16:59:39 #startmeeting 16:59:39 Meeting started Tue May 14 16:59:39 2013 UTC. The chair is lucas. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:59:39 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:59:44 hi! 16:59:51 #topic roll all 16:59:53 who is around? 17:00:04 I am 17:00:28 zack won't make it 17:00:59 err, roll call, not roll all. if I can't type, it's going to be fun. 17:01:24 well apparently I can't read, because I read "roll call" 17:01:36 o/ 17:01:53 o/ 17:02:19 * algernon is about 17:04:19 * wookey is slightly about 17:04:34 ok, let's start 17:04:49 agenda is http://titanpad.com/debiandpl-20130514 17:04:53 #topic next meeting 17:05:06 any reasons not to go with [2013-05-28 Tue 17:00] ? (date -d @1369760400) 17:05:45 None from me 17:05:50 ditto 17:05:53 ok, let's do that, then 17:06:08 #agreed next meeting [2013-05-28 Tue 17:00] (date -d @1369760400) 17:06:21 #topic action items from last meeting 17:06:31 I will just paste the actions that, AFAIK, don't need any discussion 17:06:53 ** TODO lucas to think about team name (other suggestions welcomed) 17:06:54 No progress on that front. Let's keep the current name for now 17:06:54 ** DONE lucas to reopen discussion on invited speakers on debconf-team 17:06:54 Done, but not much success: http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20130424.075756.1a1c961b.en.html 17:06:56 ** TODO lucas to finish work on bits.d.o delegation 17:06:59 Forwarded to ana + madamezou for final review 17:07:02 ** TODO bgupta to flesh out debian-sponsors wiki, and ping list again to share. 17:07:05 re-action 17:07:08 ** DONE bgupta to re-announce fundraising matching pool on bits.d.o 17:07:10 http://bits.debian.org/2013/04/dc13-fundraising.html 17:07:13 ** DONE bgupta Write to Mishi@SFLC and confirm that no changes are required to TM policy if we register Logo. 17:07:16 Still waiting - will ping on Wed, if I don't hear back 17:07:19 Waiting for Mishi@SFLC's answers 17:07:20 ** TODO bgupta investigate full madrid costs 17:07:23 waiting on reply from Mishi. If I don't hear back by Wed, I will ping 17:07:26 ** TODO zack to answer on -cloud@ about general philosophical statements from Debian 17:07:29 Still pending, please postpone to next meeting -- Zack 17:07:34 and I'll re-action the ones that need it. if you have comments on one of the above, please talk now 17:07:43 #action lucas to finish work on bits.d.o delegation 17:07:44 one comment 17:07:53 #action bgupta to flesh out debian-sponsors wiki, and ping list again to share 17:08:12 Not sure if I mentioned it but we raised over $2500 +$2500 matching funds during the debconf drive 17:08:29 #action bgupta Write to Mishi@SFLC and confirm that no changes are required to TM policy if we register Logo 17:08:41 \o/ 17:09:02 excellent. :) that was using paypal for the non-matching part, right? 17:09:13 yep, through debian.ch 17:09:40 one pending item on the DPL's TODO list is to finally get access to Debian transactions at SPI 17:09:55 so I can't say how it compares to the usual Debian donations 17:10:40 but I would say that it's about the same as what we usually receive per month 17:10:46 agreed. That would be useful to know. 17:10:59 so it means tripling donations thanks to this effort 17:11:24 #action bgupta investigate full madrid costs 17:11:31 #action zack to answer on -cloud@ about general philosophical statements from Debian 17:11:55 other comments? 17:12:10 ok, next action was: 17:12:13 ** TODO bgupta to move list of ideas to wiki and go through end of campaign's discussions 17:12:25 [hi -- time confusion from me] 17:12:28 bgupta: do you want us to review the current state of http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/campaignideas ? 17:12:45 [was still working, thought the meeting was later] 17:12:56 Let me give status 17:13:17 I am collecting topics… by reading every email. Many emails have multiple ideas… 17:13:31 once that is done I plan to dedupe with your blog list, and organize.. 17:14:03 If you want to look and see, do understand it's a work in progress. 17:14:28 I can be less thorough and finish faster… or keep doing as I am doing. 