1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
|
[21:00:05] <@mgorny> !proj council
[21:00:06] <willikins> (council@gentoo.org) ajak, dilfridge, mattst88, mgorny, sam, soap, ulm
[21:00:20] -*- arthurzam proxies mattst88
[21:00:29] <@ulm> mgorny: you want to chair? :)
[21:00:54] <@mgorny> *shrug* why not
[21:00:57] <@mgorny> lemme just find the agenda
[21:01:04] <@ulm> https://marc.info/?l=gentoo-project&m=168982936627687&w=2
[21:01:25] <@mgorny> thanks
[21:01:29] <@mgorny> so.....
[21:01:30] <@mgorny> 1. Roll call!
[21:01:35] -*- dilfridge here
[21:01:38] -*- mgorny here
[21:01:38] -*- ajak here
[21:01:38] -*- arthurzam here (proxy for mattst88)
[21:01:42] -*- sam_ here
[21:01:43] -*- ulm here
[21:02:13] <@mgorny> soap: ?
[21:02:19] -*- soap here
[21:02:20] <@soap> soz
[21:02:31] <@mgorny> ok, everyone's here, let's start
[21:02:39] <@mgorny> 2. Constitute the new council
[21:02:59] <@mgorny> - Decide on time of meetings. The previous council had its meetings
[21:02:59] <@mgorny> on the 2nd Sunday of every month at 19:00 UTC
[21:02:59] -*- dilfridge has a Bavarian constitution
[21:03:13] <@mgorny> - Vote for continuing last council's workflow considering sending
[21:03:13] <@mgorny> a call for agenda items (two weeks in advance), sending the
[21:03:13] <@mgorny> agenda (one week in advance) and have the meeting focussed, i.e.
[21:03:13] <@mgorny> have major discussions on the gentoo-project mailing list prior
[21:03:13] <@mgorny> to the meeting
[21:03:21] <@mgorny> does that work for everyone?
[21:03:23] -*- ajak sees no reason to change this time
[21:03:29] <@ulm> wfm
[21:03:32] <@dilfridge> no reason to change anything
[21:03:33] <@soap> wfm
[21:03:40] <@sam_> sure
[21:03:43] <+arthurzam> yes, wf mattst88
[21:03:50] <@mgorny> ok, so everyone agrees
[21:04:07] <@mgorny> - Appoint chairmen for this term's meetings
[21:04:12] <@ulm> I can take january and february
[21:04:26] <@mgorny> (i implicitly took July ;-))
[21:04:29] <+sultan> Can the council add consequences if the workflow is not followed?
[21:04:36] <+arthurzam> I didn't sync with mattst88 month he can chair with, so can't stand for him - sorry
[21:04:40] <@sam_> sultan: it's not open floor yet
[21:05:16] <@mgorny> ulm: i'll edit the wiki
[21:05:27] <@ajak> arthurzam: it's fine to do some of it asynchronously i think, we did last time
[21:05:48] <@mgorny> oh, i see ulm chose the same months xD
[21:05:50] <@sam_> I'll do march/april then
[21:06:13] <+arthurzam> ajak: ok
[21:06:17] <@dilfridge> will do december
[21:06:19] <@ajak> hrm, i'll claim sept/oct i guess
[21:06:44] <@mgorny> i suppose we can tentatively leave nov/dec to mattst88 like last year
[21:06:51] <@dilfridge> works too
[21:07:13] <@mgorny> dilfridge: may/june?
[21:07:17] <@dilfridge> wfm
[21:07:29] <@mgorny> soap: aug?
[21:07:33] <@soap> sure
[21:07:57] <@mgorny> ok, updated wiki, we can switch with matt if need be
[21:08:06] <@sam_> yeah, np
[21:08:09] <@mgorny> 3. Missing steps/info/work for umbrella entering (arthurzam)
[21:08:44] <+arthurzam> Yeah, so I wanted to request council on what should be done, plan, or something, so we don't miss it again or as such
[21:08:49] <@ajak> is antarus here to give us the current state maybe?
[21:09:11] <@mgorny> i think we should choose one person to oversee this
[21:09:20] <+arthurzam> Maybe appoint the chairman responsibility for that month to have "active checks and time follows" - (just idea)
[21:09:20] <@ulm> we should establish better communication with trustees, so that everyone will be on the same page
[21:09:23] <@mgorny> ulm: would you be interested? i'm sorry for dumping this on you but i think you're the best person for this
[21:10:03] <@ulm> mgorny: let's wait until the trustees election is complete, then I'm in a better position to answer
[21:10:11] <@ulm> or in no position :/
[21:10:33] <+arthurzam> ulm: it won't be clash of interest if you are in both of them, right?
