| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Meeting rules at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/Schedule/MeetingGuidelines -- Init process | ||
| bpepple | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
|---|---|---|
| Hi everybody; who's around? | ||
| * jeremy | ||
| nirik is here. | ||
| tibbs here | ||
| warren here | ||
| jwb is here | ||
| c4chris here | ||
| dwmw2 eventually finds the #fedora-meeting channel | ||
| f13 | ||
| * dgilmore is here | ||
| bpepple | ok, it looks like everyone (except spot, who said he couldn't make it). | |
| c4chris | all accounted for :) | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Any objection to this week's report from FPC at https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-May/msg00637.html | ||
| bpepple | anyone object to either proposal from FPC? | |
| * bpepple doesn't have any objections to either proposal. | ||
| jeremy | the first feels a little bit like over-specifying, but since it's just a SHOULD, I won't argue that hard | |
| dwmw2 | looks good to me | |
| caillon | the only comment i have is: | |
| jeremy | the second is obvious enough | |
| dwmw2 | well, the PatchUpstreamStatus one does; the wiki hates me now | |
| caillon | i prefer putting comments about the patch in the actual patch, not the spec file. | |
| tibbs | caillon: I agree; I hope to amend the guidelines to allow that in the future. | |
| jwb | i'm fine | |
| tibbs | Unfortunately when I posted about it I didn't get much traction, so I went with the current proposal. | |
| jeremy | caillon: *nod* especially for upstreams using a sane scm ;) | |
| * nirik is fine with it. | ||
| dwmw2 | hm, should the wiki's "fuck off; I'm too busy to talk to you right now" page be marked no-cache? | |
| or is that counter-productive? :) | ||
| caillon | tibbs, please do. i'll +1 with that in mind. | |
| * dgilmore is ok with them | ||
| c4chris | looks fine to me | |
| dwmw2 | caillon: proper changelog comments in the patch is a great idea; I quite like having a one-line status comment in the specfile too, though. | |
| jwb | both are good. move on? | |
| bpepple | alright, I don't hear any objections to the proposal, so the FPC can consider them approved. | |
| tibbs | dwmw2: Perhaps dig up my message titled "Patch metadata" from fedora-devel two weeks ago and reply to it? | |
| caillon as well. | ||
| bpepple | ok, moving on......... | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- sponsor nominations - Denis Leroy (denis) | ||
| caillon | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| tibbs | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | wot no + ? | |
| 1 | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| f13 | dwmw2: ? | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | why are we all saying '1' instead of '+1'? | |
| jwb | dwmw2, we aren't | |
| caillon | we aren't | |
| f13 | dwmw2: we all said +1 | |
| caillon | your client is buggered | |
| f13 | dwmw2: your irc client is busted. | |
| jwb | you said 1 | |
| bpepple | ok, I see eleven '+1', so denis has been approved to be a sponsor. | |
| jwb | yay for denis! | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- sponsor nominations - Jef Spaleta (spoleeba) | ||
| bpepple | +1 | |
| caillon | +1 | |
| jwb | -1000000 | |
| just kidding | ||
| +1 | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| * dwmw2 tries to work out whether it's xchat or FESCo who are fucking with his head | ||
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| caillon | (that's a total of -999999 from jwb) | |
| dgilmore | dwmw2: its xchat | |
| c4chris | or there is a conspiration :) | |
| tibbs | +1 | |
| jwb | caillon, heh | |
| * nirik wishes he could run xchat. :) | ||
| dwmw2 | /capab identify-msg fixed it :) | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| bpepple | ok, I see see eight '+1' to Jef request, so he to has been approved. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- sponsor nominations - Douglas Warner (silfreed) | ||
| nirik | I would like to see more (or any) reviews from Douglas... | |
| notting | dwmw2: in this specific case, xchat | |
| dwmw2 | notting: :) | |
| c4chris | nirik: agreed | |
| notting | no reviews == -1 for now | |
| bpepple | -1, I would like see some more reviews also. | |