17:14:43 might be worth taking a peek.. and let me know. 17:14:59 sure. note that in the copy/pasting from the blog, you lost the links to the individual posts 17:15:24 ah.. will fix that.. 17:15:43 it's probably good for bgupta to do it independently though, rather than any of the discussion participants 17:16:03 even if he was foolish to volunteer to read it all ;) 17:16:18 I don't think there's any emergency around this task, but it would be generally very useful to have such a "reservoir of ideas" 17:16:39 moray: yes, I'm not claiming that i did my own list in a totally unbiased way ;) 17:17:22 I'll reaction this 17:17:25 I'll add that this is a great learning experience for me about areas of the project I am unfamiliar with. So no regrets. 17:17:44 #action bgupta to move list of ideas to wiki and go through end of campaign's discussions -- http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/campaignideas 17:18:12 moray: did you manage to go through the backlog? any comments on what was mentioned before, 17:18:15 ? 17:18:46 lucas: I haven't caught up yet, no, as people were still talking about a topic I was interested in :) 17:19:24 scanning through, I don't notice anything controversial above 17:19:36 ok. next action is one of yours: 17:19:39 ** TODO moray to propose a more detailed process about the teams survey 17:20:03 thanks for raising the delegations topic, btw 17:20:09 yup. I didn't get to the promised post yet as I was still preparing some stuff / thinking about my own preferences 17:20:20 the delegations topic was from part of this, yes 17:20:29 it's not strictly a requirement to be sorted out, first, of course 17:20:35 but logically it was a precursor topic 17:21:25 (I also had my parents visiting here which cut into my normal Debian working time!) 17:21:36 so, stuff is progressing, sorry about the lack of visibility on that so far 17:21:45 yes. thinking more about it, I'll probably do the "this is all the delegations I know of, all others will be revoked in a month" post 17:21:55 yup, that would be good 17:21:57 before waiting for all current delegs to settle 17:22:22 (current WIP delegations) 17:22:42 it's rather silly that we have this situation where we don't actually know what delegations exist -- and pedantically it makes it impossible for you to fulfill your DPL duties correctly... 17:23:27 but generally for the rest of the project, it's obviously good to have clarity 17:23:49 if you don't mind, I'll do the www patch about adding " (delegate)" next to people in the process 17:24:01 since the organization page is a mix of delegates and non-delegates 17:24:07 if it hasn't already suggested and discussed, after moray finishes perhaps we can add a new tracking list in git://dpl-helpers?? 17:24:30 bgupta: well, the delegations should be clearly on the main website (as some are, kind of, now) 17:24:34 bgupta: I think it's fine if the tracking list is http://www.debian.org/intro/organization.en.html 17:25:15 It might also be nice having a machine parsable list somewhere (that could allow for automated checks and other fun stuff) 17:25:51 yes, I was planning to write a stupid script that would parse that page 17:26:00 it's probably not too hard 17:26:09 I'll look into that 17:26:10 organization.data source might fit the “parsable” need if HTML doesn’t 17:26:24 ah, nice 17:26:35 *might* ;) 17:26:46 lucas: Not if we add the individual " (delegate)" stuff (trying to parse the emails might get a little tricky) 17:27:11 nhandler: delegations don't change that often 17:27:22 well, maybe this can join up with plans for output from teams census/survey later on 17:27:28 we don't *only* want to track delegations 17:27:36 Is it important to track who assigned the delegation, and when? 17:27:39 nhandler: didn't you read http://xkcd.com/1205/? :) 17:27:58 bgupta: yes; we would also like to know when individual people were added, etc. 17:28:29 I'm not sure it's necessary to go further than having the pointers to the individual delegation emails 17:28:30 quite apart from the current confusion about what delegations exist, I think it would be sensible for each incoming DPL to explicitly confirm them anyway 17:28:43 I wonder if we actually need a delegations.log type of file in addition? 