16:59:31 #startmeeting 16:59:31 Meeting started Wed Sep 11 16:59:31 2013 UTC. The chair is lucas. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:59:31 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:59:40 hi everybody 16:59:45 hi all 16:59:52 the agenda for today's meeting is http://titanpad.com/debiandpl-20130911 17:00:03 hi 17:00:06 heya 17:00:06 a draft of bits from the DPL for august is http://titanpad.com/debiandpl-20130911 17:00:17 err 17:00:24 http://titanpad.com/dplbits0813 17:00:32 #topic roll call 17:00:44 here 17:00:45 * zack is around 17:01:24 so, first, I'm sorry for not being able to send the agenda and the bits earlier 17:01:33 here 17:01:41 august was busy, and september is the beginning of the university year, so ... :) 17:01:51 lucas: another ping? 17:02:02 lucas: tell me about it :) 17:02:15 MeetBot: meeting time! 17:02:15 lucas: Error: "meeting" is not a valid command. 17:02:20 MeetBot: pingall meeting time! 17:02:20 meeting time! 17:02:20 algernon anoe bdrung bgupta buxy chattr Diziet dondelelcaro Ganneff gregoa Hoaxter joehh KGB-0 KGB-1 KGB-2 laarmen lucas marga MeetBot moray nhandler paultag rafw RichiH taffit taffit_sud zack 17:02:20 meeting time! 17:03:00 since that's the first meeting in a long time, we might struggle a bit to get things going again 17:03:07 #topic next meeting 17:03:23 2013-09-24 Tue 17:00 (date -d @1380042000 ) ? 17:03:33 I remember someone saying that tuesday did not work for him 17:03:40 yes, me 17:03:55 right, ok, does someone mind if we move it to wednesday, then? 17:03:59 wfm 17:04:12 I'm ok with it 17:04:32 #agreed next meeting 2013-09-25 Wed 17:00 17:04:37 that is really great. 17:05:29 maybe it would make sense to look at action items from last meeting before looking at the TODO list, for once 17:05:46 #topic action items from last meeting / trademark stuff 17:06:21 so, one big topic currently discussed inside the TM team is our handling of debian.* domain names (debian.fr, debian.cn, etc.) 17:07:09 (correct) 17:07:11 bascially, on one hand, we could decide to do nothing, but then on the other hand, it might not be the right thing to do from a TM perspective 17:07:26 wait, what's the specific problem 17:07:39 squatted debian.* domains, or properly owned, but not by trusted orga? 17:08:00 it's more a question than a problem: "what should we do?" 17:08:02 lucas: should i try to summarize? 17:08:05 RichiH: yes please 17:08:08 k 17:08:18 bgupta: highlight 17:08:53 from my POV, we have two basic courses of action which the TM team can try to follow; a more permissive and a less permissive one 17:09:22 we all agree that in case of abuse, we should do our best to stop that immediately 17:09:45 ack 17:10:08 * paultag perks up 17:10:11 but in grey areas, we can either try to enforce more aggressively, i.e. a 'better safe than sorry' 17:10:20 personally, I think that consolidating ownership of debian.* domains into the hands of TO is good anyhow 17:10:30 as it will avoid governance problems downstream, say, ~10 years from now 17:10:36 as under US law, we need to "protect" our trademark actively to keep it 17:10:47 they're just lower priority "issues" than abuses, imho 17:11:00 the other course of action is to get SFLC to define a base level of minimum enforcement and try to follow laissez-faire 17:11:17 personally, i feel the latter is more aligned with DFSG and SC 17:11:33 ("abuse" should also be clearly defined. squatting by motorcycles websites is less of a problem than squatting with impersonification of the Debian project) 17:12:11 we could also try to draw a line with TLDs for which we care to get ownership, and TLDs for which we don't care 17:12:19 bgupta (please correct me if need be!) subscribes more to the former point, whereas joehh (also, please correct me!) sits in the middle 17:12:39 there is also the matter of available lawyer bandwidth, no? 17:12:45 zack: one point rasied by lucas is that owning domains costs money 17:13:03 given there are 200+ TLDs, and some of them have very expensive registration costs (>$1000) 17:13:06 RichiH: if my memory serves me well, the cost is ridiculously low, not enough to be a problem, no? 17:13:10 I believe that our internal policy is that we should as a general rule, not allow debian.