path: root/meeting-logs/20080814.txt

20:00 < dberkholz@> ok, it's time
20:00 < dberkholz@> roll call please, who's here?
20:00 <dertobi123@> <-
20:00 <dertobi123@> heya btw
20:00 -!- Irssi: #gentoo-council: Total of 72 nicks [6 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 66 normal]
20:01 <    Cardoe > Cardoe for Flameeyes
20:01 <Betelgeuse@> yes
20:01  *  Halcy0n is here
20:01 < dberkholz@> jokey, lu_zero: are you here?
20:03  * dberkhol  waits
20:03 <   strites > hello
20:03 < dberkholz@> jokey's been idle for almost 2 days, lu's around somewhere
20:04 <   Halcy0n@> I just IM'd jokey
20:04 <NeddySeago > dberkholz, just go for it, you have a quorum
20:04 <   strites > I am here to say lu_zero's neighborhood got a black out
20:04 <    musikc > dberkholz, i was just talking to lu and he said he has the flu atm
20:04 <    musikc > wow, that sucks
20:04 <      rane > flu and blackout, what a day
20:04 < dberkholz@> apparently he's doubly excused.
20:04 <   strites > just called me with cell
20:04 < dberkholz@> that reminds me, we really need to get default proxies for everyone 
20:04 <   strites > he told he'll be back asap ^^'
20:05 <dertobi123@> can't get jokey  on his mobile phone, so yeah ... seems he's away
20:05 <      rane > so two out
20:05 <   Halcy0n@> dertobi123: he just answered me on IM.
20:05 <   Halcy0n@> He's coming.
20:05 <dertobi123@> ok
20:06  *    jokey looks up
20:06 <     jokey@> sorry for being late
20:06 < dberkholz@> hopefully people had a chance to see what i suggested we should do during the meeting today
20:07 < dberkholz@> if not, it's at the top of http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/20080814-agenda.txt
20:07  *   musikc hands lu_zero some juice and puts him the corner away from the others :-P
20:08 < dberkholz@> to start off, i'd like to get commitments from everyone about when you'll reply on -dev to all the agenda topics (or -council for the CoC one)
20:08  *    jokey read the points already and formed an opinion
20:08 <     jokey@> next hour
20:08 <     jokey@> (given we have a meeting atm; was catching up on mails)
20:08 < dberkholz@> i'm going to commit to monday, although i hope to get it done earlier
20:09 -!- mode/#gentoo-council [+o lu_zero_] by ChanServ
20:09 <dertobi123@> i can comment on the threads until end of the weekend
20:09 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I'll respond to them all by the end of the weekend.  I haven't read through everything yet since my DSL was out for 4 days.
20:09 -!- lu_zero_ is now known as lu_zero
20:09 <   lu_zero@> uff
20:09 < dberkholz@> lu_zero: 20:08 < dberkholz@> to start off, i'd like to get commitments from everyone  about when you'll reply on -dev to all the agenda topics  (or -council for the CoC one)
20:09 <   lu_zero@> I was missing thunderstorm....
20:09 <   lu_zero@> dberkholz I'll be flickering at best
20:10 <    Cardoe > dberkholz: I've obviously got to confer with Flameeyes on that. Not sure how much keyboard time he's got right now.
20:10 < dberkholz@> Betelgeuse, dertobi123, jokey...
20:10 < dberkholz@> jokey: did i understand correctly? you're going to send emails for all of them in the next hour?
20:11 <dertobi123@> dberkholz: as i said, until the end of the weekend
20:11 <Betelgeuse@> dberkholz: weekend is fine
20:11 <     jokey@> dberkholz: yeah, I read up on most topics so I should be able to send them soonish
20:11 < dberkholz@> jokey: is soonish today?
20:11 <     jokey@> unless you have points to add that need other commenting
20:12 < dberkholz@> yes, if there's ongoing discussion, we aren't setting a deadline on that
20:12 < dberkholz@> just on getting your initial points out there
20:13 < dberkholz@> lu_zero: please respond whenever you've got a reliable connection
20:13 < dberkholz@> let's move on
20:13 <   lu_zero@> I'll try
20:13 -!- dberkholz changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Reactions to dev banned from freenode
20:14 < dberkholz@> who's got a comment or question right now?
20:14 <   Halcy0n@> Do we have a history of how many times this has happened?  I believe another dev was klined after this was initially brought up.
