[02:54] <gnomefreak> @schedule new_york
[02:54] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/New_York: 20 Dec 15:00: Edubuntu | 21 Dec 16:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 27 Dec 07:00: Edubuntu | 28 Dec 03:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 02 Jan 15:00: Technical Board | 03 Jan 15:00: Edubuntu
[06:43] <fabbione> @schedule Seattle
[06:43] <fabbione> @schedule seattle
[06:46] <fabbione> @schedule vancouver
[06:46] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Vancouver: 20 Dec 12:00: Edubuntu | 21 Dec 13:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 27 Dec 04:00: Edubuntu | 28 Dec 00:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 02 Jan 12:00: Technical Board | 03 Jan 12:00: Edubuntu
[06:59] <Seveas> @topic
[06:59] <gnomefreak> still not there
[06:59] <nixternal> @schedule chicago
[06:59] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Chicago: 20 Dec 14:00: Edubuntu | 21 Dec 15:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 27 Dec 06:00: Edubuntu | 28 Dec 02:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 02 Jan 14:00: Technical Board | 03 Jan 14:00: Edubuntu
[07:00] <apokryphos> hello everyone =)
[07:00] <Seveas> hi
[07:00] <jenda> Hello
[07:00] <PriceChild> Hi
[07:00] <nixternal> hi
[07:00] <Hawkwind> Hello
[07:00] <apokryphos> Though it hasn't gone through on the Fridge, or on the bot, there will be an Ubuntu IRC operators meeting now
[07:00] <gnomefreak> ok we are still missing a bunch
[07:00] <nixternal> argh
[07:00] <Seveas> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcOperatorMeetingAgenda is the agenda
[07:00] <Seveas> we are missing LJL, nalioth and ompaul
[07:00] <nixternal> i just now seen the email, to late to add it to the fridge i guess..im sorry for not doing so
[07:00] <gnomefreak> somerville
[07:00] <apokryphos> we will do our best to end before the Edubuntu meeting, but if there are still issues around, we shall be ready to move to #ubuntu-ops
[07:00] <apokryphos> nalioth has said he will be a few minutes late
[07:00] <Hawkwind> LjL said he might be a bit late as he was heading home
[07:00] <apokryphos> and is on his way home
[07:01] <jenda> ompaul is online, but I'm not sure if he'd like to come.
[07:01] <Seveas> he would, I've been talking to him
[07:01] <Seveas> and I told that we moved
[07:01] <apokryphos> good to hear
[07:01] <gnomefreak> DBO: is here i think
[07:01] <nixternal> jenda: tell him i am umphing gNewSense on my lappy...he will show up :)
[07:01] <apokryphos> Seveas: do you want to chair or shall I?
[07:01] <DBO> =)
[07:02] <tonyyarusso> nixternal: hehe
[07:02] <jenda> nixternal:
[07:02] <Seveas> apokryphos, I'll chair once everyone has arrived
[07:02] <apokryphos> ok
[07:02] <tonyyarusso> Gawd I should be packing...oh well, maybe it will be quick (yeah right)
[07:02] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, anything specific on the agenda that you'd like to discuss before leaving?
[07:03] <thoreauputic> as long as it's not as long as most CC meetings we should be OK ;-)
[07:03] <Seveas> hehe
[07:03] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Only if this runs WAY long
[07:03] <jenda> 5 hours apiece ;)
[07:03] <gnomefreak> as this is our first i would count on it being a while
[07:03] <Seveas> Let's start with the easy bits first
[07:03] <Seveas> Bots
[07:04] <Seveas> Who added that to the agenda?
[07:04] <apokryphos> I did, I'll speak a little about it now
[07:04] <Seveas> ok
[07:04] <nixternal> hrmm...where is the agenda?
[07:04] <thoreauputic> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcOperatorMeetingAgenda
[07:04] <gnomefreak> for future refference can we add our names to the agenda points you add
[07:04] <nixternal> ty
[07:05] <apokryphos> The ubuntu bots (ubotu and ubugtu) are both great, but on rare occassions there are problems. Seveas is the botmeister, but when he's not around I believe we need to have at least a couple other trusted people who have some admin privs to the bot, such as reconnect, death and the like
[07:05] <apokryphos> I've spoken about this before and Seveas said that some people will be added. Any more info on that?
