17:58:27 <h01ger> #startmeeting
17:58:27 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Oct 12 17:58:27 2020 UTC.  The chair is h01ger. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:58:27 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:58:47 <h01ger> #topic say hi / indicate your presence and review the agenda at https://pad.sfconservancy.org/p/reproducible-builds-meeting-agenda
17:59:09 <lamby> Good evening all. (Chris Lamb)
17:59:11 * h01ger says^wtypes 'hello' while eating the last bits of his early dinner
17:59:15 <vagrantc> hello!
17:59:27 * sangy is happy to see this reboot
17:59:35 <aehlig> Hello
17:59:40 <Foxboron> Hello :) (Morten Linderud)
17:59:44 <kpcyrd> ohai!
18:00:11 * david-a-wheeler waves
18:00:37 * h01ger is happy to see many faces^wnicks again
18:01:01 <Foxboron> Ah, david is even here!
18:01:08 * h01ger is about to remove 'add your topic here' from the agenda (there's still 'any other business')
18:01:10 <aparcar[m]> hello (Paul Spooren)
18:01:29 <david-a-wheeler> Funny, I'm usually considered odd :-).
18:01:29 <sangy> hello (Santiago Torres-Arias)
18:02:04 <david-a-wheeler> I hope everyone is doing well & healthy.
18:02:25 <lamby> You too, David.
18:02:51 * h01ger hopes so too!
18:03:21 <h01ger> so i take it we have an agenda for todays meeting which should not last longer than 60min (but certainly may)
18:03:25 <david-a-wheeler> I'm doing well. I'm now at the Linux Foundation focusing on security of OSS.
18:03:40 <h01ger> nice!
18:04:10 <h01ger> so we've prediscussed that there are generally 2 kinds of meetings:
18:04:18 <h01ger> a.) meta meetings, which are
18:04:52 <h01ger> a.) meta meetings, which are non going into details of topics and rather collect summaries, stati and delegate work to a different date+time
18:05:26 <h01ger> b.) on-topic meetings, which might be boring for half the attendes if their topics are not discussed.
18:06:00 <h01ger> these are not the best summaries of those two kinds, but i hope you get the idea
18:06:22 <h01ger> in the prediscussion we concluced to want type a.) meetings here
18:06:51 <h01ger> #save
18:07:10 <h01ger> meta: gunnar: meetbot.debian.net has the log if you lost bits due to reconnects
18:07:14 <vagrantc> and possibly plan on scheduling some topic-specific b. style meetings?
18:07:20 <h01ger> definitly
18:07:25 <david-a-wheeler> Meta-meetings make sense to me. However, I would urge where possible to try to do things *aychronously* (e.g., via email lists, issues, etc.).
18:07:42 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: agreed
18:08:06 <jathan> Hi
18:08:07 <david-a-wheeler> It's hard to get everyone to a meeting at the same time (synchronously), especially since people are around the world who have an interest in this topic.
18:08:09 <bmwiedemann> Hello: Bernhard M. Wiedemann here. (was fighting with new internet home setup)
18:08:46 <h01ger> for those late or with lost connections: backlog at http://meetbot.debian.net/reproducible-builds/2020/
18:08:47 <lamby> There's probably an ideal middle ground somewhere where we get the benefit of seeing faces/nicknames and the positives of async conversations.
18:08:48 <h01ger> #save
18:09:31 <h01ger> these irc meetings are not ment to replace the lists or bug tracker :)
18:09:50 <david-a-wheeler> lamby: Agree. If nothing else, occasional synchronous meetings force people to finish up something, as well as help community interaction.