* domains to be be held by parties other than TOs. Obviously there are some grandfathered sites like debian.co.jp, that would be difficult to change, but I think the path there should be working with jp to make them a TO. The alternate view is to grant licenses for requests where we don't have a large presence.. 17:13:31 a possible solution is to ask third parties to sign a contract which basically allows them to use $domain, but that they need to hand it over if $process within the debian project has been followed 17:13:32 lucas: oh, I probably always ignored the ridicolously expensive one ;) 17:13:42 while also forbidding resale/transfer/etc without our approval 17:13:56 RichiH: I think that's too much legal overhead / energy to be worth it 17:14:00 zack: yeah, but an (internal) set of criteria to know which ones to ignore would still be useful 17:14:09 lucas: ack 17:14:32 zack: in the case of expensive domains, it may still be worth it 17:15:00 RichiH: do you have a concrete example of an "expensive" domain we might want to have? 17:15:03 another option is that debian.foo is transferred to a TO, and whoever is actually _using_ it sets up recurring donations for that amount 17:15:12 but then we need a policy for what happens when they stop 17:15:17 and that means SPI has overhead 17:15:30 zack: i think lucas sent something around, lemme see 17:15:54 it may help to point a link to the list in git. 17:16:40 https://www.gandi.net/domaine/prix/info is the list with price 17:16:53 debiandomains.txt in trademark folder 17:17:11 (to share what we know about) 17:17:46 yeah, so, it looks like the difficult part is defining which tld are "important to have" 17:17:47 w're holding off on action until we can come to a consensus on a path forward 17:18:12 the highest i can find off-hand is debian.jp at €72 per year 17:18:17 once we have that, I think we should 1/ register the available ones, 2/ try to get back the others (hopefully making bulk mailing from SFLC, so that the efforts are reduced) 17:18:22 .tt is 1741€ 17:18:35 I've no idea how to define those who are "important", but I'm pretty sure people doing crap like SEO would know 17:18:43 no one knows anyone in that sort of business? 17:18:58 one idea would be to start by the number of DDs per country 17:19:06 There is another option.. 17:19:07 lucas: i meant "domains where debian.tld is actually taken as of right now 17:19:08 " 17:19:18 if there are many DDs, it's an important country from the POV of debian 17:19:36 lucas: yes, that's an important criteria, I agree 17:19:47 we could revisit moving forward with the trademark clearing house registration.. which basically would give us first dibs if anyone attempted to register a debian.* domain. 17:20:10 lucas: more generally, I think it should be country with a large debian community, but hopefully that is correlated with the number of DDs 17:20:42 bgupta: that sounds like a good idea no matter what, no? 17:20:42 http://paste.debian.net/hidden/0a949283/ - private 1h expiration paste (which should be ok as the repo is not secret) 17:21:43 bgupta, zack: iirc there's cost involved 17:21:50 you need to register for the clearing house 17:22:08 (I confess I'm ignorant on the specifics, that's probably lucas' call then) 17:22:44 ok, there are two services 17:22:52 I think that the first thing to do is to determine what SFLC thinks we should do in terms of protecting our TM 17:22:56 1) sunrise period for new TLDs (i.e. first dibs) 17:23:11 we should follow what they tell us to do, obviously 17:23:18 2) TM claim (i.e. hey, $entity is trying to register debian.foo, would you like to dispute that) 17:23:25 Trademark holders must pay a flat fee to register based on the length of 17:23:25 registration ($150 for 1 year, $435 for 3 years or $725 for 5 years). 17:23:34 if we want to do more, then, we need to think whether it's a useful use of Debian money 17:24:04 aye 17:24:15 lucas: I think there are 2 different concerns. One in the TM one, and on that you're right. Another is the governance issues that might be caused by squatted domains 17:24:39 (e.g. this community who claims to be the "real" debian community just because $guy owns the domain) 17:24:57 well, before we talked about preemptively registering domains, my sense was it was too costly, but if that's on the table, I think we should revisit. (The issue is that there will be a bizillion new TLDs, we can't just go register them all.) 17:24:58 that sounds rather unlikely, no? 17:25:18 lucas: I've seen this happen, maybe I was unlucky :) 17:25:34 for a project as visible as Debian? 