| dwmw2 | who's Douglas? | |
| caillon | 0 | |
| nirik | -1 for now, come back after some reviews... | |
| jwb | 0 | |
| dgilmore | 0 | |
| c4chris | -1 | |
| f13 | -1 | |
| nirik | He's a good guy, maintains packages nicely, but hasn't done much in the way of reviewing. | |
| jwb | as an aside, we should really start separating sponsorship from reviews at some point | |
| caillon | jwb, hear hear! | |
| tibbs | I have to agree with nirik. I mean, reviews aren't the only thing we go by, but I don't recall being given much to go by except the packages he maintains. | |
| jwb: Yes, but what other criteria do we have? | ||
| bpepple | jwb: agreed. some of the desktop folks don't do reviews, but they know the packaging guidelines. | |
| nirik | surely, but will need to figure out other criteria | |
| dgilmore | sponoring you need to see how well they work with others in the community | |
| jwb | bpepple, sponsorship should be more than just packaging, but that's a separate discussion :) | |
| bpepple | ok, going back to douglas's request.. | |
| nirik | if he is sponsoring people based on reviews, he needs to know how to do them... if we are sponsoring based on other things sponsors should know how to do those too. ;) | |
| tibbs | Well, we need to have that discussion. Just not during this meeting. | |
| dwmw2 | we don't have enough people actively doing reviews. I don't see any particular problem making people do reviews before they're allowed to {become a sponsor,submit new packages,eat their own lunch} | |
| jwb | tibbs, right | |
| bpepple | I'll send him a message that we would like to see him do some reviews, and come back to us in a few weeks. | |
| abadger1999 | Isn't sponsorship primarily useful for reviewers? | |
| nirik | abadger1999: right now, yeah. | |
| bpepple | abadger1999: mostly. | |
| jwb | abadger1999, at the moment. which leaves other classes of contributions out | |
| abadger1999 | Oh. Sorry. I think I misread that. sponsor vs sponsorship. | |
| jwb | which is a problem | |
| tibbs | Well, we're specifically talking about cvsextras sponsors here. | |
| * bpepple thinks we might be going off into the weeds. This might be better to discuss on the mailing lists. | ||
| jwb | yes | |
| dwmw2 | bpepple: you're probably right | |
| c4chris | yup, let's move on for now | |
| bpepple | alright, let's move on. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- Proposal to block old version of automake & autoconf - Karsten Hopp | ||
| caillon | -1000000 | |
| Kick__ | I'd like to cancel this proposal as it is obvious after that discussion on the list that we can't do that. I'd rather work with upstream of the affected packages to move them to more recent autofoo and keep the old compat stuff for development outside Fedora. Maybe have reviewers check if old autofoo is really required, but that's it | |
| dwmw2 | I don't really see the point in removing things which people are using | |
| caillon | bpepple, btw, what happened to mclasen? | |
| nirik | Kick__: fair enough... do you just not want to maintain the older ones? perhaps find others interested in that if you don't want to? | |
| bpepple | caillon: I never got any links to some examples of his work, so I could send out his request to the mailing list. | |
| dwmw2 | I just find it amusing that autocrap itself is one of the main problems for those who can't just write proper Makefiles :) | |
| caillon | bpepple, i bet you're using an example of his work right now... | |
| f13 | Kick__: yeah, you could orphan the older ones and let somebody else maintain them | |
| jwb | caillon, people have to be motivated enough to actually want to do that | |
| Kick__ | nirik: maintaining isn't the problem, having developers still use them for new projects is the problem | |
| caillon | jwb, to do what? | |
| nirik | Kick__: or perhaps we could rename them? compat-autofoo / ancient-autofoo, etc... ? | |
| Kick__ | ;-) | |
| nirik | anyhow, more discussion on list, etc... move on? | |
| jwb | caillon, gather up examples of their work. mclausen is excellent, we all know it. but he's not special enough to ignore what everyone else has to do... | |
| Kick__ | ok | |
| caillon | (I didn't have to do it when I became a sponsor) | |