20:14 <    musikc > yes
20:14 <    musikc > ive spoken with the second dev actually
20:15 <dertobi123@> who's the second one and when did that happen?
20:15 <   Halcy0n@> And is there any other informatino you can share with us in public, or is best to talk about this on council@?
20:15 <    musikc > he's still banned but i was able to speak to tomaw and kloeri who told me what to tell him. they said all info was in the ban message but the dev indicated otherwise. no real proving that
20:16 <    kloeri > I can confirm the info is in the ban message fwiw
20:16 <    kloeri > or was, whatever is the case - I don't know if they kline is expired or not
20:16 <    musikc > the guy said he'd done what he was told to do and was still waiting for some resolution
20:17 <    Cardoe > Halcy0n: council@ is a public ML.
20:17 <   Halcy0n@> Cardoe: not g-council, but the council alias
20:17 <    musikc > i last spoke to him on the 10th
20:17 <    Cardoe > Halcy0n: mm. my bad. you're right
20:18 <KungFuJesu > ahoy
20:18 < dberkholz@> alright
20:18 <    musikc > the guy is on another network if council wishes to speak with him
20:18 <    musikc > i can share info privately
20:18 <   Halcy0n@> I know who it is and can relay whatever I get from him to the rest of you.
20:19 <KungFuJesu > who are the "dev banned from ferenode"?
20:19 <   Halcy0n@> I didn't connect dots :)
20:19 <KungFuJesu > "freenode"*
20:19 < dberkholz@> is there some particular reason we aren't mentioning whoever it is?
20:19 <KungFuJesu > is this really a worthy discussion for the gentoo council?
20:20 <   antarus > it was requested they talk about it
20:20 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: it was ricmm.  I don't see a problem with mentioning the name since the quit message clearly said he was klined.
20:20 <KungFuJesu > I mean, it's just an IRC related issue, why aren't we discussing gentoo?
20:20 <   antarus > if they didn't want to discuss it they would just skip it
20:20 <KungFuJesu > well, what was the reason he/she was banned?
20:20 < dberkholz@> KungFuJesus: irc is a critical tool uses to do our job. if that tool is broken, it needs to be fixed. 
20:20 <   Halcy0n@> KungFuJesus: this is a Gentoo related issue since its affecting one of our communication mediums for a dev.
20:20 < dberkholz@> s/uses/gentoo uses/
20:20  *   fmccor has never herd of him.
20:21  * KungFuJe hasn't either
20:21 <KungFuJesu > heh, probably because he can't join our IRC
20:21 <    musikc > i dont think it matters who the dev is or if anyone heard of him fwiw, he's a dev all the same
20:21 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I will talk to him and see if he wants to share why he was banned so we can discuss the specifics.  If no one has anything else to add to this conversation point, I suggest we move on.
20:22  * KungFuJe seconds that
20:22 <dertobi123@> anyways, can we get the facts some of us have posted to council@, please?
20:22 <   Halcy0n@> KungFuJesus: please, unless you have something to add, can you refrain from commenting?  Thank you
20:22 <   Halcy0n@> dertobi123: I will find out how he wants me to share the details and let you guys know either way.
20:22 <     tomaw > This issue was resolved on the day I was made aware of it.  The dev in question is aware of that, and the reasons for the kline.  I suggest you discuss with him to find out if he's willing to share.
20:22 <    musikc > dertobi123, i'll share the background that i have
20:23 < dberkholz@> i don't really have more to add on this topic. more relevant to the next ones.
20:23 <dertobi123@> Halcy0n, musikc: thanks :)
20:23 <     tomaw > Also, please /whois ricmm.
20:23 <KungFuJesu > Halcy0n: Sorry, I just feel that there's not much to add as many details aren't being shared about
20:23 <   Halcy0n@> KungFuJesus: if you have nothing to add, you don't need to say anything then, so please, consider that.
20:24 -!- dberkholz changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Moving meetings to a location we control
20:24 <   antarus > Halcy0n: I think he gets the point ;p
20:24 <   Halcy0n@> antarus: I'm not sure he does ;)
20:24 <   lu_zero@> anyway
20:24 <   lu_zero@> back to the topic
20:24 <     tomaw > dberkholz: Could you just confirm my lines made it to the channel?  Noone responded :)
20:24 < dberkholz@> tomaw: yes
20:24 <   Halcy0n@> tomaw: yup, we saw.
