| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Meeting rules at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/Schedule/MeetingGuidelines -- Init process | ||
| * nirik is here | ||
| loupgaroublond is here | ||
| bpepple | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
|---|---|---|
| Hi everybody; who's around? | ||
| jwb | around, but about to call into a real-life meeting | |
| * notting is here | ||
| f13 | I'm here. | |
| * spot is here | ||
| c4chris | ||
| nirik is here still. | ||
| dgilmore is here | ||
| bpepple | caillon & dwmw2 mentioned that won't be able to make it today, though they did vote on the 2 proposals. | |
| f13 | oh yeah, those proposals. | |
| I'm going to attempt a barcamp on Fedora Maintainer Karma which has some play into the new maintainer containment | ||
| bpepple | f13: cool. | |
| ok, while we're waiting for folks we can probably start with something easy. | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- sponsor nominations -- caillon | ||
| f13 | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 here also. | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| spot | ehhhhh, ok. +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| bpepple | ok, that's seven votes for making caillon a sponsor. I'll go ahead and update his account after the meeting. | |
| moving on...... | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/PackageACLOpening - f13 | ||
| bpepple | caillon & dwmw2 both voted '+1' for this offline. | |
| spot | +1. | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| (yes, i've read it) | ||
| nirik | +1 here. | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| f13 | I have to remember what I wrote... | |
| jwb | (bpepple, oh, and +1 for callion as a sponsor) | |
| jwb | er, caillon | |
| bpepple | +1 to acl opening proposal. | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| notting | 0 | |
| * bpepple wonders if the wiki has gone down. | ||
| f13 | so obviously I like this idea | |
| but there was a fair number of folks that felt this should wait until we have the new maintainer containment stuff in place | ||
| drago01 | bpepple: works fine | |
| nirik | so everything is marked, but maintainers can opt out | |
| f13 | yeah, we'd just have to do it /again/ after we have the new maintainment. | |
| c4chris | f13: yes, we can do it int 2 steps | |
| bpepple | f13: dwmw2 also mentioned people having to justify opting out. | |
| f13 | bpepple: yeah, that's an interesting thought | |
| c4chris | bpepple: might want for some other maintainer to challenge the fact that a package is closed before we ask for justification... | |
| c4chris | s/want/want to wait/ | |
| * knurd will close the ACLs for all his packages in protest until the CTRL+C issue is fixed if this is done without the containment stuff until | ||
| f13 | knurd: I honestly don't think we can fix ^c until we move off of cvs | |
| knurd | then do containment stuff together with this | |
| that opening ACLs IMHO is fine | ||
| (and a good idea actually) | ||
| but one without the other is IMHO just asking for trouble until the ^c problem is not fixed | ||
| knurd | s/not// | |
| bpepple | so, what are people's opinion about waiting to implement the acl opening until the containment stuff is finished? | |
| notting | +1 | |
| dgilmore | 0 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| spot | 0, i'm supportive of it either way. | |
| nirik | perhaps we should talk about that now and see if we want to do it, then it would make sense to do it at the same time. | |
| bpepple | nirik: agreed. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/NewMaintainerContainment - f13 | ||
| c4chris | I don't really care. We'll have to repeat the opening/opt-out process after containment is implemented if we do not wait | |
| bpepple | caillon +1 to the Maintainer containment proposal. | |
| dwmw2 voted an ambivalent +0. | ||
| nirik | this is gonna be some work to implement... who is going to drive it? infrastructure folks? | |
| dgilmore | +1 but i want to know who will do the work | |
| nirik | also, does it require FAS2? and whats the timeframe on that? | |
| f13 | it may require fas2 for the karma stuff | |
| but before that I think we can accomplish containment with just fas1 | ||
| it'll just make it harder to promote people. | ||
| c4chris | personnaly I do not really think this is needed, but since it seems to make many people more comfortable: +1 | |
| f13 | I plan on working on some of it, | |
| and maybe we'll get an INfrastructure intern this summer to work on it too | ||
| bpepple | +1 to the idea, though some of the details still need to be worked out. | |
| * nirik agrees with c4chris | ||
| bpepple | c4chris: I think this will help lower the barrier a bit for new contributors, since it will limit what damage they can do. | |
| nirik | so who is grandfathered into the group? everyone now? or under discussion tomorrow? | |