[07:05] <Seveas> apokryphos, yes, I've been digging in the code to give access to specific parts
[07:05] <Seveas> problem is that there is no @reconnect
[07:06] <Seveas> and bringin bot back up after killing means needing shell access
[07:06] <Seveas> which definitely is a no-go
[07:06] <apokryphos> does your server support multiple shell users?
[07:06] <Hawkwind> What about someone having a daily rsync/backup
[07:06] <Seveas> sure, but I'm not giving away access
[07:06] <nalioth> i am here
[07:06] <apokryphos> hi nalioth
[07:06] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: Just did so for mine
[07:06] <gnomefreak> thats a security issue
[07:06] <Seveas> Hawkwind, this is just about connection problems, not databases
[07:06] <thoreauputic> hi nalioth
[07:06] <Seveas> databses are backed up daily
[07:06] <apokryphos> nalioth: we've only just started. We started with "bots" on the agenda https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcOperatorMeetingAgenda
[07:07] <jenda> How about getting the bots a virtual machine? Is that a very bad idea?
[07:07] <apokryphos> Seveas: is it a realistic possibility to get a @reconnect?
[07:07] <apokryphos> it can be important
[07:07] <Hawkwind> Seveas: I meant that if/when you aren't around and the bots are down someone can run an instance from their server or something
[07:07] <gnomefreak> tonyyarusso: ty today wasnt really needed but more for future meetings
[07:07] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: Thought I'd get in the habit ;)
[07:07] <gnomefreak> :)
[07:07] <Seveas> Hawkwind, ask ljl, he has a backup. He ended up creating /home/dennis because that part is hardcoded a lot
[07:08] <Seveas> Hawkwind, for the factoid bot I can setup an easy-to-deploy backup on a different server
[07:08] <Hawkwind> Ah ok.  I have a server that is up 99% of the time that I could do something similar for if need be
[07:08] <apokryphos> a backup is good, but it's not ideal I think.
[07:08] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: That would be helpful - LjL's backup was a week behind last time
[07:08] <apokryphos> (in some situations); like when we just need the bot to reconnect
[07:09] <apokryphos> last time we needed nalioth to do an admin kill on the bot which got him to reconnect
[07:09] <Seveas> phone, sec
[07:09] <jenda> apokryphos: if that works - it's not such a big problem.
[07:09] <jenda> apokryphos: you can get freenode staff most of the time.
[07:09] <apokryphos> it's really not the way things should be done
[07:09] <jenda> I s'pose ;)
[07:10] <DBO> what it really boils down to is Seveas would have to write a function to do that, Im sure hes capable but has he the time?
[07:10] <jono> hi
[07:10] <nixternal> hi
[07:10] <jono> sorry folks, got caught up
[07:10] <jono> I can't stay too long either
[07:10] <tonyyarusso> Hey jono
[07:11] <gnomefreak> hi jono
[07:11] <jono> so whats the current situation?
[07:11] <Seveas> back
[07:11] <apokryphos> jono:  we've only just started. We started with "bots" on the agenda https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcOperatorMeetingAgenda
[07:11] <thoreauputic> if jono can't stay long perhaps we should deal with the important issues while he's arond?
[07:11] <Seveas> dog won't make christmas :(
[07:11] <tonyyarusso> jono: just getting going.  http://www.novarata.net/wiki/index.php?title=Irc_council_meeting_thoughts and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcOperatorMeetingAgenda
[07:11] <gnomefreak> Seveas: im sorry
[07:11] <apokryphos> dang :/
[07:11] <jono> right
[07:11] <jono> ok, carry on, I am going to lurk
[07:12] <jono> :)
[07:12] <Seveas> next point: bantracker logs
[07:12] <apokryphos> what did we conclude?
[07:12] <apokryphos> Seveas: is it a realistic possibility to get a @reconnect?
[07:12] <gnomefreak> i oppose the public logs
[07:12] <Seveas> apokryphos, file it as  a bug
[07:12] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: why?