17:25:37 but clearly you're right, the benefits should be weighted against the costs 17:25:40 zack: iirc, rough consensus is "let local community use it as long as the local community agrees on what's useful to them; if they start arguing, try to see if new consensus can be reached, if that fails point it at debian.org and be done with it" 17:26:01 RichiH: sure, but to "make it point", you need a TO be the domain owner 17:26:37 Well a community fork is not impossible. If that were to happen, who would be the real debian? If we aren't strict on enforcing trademark, we risk losing trademark rights in certain juristictions. 17:26:58 zack: or an agreement that they will hand over the domain; while that may not be a perfect local-law fit, it would at least make any possible legal action more likely to succeed 17:27:21 plus, there's a trademark claim unit which can re-assign domains 17:27:34 we used that at work and won in all cases with not-that-much effort 17:27:35 RichiH: yes, but the total energy spent (by people like us) in getting out of that situation is much higher than if, say, SPI had preventively registered the domain 17:28:03 at work you had paid lawyers though 17:28:04 zack: of course; that leads back to "what do we want to squat, if anything" 17:28:14 If they aren't willing to assign domain to debian upfront, there is little likelihood they would a) sign document, and/or b) assign domain down the road. 17:28:15 zack: no, it was our ceo who did it in his spare time 17:28:38 ttbomk, no legal counsel was needed 17:29:07 bgupta: this is assuming friendly communities, of course 17:29:12 anyway, my main point is that IMHO TM is not the only reason for Debian to own debian.* domains 17:29:31 nothing more than that 17:29:59 (btw, I gotta go in ~10 minutes, unfortunately, but I'll catch up with minutes) 17:30:40 ok, we are 30 mins into the meeting. I think that the next action on this is still to get SFLC advice, and then have an open discussion on how far we want to go about debian.* 17:31:02 taking my concall 17:31:15 RichiH/bgupta: does one of you want to take care of doing the final review and sending the email? 17:31:48 lucas: sure 17:32:05 #action RichiH to review email about debian.* and send it to SFLC 17:32:22 #topic action items from last meeting / others 17:32:25 lucas: we need to know what we aim for, though. do i understand correctly that we are aiming for "bare, safe minimum to make sure we retain TM"? 17:32:41 and then we discuss what the project itself wants on top of that 17:32:54 RichiH: I think so, yes 17:32:57 ok 17:33:04 we have a draft that's ready to go 17:33:10 bare, safe minimum for legal-related reasons 17:33:21 not necessarily tm. Mishi could think of something else 17:33:21 bgupta: there are some final concerns on the ML 17:33:28 *** TODO moray to propose a more detailed process about the teams survey 17:33:29 *** TODO moray to initiate work on paths into the project 17:34:04 there were BOFs/talks about this at DebConf, but no more progress. I suggest dropping them as is as they are not very actionable 17:34:31 *** DONE bgupta/trademark@ continue logo registration process 17:34:34 (last metion of this in here: bgupta, joehh: let's do the rest on trademark@, but we all agree that we need to sign off on that mail together) 17:34:47 (done, as mentioned in the DPL bits) 17:35:02 *** TODO bgupta Help Martin (auditor) draft specs for TO requirements (Martin has agreed for help offer) 17:35:19 as to TM registration: http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=86037470&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch 17:35:20 I think there was some progress, but I didn't dig the specific email. bgupta can comment later 17:35:40 RichiH: yup, it's in the DPL bits for august ;) 17:35:47 (not sent yet, but URL is in the agenda) 17:36:00 * RichiH hangs head in shame and slinks back into his corner 17:36:07 :-) 17:36:21 i'm ashamed for not sending them to dda, so that's OK 17:36:42 #topic current DPL TO-DO list + new items 17:37:00 so, there's a big list of what's on my plate in the agenda (http://titanpad.com/debiandpl-20130911) 17:37:15 if you want details about something, just ask 17:37:33 and the goal here is really to transfer things from my plate to your plate 17:37:34 :) 17:39:19 - press team (C: someone stepped down. N: update delegation). Can you give me more info about that ? 