19:00:30 <h01ger> #startmeeting reproducible-builds.org logo, meeting #1
19:00:30 <MeetBot> Meeting started Wed Feb 21 19:00:30 2018 UTC.  The chair is h01ger. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:00:30 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
19:00:59 <h01ger> Elio: with this we'll automatically have logs+a summary on http://meetbot.debian.net
19:01:16 <h01ger> #topic introductions / finding the agenda
19:01:25 <Elio> Yep, cool. I used similar loggers in Fedora and other projects
19:01:44 <Elio> 1. brief introductions
19:01:44 <Elio> 2. agree on agenda
19:01:44 <Elio> 3. discussion/questions about the process (hopefully with finding a
19:01:44 <Elio> volunteer to document this better than in my initial mail in this
19:01:44 <Elio> thread.)
19:01:45 <Elio> 4. defintion of scope of work (logo, css, etc)
19:01:45 <Elio> 5. actual discussion about the logo design
19:01:47 <Elio> 6. agreeing on the next steps we would like to see implemented
19:01:47 <Elio> 7. finding the next irc meeting
19:01:49 <Elio> What you had in the email
19:01:52 <h01ger> hi, i'm h01ger, and i unfortunatly need to leave at 20:00 UTC sharp
19:02:12 <h01ger> Elio: thanks for posting this, saving me from doing the same! :)
19:02:22 <h01ger> anything to add to the agenda?
19:02:37 <Elio> I'd add the possiblity of working under the OTF umbrella
19:02:44 <h01ger> +everyone, please say 'hi' if you're here
19:02:58 <lamby> hi
19:03:23 <raboof> hi
19:03:26 <Elio> Hi, Elio here, the guy who will hopefully get you a nice logo and visual identity
19:04:18 * vagrantc waves
19:04:38 <h01ger> http://whiteboard.debian.net/rblogo1_fb0644.wb has the agenda
19:04:53 <h01ger> #topic agreeing on the agenda
19:05:18 <h01ger> i guess we are fine with the agenda, but i'll give people 2 more minutes :)
19:05:37 <h01ger> (to "complain", comment, add, etc)
19:05:44 <Elio> If we can discuss the OTF Usability Lab possiblity in 4 (which is also dependent on 5) yep we are good to go
19:06:22 <h01ger> thats what i ment, yes
19:06:57 <h01ger> #topic discussion/questions/documentation of *the process*
19:07:47 <h01ger> upfront: i'd be very happy if someone else than me could put this on the logo wiki page (or maybe a new subpage)
19:08:51 <h01ger> so we basically agreed to have 3 iterations, of suggestions by elio, than feedback by us, an irc meeting, and new suggestions by elio where this feedback should be included.
19:09:36 <h01ger> and all work is presented on https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Logo
19:09:46 <Elio> Yes. Also, since it seems that contributors have a rather specific vision of how the logo and visuals should look like and communicate, we should decide on a concept which I will implement
19:10:09 <h01ger> and the mailinglist rb-general@l.d.o is used for communication, irc is optional (though would be nice), except for the meetings.
19:10:20 <h01ger> Elio: yes
19:11:05 <h01ger> Elio: though i think its a tough mix of "contributors have a rather specific vision of how the logo and visuals should look like" and "contributors are not experts in logo design"
19:11:10 <h01ger> ;)
19:11:39 <h01ger> hm, and we also said something about how we find consensus
19:11:48 <h01ger> on which logo path to take
19:12:39 <h01ger> right, we wanted to go by allowing people to rule out designs by saying "i cannot live with logo X", hoping this would not be destroyed by everybody hating another logo...
19:13:19 <Elio> Yes,  but conceptually speaking in symbols requires no knowledge design
19:13:22 <h01ger> we could also reverse this into "everybody has a say which logo they like" and then the winner of this used to direct Elio's work
19:13:32 <Elio> Yes
19:13:46 <vagrantc> are we talking about the logos already listed on the wiki, or coming up with a new list?
19:13:59 <h01ger> vagrantc: well
19:14:10 <vagrantc> some of the later ones seem to have three different logos per item
19:14:15 <h01ger> vagrantc: both. (not a new list though, but maybe new ideas)
19:14:43 <h01ger> i think we should move one, and define the process later in the process.