| warren | sorry back now | |
| went to pharmacy | ||
| bpepple | nirik: I would lean towards anyone that is currently sponsored. | |
| c4chris | bpepple: agreed, there's that aspect too | |
| f13 | basically I think what I'm looking for out of FESCo is general approval of the idea so that we can allocate some resources for it. | |
| warren | "I would lean towards anyone that is currently sponsored." is for people with access to everything open? | |
| as opposed to the lower level where they have access only to their own package? | ||
| f13 | yea | |
| spot | i like the idea, i'd even vote +1 if someone was willing to do the work. | |
| warren | There is a simpler way to draw the line... | |
| bpepple | warren: correct. | |
| +1. I like the idea in general also. | ||
| f13 | spot: "someone willing" may be an intern for the summer. | |
| warren | Something like: 1) Anybody who has ever reviewed a package. or maybe 2) Anybody who owns 5 or more packages. | |
| Or 3) Anybody who has made X number of CVS commits (these can be counted by parsing the cvs-commits list easily) | ||
| You can make a reasonably good rough line between very active and less active contributors this way. | ||
| bpepple | warren: my criteria was for who was being grandfathered in. | |
| warren | bpepple, isn't that what I'm giving examples for where to draw the line? | |
| nirik | so this is all filtering out people who might mess up someone elses package, right? so any good guide to being a good community person/knowning what they are doing would be ok with me. | |
| warren | We need 1) a simple way to draw the line 2) a simple way to upgrade people we missed (which shouldn't be much if #1 was good) | |
| It isn't a big deal if #1 is too lenient, because all sponsored people could already do damage now if they wanted. | ||
| bpepple | warren: agreed. | |
| regardless, I think the details can be worked out later, since f13 is just looking for general approval of the proposal. | ||
| warren | We don't have to decide "how to draw the line" now, someone should research the best simple way to draw the line. | |
| nod | ||
| bpepple | ok, could I get a quick show of hands on general idea of f13's proposal. | |
| nirik | right. so, everyone voted? | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 on the idea | |
| bpepple | caillon +1 | |
| spot | +1 on the idea | |
| warren | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| warren | Did we already vote on caillon? | |
| jwb | 0 | |
| spot | yes, we denied the request. | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| bpepple | warren: yeah, at the beginning of the meeting. | |
| spot | (no, we didn't. he passed) | |
| f13 | out | |
| bpepple | ok, I see eight '+1', so FESCo approves the general idea of f13's proposal. now we just need to work out the details and implement it. | |
| jwb | and vote again? | |
| f13 | yeah, FESCO should get to review it before it goes live | |
| warren | great | |
| Don't really need to vote on it again. How about we vote only if anybody objects to the details? | ||
| save some time | ||
| c4chris | sure | |
| bpepple | warren: I'm fine with that. | |
| f13 | whatever's clever | |
| warren | BTW, I have a potential topic for FESCO discussion | |
| I can wait until the end | ||
| bpepple | ok, now that we've approved the new maintainer proposal, do we want to hold off the opening of the acl's until the maintainer proposal is implemented? | |
| c4chris | might as well | |
| less confusing | ||
| warren | yes | |
| bpepple | c4chris: I'm inclined to agree as well. | |
| nirik | yeah. | |
| tibbs | Awesome. | |
| spot | Now that we've voted out tibbs, lets move on. | |
| f13 | me too | |
| spot | I mean, uhhh | |
| f13 | tibbs: welcome | |
| c4chris | tibbs: do we look awesone, or were you just happy to get connected? | |
| bpepple | ok, is there anything else people want to discuss regarding f13 proposal's, or should we move on? | |
| c4chris | move++ | |
| tibbs | Actually I'm sitting in the same room with three other fesco members and I did not realize there was a meeting. | |
| f13 | tibbs: cute. | |
| bpepple | tibbs: D'oh! | |
| tibbs | I have focus. | |
| c4chris | t,t,t | |
| bpepple | do folks want to approve some features this week, or should we push them to next week? | |
| c4chris | is poelcat around? | |
| spot | has anyone seen amanda huggenkiss? | |
| * loupgaroublond would like his feature approved this week :) | ||
| spot | Why can't I find amanda huggenkiss? | |
| * c4chris wonders too | ||
| warren | I have a topic for discussion if we're just going to sit here. | |
| bpepple | warren: go ahead. | |
| c4chris | loupgaroublond: url? | |
| warren | https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427481 | |
| Package name documentation-devel is controversial. | ||
| Objections against: | ||
| 1) Presumptuous to have such a generic name to cloud the namespace. | ||
| 2) *-devel for a tools package seems wrong. | ||