17:39:28 ^^^ lucas 17:40:08 yes. there's currently a press team delegation. madamezou decided to stop her involvement in the team. ideally, we should find someone to replace her 17:40:15 I've tried to do that, without much success 17:40:32 if you have ideas, please let me know 17:40:41 btw, who handled press relations during DebConf? 17:41:02 taffit, odyx, nattie and I. 17:41:51 ah :) 17:42:10 how many requests does the press team get? 17:42:27 so it could make sense to ask you four if you would be interested in becoming press team assistants 17:42:38 is it more of a "send out pre-made text" or more of a "write in-depth stuff from scratch" 17:42:44 RichiH: not that many, but it needs to be able to react quickly 17:42:47 * taffit declines 17:43:19 RichiH: I don't know. I would assume a mix of both 17:44:02 lucas: no promises made, but i will look into it a bit; presumably, asking madamezou is a good starting point 17:44:45 RichiH: asking the current delegates is even better 17:45:09 lucas: i am not sure how much sense this makes, but if "x months trial memberships" are OK in a team, maybe announcing that fact would be an option 17:45:18 note that here, I'm only trying to get a volunteer to do the mediation work of talking with the press team to see who would be good candidates, talking with possible candidates, etc. 17:45:18 lowering entrance barriers, etc 17:45:29 I'm not really looking for someone to join the press team 17:46:20 that sounds shorter and more limited, so that's good; what i don't see is why the press team wouldn't want to do that themselves, directly 17:47:21 I'm not talking specifically for the press team, which is very functional. but you would be surprised how much teams need help to find help 17:47:56 that seems to be a weird problem, tbh 17:48:24 unless you have a complete list, can you put a "call for call for help" in your next bits? 17:48:25 most of the teams in Debian are good at what they do, but not necessarily at recruiting people 17:48:48 and then have a more or less standing section in future bits of "this needs doing; please do it/talk to X" 17:49:17 yes, but even writing good call for help takes time 17:49:30 as i said during the BoF, this carries the risk of being mentally ignored after a while, but i suspect people who read the bits will read it all. and if they see it often enough, maybe _do_ something when they feel they have time 17:49:53 "the press team is looking for more people, please email press@debian.org" 17:50:13 this is about you having _less_ work, not _more_ by writing complex descriptions 17:50:16 no, you need to explain what the press team does, and how to know if you would be a good fit 17:50:28 why not have the press team write that up, then? 17:50:58 unless they are so understaffed to be disfunctional (not saying that's the case; merely using them as an ongoing example) 17:51:09 well, for the press team, it's probably a bad example because they are supposed to be good at writing, but see my point above about teams not necessarily being good at this 17:51:34 do you have a list of teams that need help with getting help? 17:52:05 frankly, every team should be able to come up with bullet points 17:52:06 taht's the expected outcome of the team survey 17:52:17 k 17:52:26 well, look at how many teams have no wiki.d.o/Teams page 17:52:36 (or almost-empty such pages) 17:52:48 and then, everybody complains about lack of manpower in Debian 17:52:58 if they function well without one, maybe they don't need it (unless there's policy saying they should have one) 17:53:27 yes, but then they tend to complain about lack of manpower ;) 17:54:04 lucas: if you need someone to gently buttock-prod teams with issues into delivering something you can put into the bits as a call for help, poke me about that when it's time 17:54:59 if you want to start with the press team, feel free :) 17:56:04 as you said, they _should_ be able to do that themselves, but