[07:12] <apokryphos> ok, cool
[07:12] <Seveas> we don't need to decide whether it should be done, it should be
[07:12] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: if people know how they are banned they can advoid them
[07:13] <apokryphos> I agree. Are there any disagreements here?
[07:13] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Ah yes, bantracker logs was me.
[07:13] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: hmm - I see
[07:13] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: people who get banned quite a bit know how
[07:13] <Seveas> I have no problem with public logs, given that they are already public via ubuntulog
[07:13] <apokryphos> *know how to get banned, rather.
[07:13] <Seveas> but I don't like to make commenting open for everyone
[07:13] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: most of the exploiters do not so much of the "spammers"
[07:13] <tonyyarusso> I don't have ANY idea how to accomplish this technically, and what privacy concerns may come up, but ubuntulog probably takes care of that.  The purpose is for people that come in saying "why was I banned?"
[07:14] <gnomefreak> s/do not/do : not
[07:14] <apokryphos> tonyyarusso: well, we do have a bantracker. Making it public wouldn't be hard
[07:14] <apokryphos> but there'd be work on not allowing others to comment, perhaps
[07:14] <Seveas> apokryphos, neh, few lines of code
[07:14] <Seveas> that's not hard at all
[07:14] <apokryphos> cool. So that's that?
[07:14] <tonyyarusso> Agreed commenting and such should likely remain private.  I was referring strictly to easy access to logs.
[07:14] <gnomefreak> what do others need to see it for?
[07:15] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: transparency
[07:15] <apokryphos> and also it's easier
[07:15] <jenda> gnomefreak: the banned has to be able to see it.
[07:15] <Hawkwind> gnomefreak: To show we aren't hiding anything from them maybe
[07:15] <apokryphos> when people come in who've been banned 10 times, and we want to show them the logs, we can just point them there
[07:15] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: we should have nothing to hide, IMO
[07:15] <Seveas> I agree
[07:15] <jenda> +1
[07:15] <tonyyarusso> In addition to be good for the bannee, it would be good in that others could "audit" our actions, which may have benefits.
[07:15] <Hawkwind> I'm in agreeance too, bantracker info should be public, with the commenting disabled for the public
[07:16] <nixternal> i think before any of it is made public, we need to refrain from the "omg what an idiot" remarks I have seen in the past - got to stay CoC with it, which I know gets difficult at times due to frustrations
[07:16] <Seveas> should comments be visible to the public?
[07:16] <nixternal> Seveas: as long as we keep them CoC safe, why not?
[07:16] <gnomefreak> if your gonna make it public make it all public
[07:16] <Seveas> fair enough
[07:17] <jenda> Seveas: shouldn't comments only be made by the bannor?
[07:17] <gnomefreak> nixternal: we dont know all the ops so we dont know how they play
[07:17] <thoreauputic> yes - just show some restraint :)
[07:17] <apokryphos> jenda: not necessarily, nope.
[07:17] <Seveas> if anyone objects, please shout now
[07:17] <jenda> ok
[07:17] <Seveas> LjL, welcome
[07:17] <gnomefreak> LjL: welcome
[07:17] <LjL> hello
[07:17] <Hawkwind> Hey there LjL
[07:17] <nixternal> ehlo
[07:17] <jenda> LjL- welcome ;)
[07:17] <tonyyarusso> I am okay with my comments being public.  Not sure how others feel.
[07:17] <DBO> Seveas, no issues here with public comments
[07:17] <Hawkwind> No objections here on making it all public
[07:17] <gnomefreak> Seveas: can you make it read only for public?
[07:18] <Seveas> gnomefreak, that's the plan
[07:18] <apokryphos> yeah. Next item?
[07:18] <gnomefreak> k good
[07:18] <Seveas> ok, nice
[07:18] <Seveas> let's go from easy to hard
[07:18] <nixternal> yay
[07:18] <apokryphos> 8)
[07:18] <Seveas> next is channel access policy
[07:18] <jenda> Seveas: jono will have to leave.
[07:18] <Seveas> jono, anything you are particularly interested in?
[07:18] <gnomefreak> who added that and what is a lead?
[07:18] <jenda> I wouldn't avoid the tuffstuff for too long.