19:15:06 <h01ger> move on = next topics until we are at 6. of the agenda where we discuss the actual drafts
19:15:32 <h01ger> Elio: are you fine with defining the process while we go?
19:15:37 <vagrantc> i don't understand how we can discuss in greater detail while brushing aside the process ... but maybe i'm entirely missing something here
19:15:53 <Elio> Well, I'm flexible in the process
19:16:20 <h01ger> if we agree that it should either be logo A or B, then we could just ask Elio to do new drafts based on A+B, and not discuss the process further now
19:16:21 <Elio> From the mailing list I saw that people had strong feelings about certain designs
19:16:25 <h01ger> (an example)
19:16:59 <Elio> A good first question is to ask whether any of the logos is remotely close to a final concept you'd like to see?
19:17:17 <Elio> Maybe not visually, but shape-wise or even conceptually
19:17:19 * vagrantc likes one contender better than all the others
19:17:28 <Elio> Which is vagrantc?
19:17:32 <h01ger> Elio: there is also the difficulty of strong feelings which the person doesnt mind if they are ignored and strong feelings by someone who is a drive by contributor etc... we need to consider everybodys feelings, i think, and then ignore some of them
19:17:51 <h01ger> Elio: vagrantc: please stop this now. lets go with the agenda
19:18:10 <h01ger> next topic is funding.. then scope.. then discussion of the logos
19:18:27 <h01ger> then agreeing next steps and then next meeting
19:18:29 <vagrantc> bah.
19:19:03 <vagrantc> h01ger: i don't see the agenda being followed or anything, so i'm not sure what you mean
19:19:13 <lamby> ("… and then ignore some of them" made me grin)
19:19:26 <h01ger> lamby: :D
19:19:42 <h01ger> #agreed we define the process along the way
19:19:48 <h01ger> #topic funding
19:19:51 <vagrantc> agreed by who?
19:19:56 <h01ger> by Elio
19:20:28 <vagrantc> i've got to say, i'm a bit agitated here
19:20:45 <h01ger> vagrantc: i need to leave in 40min, sorry for being pushing, but you said you dont see the agenda being followed, which i think was because you didnt follow it
19:21:07 <h01ger> and noone objected to defining the process as we go, so i thought we agreed on this and Elio explicitly said yes
19:21:31 <h01ger> and Elio needs to work with us, so he is really the one who needs to agree to work with this "mess" ;)
19:21:48 <h01ger> so, funding?
19:22:06 <Elio> I don't want to complicate it even more so I'm fine working with the process you agree on. As long as we make progress and don't bikeshed that is
19:22:08 <Elio> Yes, funding
19:22:43 <Elio> So this takes a bit of time and to get it right, a considerable amount of time needs to be invested in.
19:22:50 * vagrantc finds making a process as you go prone to poor decisions
19:23:33 * h01ger approached OTF today and asked whether we can get the logo work funded by them. answer was: sure, please apply the usual way, we'll see
19:23:41 <Elio> Vagrantc, I think you should offer alternative solutions instead of identifying a problem solely. But then again, probably the best time for that is after we finish the agenda
19:23:51 <Elio> I can stick around for longer after Holger leaves as well
19:24:14 <vagrantc> Elio: i hear you, i just feel like as soon as i type something the it's deemed off-topic, so i'm at a loss
19:24:31 <h01ger> Elio: not sure what to discuss about funding right now
19:24:46 <h01ger> i will apply for OTF funding this
19:24:56 <h01ger> and will let Elio review it before sending
19:25:10 <Elio> Will we do a Plan B or think about it if Plan A fails?
19:25:52 <Elio> OTF funding is also related with 5. in the agenda, the scope of work
19:25:55 <h01ger> plan B would probably be to ask another fundation, eg ford, or wau holland
19:26:38 <h01ger> good point that this is tied to 5. :)
19:26:46 <Elio> Okay, if there is not much more to funding, we can move on to 5?
19:27:05 <Elio> Anyone any other points to 4?
19:27:24 <h01ger> #info if plan A fails (funding by OTF), we will try plan B and C (funding by ford or wau holland foundation)
19:27:45 <lamby> What sort of numbers are we thinking of re. funding?
