T20:15:21+0100] <@gyakovlev> I'm ok if it's explicit opt in via configuration, like repoman always was.
[2022-05-08T20:15:24+0100] <@sam_> to be honest, I think we've sort of reached consensus on this, even if it's not ideal to have churn, it is what it is
[2022-05-08T20:15:31+0100] <@gyakovlev> especially if it's done on .git/config basis
[2022-05-08T20:15:33+0100] <@sam_> obviously we'll have a few moments for folks to discuss
[2022-05-08T20:15:37+0100] <@gyakovlev> not on global basis
[2022-05-08T20:15:40+0100] • antarus: shrugs
[2022-05-08T20:15:46+0100] <@mattst88> yeah, can't you just configure SoB in .git/config?
[2022-05-08T20:15:48+0100] <@dilfridge> just have people switch it on once
[2022-05-08T20:15:49+0100] <@sam_> I think arthur just wanted some backing as he's handling the responsibility of a lot of tooling here
[2022-05-08T20:15:50+0100] <+antarus> one mans churhc is another mans progress
[2022-05-08T20:15:56+0100] <+antarus> churn*
[2022-05-08T20:15:59+0100] <@sam_> mattst88: no, sadly, because of git ideological mess
[2022-05-08T20:16:00+0100] <@mattst88> if you can do that, let's just do it and end the discussion :)
[2022-05-08T20:16:06+0100] <@gyakovlev> mattst88: git itself used to have such thing, but they removed it.
[2022-05-08T20:16:07+0100] <@sam_> mattst88: but arthur has added the equivalent to pkgdev config
[2022-05-08T20:16:13+0100] <@ulm> mattst88: you cannot turn it on in git be default, for good reason
[2022-05-08T20:16:16+0100] <+arthurzam> Yes, exactly - with some extra help from other devs, we currently have a very good behaviour design we can do for transition and ease of setup config
[2022-05-08T20:16:16+0100] <+arthurzam> Just some were against this (they were quiet since) so wanted back support as I see this global main tool of gentoo
[2022-05-08T20:16:17+0100] <@ulm> *by
[2022-05-08T20:16:19+0100] <@sam_> so I think we're all good, unless someone objects, which I'll give a few minutes for, and then we're moving on
[2022-05-08T20:16:30+0100] <@sam_> (then I'll call a vote, just for formality)
[2022-05-08T20:16:41+0100] <@dilfridge> who's formality?
[2022-05-08T20:16:44+0100] <@sam_> :p
[2022-05-08T20:16:47+0100] <@mgorny> you know what would be cool? if pkgdev printed the text on the first run, and asked for approval
[2022-05-08T20:16:54+0100] <@ulm> oh please, do we really need a vote on this?
[2022-05-08T20:17:04+0100] <@sam_> not if nobody objects, no
[2022-05-08T20:17:04+0100] <@ulm> micromanagement :(
[2022-05-08T20:17:14+0100] <@dilfridge> I'm fine with no vote
[2022-05-08T20:17:16+0100] <@sam_> but at least one person hasn't spoken yet :)
[2022-05-08T20:17:30+0100] <@dilfridge> Marecki is still busy on the ssd bug
[2022-05-08T20:17:40+0100] <@Marecki> I really don't care either way.
[2022-05-08T20:17:42+0100] <@sam_> I think we can do this by acclamation then
[2022-05-08T20:17:57+0100] <@sam_> we're happy with arthurzam's prerogative and the change is reasonable
[2022-05-08T20:18:02+0100] <@dilfridge> ack
[2022-05-08T20:18:04+0100] • ulm: acclaims :)
[2022-05-08T20:18:06+0100] <@sam_> :)
[2022-05-08T20:18:13+0100] <@sam_> excellent
[2022-05-08T20:18:16+0100] <@sam_> now, finally
[2022-05-08T20:18:18+0100] <+arthurzam> OK, that is good enough for me, I will implement it soon and do a release with announcement. Thank you all
[2022-05-08T20:18:25+0100] <@sam_> thanks a lot arthurzam!
[2022-05-08T20:18:29+0100] <@sam_> 4. Open floor
[2022-05-08T20:18:32+0100] <@sam_> Anyone got any topics to raise?
[2022-05-08T20:18:42+0100] • NeddySeagoon: raises a hand
[2022-05-08T20:18:47+0100] <@sam_> NeddySeagoon: What's up?
[2022-05-08T20:19:52+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> Next month is the last meeting before the election. I can just call it if you want. Council has a few weeks to influnce the timing. 
[2022-05-08T20:20:01+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> What does the team think?
[2022-05-08T20:20:33+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> I don't need a response tody
[2022-05-08T20:20:37+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> today*
[2022-05-08T20:20:55+0100] <@sam_> Define "just call it"? As in pick a date of your choosing, after the next meeting?
[2022-05-08T20:20:56+0100] <@mattst88> I'm confused what you're asking
[2022-05-08T20:21:00+0100] <@ulm> same time period as last year should be fine?
[2022-05-08T20:21:03+0100] <@sam_> yep
[2022-05-08T20:21:10+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> mattst88: yes
[2022-05-08T20:21:26+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> ulm: sam_ that werks
[2022-05-08T20:21:27+0100] <@mattst88> NeddySeagoon: that didn't help :)
[2022-05-08T20:21:54+0100] <@sam_> ok, I don't think anything for us to do unless someone wants to speak up. We can always revisit anyway?
[2022-05-08T20:22:00+0100] <@sam_> I think go ahead with normal planning like last year
[2022-05-08T20:22:16+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> I'll do some prep over the next couple of weeks
[2022-05-08T20:22:29+0100] <@sam_> I think it's somewhat minutiae (but thank you for asking), and I trust elections to handle it as they see fit
[2022-05-08T20:22:34+0100] <@mgorny> I'd say whatever works for elections team 
[2022-05-08T20:22:36+0100] <@sam_> ^
[2022-05-08T20:23:39+0100] <@sam_> so what were you actually asking for? whether we had a preferred date after the next meeting?
[2022-05-08T20:23:45+0100] <@sam_> i don't think it matters too much
[2022-05-08T20:24:00+0100] <@sam_> maybe if someone knew they would be unavailable
[2022-05-08T20:24:23+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> Preferred dates.  I'll propose something and email dev ML based on last yeal
[2022-05-08T20:24:27+0100] <@sam_> sounds good
[2022-05-08T20:24:34+0100] <@sam_> ok, anything else for open floor?
[2022-05-08T20:25:40+0100] <@ulm> NeddySeagoon: timing is best when the last meeting isn't within the voting period, and when there's some time after the voting for the new council to organise a meeting in that month
[2022-05-08T20:25:59+0100] <+NeddySeagoon> ulm: I remember.
[2022-05-08T20:26:03+0100] <@ulm> which is a little contradictory, but has worked out in the last years
[2022-05-08T20:26:44+0100] <@sam_> final call? nothing else?
[2022-05-08T20:27:01+0100] <@mattst88> nothing from me
[2022-05-08T20:27:17+0100] <@sam_> it's been a pretty quiet month tbh
[2022-05-08T20:27:22+0100] <@sam_> I think we can call it then
[2022-05-08T20:27:30+0100] • sam_: bangs the meeting gavel