| tibbs | If someone wants to start up a project to see about porting some packages off of old autotools, I'd certainly support it. | |
| bpepple | caillon: I agree, it seems sorta pointless to ask mclasen for examples, but other FESCo members felt we shouldn't give him an exception. | |
| jwb | caillon, me either. i think that's a failure | |
| * dwmw2 doesn't even know whether he's a sponsor or not. | ||
| jwb | bpepple, i just think exceptions are a slipper slope. then you have to deal with people saying "but he didn't have to do this.." | |
| jwb | slippery | |
| caillon | http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/userinfo?userID=78 | |
| his work ^^ | ||
| dgilmore | dwmw2: you dont have those keys | |
| bpepple | caillon: I'm fine with using that, since mclasen most likely doesn't have time for package reviews. | |
| caillon | actually, he even does those. | |
| https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442693 for one example | ||
| buggbot | Bug 442693: medium, low, ---, Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it, NEW , Review Request: geoclue - Geoclue is a modular geoinformation service | |
| caillon | and why he should be a sponsor | |
| dgilmore | caillon: no one is working on that ;) | |
| tibbs | Looks to me like he should assign that ticket to himself. | |
| It's one of the 37 reviews that our good friend Nobody has done. | ||
| bpepple | caillon: I'll send out an e-mail about mclasen after the meeting, and we can vote on him next week. does that work? | |
| c4chris | fair enough | |
| caillon | that's another week our anxious contributor doesn't get to do fedora work | |
| we're not screwing mclasen here... | ||
| we're screwing out contributors | ||
| jwb | which anxious contributor? | |
| tibbs | Honestly I don't care who supplies the info about mclasen, but I personally don't know much about what he has done so I have nothing to go on when deciding how to vote. | |
| caillon | the one submitting the review i just posted | |
| * dgilmore thinks that mclasen will make an excellent sponsor, he works well with others and does good work | ||
| jwb | that can be dealt with in 30 seconds | |
| bpepple | dgilmore: agreed, | |
| caillon | jwb, if we deal with it in 30 seconds, that's a wrong way to do so. the person willing to walk through with them when they have problems should be the sponsor | |
| jwb | sponsor-by-proxy has been done before | |
| caillon | sponsoring people we aren't going to interface with is an insult to the sponsorship process, really. | |
| nirik | I can step up and sponsor that guy now if you like, and we can vote on mclasen next week? | |
| jwb | caillon, yes. which is part of the larger problem, given that there is no defined responsibilities for sponsors | |
| caillon | but it's not the first failure in the sponsorship process we have | |
| nirik, i can too. the point was that mclasen should be. | ||
| jwb | agreed. nor is it quite as big a deal as "hurting our users" | |
| caillon | i think hurting our contributors is more of a big deal than hurting our users | |
| jwb | sorry, meant contributors | |
| nirik | caillon: sure, as long as he has time to do so... | |
| tibbs | So where is the actual failure here? We asked for info on mclasen before making a decision and we didn't get it. | |
| caillon | i never saw that request. so it's apparently my failure since i proposed him and i saw bpepple say he added him to the docket. | |
| nirik | I suppose we could vote now, and those with enough info could vote and those without could abstain? | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| caillon | +1 | |
| tibbs | 0 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| jwb | 0 | |
| nirik | +1 (I haven't seen a ton of reviews, but the ones I have seem good) | |
| jwb | c4chris, ? | |
| bpepple | ok, I see six '+1', and two '0'. | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| jwb | 7 | |
| tibbs | So this wasn't passed by the other sponsors, right? | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| jwb | tibbs, correct | |
| bpepple | ok, we've approved mclasen to be a sponsor. | |
| notting | his reviews are at http://tinyurl.com/4dkqlk | |
| f13 | I know that mclausen comes and talks to me or others when he encounters something that doesn't make sense or he doesn't understand. | |
| notting | (fwiw( | |