19:28:29 <Elio> Independently. around 2k
19:28:32 <lamby> As in… very roughly, are we talking $50, $500, $5000.
19:28:33 <lamby> cool
19:28:44 <h01ger> Elio: USD or EUR? :)
19:29:09 <Elio> Well,  USD then :p
19:29:15 <Elio> I can do a logo with less
19:29:22 <Elio> But the deliverables take time as well
19:29:24 <h01ger> #info we need around 2k USD
19:29:26 <Elio> Coming up with the visual language
19:29:28 <Elio> patterns
19:29:43 <h01ger> Elio: i rather have you come up with a whole set..
19:29:46 <Elio> If you want and Plan A fails. We can break down the costs into smaller milestones
19:29:52 <Elio> Yes, that would be best
19:30:16 <Elio> Let's tie this in with 5 now, since funding is related to scope of work
19:30:22 <h01ger> #topic defintion of scope of work (logo, css(es), etc)
19:30:30 <Elio> If Plan A with OTF succeeds. I can probably do even more deliverables
19:30:43 <Elio> Since OTF will pay us
19:30:52 <h01ger> i wrote css(es) now as we have two websites, www.reproducible-builds.org and tests.reproducible-builds.org
19:31:18 <vagrantc> that seems like a bigger scope than just a logo
19:31:23 <h01ger> the design of the latter, on tests.r-b.o/debian is debianish
19:31:26 <vagrantc> (to state the obvious)
19:31:57 <h01ger> there is also our blog, which should have the same css style
19:32:00 <Elio> If we go into anything more than visual design (including CSS) and the deliverables in the final form are expected by me, I need to involve more people, such as frontend devs
19:32:10 <h01ger> should the diffoscope output follow?
19:32:29 <Elio> What I'd imagine is creating a complete style guide and patterns
19:32:31 <emaste> h01ger: belated pong
19:32:33 <h01ger> Elio: what do you have in mind when you say "deliverables"?
19:32:46 <h01ger> emaste: hi & later, in a r-b logo meeting right now...
19:33:22 <Elio> I'm no frontend developer, so CSS and other technical tasks are probably not a good fit for me alone
19:33:34 <h01ger> ah!
19:33:45 <h01ger> so, with css 2k would not be enough?
19:34:22 <Elio> It might be, might be not. I'd say to be sure that a style guide without CSS would be less than 2k
19:34:24 * h01ger is still curious if there are other deliverables...
19:34:40 <Elio> I just haven't worked doing CSS deliverables in the past so I might under or overestimate
19:35:00 * h01ger fears a simple style guide would be useless, or to say it more mildly: would not be used and thus..
19:35:07 <Elio> Okay, what I have in mind is a similar thing like I did for The Tor Project
19:35:16 <Elio> It's  not "simple"
19:35:23 <h01ger> hehe
19:35:32 <lamby> CSS is hard. :)
19:35:36 <Elio> And also not useless, you can see by Tor's example
19:35:39 <h01ger> s#a simple#just a#
19:35:42 <Elio> https://styleguide.torproject.org/
19:35:46 <h01ger> thanks
19:36:18 <h01ger> ok, thats a css
19:36:25 <h01ger> just not ours adopted to it
19:36:31 <h01ger> :)
19:36:46 <Elio> Yeah this has been adapted by a static one I created
19:37:01 <Elio> I could do a similar thing, involving a bit our frontend developer at Ura as well
19:37:08 * h01ger just decided to stay another hour so we can have this meeting as long as needed / at least 30min longer. just need to catch a last train then..
19:37:38 <Elio> Anyway, if you want something similar to Tor's one, it could fit in 2k
19:38:19 <Elio> And it's also a better sell for OTF, as you are requesting a style guide to improve usability of your projects you offer
19:38:35 * h01ger thinks thats good, as that results in a bootstrap theme, which we should be able to use "on our own". and because thats less money, so finding funds should be easier
19:38:37 <Elio> So let's not talk too much about money
19:38:47 <Elio> I am positive Plan A will work
19:39:36 <h01ger> so, agreed, scope is logo and styleguide?