18:09:57 <bmwiedemann> so it is a complementary channel
18:10:26 <vagrantc> i sort of see irc meetings as helpful to kickstart a stalled conversation, or bring up new topics to frame them for a larger conversation through other channels
18:10:29 <david-a-wheeler> But I don't think sync meetings need to happen *often* for that to work. Also - the more warning time the better (so we can clear our calendars)
18:10:38 * h01ger mostly made this topic so you know what to expect. i'm not sure there is much to discuss now. i'd say: lets try and if this (the meta meetings) doesnt work, we can discuss again and change plans as needed
18:10:56 <david-a-wheeler> h01lger: Makes sense to me!
18:11:15 <h01ger> (meeting frequency is the next topic)
18:12:13 <lamby> It also felt sensible to me to mention the type of meeting up front (even though there is little to discuss right now) so we can point back to this conversation if we get too detailed on some particular technical topic.
18:12:34 <Foxboron> These meetings might also be a nice introducion for some people to start contributing. Shouldn't ignore that factor either :)
18:12:43 <h01ger> Foxboron: very much so!
18:13:01 <vagrantc> also just to show the bots we have something to say as well
18:13:30 <h01ger> :) alright then... next topic
18:13:40 <h01ger> #topic 3. meeting frequency
18:14:12 <h01ger> my idea/suggestion is to try to go with bi-weekly, very 2nd monday, at 18 utc. aiming for an hour.
18:14:25 <h01ger> s#very 2nd monday#every 2nd monday#
18:14:28 <lamby> wfm
18:14:37 <jelle> sounds good
18:14:38 <sangy> was monthly too far appart?
18:14:47 <h01ger> sangy: i think so, yes
18:15:04 <sangy> Fair enough. I'm mostly concerned about having enough content and continuity
18:15:09 <vagrantc> if we end up scheduling some "b." style meetings, that might get to be a bit much
18:15:14 * h01ger also knows any time will be bad for someone and is happy to do a new doodle poll for a different time say every 3 months
18:15:21 <sangy> I think the reason we lost some of the momentum was that the last meetings were lacking stuff to talk about
18:15:26 * david-a-wheeler Googles, finds that's 2pm US Eastern Time right now.
18:15:29 <vagrantc> sangy: yup
18:15:52 * h01ger googles "US eastern time"
18:16:10 <Foxboron> 18 UTC might be a bit inconvenient for the extreme ends of the timezones. Like Australia and the... east coast of the US?
18:16:29 <Foxboron> But time can maybe be decided upon on a case-by-case?
18:16:32 * h01ger notes he drew in the next topic (time) into this (frequency)
18:16:35 <lamby> Foxboron: (West coast, I think you mean?)
18:16:45 <h01ger> Foxboron: i'd say so yes.
18:16:47 <Foxboron> (Yes, west coast :))
18:16:52 <sangy> I wonder if we can do bi-weekly and also alternate TZ's?
18:16:54 <vagrantc> lamby: 18UTC isn't bad for me west coast ...
18:16:55 <bmwiedemann> some projects do alternating times to better cover the globe
18:17:23 <david-a-wheeler> US West coast is -3 hours US East coast, so 11am US West Coast. That doesn't seem bad. Any time is going to be horrible for some TZ.
18:17:28 <aparcar[m]> 18utc work for me here
18:17:29 <h01ger> sangy: i'd avoid alternating TZ. its hard to remember a bi-weekly meeting already, if you add different times to it, more people will forget
18:17:32 * bmwiedemann wonders how many Asian/Australians do we not have here today
18:17:36 <jathan> biweekly meetings sounds great
18:17:59 <h01ger> most people who are here now can make 18 utc work for them. else they wouldnt be here. hence my happiness to do dudle polls for times every 3 months
18:18:13 <vagrantc> i would think the people who showed up for this meeting bias the results of 18UTC ... but this meeting time was selected after making a poll
18:18:14 <Foxboron> 18 UTC works for me, I'm just forwarding the concern as I recently had to consider it a bit :)
18:18:17 <aparcar[m]> ack
18:18:18 <david-a-wheeler> Biweekly 18 UTC works for me right now. I can't promise to be at every meeting :-(.