20:24 <     tomaw > Thanks.
20:24 < dberkholz@> tomaw: we haven't +q'd you yet. =)
20:24 <     jokey@> :D
20:24 <       spb > wouldn't make much difference if you had
20:24 <   markand > hi there
20:25 < dberkholz@> anyone got a question/comment about the next topic?
20:25 <    musikc > dberkholz, all of these topics will be discussed on lists as well so voting can take place hopefully next mtg?
20:26 <    Cardoe > We already have a public ML where predominately a lot of the discussion takes place. Is there really any actual supression occurring because of our use of Freenode?
20:26 <jmbsvicett > dberkholz: That issue should be discussed at the same time as having a gentoo irc network, imho
20:26  *    jokey is still not in favour of running an irc network
20:26 <KungFuJesu > now that I agree on, if gentoo hosts the IRC server, these problems won't happen
20:26 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I need to read all of the emails to understand what the motivation is for this, so I can't give any useful comments at this point in time.
20:27 <KungFuJesu > honestly is there any reason to use freenode other than the fact it's easier than hosting it yourself?
20:27 < dberkholz@> Halcy0n: motivation is that when our devs get klined, it's really hard for them to work with others on irc
20:27 <    musikc > motivation being that devs have asked for it?
20:27 <   Halcy0n@> musikc: I meant the reasoning behind asking for it.
20:27 <    musikc > been a bit of dialog on the lists for that
20:27 <   Halcy0n@> I haven't read it all yet.  I have a backlog of emails I'm still sifting through :)
20:27 <    yngwin > also, the situation with the group contacts
20:27 <   antarus > dberkholz: I think our devs should be motivated to not get klined ;)
20:27 <    musikc > honestly, though wolf tried to calm it, i suspect the conversation started b/c of that incident
20:28 <       spb > all of which can be summed up with paranoia, conspiracy theories and general storm-in-a-teacup
20:28 <KungFuJesu > antarus: you gotta point there, I wish I knew the reason he was klined
20:28 < dberkholz@> antarus: as i was saying earlier, freenode is a tool for us. if that tool is getting in our way, it needs to change
20:28 <       spb > yngwin: the situation is that gentoo has two active group contacts
20:28 <   Halcy0n@> spb: who are those 2?  I thought it was musikc and rane?
20:28 <    musikc > spb, yes. i had to quit before that took place though
20:28 <       spb > ferris and rane
20:29 <   Halcy0n@> spb: oh, when was ferris added?  I thought there was quite a backlog to getting GCs added?
20:29 <       spb > ferris was there all along
20:29 <    musikc > Halcy0n, this morning
20:29 <       spb > he was never properly removed
20:29 <    Cardoe > dberkholz: the question is the tool getting in our way or hindering us. Or will devising our own tool hinder us more..
20:29 <    fmccor > Halcy0n, Turns out I have been all along, but didn't know I was still active.
20:29 <       spb > so when musikc left, he asked to be reactivated, as it were
20:29 <   Halcy0n@> spb: ah, okay.
20:29 <KungFuJesu > Cardoe: how hard could it possibly be to run an irc server?
20:30 <       spb > ha. ha. ha.
20:30 <   Halcy0n@> Cardoe: I think us having to maintain it will be more of a headache.
20:30 <KungFuJesu > I understand porting some of the bots may be a pain
20:30 <       spb > it's easy, if you have no users
20:30 <    Cardoe > Halcy0n: I'm in agreement with you on that.
20:30 <dertobi123@> dito
20:30 <KungFuJesu > does irc really eat that much bandwidth?  Or are we talking about moderation issues?
20:30 <   Halcy0n@> But, I think these are all things that we should bring up on the list to figure out what is possible.
20:31 <   Halcy0n@> KungFuJesus: maintainence, legal issues, trolls, DoS attacks, etc
20:31 <     jokey@> indeed, let's discuss this there
20:31 <   Halcy0n@> There is a lot involved that we shouldn't waste the manpower on.
20:31 <KungFuJesu > the DoS I can see as an issue, I don't know about legality, and trolls will troll
20:31 <    yngwin > but we could still move to oftc
20:31 <    Cardoe > Halcy0n: exactly
20:31 <KungFuJesu > ban them when they're out of line, ignore them otherwise
20:31 <   Halcy0n@> yngwin: that is a possibility, but again, something we should discuss on the mailing lists to see if we do indeed want to move, how many people will do so.