19:39:47 <Elio> Living Style guide
19:40:03 <Elio> Visual Identity And Living Style Guide
19:40:18 <raboof> that includes fonts to use that work well together etc?
19:40:24 * h01ger wants a matching kitchen wallpaper
19:40:40 <Elio> Yep, and other visual elements which are good on posters, banners, websites
19:40:52 <vagrantc> Elio: living is a cruicial phrase here?
19:40:58 <Elio> wallpaper material indeed
19:41:12 <Elio> Well yes. Styleguides are usually PDF's
19:41:26 <vagrantc> and a "Living" style guide is a... ?
19:41:37 <Elio> Having a website which fetches data from a git repo is considered "living"
19:41:38 <h01ger> Elio: we want the styleguide as html like tor
19:41:42 <vagrantc> ok
19:41:53 <Elio> Because you update the code and the styleguide gets updated
19:42:17 <vagrantc> sounds more ideal than a PDF. :)
19:42:26 <Elio> Yes, it's a better investment
19:42:28 <h01ger> #agreed scope is logo and styleguide.git (with html output)
19:42:37 <h01ger> next topic?
19:42:52 <Elio> Where are your git repos hosted?
19:43:03 <h01ger> Elio: next question please
19:43:05 <h01ger> :)
19:43:22 <vagrantc> Elio: git repositories may be in a transition period
19:43:23 <h01ger> we are on alioth.debian.org, which is going away to salsa.debian.org, but havent migrated yet
19:43:28 <h01ger> alioth goes down in 2 months or less
19:43:44 <h01ger> we also have automatically updated clones on github
19:44:06 <Elio> Okay, I might need someone's help as I don't have much experience of git outside GitHub and GitLab
19:44:09 <vagrantc> nice thing about git is it's generally not hard to move from one to another
19:44:14 <Elio> for technicalities
19:44:15 <h01ger> Elio: so use whatever git provider you prefer. github is fine
19:44:25 <Elio> Okay, sounds good
19:44:45 <h01ger> salsa.debian.org is a github instance, but i'm really not sure i want to move r-b.o stuff to it, cause its debian
19:45:06 <vagrantc> this seems a bit off-topic, though
19:45:25 <h01ger> yup
19:45:27 <Elio> So 6. actual discussion about the logo design?
19:45:48 <h01ger> #topic discussion about the logo drafts on https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Logo
19:47:11 <lamby> s@salsa.debian.org is a github instance@salsa.debian.org is a gitlab instance@  ;-)
19:48:32 <Elio> So shoot anything you have to say about the current state of the logo concepts?
19:48:34 <vagrantc> so there are a fair number of opionions already out there on the existing logos
19:48:53 <h01ger> #8 is okish, #11 is a good idea but dunno how to implement it, #12 is a good idea, but needs work, but i like it! #13 too. #15 as well. #17 is also great. #18 i dont like _without text_, eg i like the left one on https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Logo?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=RB_7.png but then i think the logo should also be good without text
19:48:59 <h01ger> my 2 cent
19:49:06 <h01ger> the others i mostly dislike
19:49:11 <vagrantc> i have a strong preference for #8 and #17
19:49:32 <vagrantc> #18 A+B are maybe interesting
19:49:56 <h01ger> 18B wont work, i think, too subtile the colors are
19:50:05 <vagrantc> well, i guess #18-20 A+B are very similar
19:50:48 <h01ger> oh, right i stopped at 18, didnt notice 19+20 were different :/ (sorry)
19:51:15 <raboof> I think #17 turned out promising (but sorry to toot my own horn, especially as a newcomer/drive-by-contributor so far)
19:51:42 <vagrantc> #17 is basically inspired by #8
19:51:45 <vagrantc> ?
19:52:18 <raboof> yes (i changed the arrows so they show convergence and of course the visual style)
19:52:24 <Elio> Are the arrows on purpose like that on 17?
19:52:28 <Elio> Or by accident?
19:52:45 <Elio> So if they would point to the next arrow that would be wrong?