17:29:01 ah.. 17:29:26 lucas: Yeah, I read (and enjoyed) it ;) 17:29:40 #action lucas update organization web page to add " (delegate)" and send email about current known+active delegations 17:30:27 yeah. a single list would be good since we lack one for a long time, but also an explicit cancel of any ancient unknown ones seems helpful 17:30:56 I know someone might be upset by their unknown delegation being cancelled/forgotten, but really if they're that inactive then it *should* be cancelled 17:31:11 i'll do that in two steps. my first mail will be "those are the ones I know about. I'll cancel all other delegations in a month" 17:31:34 right -- but you should probably announce (as suggested previously) that you plan to do the cancel 17:31:43 so people realise there is a deadline for reminding about old ones 17:31:44 yes, that's my plan 17:31:47 great 17:32:12 something else to discuss about the teams survey, or should I just reaction your own action? 17:32:25 just re-action, I think 17:32:40 #action moray to propose a more detailed process about the teams survey 17:32:47 OK, next action is also yours: 17:32:52 ** TODO moray to initiate work on paths into the project 17:33:07 right. this is in my queue after getting the other thing publicly started 17:33:36 so re-action, possibly with an explicit (finite!) delay 17:33:42 somehow related to that, I was thinking about how I could leverage UDD to do some "gamification" of debian-mentors@ 17:33:57 moray if you are doing this discussion publically please let me know where, as I think I can add to convo 17:34:16 with all the hype about serious games lately, that's probably something we should look into 17:34:30 (Path into debian, not gamification) 17:34:33 lucas: right. as long as the metrics aren't too simple 17:34:59 #action moray to initiate work on paths into the project 17:35:00 lucas: Some amount of points based on if you review/comment or sponsor and how long the package has been sitting in the queue? 17:35:01 lucas: e.g. not just number of sponsored packages, but number of sponsored packages without RC bugs? ;) 17:35:32 I still need to think about what is actually possible, but this kind of things, yes 17:35:43 moray: Would RC bugs be caught and reported for new (not that popular) packages in a reasonable time for a game? 17:36:18 nhandler: well, you mostly just want to discourage really broken packages, that don't build etc. 17:36:35 * nhandler nods 17:37:24 ok, next two items are noop for today 17:37:30 ** TODO paultag do ics automailer 17:37:31 ** TODO Diziet make progress on inbound trademark policy 17:38:10 for the second one, I need to dig into that a bit. as bgupta knows, I enjoyed a lot of trademark fun lately :) 17:38:16 yup 17:38:19 #action paultag do ics automailer 17:38:24 #action Diziet make progress on inbound trademark policy 17:38:43 #topic New topics 17:38:51 #topic ** Help sought to review package name and description for DVD support libraries installer (= review maintainers proposals, make sure they meet SFLC's recommandations) 17:39:22 the current is: we have SFLC's recommendations, and we have maintainers proposing things. and leader@ in the middle. convergence is slower than it should be. 17:39:35 the current state* is 17:40:08 is someone interested in working from SFLC's recomendations, and with the maintainers, to get to something that could be uploaded? 17:40:45 (if not, I'll do that, but that's something I would happily delegate) 17:41:18 no takers? if someone want to take it later, just ping me 17:41:34 #topic ** default init in Debian: move decision to TC? 17:42:13 so, I feel that the discussion about init systems is going on in circles, and that nobody among maintainers of related packages is sufficiently empowered to decide 17:42:28 it's probably a sensible way to get to a decision, yes 17:43:27 I guess the risk is if the TC makes a decision that later, in hindsight, seems not the best one -- but that's more a reason for the TC to be worried about deciding than against asking them to decide 17:43:55 (= a risk because it might make people complain about the TC later on) 17:44:20 the other point is that there's a group who argue that the right answer is roughly "support everything" 17:44:39 A counter point, if there isn't enough data to make a decision, perhaps it should remain going in circles 17:45:10 (Not saying that's what I advocate, just food for thought) 17:45:11 so probably a question to the TC should be phrased to allow an "allow them all" outcome 17:45:26 bgupta: well yes, if we wait enough years there will probably be a winner we can adopt 17:45:41 is someone interested in preparing/writing that mail to the TC? 17:45:42 but I doubt there will be a clearer winner in