[21:10:37] <@ajak> what difference does that make?
[21:10:48] <@mgorny> i think we should resume comms immediately independently of trustee election results
[21:11:12] <@ulm> ajak: if voters would put me below _reopen then I'd be the wrong person
[21:11:26] <@mgorny> or maybe something more specific
[21:11:33] <@dilfridge> yeah and hell freezes over next month
[21:11:34] <@ulm> mgorny: then take it as a yes from me
[21:11:40] <@mgorny> do we all agree to continue the process started by trustees in the previous term?
[21:11:47] <@mgorny> i.e. the same umbrella?
[21:11:54] <@dilfridge> which one was that again?
[21:11:59] <@soap> opencollective?
[21:12:00] <@ulm> open collective
[21:12:08] <@mgorny> Open Collective Foundation, i think
[21:12:10] <@mgorny> lemme double check
[21:12:15] <+antarus> I think the email thread was pretty clear on the state
[21:12:23] <+antarus> but i only emailed the thread to mattst88 and he isn't here today
[21:12:37] <@mgorny> yes, OCF
[21:12:39] <+antarus> (the thread being our thread with OCF)
[21:13:07] <@ajak> okay.. so can you share that so we can attempt to establish what needs to be done moving forward?
[21:13:40] <@mgorny> i think the key point would be to apologize and reply to their previous inquiry, hopefully they'll let us resume from there
[21:14:07] <+antarus> More or less, that, yes.
[21:14:28] <@ajak> yep, agreed
[21:14:38] <@dilfridge> sounds good to me
[21:15:01] <@mgorny> ulm: could you do that? we can help prepare/proofread but i think we should really focus on one person sending it
[21:15:24] [tomaw] [Global Notice] Around 1800UTC on Monday we'll be performing maintenance on the box that runs ChanServ, NickServ and their relatives. During this time those services will be unavailable for a (hopefully!) short period. If you're a channel operator that doesn't usually keep your operator status you may want to in case you need it. I'll send a reminder nearer the time.
[21:15:24] [tomaw] [Global Notice] Around 1800UTC on Monday we'll be performing maintenance on the box that runs ChanServ, NickServ and their relatives. During this time those services will be unavailable for a (hopefully!) short period. If you're a channel operator that doesn't usually keep your operator status you may want to in case you need it. I'll send a reminder nearer the time.
[21:15:27] <@dilfridge> s/sending it/centrally handling all communication/
[21:15:29] <@ulm> mgorny: sure, but I don't yet have the full info
[21:15:44] <@mgorny> dilfridge: that, thanks
[21:15:50] <@mgorny> ulm: thanks
[21:15:52] <@ajak> antarus: can you share the thread with council@?
[21:15:53] <@ulm> i.e. all previous communication with them
[21:16:14] <@mgorny> and let's keep council@ and trustees@ in CC for future comms perhaps
[21:16:23] <+antarus> sure
[21:16:36] <@dilfridge> \o/
[21:16:44] <+arthurzam> Can we add an item to each council meeting as an update on the progress?
[21:16:49] <@dilfridge> ++
[21:17:10] <@ajak> yes, let's make this a repeat agenda item
[21:17:19] <@ulm> maybe we could even have joint council/trustees meetings
[21:17:26] <@ulm> not necessarily every month
[21:18:00] <@mgorny> ok, so i'd propose we put the goal right now on reestabilishing the status, resuming comms and discussing this next month as an agenda item
[21:18:06] <@mgorny> anything else?