[07:18] <Seveas> gnomefreak, I added that
[07:19] <nixternal> like a #ubuntu lead, #kubuntu lead, and so on?
[07:19] <Seveas> basically, we need someone to be administrative contact for #kubuntu-* #xubuntu-* #ubuntuforums-*
[07:19] <Hawkwind> nixternal: Yes
[07:19] <Seveas> who we can poke for things
[07:19] <apokryphos> Seveas: I didn't forget about that by the way, Riddell hasn't been around since.
[07:19] <Seveas> currently that's rather ad-hoc
[07:19] <nalioth> and who should be conversant with Ubuntu IRC guidelines and policies
[07:20] <Seveas> Currently we have jenda for the forums side, somerville32 for xubuntu and noone for kubuntu, but apokryphos is attempting to clear that up
[07:20] <gnomefreak> any suggestions on who or a vote or raise hand on what channel? im ok for any channel i need be
[07:20] <Seveas> does anyone hae problems with these people?
[07:20] <gnomefreak> not sure on one of them
[07:20] <nixternal> Seveas: i can do kubuntu if no one steps up
[07:21] <apokryphos> nixternal: I'm awaiting on Riddell's response for it atm
[07:21] <Seveas> nixternal, apokryphos stepped up but hasn't been able to talk to riddell yet
[07:21] <nalioth> nixternal: where is riddell?
[07:21] <nixternal> also, with "leads" would it make since having more than 1 possibly 2 for shifts?
[07:21] <apokryphos> he's been away for a few days
[07:21] <DBO> AWOL
[07:21] <gnomefreak> has somerville been an op long enough to know what to do incase hes needed being a contact?
[07:21] <tonyyarusso> If there is any desire/need to have separate contacts for -offtopics, I'd be happy to take responsibility for #ubuntu-offtopic, but I don't know if there's any reason for that.
[07:21] <Hawkwind> nixternal: Good point
[07:21] <thoreauputic> I think the channel leads should be fairly experienced
[07:21] <nixternal> Riddell is on a sabatical trying to get more aliens to use Kubuntu
[07:21] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: could be a good point.
[07:22] <Seveas> nixternal, 2 is unneccessary, except for during holidays -- it's not meant for urgnt things
[07:22] <LjL> -1 for separate -offtopic contacts, +1 for *having* contacts of course
[07:22] <nixternal> a contact is going to be nothing more than a liason to the irc ops correct?
[07:22] <apokryphos> Seveas: was there any discussion on adding somerville before she was made #xubuntu-* ?
[07:22] <Seveas> apokryphos, he was the first and only one who stepped up
[07:22] <apokryphos> nixternal: to IRC ops, but they also have power over the channels with the access lists, and Freenode staff
[07:22] <Seveas> and he's very enthousiastic
[07:23] <jenda> Seveas: the owner of the #ubuntuforums channel is zenwhen. I can act as contact to the operator team, though.
[07:23] <nixternal> ya, i would say Riddell for #kubuntu then, since he is the Kubuntu daddy
[07:23] <Hawkwind> Maybe one of us could do #Xubuntu for a little bit while somerville learns a bit more of the IRC/Op duties or something
[07:23] <apokryphos> nixternal: right, but he's a very busy man who's not always around
[07:23] <gnomefreak> nixternal: does he play enough in there or pay atttention in therE?
[07:23] <nixternal> then look at Hobbsee and see if she is interested
[07:23] <Seveas> nixternal, I'd rather have someone being more irc-minded instead of devel-minded in that position
[07:23] <apokryphos> nixternal: another very busy person, which is what we said last time.
[07:23] <thoreauputic> +1 for hobbsee
[07:23] <nixternal> we are all busy
[07:24] <Hawkwind> nixternal: Hobbsee has so many things going on now, I don't think she wants it
[07:24] <DBO> thoreauputic, she might not even want the job
[07:24] <tonyyarusso> Hawkwind: fwiw, somerville added me with 10 to #xubuntu even though it's not my regular stomping grounds, to help on occasion at least
[07:24] <thoreauputic> right
[07:24] <gnomefreak> nixternal: shes more of devel atm
[07:24] <nixternal> gnomefreak: she is the communications leader for Kubuntu though
[07:24] <tonyyarusso> Not that for Hobbsee "if she is interested" may be a big if atm
[07:24] <tonyyarusso> *Note
[07:24] <gnomefreak> nixternal: i understand that
[07:24] <nixternal> the community manager that is
[07:24] <Hawkwind> tonyyarusso: I was thinking maybe I should hang out there too a bit to help as well since somerville is still a bit new to the op stuff
[07:24] <thoreauputic> DBO: perhaps this needs discussion on the mailing list + voting then?