just another few months 17:46:52 lucas: it sounds like a good core DPL task to push the discussion or announce that you think that going to the TC is best... 17:47:21 I don't think that a long complex message to the TC is needed really, or at least I hope that the TC isn't so bureaucratic as to require that 17:47:59 I was not particularly interested in getting enough insight into that debate to do that :) but yes, you are right 17:48:22 well, I'm sure you can write it *as if* you read it all... 17:48:33 :P 17:48:36 but just that you are rising above the debate to be impartial 17:49:09 lucas: It's probably worth having TC discuss in committee, and see if they even can even come up with a recomendation. 17:49:54 bgupta: yes 17:50:06 OK. next topic: 17:50:17 #topic ** Help sought: improve donations "infrastructure" (see http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-sponsors-discuss/Week-of-Mon-20130506/000029.html and 17:50:20 http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-sponsors-discuss/Week-of-Mon-20130429/000025.html) 17:50:37 oops, copy/pasting failed. you get the links anyway 17:51:11 basically, our current "donations" infra is kinda-poor 17:51:34 I was a bit concerned about the "create a paypal account directly" idea, it needs to be legally owned by something appropriately 17:51:49 but under the written topic, the donor experience should also be considered 17:52:04 see e.g. recent query on the SPI list 17:52:47 but also, as previously pointed out, that people who find the links at all tend to end up at a "donate to every SPI project" page 17:52:54 which isn't really the outcome that is best for us 17:53:43 yes. I think that more info should be added to the Debian website directly 17:53:57 of course, it means more info to keep up-to-date, but it's not information that changes so frequently 17:54:07 well, it seems like we should be able to embed online donation boxes directly, too 17:54:49 yes 17:55:04 i'm not completely sure if that would work technically, but it's clearly worth investigating 17:55:34 I think the debocnf13 matching drive was a fairly clean model here. that we could certainly follow for debian proper.. 17:55:47 03nhandler 05master b0384ff 06dpl-helpers 10meetings.ics * Add next meeting to calendar * 14http://deb.li/3hEZ2 17:55:52 though, to some extent this is just another symptom of the lack of caring for our website overall 17:55:53 yes 17:56:35 there are quite a few unloved sections that we don't really use, which again is ok for us active developers, but confusing for users who don't know where the information is instead 17:56:40 (often the wiki, for example) 17:56:59 any takers for that? (look into paypal donations, and into improving donate page. inspire from dc13 matching fund) 17:57:15 So, streamlining donations, is one of the areas of interest to me, and I would eventually drive to get this fixed, just not sure how soon, as I have other debian work in my queue that's I'd need to clear out first, so wouldn't want to be a blocker here. 17:57:48 lucas: look for volunteers on that sponsorship discussion list maybe? 17:57:58 (if anyone beyond us is still reading it...) 17:58:32 bgupta: OK, I'll keep that in mind :) 17:58:53 I'll try to mention "open tasks" in my next dda bits, too 17:59:36 #agreed need to look into paypal donations, into improving donate page (donation form?). inspire from dc13 matching fund 17:59:40 (so this doesn't get lost) 17:59:59 yup 18:00:00 #topic ** Perhaps mention thoughts to make TM team a delegation and grow team due to fact number of trademark@debian.org emails has grown by an order of magnitude since 2012. 18:00:24 since the TM policy has been officialized, trademark@ has been receiving a very large amount of requests 18:00:57 yeah 18:01:14 I would like to delegate this area of authority in the not-to-distant future, as I don't think it's necessary for the DPL to be in the loop 18:01:33 if you know of people that would be interested... :) 18:01:37 though the slightly danger in "grow the team" is making sure that extra infrastructure to do that doesn't add more work instead 18:01:48 but if it's just a shared alias and CCing it in replies, it sounds sensible 18:02:07 yes, or RT could be used 18:02:30 I don't think that more than 2-3 people are needed, but it would be nice to have 2-3 people 18:03:02 Getting some sort of proper