sure 17:56:11 "who is active? who is going to reduce his/her involvement soon? how do you feel you cope with the load?" are good conversation starters 17:57:14 #action RichiH to look into the status of the press team, and advise lucas on how to update the current delegation 17:57:17 sorry off call now, readying log 17:57:42 ok; i will mail the press team and cc the emeritus for good measure in case they want to resurface 17:57:49 ok 17:58:18 please Cc leader@, that's the kind of email exchanges that are very useful in the archives 17:58:41 of course 17:58:58 - check status / aliveness of Debian events team (N: ping) 17:59:15 that's very similar in terms of task, except that we know for sure that there's a problem 17:59:24 lucas: regarding proposed draft of what a TO is, I send on Aug 23rd, but have not had any response. 17:59:54 lucas: what's the issue with tht events team? 17:59:57 bgupta: tbm usually answers email in batches from time to time 18:00:15 rafw: I was told it's inactive 18:00:54 lucas: how much time should I give before repinging. IE: before or after next dpl-helpers meeting? 18:00:59 ah ok, I think I can try to see what is happening there. 18:01:03 bgupta: before 18:01:19 rafw: ok, thanks a lot 18:01:36 welcome :) 18:01:47 #action rafw to look into the status of the Debian events team, and advise lucas on possible course of action 18:02:15 rafw: do we want to share a template? that might be useful to put into dpl-helpers repo 18:02:23 there are not delegates, but a possible outcome is "change listing of active members on http://www.debian.org/intro/organization.en.html, prepare call for help to be sent on dda" 18:02:32 lucas, zack: if you have anything we can steal, please let me know 18:02:48 not really 18:03:12 RichiH: I think I will start by pinging someone I know that I believe he was in that team. 18:03:15 #action bgupta to followup with auditor@ on 9/13 regarding proposed requirements for Debian TO 18:03:22 it's more about asking questions than about writing long emails 18:03:39 and identifying who you can ask questions to when the team address doesn't answer 18:04:26 rafw: sadly, there's nothing on the wiki, but i am willing to bet that rhalina is a good entry point in case yours turns up empty 18:04:54 RichiH: rhalna was in the events team ? 18:05:46 rafw: i have no idea, but she's at pretty much all german-speaking conferences, (wo)manning the debian booth 18:06:01 rafw: Franziska Lichtblau on http://www.debian.org/intro/organization.en.html 18:06:11 Lichtblau ← awesome name 18:06:22 good idea, will try her also. 18:06:36 paultag: that is _not_ a made-up name. it's her legal name 18:06:38 * RichiH checked 18:06:47 So good! Frau Bluelight! 18:07:32 heh 18:07:53 lucas: arguably, http://www.debian.org/intro/organization.en.html should carry the nicks 18:08:23 RichiH: the Debian logins would be more useful 18:08:28 (i can action item that if you say yes) 18:08:29 RichiH: do you want an action for that? :) 18:08:42 RichiH: they are generally available in the delegation emails (for delegates) 18:08:43 it shall be done 18:08:45 *gong* 18:09:02 #action RichiH to add Debian logins to http://www.debian.org/intro/organization.en.html 18:09:31 excellent 18:10:05 (if anyone knows by heart if every DD can edit that page or if i need to join $team, please let me know -- or if it's better to contact someone with a patch instead of doing it myself) 18:10:52 you need to join debian-doc on alioth I think 18:10:59 taffit is a good contact point for that page 18:11:14 and beware, it's maintained in CVS!! 18:11:27 are you fucking... 18:11:27 ok 18:11:44 * RichiH joined #debian-www; consider it done 18:11:54 great 18:12:03 rather webml, but we may prefere a patch first 18:12:34 (the Alioth group) 18:12:56 - enable donations via paypal (C: <20130505220527.GA4718@upsilon.cc>) 18:12:57 + generally improve donations infrastructure 18:13:33 lucas: There is an SPI board meeting tomorrow. Perhaps you can attend? 18:13:51 that's something for which either rafw or bgupta could have an interest ;) 18:13:56 bgupta: yes, I added it to my agenda 18:14:12 bgupta: is it planned to discuss paypal donations? 18:14:27 not that I am aware of. 18:14:49 They pretty much are very leery of it, do to fears that funds will be seized by paypal. 