18:18:24 <h01ger> #agreed we do type a.) meta meetings
18:18:36 <h01ger> #agreed biweekly is a good frequency
18:18:54 <david-a-wheeler> To clarify: Biweekly = alternate weeks
18:19:00 <bmwiedemann> fortnightly
18:19:00 <vagrantc> every two weeks
18:19:06 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: noone expects you to, though many people will be happy when you show up
18:19:21 <h01ger> #agreed every 14 days is a good frequency
18:19:36 <h01ger> #topic 4. meeting time
18:19:45 <david-a-wheeler> h01ger: Very kind, thanks!
18:20:01 <h01ger> "meeting time" was mostly discussed in the previous topic
18:20:06 <Foxboron> Oh. sorry :x
18:20:53 <vagrantc> seems like the proposal was to go with 18UTC, though there were some ideas about having each meeting switching the time?
18:20:59 <h01ger> maybe we can also have this rule: if two or more people want a dudle poll for a new time, we do it
18:21:24 <h01ger> vagrantc: there was the idea of switching time each time but i really dont think it will work well.
18:21:30 <sangy> yeah, I just threw the proposal out there, but I"m not very strongly opposed to single TZ
18:21:51 <vagrantc> the TZ is UTC :)
18:21:51 <sangy> I've just seen the format exist in other groups to allow for people who would not otherwise be able to join (existing and future members)
18:21:58 <bmwiedemann> btw: in 2 weeks is DST change in EU and then, 19 UTC would be easier for me
18:21:59 <sangy> sorry, s/tz/meeting time/
18:22:18 <vagrantc> /o\ DST!
18:22:19 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: same here :)
18:22:24 <david-a-wheeler> h01ger: Many groups have alternating times due to TZ, but they usually only do that once the group gets bigger.
18:22:36 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: ic
18:23:01 <vagrantc> that makes sense
18:23:08 <h01ger> i'm not strictly against alternating times..
18:23:11 <sangy> e.g., I think it's 2AM right now in China/Japan
18:23:17 <h01ger> i just know that regular times help me make a meeting
18:23:22 <vagrantc> +1
18:24:08 <h01ger> can i say: _agreed we use 18 UTC for now and if two or more people want a dudle poll for a new time, we do it
18:24:09 <h01ger> ?
18:24:18 <h01ger> s#say#record#
18:24:21 <vagrantc> h01ger: sounds reasonable
18:24:31 <Foxboron> I think it's reasonable as well
18:24:36 <jelle> sounds good
18:24:41 <david-a-wheeler> For now. I think I'll have a conflict once DST starts, but I guess I'll see.
18:24:49 * vagrantc watches jelle haggle
18:25:11 <lamby> wfm
18:25:30 <h01ger> #agreed we use 18 UTC for now and if two or more people want a dudle poll for a new time, we do it
18:25:39 <david-a-wheeler> Hmm. Confirmed, I'll have a conflict once US DST starts. I may ask for 19 UTC then, but that's up to the group to decide if they want to change.
18:25:43 * bmwiedemann votes for having a dudle for after DST
18:25:55 * david-a-wheeler seconds bmwiedemann
18:25:56 <h01ger> DST changes at different places on a different date
18:26:05 <vagrantc> yeah, that's what makes it fun
18:26:14 <h01ger> that said: "if two or more people want a dudle poll for a new time, we do it"
18:26:14 <bmwiedemann> 2020-10-25 in EU, 2020-11-01 in US
18:26:29 <david-a-wheeler> h01ger - I know, that's why I said "US". It *used* to be coordinated :-(.
18:27:11 <david-a-wheeler> We're here now. Can we just use 19 UTC starting November?