[07:25] <apokryphos> nixternal: but it's worth mentioning now if you'd object to me being the contact.
[07:25] <nixternal> well then, for #kubuntu make it chanserv, he is the only one available 99.9% of the time :)
[07:25] <DBO> thoreauputic, I highly doubt this one can be solved today
[07:25] <apokryphos> I'm not sure you're getting this
[07:25] <tonyyarusso> Hawkwind: May be nice.  I figure sit back as much as possible, but step in if needed.
[07:25] <DBO> so thats probably a good idea
[07:25] <nixternal> i could care less who the contact is truthfully
[07:25] <thoreauputic> DBO: I agree
[07:26] <thoreauputic> I suggest people could nominate themselves on the list, or be nominated and accept/refuse
[07:26] <Seveas> ok, defered to mailinglist
[07:26] <nixternal> Seveas: +1
[07:26] <gnomefreak> make a site of responseiblities and see who is up for it?
[07:26] <gnomefreak> and spell that right when you read it please
[07:26] <apokryphos> sounds good
[07:26] <Hawkwind> Hah
[07:26] <tonyyarusso> Knowing the responsibilities would be very good
[07:26] <Seveas> next up #ubuntu-ops
[07:27] <apokryphos> ok, let me quickly discuss why things are the way they are currently
[07:27] <Seveas> let's do a preliminary vote: +1/0/-1 on should it be "no lurkers"?
[07:27] <Seveas> 0
[07:27] <DBO> 0
[07:27] <gnomefreak> Seveas: i say keep it so people hav e aplace to argue thier bans (argue for lack of better word)
[07:27] <jenda> -1
[07:27] <tonyyarusso> I would like it to be public, as least read-only.
[07:27] <tonyyarusso> -1, allow lurkers
[07:27] <jenda> perhaps +m?
[07:27] <apokryphos> -1
[07:27] <apokryphos> jenda: why?
[07:27] <DBO> jenda, cant be +m
[07:27] <gnomefreak> jenda: +m would defeat the purpose of the channel
[07:27] <apokryphos> unless we had +z
[07:27] <DBO> sometimes people need to talk to ops
[07:27] <apokryphos> but then I don't see the point
[07:27] <thoreauputic> +1 for public - but I suggest that interop discussion of bans be initially at least in /msg
[07:27] <jenda> ok
[07:27] <LjL> +1 DBO
[07:27] <jenda> it was a reaction to tonyyarusso's read only.
[07:28] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: /msg 35 ops?
[07:28] <Seveas> ok, no one really voting for keeping it private?
[07:28] <apokryphos> doesn't seem so
[07:28] <PriceChild> Am i allowed to vote?
[07:28] <LjL> Seveas, i'd probably consider having *a* private channel
[07:28] <Seveas> yes
[07:28] <tonyyarusso> jenda: I was thinking in case something happens such that people are creating a disturbance.  would prefer totally open if lurkers can behave.
[07:28] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: no, I mean if you have problems with someone's ban, ping them first
[07:28] <apokryphos> but, I should say one thing
[07:28] <apokryphos> if it's public we have to ensure that things generally stay on topic
[07:28] <nalioth> thoreauputic: no, because that can create a huge multi-layered PM net with more than a few ops talking to each other
[07:28] <jenda> tonyyarusso: ok
[07:28] <Seveas> apokryphos, +1
[07:28] <gnomefreak> making the bantracker public would make the channel public or everyones points would be moot
[07:28] <DBO> I would like to make one comment
[07:28] <LjL> it has been mentioned that *another* channel could be created for "private" discussions. that could be discussed.