18:15:30 couldn't we just transfer funds out of paypal on a regular basis? 18:15:43 we did it this year for DC13. We should ask hug about his experience of it. 18:15:44 They said if they did it they would need to setup a separate bank account for just paypal. 18:15:53 lucas: this is what hug was doing. 18:16:00 ah, it could be useful to keep money in paypal to provide that alternative for e.g. reimbursements? 18:16:06 They are fearful that somehow the bank account itself, not the paypal account would get frozen.. 18:16:33 (I don't 100% understand) 18:16:44 Under what legal framework that could happen 18:17:08 indeed 18:17:17 regarding paypal: if you have sizeable amounts of money go through paypal, they may require you to keep part of that money in your account 18:17:20 for "safety" 18:17:46 from personal experience, it's practically impossible to unfreeze funds 18:17:57 if they decide to freeze 18:18:20 These guys pulled it off through a PR campaign http://www.mailpile.is/blog/2013-09-05_PayPal_Freezes_Campaign_Funds.html 18:18:25 recently, there was one high profile case where they unfroze, but if you look around, in the past, they simply sat it out and kept the money 18:18:32 I'm sure it would be a huge black eye if paypal froze debian's funds 18:18:39 we have a press team 18:18:55 * RichiH shrugs 18:19:12 i am not saying it doesn't make sense to accept donations via more avenues 18:19:27 but we should be careful 18:19:36 always 18:20:32 I'm not very familiar with paypal, but isn't this related to a specific way of using paypal for fundraising? 18:21:27 Speaking of donations, I would also like to explore whether or not debian can accept cryptocurrency donations. (e.g. - bitcoin) I don't know if there are any legal issues, but my guess is it would be a cool pressworthy announcement if we did, and get us donations 18:22:12 right. we would need advise on how do deal with them too: transfer them to USD/EUR asap or wait 18:22:13 lucas: it has happened with sellers, as well 18:22:25 _especially_ if there's a sudden influx of money 18:22:58 lucas: can I volunteer to look into that? (I'd ping mishi on it) 18:23:11 bgupta: sure. can you action it? 18:23:14 bgupta: fwiw, .de legally accepted bitcoin as "private money" recently, whatever that means. a TO in .de could accept those, then? 18:23:36 wat 18:23:53 #action bgupta to explore legal issues around accepting cryptocurrency donations 18:24:00 paultag: i only skimmed the article as i don't really care about bitcoin 18:24:15 RichiH: I would imagine most gov'ts hate the idea of non-gov't minting money 18:24:28 I'm shocked they allow "private money" 18:25:58 any other items that should be discussed/ that you want to volunteer for? 18:26:05 of course, you don't need to decide now 18:26:16 paultag: i seem to remember it puts it in the same region as gold: not official currency, but you don't need to pay taxes on buying/selling and usual laundering rules apply 18:26:17 did we discuss opw 18:26:30 opw expands to? 18:26:33 bgupta: no 18:26:38 Outreach Program for Women 18:26:41 RichiH: ah, ack 18:26:44 lucas: Oh right, OPW 18:26:49 an internship program organized by GNOME 18:27:04 AFAIK, the situation is the one mentioned in my bits 18:27:06 that is: 18:27:28 lucas: it seems like some of the other GSoC admins are willing to chunk out time, we managed this year's slots with 4, handling a few slots can be done by 2-3 people 18:27:29 The next edition of Outreach Program for Women, an internships program 18:27:29 organized by GNOME, will start soon. So far, I failed to find someone to 18:27:29 volunteer to be the coordinator on the Debian side (though it's worth 18:27:29 noting that several people offered to help if such a coordinator stepped 18:27:29 forward). See this thread[1] for details. Time is running out, as GNOME 18:27:31 would like to know the participating organizations before mid-september 18:27:34 (ideally). 18:27:57 What is required from coordinator? IE: What skills, expected timeload/duration and credentials? 18:28:17 Also do they have to be a Project Member? 