18:27:16 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: i heard the world is bigger and i wouldnt be surprised if there are different places in europe :)
18:27:17 <vagrantc> well, it's within anyone's power to find another person and propose the doodle poll :)
18:27:19 <h01ger> anyhow
18:27:21 <h01ger> next topic
18:27:40 <h01ger> #topic 5. quick brainstorm of potential topic-specific irc sessions
18:27:54 <h01ger> i think topic 6 is/might be one ;)
18:28:01 <h01ger> and topic 8 too
18:28:32 <vagrantc> so, the idea i had here was to have a no-discussion brainstorm of ideas for topic-specific sessions ... kind of like the in-person breakout sessions we've had at the summits
18:28:34 <h01ger> besides that i have "debian: distributing .buildinfo files for real"
18:28:49 <vagrantc> any clarification needeD?
18:29:02 <jelle> vagrantc: I think we had set some goals too on the summit which we where going to revise the next summit
18:29:29 <h01ger> and "debian: a new .deb format including .buildinfo files" (which is what i suggested in my dc20 talk and for which i still need to present a complete written down rationale, which i plan to do in the next 2 weeks)
18:29:52 <Foxboron> Look at/discuss current published research being done in repro builds might be interesting. It's also relevant as we intend to collect some of it on the webpage.
18:29:59 <vagrantc> ok, brainstorm on!
18:30:29 <vagrantc> applying reproducible builds to achive diverse-double-compiling in the real world
18:30:38 <h01ger> brainstorm idea: at each meta meeting we nominate one topic for a type b.) meeting 7 days after that meta meeting
18:30:50 <david-a-wheeler> vagrantc: I like that one :-)
18:31:48 <bmwiedemann> I want to use dettrace more in my r-b tools - especially the autoclassify.
18:31:51 <vagrantc> brainstorm: strategize a vision for reproducible builds 1/3/5 years in the future
18:32:06 <david-a-wheeler> Idea: "Default Debian (or Ubuntu/Fedora), as delivered, is fully reproducible". Or maybe that should be broken down further?
18:32:33 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: i want a pony. IOW: this needs to be broken down more
18:32:38 <bmwiedemann> vagrantc: https://github.com/bmwiedemann/ddcpoc
18:32:38 <h01ger> #save
18:33:11 * vagrantc taunts people to come up with more ideas :)
18:33:35 <david-a-wheeler> I've lost the bubble on how close things are to that vision. Can someone break that vision down into the steps needed?
18:34:36 <jelle> maybe discuss our set goals on the last summit https://reproducible-builds.org/files/ReproducibleSummit5EventDocumentation.html#__RefHeading___Toc14828_2303288670
18:34:37 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: happy to do after the meeting :)
18:34:39 <vagrantc> brainstorm: open office hours Q&A session to catch people up on missing pieces
18:35:02 <bmwiedemann> david-a-wheeler: in openSUSE, there are roughly 95% of packages that can build reproducibly, but some of the workflows fail when we normalize mtimes.
18:36:09 <jelle> brainstorm: rebuilder progress / pain points
18:36:16 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: david-a-wheeler: in debian there are also 95% of packages that can be build reproducibly, but that wasnt davis's question. he asked for "as delivered, is fully reproducible" (and i'm not refering to the 95 vs 100% but rather to "can vs is")
18:36:18 <vagrantc> maybe we should close this topic for now, and revisit it?
18:36:18 <david-a-wheeler> bwiedemann: I imagine that they can be prioritized. I would prioritize the "default package set" first.
18:36:30 <h01ger> vagrantc: yes
18:36:47 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: bmwiedemann: lets stay meta for here and now please.
18:37:07 <h01ger> vagrantc: do you have your brainstorm topic resolved? did you take notes or will you?
18:37:27 <vagrantc> h01ger: i'll put together a summary from the meeting logs
18:37:30 <bmwiedemann> brainstorm: I'd like to see a Debian and other OS versions of https://github.com/bmwiedemann/reproducibleopensuse/blob/devel/howtodebug
18:37:30 <h01ger> IOW: how do we get from this brainstorm collection to the next on topic meeting?