| Arguments to keep it: | ||
| buggbot | Bug 427481: medium, medium, ---, Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it, NEW , Review Request: documentation-devel - Documentation tool chain | |
| warren | 1) Red Hat has been using this name for years internally. (emotional?) | |
| 2) 179 modules * 23 languages must be updated to contain the new name. (Concern that the non-technical users that are translators will screw this up.) | ||
| Should FESCo make a recommendation, mandate or just stay out of this? | ||
| loupgaroublond | c4chris: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GoodHaskellSupport | |
| warren | My personal opinion is that the argument against #2 is really not such a huge burden, and #1 isn't valid either. The objection #2 makes it important enough for them to rename. | |
| notting | warren: 4117 instances? niiiiice. | |
| dgilmore | bpepple: next week | |
| spot | it seems like it should be "fedora-documentation", with a provides for "documentation-devel" | |
| warren | notting, really, the update could be scripted. | |
| spot, wont that make it be "multilib" and be removed if someone does "yum remove *-devel"? | ||
| notting | of course | |
| spot | won't it also be multilib if left as is? | |
| warren | spot, we *do* have a policy against runtime and tools being in or requiring *-devel right? | |
| spot, which is wrong. | ||
| rdieter | fwiw, it's documentation-devel is noarch. | |
| warren | ok, maybe multilib isn't a concern | |
| *-devel in the name seems wrong. | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| warren | Should FESCo stay out of this, make a recommendation, or mandate? | |
| loupgaroublond | no features this week? | |
| warren | loupgaroublond, no poelcat | |
| loupgaroublond | bummer | |
| warren | Any opinions at all? | |
| spot | i think the name should be changed | |
| with a provides to the old name | ||
| f13 | I think we should make it known in our guidelines that packages/subpackages with a -devel tail is treated differently | |
| spot | since multlib is a non-issue | |
| f13 | just like with -libs | |
| we have a few Fedora standard naming schemes, -devel, -libs, etc.. | ||
| warren | spoleeba, can -devel be spelled out explicitly in guidelines? | |
| spot | I suppose it could be. | |
| warren | So we're making this a mandate that the name be changed? | |
| jwb | i hate that word | |
| warren | jwb, what else do we call it? | |
| f13 | a suggestion | |
| spot | I don't think we're making anything. I'd recommend it be changed. | |
| f13 | a strong suggestion. | |
| f13 fcrippa fab | ||
| bpepple | f13: +1 | |
| jwb | "a recommendation" | |
| or what f13 said | ||
| warren | "FESCo discussed this during the meeting, and strongly suggests changing the name. Packaging guidelines will soon more explicitly spell out the rules regarding -devel." | |
| ? | ||
| bpepple | warren: sounds good. | |
| spot | sure. | |
| warren | should we vote on this? | |
| spot | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| warren | +1 | |
| anybody else? | ||
| f13 | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 I guess. | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| bpepple | jwb, tibbs, notting, dgilmore? | |
| tibbs | +1 | |
| jwb | sec | |
| warren | Is that a majority? | |
| notting | +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| f13 | looks like it | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| warren | OK, great. | |
| I'll post it | ||
| bpepple | warren: cool, thanks. | |
| anything else, or should we wrap up for this week? | ||
| f13 | just calling it documentation-development would be fine | |
| warren | names discussed were: | |
| DocumentationKit | ||
| documentation-tools | ||
| documentation-development I guess | ||
| f13 | DocumentationKit! Rock | |
| nirik | documentator! | |
| notting | DocBoxOfRocks | |
| warren | Oh, and "warrensucks" | |
| bpepple | f13: yeah, we need another Kit! | |
| warren | which is totally fine with me, because it has no -devel. | |
| spot | KatKit. | |
| loupgaroublond | CrateOfLinuxManuals | |
| notting | docs-o-matic | |
| dgilmore | no more -o-matic | |
| warren | Yeah, no -o-matic | |
| OK I'm done here. gotta owrk | ||
| work | ||
| anything else? | ||
| c4chris | wrap sounds fine | |
| bpepple | ok, if there's nothing else let's wrap it up, and let the FUDCon folks go back to hacking. | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 60 | ||
| notting | no feature-fu this week? | |
| c4chris | no feature-master... | |
| bpepple | not to mention we're short on time anyhow. | |
| nirik | he just walked into the room | |
| smooge | YanKit? | |
| * bpepple waits a moment before starting to count again. | ||
| nirik | and left. | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 30 | ||
| nirik | ok. | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 15 | ||
| bpepple | -- MARK -- Meeting End | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!