20:32 <    Cardoe > We have other things to use manpower on, like developing a distribution.
20:32 <    yngwin > sure
20:32 <   Halcy0n@> I'd hate to see us get into a situation where half of our channels are on one networks, and half on the other.
20:32 <jmbsvicett > Halcy0n: That has been raised in the mls
20:32 < dberkholz@> KungFuJesus: you might want to bring up your questions on the gentoo-dev list once the meeting is over
20:32 <   Halcy0n@> jmbsvicetto: okay, good to know :)
20:32 <Betelgeuse@> dberkholz: -project rather
20:33 <KungFuJesu > Halcy0n: the division of networks I can see as a huge problem, as freenode is pretty much a wild west of channels
20:33 < dberkholz@> suppose we should try to bounce that thread over
20:33 < dberkholz@> next topic
20:33 -!- dberkholz changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Favor irc.gentoo.org alias in docs, etc
20:33 <Betelgeuse@> +1
20:33 <   Halcy0n@> I agree with this, without even having to read anything on it
20:33 <   lu_zero@> fine with it
20:34 < dberkholz@> in general, i like this idea regardless of the migration thing.
20:34 <jmbsvicett > dberkholz: We already have the dns alias and should really use it instead of irc.freenode.org everywhere
20:34 <dertobi123@> i guess we can easily vote on that, right?
20:34  * KungFuJe agrees
20:34 < dberkholz@> i like it for branding reasons
20:34 < dberkholz@> kinda like irc.gnome.org actually goes to gimpnet
20:34 <   Halcy0n@> KungFuJesus: please, if you have something of substance to add to the conversation, do so, otherwise let us have our meeting.
20:34 <KungFuJesu > I like it for consistency's sake, many distros follow the same trend
20:34 <     jokey@> ++
20:35 <       spb > experience from other networks shows that it becomes a pain in the arse for other random channels on that network, though
20:35 <       spb > as people connect to irc.gentoo.org and assume that generic-sounding channel names are all about gentoo
20:35 <Betelgeuse@> spb: And people connect to freenode and assume gentoo-java is about generic Java
20:36 <       spb > less commonly
20:37 <     jokey@> I'd say at least one user every 3-4 days over in #gentoo-php
20:37 <     jokey@> so not that uncommon
20:37 <   Halcy0n@> spb: is this something that has caused a lot of pain for others already?  And do you think if in our documentation we mention that Gentoo specific channels are #gentoo-* that would help?
20:37 <Betelgeuse@> jokey: Quite common on #gentoo-java too even with the warnings all over the place.
20:37 <       spb > it happens quite a lot on other networks i oper/admin on
20:38 <       spb > and it wastes quite a lot of time talking completely at cross purposes before discovering what the person in question thinks he's on about
20:38 <dleverton_ > People assuming that a #gentoo- channel is generic is pretty clearly a PEBKAC, whereas assuming that anything on irc.gentoo.org would be gentoo related seems a lot more reasonable.
20:38 <KungFuJesu > I have seen some ubuntu-trolls come in from time to time
20:38 <       spb > plus, someone asking a generic java question in #gentoo-java is easily recognised and easily directed elsewhere
20:39 <    jilles > the 'independence' of a particular IRC network is rather good though
20:39 <       spb > someone asking about how to do something on a gentoo system in a red hat channel that he thinks is a gentoo channel, on the other hand, is apt to cause massive confusion
20:39 < dberkholz@> alright, we've got some points worth thinking about here, so we might want to hold off on an instant vote and finish it up on-list
20:39 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I agree.
20:40 <   Halcy0n@> spb: thanks for the insight.
20:40 < dberkholz@> thanks for bringing that up, spb 
20:40 <     jokey@> dberkholz++
20:40 <KungFuJesu > spb: I admit to doing this myself
20:40 < dberkholz@> anything else new on this topic?
20:40 <KungFuJesu > let's try to consider the IRC client, though.  If one isn't aware of what channel they're typing into this same problem will happen anyway
20:41 <Betelgeuse@> KungFuJesus: ?
20:41 < dberkholz@> are there many popular irc clients that don't display the channel?