19:52:49 <raboof> on purpose: the concept is that 1 source may be built multiple times but these will lead to the same result
19:53:04 <vagrantc> main reason i like #17 is the arrows show a dirvergent flow with a convergent result
19:53:24 <Elio> Yeah I just thought so. That makes me like the concept more
19:53:36 <h01ger> raboof: totally fine! (tooting your horn as a newcomer) - i was more aiming at people who do that *and* then dont stop, never ;) so, please, toot, as i guess you got my point :)
19:53:40 <vagrantc> though maybe the beginning and end could be more clearly distinguished from the processes?
19:53:48 <Elio> I can do a quick draft right now as we speaking
19:54:01 <vagrantc> i also liked the RB in the middle from #8
19:55:04 <h01ger> #8 to me too much looks like a design from the 1950s to me. to sharp corners, straight edges, etc
19:55:27 <vagrantc> what i like about #17 is it is a relatively simple shape that would be recognizable at various sizes that actually has some conceptual relevence to the project
19:56:00 <h01ger> yeah
19:57:03 <vagrantc> often hard to embed meaning as well as branding in a logo, but i think it's nice when it's there
19:58:11 <Elio> So I think we have a pattern of 8 and 17 here, right?
19:58:34 <lamby> :)
19:58:39 <h01ger> well, only 3 people said something..
19:58:52 <h01ger> but yes, indeed ;p
19:59:04 <emaste> OK: I think #17 is good too
19:59:40 <vagrantc> so, since we're making the process up as we go... how do we gain confidence in that as a proposal with so little input?
20:00:16 <vagrantc> post to the list as "at the meeting we proposed this as a strong candidate" ?
20:00:22 <h01ger> vagrantc: we post to the list
20:00:32 <vagrantc> heh.
20:01:14 <h01ger> but i would suggest to frame it as "the irc meeting has decided, X and Y (and you were all invited so dont complain now)" ;p
20:01:23 <h01ger> s#frame#phrase#
20:01:47 <Elio> The initial mailing list also indicated light favor in 17 afair
20:02:02 <h01ger> also, iirc, 8+17 were also the winners when we had this discusson on the list 2 months ago
20:02:38 <h01ger> so who writes that mail? ;)
20:02:58 <h01ger> assuming we are done with the discussion for now, and want to proceed...
20:04:25 <vagrantc> i can write a mail...
20:04:27 <h01ger> now i wonder, do we agree on "elio should provide new drafts based on 8+17" or 17 alone or?
20:04:33 <h01ger> vagrantc: \o?
20:04:35 <vagrantc> i'd probably not word it quite as harshly as h01ger suggested
20:04:36 <h01ger> vagrantc: \o/
20:04:47 <h01ger> vagrantc: even more \o/ for that! :)
20:04:53 <Elio> https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/N5yz79wU/17%20draft%202
20:05:25 <h01ger> Elio: hui! quite different
20:05:42 <vagrantc> Elio: first looks a bit overly busy
20:05:52 <Elio> Indeed. hence I did the 2nd one
20:05:59 <Elio> https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/CZtxxp8W/17%20draft%203
20:06:09 <h01ger> maybe when suggesting new drafts based on old drafts the old drafts should be included too, so we can say "we want the old stuff". and yes, the 2nd is better, but for me still too much
20:06:12 <vagrantc> i like the diamond shape
20:06:20 <Elio> Maybe we don't need the square in the middle
20:06:30 <h01ger> on draft 3 i like the upper one better
20:06:33 <Elio> Me too, there were concerns of a swastika however
20:06:54 <vagrantc> the diamond shape seeming swastika-like?
20:07:05 <h01ger> Elio: re: process and presenting drafts for real: please put all images on the wiki... probably a new subpage..
20:07:15 <Elio> I will
20:07:25 <h01ger> so https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Logo/Round1 instead of appending to https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Logo
20:07:40 <h01ger> so
20:07:40 <vagrantc> or maybe moving the content on Logo to a subpage?
20:07:46 <raboof> if we go for a square it might be best to have the arrows from top-left to bottom-right? but I liked the 'diamond' orientation as well ;)
20:07:54 <h01ger> #agreed we like to see proposal / variations of #8 and #17
20:08:06 <raboof> indeed perhaps the square in the middle can go - and perhaps the dots don't need to be so prominent?