delegation in place is probably important, if there's not that base then the 'team' is essentially powerless (see debian-sprint 'team') 18:03:19 For context, I can keep up with current workload, but if it keeps growing, I will likely have challenges. That and it would be good for me and project to know that team has redundancy 18:03:28 the current status is that bgupta is doing a lot of awesome work, but he is not a DD yet 18:03:39 So, I'd suggest delegating 1 person is probably more important than trying to fill a team. 18:03:42 to some extent there is an implicit delegation in that they receive the messages to the advertised address 18:04:09 See, for example, ftp-master, where it's only the masters, nto assistants etc. 18:05:00 I think that it's much easier to make judgement calls in that area when they are two people to confront their views, too 18:05:09 lucas: well, from my point of view, people doing tasks like this but not being members is a bug, that should be fixed by making them members (unless they are the few people with a real philosophical objection) 18:05:24 * Maulkin nods 18:05:25 moray: that's work in progress 18:06:19 so, two more topics 18:06:37 lucas: you could at least post an "appointment" message even if it's not a constitutional delegation 18:06:38 #topic Q from bgupta to the room: Is there policies and procedures in place for how delegations work specifically, e.g. - How often delegations must report to DPL, etc? (Looking for more granular info than in constitution) 18:07:04 I would prefer this to be "report to the project" 18:07:23 with of course space for optional secret dpl-only part, but not as the default 18:07:50 I'm only aware of what is in the Constitution and any notes made by the DPL in a delegation 18:08:27 there's the general expectation that delegates work in a reasonable transparent way, as would any DD. but there's nothing formal. 18:08:48 "report to the project" was one of the kind of things I would like people to discuss their expectations of with respect to all major teams 18:09:01 thank you, I assumed as much but wanted to confirm. 18:09:02 I guess that by now project members have some expectation of it, as some teams have done it well 18:09:17 but it's clear that not all delegations do it indeed 18:09:26 since there are some delegations we had forgotten about... 18:10:05 yes, looking for last n dda posts from teams as part of the survey would be interesting 18:10:27 I think at least an annual update is a reasonable expectation for any delegation. Obviously, some of the more active/visible teams should probably be doing more frequent updates 18:10:34 lucas: indeed 18:11:59 as part of the team survey, we could try to identify such teams that have done no such reporting, and encourage them to do it 18:12:12 a yearly basis sounds good, indeed 18:12:31 last topic: 18:12:40 (right) 18:12:46 #topic Propose (if not already happening) that DPL reaches out our TOs (SPI, FFIS, and ??) and see if they have any concerns, and start dialog about addressing any Debian may have. 18:12:58 so, that's happening 18:13:03 sounds good 18:13:28 for example, re SPI, I mentioned early the problem with getting access to Debian transactions 18:14:10 Nice. Would it make sense to directly reach out to the specific delegated teams as well (Ubuntu's Community Council recently started doing this). 18:14:25 in FFIS there were some problematic delays in DebConf reimbursements etc., I think 18:14:58 I read about such problems, but I think that a more recent reimbursement went very well 18:15:24 (but I would have to double-check) 18:15:48 I'll check that with auditor@, they are more likely to know 18:15:56 I think the question would be more if they have some redundancy yet 18:16:05 so that we're less dependent on the one particular person having time 18:16:40 I'm not completely sure that this is the kind of tasks that can be shared without adding quite a lot of overhead 18:16:41 you can also ask SPI reducing the 5%, since they now apparently recognise that they don't need to keep that money 18:17:19 I think that it's more important to Debian that they solve the access to transactions issue 18:17:26 sure 18:17:29 solving that might increase costs 18:17:44 the possibility of paying an accountant was mentioned 18:18:27 One alternate, is we were to provide them with additional volunteer manpower? 