18:28:26 paultag: having a lot of people willing to help is great, but I really need someone who feels responsible about it 18:28:55 bgupta: needs to be good at paperwork, good at tracking down reports from mentees and mentors (including full-blown manhunts) 18:29:03 (for GSoC (which is like OPW)) 18:29:08 lucas: yeah. 18:30:03 Do they need to be a Debian Project Member? I have someone in mind who's debian friendly, works at wikimedia foundation, and I believe has coordinated GSoC before. 18:30:19 (Not sure if they are interested though and/or have time) 18:30:25 I love wikimedians 18:30:33 bgupta: I would be quite uncomfortable about that, but that could work 18:30:48 bgupta: anyone you'd be OK with mentioning in PM? 18:30:51 bgupta: it would take at least one recommendation email 18:30:56 I know a few of them 18:31:04 (from a DD) 18:31:13 I could mention in PM. 18:31:28 maybe they should start DD, non-uploading if they want to do that? 18:32:03 the (soft, I think) deadline for applying as an organization is in 4 days 18:32:04 (and have a DD at hand who knows debian-specific stuff or can prod people) 18:32:09 lucas: I will advocate bgupta's suggested person 18:32:17 lucas: I very very very much trust the person he has in mind 18:32:49 but do you trust them very very very very much? 18:32:51 :> 18:32:55 :) 18:33:02 enough to have them run the program without any concerns anywhere 18:33:26 ok, please reach out to them, and we will see 18:35:02 lucas: if this person picks it up, I'll co-lead this. I can devote enough time for that, I think. 18:35:16 Just to have someone else. 18:35:19 paultag: great 18:35:31 yeah, a two people team is much better, of course 18:35:34 aye 18:35:39 and you can put an @debian on it too 18:35:59 (since you can't delegate a non-DD) 18:36:48 if that happens, we would need a quick talk about fundraising 18:37:36 I really would like to use this to test our opportunity to raise funds for OPW participation 18:38:38 anything else that you would like to talk about? 18:38:50 of course, if you want to talk to some things later, this channel stays open :) 18:39:19 "make these meetings more visible, somehow" 18:39:57 complete list of attendees: bgupta, lucas, paultag, rafw, taffit, me 18:40:12 and taffit has one line 18:40:15 + zack 18:40:19 oh, sorry 18:40:31 still, that's 3 times more than some past meetings 18:40:38 but my point remains the same: that's not a lot 18:40:43 I agree 18:41:21 spam dda with meeting schedule? ping this channel a day in advance so people can plan in case they missed it? 18:41:50 I can improve on scheduling and pinging, yes 18:42:52 but in the end, there are not so many people who seem to care for such work to show up 18:43:09 it takes a weird lot to enjoy janitorial work, yes 18:43:24 grumbles 18:43:55 bgupta: what about? 18:44:48 oh, technical question 18:45:03 I'm really not at ease with using an external tracker for the DPL todo list 18:45:07 (ie, not a local file) 18:45:14 master org-mode file or something? 18:45:24 because, if it's a local file, I can easily split it into "stuff that can be public, and stuff that can't" 18:45:35 and move stuff around, etc 18:46:13 paultag: I'm using vim, and not all org-mode features are available in vimorganizer 18:46:26 lucas: I'm using vim too :) 18:46:35 I just figured you inhereted something from zack :) 18:46:38 any brillant idea on how to solve that? 18:46:49 not sure, I don't use org-mode myself 18:47:25 actually, I could just push the public part to a static URL 18:47:39 that would be easy 18:48:00 but I would still be the only editor 18:48:07 gobby? 18:48:25 I would really like to continue using vim :/ 18:48:42 alternatively, initially, titanpad was pushed by debian people, maybe they are willing to maintain a titanpad.d.n? 18:48:51 * RichiH uses vim as well; just throwing out ideas 18:49:36 if you ikiwiki your notes, you can use vim locally and still have a web form for edits 18:49:56 let's start with having a static URL with the public TO-DO list 18:50:18 RichiH: Your characterization of the work that happens here. 18:51:09 realistically, everyone who cares about that list will probably be able to get push access to a git repo if need be 18:52:00 yeah 18:52:03 ok, anything else? 18:52:15 bgupta: janitorial? it's not demeaning. this work is essential, it's taking place out of sight, most people would not consider doing it, and it involves cleaning up after others 18:52:46 don't hesitate to pick up other items. I don't claim ownership. :) 18:52:51 #endmeeting