20:41 < dberkholz@> that seems a bit hard for me to grasp
20:41 <KungFuJesu > they display it, but it's easy to forget it's there sometimes
20:41 <  blackace > uhh, we're still talking about this?  if someone is too stupid to realize where they are, they're too stupid no matter what we do
20:41 <Betelgeuse@> blackace: yeah exactly
20:41 <KungFuJesu > I'm using irssi, and maybe I'm just stupid, but I've done it
20:41 <  blackace > we should do what is best for Gentoo, not what is best for stupid people
20:42 <   Halcy0n@> blackace: I agree, but its worth considering the impact we'll have on other users of the network.
20:42 <Betelgeuse@> dberkholz: Some people come around to IRC via some Java applets for example and don't really know what they are doing.
20:43 <Betelgeuse@> But that's not the point here.
20:43 <       spb > blackace: sometimes what's best for gentoo is not pissing off the people who host services for you
20:43 <  blackace > Halcy0n: I don't see what impact we'll have, if a gentoo user joins ##php and asks a php question, it's probably still on-topic
20:43 < dberkholz@> yeah, i don't really think any of this part is relevant
20:43 <KungFuJesu > spb: would freenode be angry if we left their network?
20:43 <  blackace > spb: I don't really care
20:43 < dberkholz@> if people type iwthout reading, then they do
20:43 <       spb > so i noticed
20:43 < dberkholz@> without*
20:43 <   Halcy0n@> (random aside, its now pouring here, so if I disconnect, I lost power)
20:43 < dberkholz@> so let's move on to the next topic
20:43 -!- dberkholz changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Why aren't fired developers banned from the channels where they displayed this behavior?
20:44 < dberkholz@> anyone have a question/comment/response?
20:44 <  blackace > isn't that kind of up to the individual channel owners except in the case of #gentoo-dev?
20:44 <KungFuJesu > sorry for my ignorance, but what behavior?
20:44 < dberkholz@> KungFuJesus: if you don't have the context for this discussion, you might want to sit it out
20:44 <  blackace > KungFuJesus: the behavior that got them fired?
20:44 <    musikc > blackace, what about the common ones like #-dev? would that be different?
20:44 <KungFuJesu > oh I see
20:44 <dleverton_ > As I said on the list (maybe too late for anyone to have noticed), since yngwin said there were're actually any devs that this applies to, is there anything to discuss?
20:45 <  blackace > musikc: err, I said, except for -dev :)
20:45 <dleverton_ > *weren't
20:45 <    musikc > hehe, sorry blackace
20:45 < dberkholz@> dleverton_: i must've interpreted his response differently from you
20:45 <    yngwin > i didnt say it like that, dleverton_
20:45 <    musikc > ive been asked about specific devs
20:45  * dleverto will read it again.
20:45 < dberkholz@> what i understood was that we should ban them from the same communication channel
20:45 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I will post my feedback on the thread.
20:46 <       spb > can i just point out at this point that the majority of "evidence" presented against the three of us that were removed came from #gentoo-dev
20:46 < dberkholz@> and allow other ones where they handled themselves differently
20:46 <       spb > and that we were banned from there for quite some time
20:46 <    musikc > ok, from a devrel perspective it is not a right for retired devs to automatically get voice in #-dev
20:46 <  blackace > musikc: the only issue I see with -dev is that since they're not banned they rely on another dev voicing them and two devs could get into a +v/-v war over it
20:46 <dleverton_ > I asked who he was referring to, aballier said "nowhere have I seen any accusation", and yngwin said he agreed (and certainly didn't ganswer my question directly).
20:47 <    musikc > blackace, thats a recent freenode limitation
20:47 <dleverton_ > If there is no accusation, that presumably no-one is being accused.
20:47 <    musikc > blackace, and maybe a bot could take care of that
20:47 <    yngwin > dleverton_: because i dont want to talk about specific cases, but about policy
20:47 <   antarus > I used to get annoyed when spb trolled #gentoo-dev often
20:47 <  blackace > musikc: yeah, there are more than a few ways to skin that cat :)
20:47 <KungFuJesu > if they're fired, I can see why they shouldn't be able to speak in the *-dev channels, however if they quit on their own volition, there is a sense of welcomed experience for a veteran developer to come back and give input
20:47 <   antarus > but I find now that I'm not on irc as much i don't care
20:47 <dertobi123@> i think this topic belongs to the CoC discussion as its a part of that discussion
20:48 <    fmccor > Isn't there already a policy question on this sort of thing floating around?
20:48 <    musikc > fmccor, the policy discussion i think you refer to is the extent of CoC enforcement?