| tibbs | When we did an identical vote last week we corrected ourselves and went through that process. I just wish we could stick to one actual procedure. | |
| caillon | i'll also note that http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/tasksbyuser shows him as the 4th highest builder behind kojira, jkeating (who did the mass rebuilds), and lmacken (due to bodhi stuff) | |
| jwb | tibbs, yes that was sort of my point | |
| caillon | so if he's doing stuff wrong, we have a much bigger problem. | |
| abadger1999 | caillon: Reviews are much more important than builds to be a sponsor. | |
| jwb | abadger1999, for now | |
| caillon | that's what the process says | |
| tibbs | But honestly I have no problem switching to a "get it done" attitude if that's what we want. | |
| caillon | that's not really true. | |
| notting | abadger1999: ok, then he has the third most reviews of any non-sponsor, currently (according to package status) | |
| abadger1999 | notting: That is very relevant and important :-) | |
| tibbs | Anyway, it's past the half-hour mark; what's left? | |
| caillon | notting, thanks for the quick stat | |
| f13 | getting trashed for F9 | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MaintainerResponsibilityPolicy -- bpepple | ||
| tibbs | Glad to see my old draft getting some love. | |
| notting | caillon: i just read the page. c4chris does all the hard work behind PackageStatus | |
| * c4chris blushes :) | ||
| bpepple | tibbs: yeah, I had some free time, figure I would dust that off. | |
| caillon | i didn't realize that stat was there | |
| tibbs | caillon: It's getting harder to see through all of the mega-reviewers, but there's still some useful bits to be gleaned. | |
| jwb | bpepple, i like what you have hear | |
| jwb | er, here | |
| * nirik likes it... wonder if anything is missing... seems a bit light for some reason. | ||
| notting | it's a good start, and might as well go with it and add from there | |
| dwmw2 | yeah, it looks good to me | |
| tibbs | +1 the maintainer responsibility document. Obviously we'll need to adjust it going forward, but what's there is good. | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| notting | the 'deal with reported bugs' may not apply equally to all packages. the kernel is still doomed. | |
| tibbs | Is there an easy way for a maintainer to know what depends on them? | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| caillon | +1 with knurd's addition | |
| nirik | +1 overall (we can always add) | |
| notting | tibbs: repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps, for both source and binary repos | |
| bpepple | +1 here also. ;) | |
| * c4chris afk a few minutes... | ||
| nirik | how about something about interfacing with upstream? not sure to what extent, but might be nice to mention that communication with upstream is important. | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| bpepple | ok, I count nine '+1', so this has been approved. | |
| And as mentioned we can add to it, as needed in the future. | ||
| notting | i suspect knurd's addition would be 'Maintain stability for other developers'. with a large 'don't change the ABI in a released version, please' entry | |
| dwmw2 | we should add something on making sure we merge patches upstream as well as possible | |
| bpepple | dwmw2: not a bad idea. | |
| dgilmore | dwmw2, nirik: yep | |
| dwmw2 | with the obvious corollary that we should only really be shipping patches which are suitable for upstream in the first place, as far as possible | |
| tibbs | Who moderates fedora-devel-announce? Do they know to expect change notices like this? | |
| dgilmore | tibbs: f13 does it | |
| f13 | I moderate it, and can extend said moderation to more people | |
| something I want to do after F9 is consolidate the various -annoucne list passwords and get a group of moderators | ||
| bpepple | f13: sounds like a good idea. | |
| * c4chris is back | ||
| bpepple | dwmw2: I'll add your suggestion, when I add it to the wiki. thanks. | |
| unless there is anything else, we can probably move on. | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- F9 - any issues needing discussion? - all | ||
| caillon | F9: are we there yet? | |
| bpepple | anything we need to discuss about F9, or are we in celebration mode? | |