18:37:42 <h01ger> vagrantc: coolio
18:37:44 <vagrantc> #commit vagrantc to summarize brainstorm session
18:37:47 <david-a-wheeler> okay, meta-level is to identify *specifically* what is needed to get the "minimum/default set of packages" reproducible on a common distro (or more than one)
18:37:54 <h01ger> #action: vagrant will provide a summary of this discussion
18:38:13 <h01ger> next topic then
18:38:15 <vagrantc> h01ger: thanks :)
18:38:28 <h01ger> #topic https://ismypackagereproducibleyet.org/ wants feedback, and possible additional data sources
18:38:31 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: ^
18:38:59 <vagrantc> bmwiedemann: i love it, is there a way to do a regexp or glob search, since different distributions may use different package names?
18:39:12 <jelle> does this compare the CI tests?
18:39:26 <jelle> the links are not really readable for me (blue on black background)
18:39:49 * h01ger registers ismypackagereproducibleinpracticeyet.com and puts a big NO on it :/
18:39:51 <bmwiedemann> yes, CSS is improvable. it takes the reproducible.json published from tests.r-b.o
18:40:02 <david-a-wheeler> I really like ismypackagereproducibleyet.org. Maybe we can nag Fedora/RH friends to provide equivalent data?
18:40:06 <jelle> maybe worth to point that out?
18:40:18 <Foxboron> david-a-wheeler: I haven't seen a lot of movement from them on this for a while honestly.
18:40:29 <h01ger> david-a-wheeler: noone from fedora/RH is working on anything reproducible atm ttbomk
18:40:55 <david-a-wheeler> h01ger: That's too bad :-(.
18:40:57 <jelle> h01ger: I have talked with someone who worked on it for Fedora but forgot his name
18:40:57 <Foxboron> h01ger: Neal Gompa disagreed with me last time I said that :p there is *some* movement *somewhere* but nothing visible.
18:41:01 <aparcar[m]> bmwiedemann: style is a bit hard to read 🙂
18:41:02 <bmwiedemann> vagrantc: possible, but I tried to keep it simple for now, so only exact matches atm.
18:41:07 <Foxboron> jelle: Neal?
18:41:10 <aparcar[m]> Are those reproducible.json files all the same over multiple distros?
18:41:15 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: is there any specific data source you are missing (and which you know exists)?
18:41:15 <bmwiedemann> I know Neal :-)
18:41:17 <jelle> Foxboron: whoever was in #archlinux-projects
18:41:21 <jelle> then it is Neal
18:41:21 <Foxboron> That was Neal :)
18:41:49 <h01ger> we have 3 more topics and 15min left
18:41:54 <bmwiedemann> h01ger: I was wondering what else is on tests.r-b.o ? FreeBSD? alpine? does openwrt have packages of e.g. bash?
18:41:57 <david-a-wheeler> I do have a request for https://ismypackagereproducibleyet.org/ - can it also include hyperlinks to the specific results? It must get the data from somewhere...!
18:42:07 <jelle> good point!
18:42:11 <vagrantc> bmwiedemann: i think https://repology.org/ tracks differing names ... now sure how hard it would be to integrate
18:42:19 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: ok, happy to discuss this directly after the meeting if that works for you
18:42:36 <bmwiedemann> OK, let's close this topic. thanks for the great feedback.
18:43:06 <aparcar[m]> where is the source?
18:43:29 <h01ger> or i can give the answer here: freebsd ports are not being tested. alpine tests are broken. openwrt packages are build, but only as package set (there is no data to be exported on t.r-b.o)
18:43:30 <aparcar[m]> oh nevermind
18:43:34 <jelle> aparcar[m]: it's the second or first link on the page
18:43:35 <h01ger> happy to go into more detail later
18:43:38 <vagrantc> maybe we should link to ismypackage... from tests.r-b.org
18:43:39 <h01ger> next topic..