20:49 <  blackace > if the CoC is violated, wouldn't they have already been banned prior to being fired?
20:49 <    kloeri > musikc: I don't get your comment about a recent freenode limitation - you can ban and unvoice people if you like just as you've always been able to
20:49 <jmbsvicett > dertobi123: I think you'll be restricting it much if you put it under CoC - it's a larger issue
20:49 <dleverton_ > yngwin: so it's purely a hypothetical question, then?
20:49 <    fmccor > I think so.  As I said, I'm not even sure what that iw about anymore.
20:49 <    musikc > kloeri, tomaw knows what i refer to, long conversation about it
20:49 <   Halcy0n@> kloeri: she means the -1 access level to automatically remove ops/voice.
20:49 <jmbsvicett > kloeri: mode -1, iirc
20:49  *   musikc nods and hands cookies to Halcy0n and jmbsvicetto 
20:49 <  blackace > mind readers!
20:50 <       spb > there is a general principle on which almost all IRC-based software is designed
20:50 <       spb > and that is that if you don't trust someone, you don't give them operator access
20:50 <  blackace > spb: which probably has nothing to do with this meeting
20:50 <       spb > which makes access level -1 redundant
20:50 <    musikc > blackace ++
20:50 <    kloeri > there's a rather easy solution to that.. don't give +o to people that can't follow gentoo decisions and keeps removing bans and voicing people who're not supposed to be voiced
20:50 <       spb > blackace: quite true, but then nor did the comment to which i was responding
20:51 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I think we aren't getting much here, so I suggest we bring this to the ML to discuss any points people want to bring up.
20:51 < dberkholz@> does anyone have a new question or comment that's directly related to the topic?
20:51 <     tomaw > Is the council interested in the autodevoice feature or is this rambling off topic?
20:51 <    Cardoe >  ok wrangling this back on topic...
20:51 <     tomaw > If you are then I have a simple explanation.  If not, I won't bother.
20:51 <    musikc > from a devrel perspective, we do not give voice to every dev who is retired so why should a forcibly retired dev be any different?
20:51 -!- mode/#gentoo-council [+v Cardoe] by Halcy0n
20:51 <jmbsvicett > tomaw: As long as we stick to freenode, -1 is something that interests us
20:51 <    Cardoe+> This needs to be kicked back to the list.
20:52 <   Halcy0n@> Cardoe: agreed.
20:52 <     tomaw > Well, I can tell you that the feature isn't present on OFTC either ;)
20:52 <    Cardoe+> It probably even belongs in devrel's level.
20:52 <  blackace > OFTC isn't our only option
20:52 <     tomaw > True, but it is one, hence me mentioning it.
20:52 <    Cardoe+> Standardize a policy for what happens to voluntarily retired devs and forcibly retired devs.
20:52 <   Halcy0n@> This is all a bit off topic, so if we could please go back to the topic at hand.
20:52 <  blackace > sorry :)
20:52 <     tomaw > Halcy0n: sure, sorry.
20:53 < dberkholz@> since nobody's adding anything on the topic, let's move on
20:53 < dberkholz@> feel free to discuss the other stuff on -dev or wherever you like besides right here and right now =)
20:53 <    Cardoe+> Can we actually tweak it?
20:53 <    Cardoe+> the council direct devrel to come up with a proposed solution/policy
20:53 <    Cardoe+> and move along
20:53 <    musikc > Cardoe, im happy to do so
20:54 <     jokey@> deal then ;)
20:54 <    musikc > dberkholz, declare it an action item and im there :)
20:54 <dertobi123@> heh
20:54 < dberkholz@> i don't agree with having a written policy for everything
20:54 < dberkholz@> Cardoe: i added your point to the summary, i'd like to discuss it more
20:55 <    musikc > dberkholz, your call. happy to assist by doing work or by just stating current process and devrel stance :)
20:55 < dberkholz@> (outside the meeting)
20:56 <    musikc > sold!
20:56 < dberkholz@> if there aren't any other questions/suggestions, let's move on
20:56 <    musikc > hehe
20:56 -!- dberkholz changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: PMS as a draft standard of EAPI 0
20:56 < dberkholz@> we were talking about this earlier today in here
20:56 <    Cardoe+> I'd say we're pretty close on this
20:57 <    musikc > dberkholz, i propose taking it to the list due to discussion from prior to this meeting
20:57 <    Cardoe+> save for the PMS guys feel one way and ${package_manager} feels another way
20:57 < dberkholz@> to quickly summarize, EAPI 0 and portage need to agree. there are some conflicts of opinion, and the question is how do they get resolved?