20:08:18 <Elio> https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/9tnLMkeO/draft4
20:08:31 <vagrantc> inside each of the dots is a smaller version of the logo
20:08:32 <Elio> You'd want this to work as a favicon, so all elements should be similarly sized
20:08:40 <vagrantc> infinitely recursive logo
20:08:41 <Elio> But maybe the dots could be a tiny bit smaller
20:08:41 <vagrantc> :)
20:08:59 <Elio> That's a good idea for a gif or animation I guess
20:09:00 <h01ger> on draft 4 the upper one, but that one is quite far from #17 ;)
20:09:21 <Elio> Visually of course it's different. The concept is the same however
20:09:27 <h01ger> #topic agreeing on the next steps
20:09:33 <Elio> From what I get people like 17 because of the notion and concept
20:09:57 <h01ger> .oO( "agreeing on the next steps we want to see implemented" was the original topic title )
20:10:15 <h01ger> Elio: also the colors. (as they match the current r-b.o website)
20:10:31 <h01ger> which i understand is a chicken+egg thing
20:10:35 <Elio> The colors should be totally not considered right now I'd say
20:10:37 <raboof> (I liked the 'style' of #17 as well though I wasn't sure about some of the proportions - but I can see how it might not work that well in really small instances?)
20:10:38 <h01ger> but it still contributes
20:10:57 <Elio> We should overdo the colors as well as blue is not enough at all to server your identity
20:11:22 <Elio> raboof true. I will try to do a version which hs more of that style though
20:11:42 <h01ger> next steps proposal: vagrant writes the mail summarizying this meeting. elio creates /Logo/Round1 wiki page with new drafts within the next 14 days. we have another meeting like this in 21 days.
20:11:46 <Elio> It however looks very technical and futuristic and I wanted to avoid making it more rocket science
20:11:53 <h01ger> other proposals or which variations?
20:12:20 <h01ger> we could also dudle for the next meeting date or decide today in 21 days...
20:13:25 <Elio> I will be in Rome at the Tor Meeting in 21 days
20:13:38 <Elio> so a week later or a week earlier would be best for me
20:14:36 <h01ger> if you can create the drafts in a week, we could do a week earlier, else, we do it a week later..
20:15:39 <vagrantc> i daresay that reproducible builds is a bit ok to be seen as technical
20:15:42 <h01ger> actually in 2 weeks irc meeting at this time would be a bit difficult for me, so i dont mind 4
20:15:45 <Elio> I can do the drafts by tomorrow probably
20:16:16 <Elio> Let's do 4. As we will also have a reply from OTF probably by then
20:16:25 <h01ger> ok
20:16:35 <Elio> vagrantc no worries, it will be noticeable it is technical
20:17:01 <h01ger> next steps proposal: vagrant writes the mail summarizying this meeting. elio creates /Logo/Round1 wiki page with new drafts soon. we have another meeting like this in 28 days, that is on march 21st
20:17:01 <Elio> We want to balance it out to not scare people away while also making contributors proud of the project
20:17:05 <Elio> I hope so at least
20:17:13 <Elio> Sounds good to me
20:17:15 <h01ger> agreed on that proposal?
20:17:51 <vagrantc> sounds reasonablew
20:18:14 <Elio> I will post the drafts without a wordmark, okay?
20:18:15 <lamby> Sounds good to me.
20:18:22 <Elio> As that is a kind of additional topic to the logo
20:18:28 <h01ger> #agreed next steps: vagrant writes the mail summarizying this meeting. elio creates /Logo/Round1 wiki page with new drafts soon. we have another meeting like this in 28 days, that is on march 21st, 19 UTC, on #reproducible-builds
20:18:30 <Elio> Let's tackle the icon mark first
20:18:42 <lamby> Makes sense.
20:18:48 * h01ger nods
20:19:11 <h01ger> we can skip the next and final topic, we already agreed on the next irc meeting
20:19:23 <h01ger> we are done for now \o/
20:19:40 * h01ger thanks everyone for attending and contributing
20:19:59 <raboof> o/ very much looking forward to the new drafts!
20:20:12 <Elio> Sounds great
20:20:26 <Elio> I will be available in the next 15min for any other questions if you have any
20:20:27 <Eric[m]> if anyone's still around for some more minutes
20:20:34 <h01ger> #endmeeting