18:43:51 <h01ger> #topic 7. updates on projects status
18:43:59 <h01ger> jele, what do you mean with this?
18:44:04 <jelle> I can do an Arch update
18:44:05 <h01ger> jelle, sorry
18:44:22 <aparcar[m]> I can do an OpenWrt update at the next meeting
18:44:39 * h01ger thinks distro/project updates are good, but maybe even better send to the list?
18:44:44 <h01ger> aparcar[m]: also cool
18:44:49 <jelle> hmm we could
18:45:12 <jelle> h01ger: I was bringing up the topic as this was the first time we had a meeting since summit :-)
18:45:17 <h01ger> jelle: if you have prepared something, do paste it now?
18:45:40 <h01ger> jelle: sure. this is our first irc meeting, so i'm not surprised we're still a bit bumpy
18:45:45 <jelle> ah, I forgot to prepare something :-)
18:46:11 <h01ger> heh, ok then
18:46:30 <kpcyrd> (speaking of bumpy, I need to leave in ~10min :/)
18:46:32 <h01ger> #agreed we very much appreciate project status updates send to the list (or shared via irc, blogs or cnn)
18:46:39 <jelle> ok :)
18:46:40 <h01ger> next topic then?
18:46:57 <h01ger> #topic 8. rb-format
18:46:58 <david-a-wheeler> I think it's best if status is posted to mailing list, then all can see.
18:47:07 <h01ger> aparcar[m]: i suppose this was you? :)
18:47:13 <h01ger> (rb-format)
18:47:30 <aparcar[m]> yea the mail thread was active for a bit but then went to sleep again
18:47:38 <bmwiedemann> hint: it helps to tag topics with a name
18:47:43 <aparcar[m]> I'm wondering if there happened something in the meantime
18:47:44 * vagrantc tried to stir it up a bit
18:47:49 <h01ger> bmwiedemann: the hint is on the agenda now
18:48:02 <vagrantc> but mostly heard crickets
18:48:16 <h01ger> aparcar[m]: not much, it got stalled there. someone should write a summary of the replies and move the topic forward
18:48:28 <h01ger> vagrantc: what does 'hearing crickets' mean?
18:48:30 <sangy> yeah I wonder if ti just needs a bump...
18:48:30 <aparcar[m]> I remember working on a database layout with sangy but we never got anything in-toto related integrated
18:48:57 <sangy> aparcar[m]: I did some sketch and I believe I submitted a WIP PR. It's been so long, so sorry if I was blocking on my side
18:49:04 <h01ger> #info this topic got stalled on the list and needs someone to drive further
18:49:05 <vagrantc> h01ger: basically no response ... you listen, and all you hear is the noise of various insects in the distance
18:49:19 <h01ger> vagrantc: ah, i see
18:49:33 <bmwiedemann> (= Grillenzirpen)
18:49:53 <sangy> I love aglutinating languages heh
18:50:07 <sangy> aparcar[m]: anyway. I wonder if we can bump the thread and I can shake the dust off of our discussion and take it from there?
18:50:12 <aparcar[m]> okay if people are still interested in this I'll try to write a bump
18:50:25 <aparcar[m]> or maybe sangy because you'd be the leader in in-toto related things?
18:50:30 * h01ger would like to stay on topic and use simple languange everyone understands. i love discussing language IRL
18:51:04 <h01ger> #action sangy or aparcar[m] or both will try to revive the topic
18:51:09 <vagrantc> aparcar[m]: it might require summarizing the goals again, too
18:51:14 <sangy> aparcar[m]: yeah. I can definitely take a look at where things left off and also send a bump. I don't think both of us reviving the thread would hurt :)
18:51:16 <h01ger> next topic for now then..
18:51:18 <aparcar[m]> vagrantc: ack
18:51:28 <aparcar[m]> sangy: ack
18:51:31 <h01ger> #topic 9. any other business
18:51:58 <h01ger> i have one, a question: do you feel you spent the last hour well?