20:57 <   ciaranm > specific examples please?
20:57 <       spb > ciaranm: --jobs breaking invariancy was one example given
20:58 <    Cardoe+> my proposal is open a specific bug and have a specific bug at hand and let the council decide which way as far as conflict resolution.
20:58 < dberkholz@> 17:24 <   zmedico > dberkholz: mainly these two:  http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=222721  http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=232990
20:58 < dberkholz@> 17:25 <   zmedico > In both cases I consider something to be negligible that  the pms folks do not
20:58 <   ciaranm > ah. well, the way portage does --jobs is broken. so pms is right there and someone needs to make zmedico fix portage
20:58 <jmbsvicett > dberkholz: There must also be a way for future updates to the doc to take input from all PMs and not to be at the discretion of the current people behind PMS
20:58 <   ciaranm > portage is breaking existing stuff in the tree, so portage is in the wrong there
20:58 <    musikc > jmbsvicetto, makes sense
20:58 <   ciaranm > jmbsvicetto: examples of where we've rejected input please?
20:59 <   zmedico > ciaranm: I haven't seen any evidence to support you claims
20:59 <    Cardoe+> potentially creating a PMS editor post.
20:59 <   ciaranm > zmedico: it's on the bug
20:59 <   Calchan > ciaranm, broken from whose point of view besides yours ?
20:59 <    Cardoe+> That person can not be a developer on ANY package manager
20:59 <    musikc > i liked Halcy0n's idea about some kind of third party work on it
20:59 <   zmedico > ciaranm: not good enough
20:59 <   ciaranm > Calchan: objectively broken
20:59 <   zmedico > subjectively
20:59 <   ciaranm > Cardoe: examples of where the current editors aren't doing well enough?
20:59 <    Cardoe+> Halcy0n: You and I discussed this long ago
20:59 <    musikc > dberkholz, definitely sounds like a take it to the list item
20:59 <   Halcy0n@> Cardoe: the mediation thing?  Yes, and I brought it up again earlier :)
20:59 <   ciaranm > zmedico: no no. causing system breakage is not subjective.
20:59 <    Cardoe+> ciaranm: no situation where the current editors are not
21:00 < dberkholz@> what we're trying to do here is not have a discussion, but figure out where the conflicts and questions are
21:00 <    Cardoe+> ciaranm: It's just the logical solution.
21:00 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: I think the mailing list would be best to get all of these things straightened out.
21:00 <    Cardoe+> Put it in the hands of a third party
21:00 <   zmedico > ciaranm: you don't have enough evidence to show it's not neglible
21:00 <   antarus > indeed too much talking here ;p
21:00 <    Cardoe+> and if there's a conflict, let the council decide
21:00 <       spb > it's the logical solution based on an irrational set of premises
21:00 <    Cardoe+> however there should be an explicit bug.
21:00 <   ciaranm > Cardoe: i'd say the logical solution is using what's available, given limited manpower...
21:00 <   ciaranm > zmedico: two different packages running eselect opengl to save and restore in pkg_*. b0rk!
21:00 <    Cardoe+> fine. I'll volunteer to be the PMS editor
21:00 <    Cardoe+> everyone can submit patches to me
21:01 <   ciaranm > Cardoe: what are your qualifications?
21:01 <    musikc > dberkholz, conflict in that some feel PMS is biased?
21:01 <    Cardoe+> and when there's a specific conflict
21:01 <   ciaranm > musikc: specific examples of bias please
21:01 <   zmedico > ciaranm: I've never seen it happen
21:01 <    Cardoe+> I'll create a specific bug and ask the council to decide
21:01 <   ciaranm > zmedico: so? it can happen
21:01 <jmbsvicett > ciaranm: What are *your* qualifications?
21:01 <   ciaranm > jmbsvicetto: i wrote the only independent implementation of EAPIs 0 and 1
21:01 <Betelgeuse@> Well we shouldn't be changing EAPI 0 stuff in the first place. We should be creating new EAPIs.