[07:29] <thoreauputic> nalioth: hmm - good point
[07:29] <nixternal> public, and get rid of the silly voices :)
[07:29] <Seveas> DBO, please go ahead
[07:29] <DBO> while I have no opinion on kicking them, asking them to leave is perfectly ok
[07:29] <gnomefreak> we tried that most just left thier nicks there
[07:29] <DBO> there really is no reason for lurkers, dont force them to leave, but asking nicely is harmless
[07:29] <nixternal> if they want to lurk let them lurk, if you need to say something they shouldn't see/hear, you shouldn't be saying it all then
[07:29] <Seveas> LjL, I don't agree, most of what we do here is making things more open
[07:29] <thoreauputic> nixternal: i agree
[07:30] <apokryphos> DBO: I'm not sure that doesn't lead to having a "no lurking policy"
[07:30] <LjL> Seveas, depends. when i say "warning, there might be organized trolls around, judging from the fact that X is a proxy, and so is Y, and they're arguing, and a few more strange nicknames are joining" -- i don't want *them* to see this
[07:30] <apokryphos> I say we just leave anyone to lurk for the time being
[07:30] <gnomefreak> we had an issue with one person that lurked inthere
[07:30] <jenda> Seveas: agreed, I don't think the ops really need a channel to discuss things in private... and if the need arises, we can always create one.
[07:30] <thoreauputic> what exactly is the problem with people lurking? They might learn things, and who is to say which ones might eventually be ops?
[07:30] <DBO> apokryphos, I can see how its a slippery slope
[07:30] <tonyyarusso> DBO: I have doubts about your "no reason" assertion.  Reason's could include curiosity about how we operate, external auditing of our actions, observing for purposes of learning by folks interested in opping a channel of their own, etc.
[07:30] <gnomefreak> he had a freind that was beiung banned and he gave them a work around
[07:31] <LjL> Seveas: one thing is being open to *Ubuntu users*, one thing is being open to *deliberate trolls* who can take advantage of our internal FYI's
[07:31] <jhaitas> sorry if you guys think i'm lurking
[07:31] <DBO> apokryphos, I was not suggesting doing that to everyone, just people who seem to kinda forget they are in there
[07:31] <thoreauputic> jhaitas: heh
[07:31] <nixternal> lol
[07:31] <Seveas> LjL, that's a rather good point
[07:31] <jhaitas> i'm just being quiet because i don't want to disrupt what is going on
[07:31] <kkathman> thoreauputic:  I agree, many newbies are afraid to speak, whent they dont know anything yet...and many choose to just watch and learn.
[07:31] <Seveas> LjL, how about giving ubugtu a function to broadcast something to all ops?
[07:31] <jhaitas> i'm trying to learn how you guys do business before i speak up
[07:31] <apokryphos> what like?
[07:32] <Hawkwind> Seveas: +1 on that idea
[07:32] <LjL> Seveas: well, that would be similar to having a separate a channel - though perhaps less hassle. +1 for me
[07:32] <Seveas> that has the advantage of it being in a pm and thus not too scrolling
[07:32] <gnomefreak> ok that works use /msg ubugtu something <span all ops>?
[07:32] <Hawkwind> Or even as a /notice maybe
[07:32] <thoreauputic> I think we seem to be reaching some consensus that we should be as open as possible in evry way. Comments?
[07:32] <DBO> Hawkwind, notice would be hard to find on scrollback
[07:32] <LjL> implementation details IMHO
[07:32] <Seveas> last thing: logging
[07:32] <Seveas> should the channel be publicly logged?
[07:33] <PriceChild> I remember being in -ops a while ago with some question about ubotu, and after the question I was promptly kicked out, not a clue what I had done and felt a bit scared.
[07:33] <apokryphos> I think it should be logged
[07:33] <nixternal> NOTE:  Our number one goal is Ubuntu - advocate it, support it, and rock it - telling someone to leave because they are in a "skullz" or "private-society" channel defeats our common goals
[07:33] <tonyyarusso> thoreauputic: +1 from me.  Unless someone gives some concrete, specific thing that must not be, I personally want things public.
[07:33] <Hawkwind> DBO: Yeah maybe for some.  I have it set to show in active channel when I'm away and the tab I leave it on is not an active tab with chat
[07:33] <gnomefreak> Seveas: well everything else is public make it publicc
[07:33] <jenda> Seveas: once it's open, yes.