18:51:59 <aparcar[m]> can someone send a rb sticker to hawaii? my laptop is a bit bald
18:52:02 <bmwiedemann> it is always a good idea to be clear on the goals of what you do
18:52:16 <h01ger> aparcar[m]: mail me your shippign address and i'll happily do
18:52:21 <aparcar[m]> h01ger: yes
18:52:33 <vagrantc> aparcar[m]: i could too
18:52:37 <h01ger> aparcar[m]: nice
18:52:41 <vagrantc> dunno if international shipping is any different...
18:52:50 <aparcar[m]> h01ger: yes I think the time is well spent as it show that multiple people are interested on working on the various topics :)
18:53:07 <jelle> I lost some reproducible packages and want them back
18:53:17 <Foxboron> I did a "state of repro builds" during the weekends Arch Conf. The presentation might not be super interesting if you are in the weeds, but the Q&A is fairly informative I think.
18:53:20 <bmwiedemann> h01ger: I think, the SNR was good, though interweaved discussions can be hard to read in IRC.
18:53:23 <vagrantc> i think we've stirred up some old topics and look forward to renewed progress :)
18:53:39 <kpcyrd> bmwiedemann: +1
18:53:41 * h01ger is a bit exhausted from juggling topics (so i'm a bit empty right now) but is happy we are having these meetings again, hoping to include new and old contributors with it
18:53:46 <aparcar[m]> Foxboron: link?
18:53:56 <david-a-wheeler> If this speeds up progress, the meeting was worth it!
18:54:10 <lamby> I liked this meeting and looking forward to the next one.
18:54:22 <vagrantc> happy to see nicks i hadn't seen in a while (or ever)
18:54:29 <Foxboron> aparcar[m]: https://streaming.media.ccc.de/archconf2020/relive/6308 :)
18:54:31 <Foxboron> while it's hot
18:54:34 <h01ger> +1 on what vagrantc just said
18:54:47 <aparcar[m]> thank you
18:55:28 <david-a-wheeler> Clearly many people are interested in this important topic, and that's a good thing.
18:55:31 <h01ger> alright then, i think we can preparing closing this meeting in 4 mins. so i'll say "thank you all very much for attending and contributing to this meeting!" now and will say endmeeting in 3min
18:55:46 <david-a-wheeler> Thanks so much!
18:55:50 * h01ger waves happily
18:55:54 <Foxboron> Thank you very much h01ger :)
18:56:02 <aparcar[m]> Thanks h01ger !
18:56:03 * david-a-wheeler waves back!
18:56:11 <jathan> Very happy to could attend for the first time :)
18:56:11 <lamby> Indeed, thanks h01ger.
18:56:11 <vagrantc> david-a-wheeler: had hoped at some point to get your comments on: https://reproducible-builds.org/news/2019/12/21/reproducible-bootstrap-of-mes-c-compiler/
18:56:36 <jathan> Thank you for organsing this h01ger.
18:56:40 <Foxboron> david-a-wheeler: yes, you might be very interested in that blogpost :)
18:57:09 <Foxboron> vagrantc: I mentioned that as part of the Q&A since someone asked if repro builds solved anything if dependencies was bad :p
18:57:16 <Foxboron> dependencies bad/compromised
18:57:26 <h01ger> #topic next meeting: monday, october, 26th, 18 UTC on #reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net
18:57:28 <aparcar[m]> I'm off, bye
18:57:34 <h01ger> #agreed next meeting: monday, october, 26th, 18 UTC on #reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net
18:57:36 <lamby> Thanks all o/
18:57:38 <Foxboron> thank you!
18:57:45 <h01ger> thank you all!
18:57:51 <david-a-wheeler> Thanks!
18:58:10 <david-a-wheeler> And thanks for pointing me to the MeS post, I miseed that somehow!
18:58:18 <h01ger> #endmeeting