| notting | barring something really bad exploding under testing in the next couple of hours, F9 is done. | |
| f13 | caillon: QA has a few more hours to hit the big red button | |
| bpepple | notting: sweet. | |
| f13 | that means rawhide will see F10 content early next week | |
| jwb | we've secretly disconnected the big red button and QA doesn't know it though | |
| jeremy | jwb: shhhhh! | |
| caillon | jwb, that's ok. QA is colorblind. | |
| tibbs | I downloaded F9 yesterday... But someone fixed the permissions before I got the boot images. | |
| notting | f13: are we allowing syncing solely from tier0? | |
| jwb | silence... | |
| notting | so, in light of F9 being mostly done... get your stuff ready for F10 alpha! coming sooner than you think! | |
| jeremy | indeed! | |
| next week's fesco topic -- f10 schedule ;-) | ||
| wwoods | two months and a week! | |
| jwb | which means the F10 name game starts soon | |
| bpepple | ok, that's all I got on the schedule for this week. So, | |
| c4chris | acid anyone ? | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| nirik | so does F-10 get 2 weeks shorter due to f_9 slip? oh well, I guess we can discuss that later. ;) | |
| wwoods | QA hasn't found anything big-red-button-worthy, and at this point I don't think we can find anything bad enough to require cancelling everything | |
| dgilmore | nirik: probably | |
| wwoods: we revoked big red button powers last night | ||
| :) | ||
| bpepple | anything else folks want to discuss, or should we start to wrap up for this week? | |
| wwoods | if someone was like "uh it makes all Gateway machines catch fire" I'd be looking for a workaround. | |
| jwb | wwoods, what about powerpc machines? | |
| wwoods | I've tested that | |
| they don't catch fire | ||
| jwb | you disappoint. i was looking for a snarky comeback | |
| c4chris | only acrid smoke ? | |
| f13 | so uh, I can't boot from mdraid 1 | |
| notting | f13: really? | |
| f13 | yeah, really :/ | |
| jwb | f13, you don't count | |
| nirik | jwb: aside from my video not working ppc has been doing really well with my testing. | |
| notting | f13: lemme try | |
| jwb | nirik, mine as well | |
| f13 | notting: key might be two actual disks | |
| nirik | jwb: r128? | |
| jwb | nirik, radeon 9600 | |
| which is r350 i think | ||
| dwmw2 | hm, my 9600 works fine (dual head and everything) | |
| dgilmore | jwb: whats the other user have? | |
| wwoods | yeah, I think my G5 is 9600 as well | |
| nirik | wonder if it's fbdev thats broke | |
| dgilmore | oh sorry dwmw2 forgot you were here :) | |
| nirik | https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445419 is the r128 bug I filed | |
| buggbot | Bug 445419: low, low, ---, Dave Airlie, ASSIGNED , r128 driver broken on ppc | |
| dwmw2 | *rsap* | |
| jwb: failure mode? | ||
| jwb | dwmw2, er... 9600 doesn't do dual head... | |
| dwmw2, i can't recall actually. it's been forever since i tried the actual radeon driver | ||
| dwmw2 | pmac /pmac/git/mtd-2.6 $ lspci | grep Radeon | |
| 0000:f0:10.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AP [Radeon 9600] | ||
| pmac /pmac/git/mtd-2.6 $ xrandr | grep ^DVI | ||
| DVI-1 connected 1920x1200+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 519mm x 324mm | ||
| DVI-0 connected 1600x1200+1920+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 360mm x 270mm | ||
| nirik | anyhow, not red button worthy. :) | |
| jwb | Section "Device" | |
| Identifier "Videocard0" | ||
| Driver "fbdev" | ||
| Option "UseFBDev" "true" | ||
| EndSection | ||
| that's what i use | ||
| and it works | ||
| dwmw2 | hm, so you're not using the radeon driver at all? | |
| nirik | driver fbdev? | |
| * notting thinks this is slightly off-topic for fesco -> #fedora-devel,maybe? | ||
| jwb | moving | |
| * nirik nods | ||
| dwmw2 | bugzilla, even | |
| notting | bpepple: anythign about elections we need to bring up? | |
| bpepple | notting: not really. I'm going to be sending out a reminder about nominations each week until the election. | |
| if there's nothing else, I think we can wrap up. | ||
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 60 | ||
| c4chris | wrap++ | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 30 | ||
| 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!