[07:33] <LjL> +0 for me, but -1 if the logs are made available in real time
[07:33] <apokryphos> -1,0,+1 on public logging?
[07:33] <apokryphos> +1
[07:33] <LjL> make them available with some time difference at least
[07:33] <Seveas> LjL, ubuntulog isn't real time
[07:33] <gnomefreak> you cant make one thing public and not hte rest
[07:33] <LjL> that's ok then
[07:33] <Seveas> +1 on logging from me
[07:33] <thoreauputic> I have no issues with public logs +1
[07:33] <LjL> ok, +1
[07:33] <Hawkwind> +1 on logging
[07:33] <DBO> +1
[07:33] <jenda> +1
[07:33] <nixternal> +1 on everything
[07:33] <apokryphos> alright, sorted.
[07:33] <tonyyarusso> LjL: What's the realtime concern?
[07:34] <gnomefreak> ok Seveas looks like logging
[07:34] <nixternal> +1x10-3+17^5
[07:34] <Seveas> ok, now we are at the hard part
[07:34] <tonyyarusso> lol
[07:34] <nalioth> most store managers do not let their customers hang out in their offices, even though the stores are "open to the public"
[07:34] <Seveas> operator policy
[07:34] <LjL> tonyyarusso: same as above - trolls seeing stuff in too-real-time. though the Ubugtu implementation Seveas proposed would probably get around that.
[07:34] <gnomefreak> i agree with nalioth on that
[07:34] <LjL> +1 nalioth
[07:34] <mc44> nalioth: almost all of ubuntu is open to the public
[07:34] <tonyyarusso> LjL: *nod*
[07:34] <Seveas> nalioth, but ubuntu as a community is more open than a store
[07:34] <apokryphos> nalioth: I think we should keep it open though until we have a reason to believe that it shouldn't be
[07:34] <Seveas> all processes are public
[07:34] <jenda> nalioth: imprecise analogies are dangerous...
[07:35] <gnomefreak> Seveas: can we set up a signing of the guidelines? or something of the sort
[07:35] <Seveas> jenda, +1
[07:35] <apokryphos> unless there's a direct threat from keeping it open, it should be.
[07:35] <tonyyarusso> nalioth: Although, those that are open in operations as well as sales floor in a sense often garner respect.
[07:35] <Seveas> gnomefreak, that's a good plan
[07:35] <jenda> the store keeper usually doesn't recruit staff from good customers.
[07:35] <PriceChild> nalioth: doesn't mean you can't have private discussions in pm or other  channels etc.
[07:35] <mc44> discussions in private should only be when absolutely necessary
[07:35] <nixternal> Ubuntu isn't a store - it is a garage sale, wherever there is merchandise you are free to wonder :)
[07:35] <thoreauputic> let's not get sidetracked with the analogy :)
[07:36] <LjL> one thing - we keep mentioning "PM". but PM can have the disadvantage that things are only shared between *two* people, the other people "suddenly" discovering about something later... and we end up like we're now.
[07:36] <gnomefreak> Seveas: also i think making it a bit less general would be a good idea since people seem to interpret things differnetly
[07:36] <apokryphos> we know the bad arguments they can create, such as Plato's :P
[07:36] <LjL> i'd like a *multi-way* medium that can be used a bit privately. Ubugtu sounds ok
[07:36] <jhaitas> would y'all prefer it if i leave?
[07:36] <gnomefreak> jhaitas: what are you going on about?
[07:36] <jenda> apokryphos: I love his analogies :)
[07:36] <tonyyarusso> LjL: Point - I think it has it's place for minor points (like something I said to sommerville yesterday that should have been pm, but oh well), but should be carefully used.