18:18:43 right -- they plan to donate, roughly, the 5% from the last year, to a non-SPI organisation, as well as possibly hire an accountant/bookkeeper 18:18:44 (Assuming we had volunteers and they were willing) 18:19:39 I'll try to check if that would be useful 18:19:51 ok, any other topics? 18:19:59 I added one to wiki 18:20:02 err pad 18:20:13 #topic ** Does anyone know is FFIS can register domains on Debian's behalf and/or can we get a full list of "domain domains", and what TO holds them? 18:20:39 "can", probably, yes 18:20:41 is there a more specific question behind this? 18:21:14 moray: the question behind that is "where do we get the list of domains that Debian controls?" 18:21:19 moray: (for trademark stuff) 18:21:22 ok 18:21:29 yes, that makes sense 18:21:30 I guess I want a list of domains debain controls, and what organizations hold them.. Useful to me as data for ™ team 18:21:45 right 18:22:01 bgupta: maybe you could ask Ganneff about that? he might be able to provide more info, at least on the SPI side of things 18:22:04 and yes, like delegations there absolutely should be a correct list, but I don't think there is 18:22:19 Would DSA be a good starting point? 18:22:26 dsa would. 18:22:27 did the Debian auditors not get them? at some point it was said they would look at non-money stuff too 18:22:34 Ganneff: ah good 18:22:38 but dsa doesnt control many of them. 18:22:45 ah right, auditor@ too 18:22:50 Ganneff: ok, but you know about the ones you don't control? 18:22:52 spi does a lot. and some other orgas. 18:23:05 i know a little, if i poke the right part of my brain. 18:23:32 ok, maybe let's move that to email, with dsa, hostmaster@spi, auditor@ involved? 18:23:39 debian.com/org/net/gr is with spi. 18:24:01 there is debian.eu too. not with spi. 18:24:22 and yeah, someone mail hostmaster@spi and auditor and we can go on 18:24:35 bgupta: do you want to take care of that? 18:24:49 lucas: yes 18:25:09 #action bgupta to investigate domain held by Debian with dsa, hostmaster@spi, auditor@ 18:25:14 ok, I think we are done 18:25:30 Q: should we aim for shorter meetings? 18:25:36 preferably 18:25:48 I'd prefer aiming for <= 1 hour 18:25:51 the SPI meetings are a good example 18:26:14 but yes, in general I believe meetings should be <= 1 hour (while preferably not aiming to always fill the hour) 18:26:27 any specific suggestions on how to improve? 18:26:52 Some of my questions could have been moved to email. I will do so in the future. 18:27:10 well, some general things like that yes 18:27:18 Yeah, and new topics could at least be initially discussed on the ML before the meeting 18:27:25 specific to this meeting type, perhaps some of the re-actions should be scheduled further ahead 18:27:28 lucas if ok that I send questions to dpl-helpers list? 18:27:33 not every topic needs to be discussed every meeting 18:27:54 things could be "check status in a month" or "let's look at this in September" 18:27:57 moray: yes, that's what I was trying to achieve by getting the agenda pre-filled 18:29:04 I think one thing we should do, is if a discussion is much mroe than a status update and comment, we should move convo to list. 18:29:05 we could have a policy of not discussing things where status is described in the agenda OR status is empty (just reaction those) 18:29:28 s/should/could/ 18:30:04 lucas: what does that leave as should-be-discussed? 18:30:23 (not disagreeing, just not sure what you mean) 18:30:26 moray: items that explicitely state that they should be discussed 18:30:55 ah, I see 18:31:12 generally, it's easier to get brainstorming-like feedback in IRC meetings that on mailing lists 18:31:16 yes 18:31:32 I fear that, by moving to the mailing list, we will lose on that. we need to be careful about that 18:31:37 apparently not ;) check -vote 18:32:14 campaigns is a bit different. people have a motivation to send brainstorming-like emails :P 18:32:34 and bikeshedding is meant to be banned by the format 18:33:09 I would play it by ear.. but have a policy to prioritize new business, and defer any new business that isn't urgent to next meeting 18:33:20 (If we hit time limit0 18:33:24 anyway. I agree with the goal of <=1h. will try to push in that direction 18:33:45 (or are close to it) 18:33:48 yes, revert the agenda. will try that during next meeting 18:34:25 ok, let's close the meeting! 18:34:28 #endmeeting