[21:18:11] <@ulm> sounds good
[21:18:41] <@sam_> +1
[21:18:54] <+arthurzam> sounds good
[21:19:07] <@mgorny> ok, thanks, let's move on then
[21:19:10] <@mgorny> 4. Open bugs with council involvement
[21:19:29] <@mgorny> bug 883715
[21:19:30] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/883715 "(new) Developers who wish to stay anonymous"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; juippis:recruiters
[21:19:49] <@ulm> no progress there it seems
[21:19:56] <@sam_> yeah that's not blocked on us
[21:20:05] <@ulm> it's up to recruiters to answer our questions
[21:20:13] <@mgorny> bug 909432
[21:20:14] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/909432 "Motion: Ban EAPI 6"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; IN_P; ulm:council
[21:20:32] <@ulm> done, and now it's in the log :)
[21:20:35] <@mgorny> that one's been voted by mail, 7/0/0 y/n/a
[21:20:44] <@mgorny> accepted unanimously
[21:20:44] <@dilfridge> excellent
[21:20:57] <@mgorny> bug 909768
[21:20:58] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/909768 "QA lead election 2023"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; IN_P; ulm:council
[21:21:03] <@ulm> EAPI 6 removal is glacial though
[21:21:13] <@sam_> I think we're done there
[21:21:16] <@sam_> yeah, it is :(
[21:21:21] <@mgorny> 6/0/1 y/n/a, i.e. soap approved unanimously, modulo his abstention
[21:21:27] <+arthurzam> Congratulations soap on winning QA elections :)
[21:21:28] <@ulm> congratulations to soap
[21:21:34] <@soap> :>
[21:21:35] <@dilfridge> heh, congrats
[21:21:37] <@sam_> yes, congrats
[21:21:47] <+antarus> do recruiters know https://bugs.gentoo.org/883715 is waiting on them?
[21:21:48] <@mgorny> and these were all the bugs
[21:21:48] <@ajak> yay soap
[21:21:49] <+antarus> status seems unclear
[21:23:18] <@mgorny> ulm: ^ you seem to know that bug best
[21:23:39] <@ulm> antarus: it's assigned to them
[21:24:33] <@ulm> maybe I should ping juippis in irc
[21:24:51] <@mgorny> ok, let's move on to…
[21:24:52] <@ulm> might be more effective than communicating via the bug
[21:24:55] <@mgorny> 5. Open floor
[21:24:58] <@dilfridge> ok
[21:25:00] <@dilfridge> briefly
[21:25:08] <@dilfridge> before we talk about other stuff
[21:25:25] <@dilfridge> the 23.0 profiles are right now blocked on my time mostly
[21:25:48] <@dilfridge> I dont see them as very urgent, so unless someone protests I'll just defer that stuff until fall
[21:26:26] <@dilfridge> that's it
[21:26:32] <+arthurzam> Sounds fine, thank you for working on it (and to all others)
[21:27:26] <@dilfridge> anything / anyone else?
[21:27:28] <+arthurzam> I think sultan had something for open floor?
[21:28:05] <+NeddySeagoon> Call them 24 then :)
[21:28:24] <@dilfridge> too much extra work
[21:28:32] <+NeddySeagoon> heh
[21:30:27] <@ulm> 10.0 were released in 2009, but with 13.0 we switched to years
[21:30:38] <@sam_> I wish we didn't use years at all
[21:30:55] <@sam_> I have to explain to people that 17.1 is not "old"
[21:31:13] <@mgorny> we can switch to something else now
[21:31:23] <@mgorny> Gentoo Z
[21:31:24] <@dilfridge> give it a name, like the linux kernel releases
[21:31:26] -*- mgorny hides
[21:31:30] <+NeddySeagoon> Switch to EAPI numbers. They often go hand in hand
[21:32:44] <@ulm> nah, don't change the naming scheme
[21:33:05] <@ulm> 23.0 is already better than the 2004.1 we have in ancient times
[21:33:07] <+ionen> fwiw a name would make it hard to differentiate from profile subdirs/features
[21:33:34] <+Arsen> clearly, we need to adopt google versioning and just go with 117.33.114.28 for the next profile round
[21:33:46] <@sam_> gentoo 1337
[21:34:04] <+ionen> take the version what whatever distro has at the highest number, and increment it so we're higher
[21:34:07] <+Arsen> actually, we need to be more original, and use ipv6 addresses as versions rather than ipv4
[21:34:37] <@mgorny> how about irrational versions?
[21:34:53] <@ulm> quaternions
[21:34:56] <@mgorny> Gentoo pi³
[21:35:18] <+arthurzam> Hmm, like TeX version number
[21:36:26] <@mgorny> anything else for the open floor?
[21:36:43] <+Arsen> arthurzam: sure, but we ought to use 'e' instead
[21:36:47] <@sam_> nothing from me
[21:36:51] <+sultan> mgorny: see my comment above, but no time now
[21:37:02] <@sam_> I don't understand what the comment meant
[21:37:25] <@ajak> so.. no more topics for open floor then :)
[21:38:40] <@mgorny> let's wait till :40
[21:40:12] <@mgorny> ok
[21:40:15] -*- mgorny bangs the gavel
[21:40:17] <@mgorny> meeting adjourned!
|