21:01 <   ciaranm > jmbsvicetto: and i wrote more than half of PMS
21:01 <    musikc > ciaranm, he asked what the conflict was and i was commenting to conversations you were not present for prior to meeting hence my previous statement of a 'take it to the list' item for further discussion
21:01 <KungFuJesu > later
21:01 <jmbsvicett > ciaranm: really?
21:01 <   zmedico > ciaranm: I doubt it
21:02 <   ciaranm > zmedico: explain how portage prevents the scenario i described frmo happening
21:02 <   ciaranm > jmbsvicetto: really to which one?
21:02 <jmbsvicett > ciaranm: To writting the "only independent" implementation
21:02 <   zmedico > ciaranm: explain an upgrade scenario where it will happen
21:02 <   antarus > ciaranm: I thinnk the answer is 'it does not' and 'he does not care'
21:02 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: are we done? :)
21:02 < dberkholz@> does anyone have a new point here?
21:02 <   antarus > just +m the channel and get on with it ;)
21:02 <       spb > or rather, does the council have an answer to the question that i posed?
21:02 < dberkholz@> all i'm seeing is the same argument going back and forth
21:03 <   lu_zero@> sigh
21:03 <   ciaranm > jmbsvicetto: pkgcore uses a lot of portage stuff, which is why it doesn't find a lot of the issues paludis does
21:03 <   ciaranm > zmedico: two packages do the save / restore stuff in pkg_*. portage parallelises them. splat.
21:03 < dberkholz@> ciaranm, zmedico: could you discuss this somewhere else, please?
21:03 <    Cardoe+> seriously. We need to hash out a proper channel
21:04 <     jokey@> yep
21:04 <   ciaranm > dberkholz: i'd like the council to discuss it, since zmedico is being deliberately ignorant
21:04 <   ciaranm > in that he knows it's possible for breakage to happen, and he chooses to say "i haven't seen it so it doesn't exist"
21:04 <    Cardoe+> dberkholz: we can legitimately discuss the two bugs that zmedico and ciaranm have pointed out.
21:04 <   Halcy0n@> We've hit our one hour mark, so I'd like to slate this for our next meeting.  I have to call into a meeting for work right now.
21:04 < dberkholz@> Cardoe: on the list...
21:05 <     jokey@> Halcy0n: ++
21:05 <Betelgeuse@> spb: Doesn't look like it.
21:05 <       spb > somehow i'm not overly surprised
21:05 < dberkholz@> ok.
21:05 <    Cardoe+> spb: what was the question?
21:05 <   ciaranm > does the current council even still consider pms a priority?
21:05 < dberkholz@> It should be treated as a draft standard, and any deviations from it
21:05 < dberkholz@> found in the gentoo tree or package managers should have a bug filed
21:05 < dberkholz@> against either the deviator or PMS to resolve the differences.
21:05 < dberkholz@> Alternatively, what (specific) changes are required to PMS before such a
21:05 < dberkholz@> statement can be made?
21:06 < dberkholz@> ok.
21:06 <Betelgeuse@> In general I agree that we should push for this to get things forward.
21:06 < dberkholz@> as Halcy0n said, we've hit the one-hour mark
21:06 <    Cardoe+> I'd vote for that statement to be true as long as we can specify the method to resolve differences.
21:06 <   Halcy0n@> spb: with everything going back and forth, I can't make a decision on it until we figure out how differences will be resolved and/or handled.
21:06 < dberkholz@> so we'll push this to the list, and bring it up again in 2 weeks if we haven't gotten it resolved on-list
21:07 <   Halcy0n@> Which seems to need further discussion.
21:07 <Betelgeuse@> Cardoe: I would just put the council actively involved.
21:07 <   lu_zero@> fine
21:07 < dberkholz@> i look forward to seeing everyone's responses to all these topics on the list by monday
21:07 <       spb > differences will be resolved by filing a bug, so what needs to be sorted is what sort of escalation/mediation mechanism there is
21:07 <Betelgeuse@> At least something technical to talk about instead of the project stuff.
21:07 <jmbsvicett > spb: I think there's a bit more to discuss than that
21:08 <   ciaranm > jmbsvicetto: specifically what?
21:08 <   Halcy0n@> dberkholz: thanks for chairing.
21:08 < dberkholz@> feel free to continue discussion, although this meeting is over
21:08 <jmbsvicett > specifically that the document doesn't reflect what the authors want to reflect instead of what is the reality or what people around gentoo want it to reflect
21:08 < dberkholz@> and please post anything important to the list