[07:36] <nixternal> it needs to be open, a private channel/society leads to eliteism and you cant' say that it doesn't...i have seen it happen with many-a-distro...if there is something we need to say that shouldn't be heard by all there is a thing called /notice or /msg, but at the same time, we shouldn't be keeping secrets
[07:36] <PriceChild> jhaitas, not all the 90 people here are part of the meeting, don't worry bout it. This is a public meeting
[07:36] <thoreauputic> if we back each other up and keep the CoC in mind, we are less likely to have major issues IMO
[07:36] <jenda> jhaitas: we're not even talking about this channel :)
[07:37] <apokryphos> jenda: I like them too; problem is when he thinks they back up his argument :P
[07:37] <mc44> why not an#ubuntu-ops-private which is used only when necessary and any discussion made availiable after the fact when it is no longer sensitive
[07:37] <jenda>
[07:37] <jhaitas> ok
[07:37] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: remember we just added 30 ops to our list?
[07:37] <apokryphos> I think Ubugtu OP actions are *possibly* a case where privacy is required
[07:37] <gnomefreak> that most of us dont know
[07:37] <LjL> ok, so the channel as open as possible, but a separate place (like Ubuntu commands) to use *sparingly* for "service messages". does that sound ok?
[07:37] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: and?
[07:37] <jhaitas> i'm relatively new to the ubuntu community...
[07:37] <Seveas> LjL, yup
[07:37] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: how do we prevent the ops are with ops
[07:37] <tonyyarusso> apokryphos: maybe
[07:37] <LjL> s/Ubuntu/Ubugtu/
[07:37] <nixternal> if you do decide on a private channel, remove the the ubuntu from the channel name
[07:37] <gnomefreak> if we dont know the other ops
[07:38] <Seveas> nixternal, council greyskull is already taken ;)
[07:38] <nixternal> haha
[07:38] <gnomefreak> motu grabbed that
[07:38] <Hawkwind> The access list in -ops should contain all known ops of every official Ubuntu-* channel, even if they don't hang out there regularly
[07:38] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: I don't follow - all ops are supposed to keep the CoC
[07:38] <apokryphos> course
[07:38] <gnomefreak> Hawkwind: they are
[07:38] <Hawkwind> Or we should have a wiki page that lists every op
[07:38] <jenda> I will have to go soon.
[07:38] <mc44> *the Leadership CoC, no?
[07:38] <tonyyarusso> Hawkwind: LP / ubuntu-irc?
[07:38] <Seveas> Hawkwind, we have, but it's outdated
[07:39] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: i cant honestly say joey will obey the coc even if he signed it
[07:39] <thoreauputic> mc44: yes
[07:39] <Seveas> Hawkwind, feel free to fix ;)
[07:39] <nalioth> jhaitas: this is #ubuntu-meeting anyone is welcome
[07:39] <jenda> Seveas: I believe this idea is worth a try: "* If someone appeals in #ubuntu-ops, the banning op is not allowed to act, only to defend his actions"
[07:39] <Hawkwind> Seveas: Hah.  If I knew all the ops, I'd do it.  Maybe we can get together and get that list
[07:39] <nixternal> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRCOperators
[07:39] <nixternal> update that ^^
[07:39] <highvoltage> which meeting is currently running?
[07:39] <gnomefreak> highvoltage: ops meeting
[07:39] <thoreauputic> highvoltage: ops
[07:39] <apokryphos> highvoltage: Ubuntu IRC op meeting
[07:39] <nixternal> irc bofh's
[07:39] <Seveas> jenda, ack
[07:39] <thoreauputic> nixternal: heh
[07:40] <tonyyarusso> I second jenda's point.  In fact, I would _prefer_ to not be the reviewer for bans I had set originally.
[07:40] <jenda> tonyyarusso: that's Seveas' point.
[07:40] <DBO> +1 jenda
[07:40] <jenda> I quoted.
[07:40] <LjL> i don't know. i'd give this like a 30-day trial and then a vote
[07:40] <tonyyarusso> jenda: Ah
[07:40] <tonyyarusso> Then +1 Seveas
[07:40] <LjL> i'd have to see how it works out
[07:40] <thoreauputic> I think jenda's idea is worth a try
[07:40] <thoreauputic> +1
[07:40] <gnomefreak> +1
[07:40] <jenda> thoreauputic: Seveas' idea, I quoted :)
[07:40] <gnomefreak> highvoltage: it never went through from fridge ml
[07:40] <Seveas> LjL, this is all about trying new things, nothing is set in stone until it is succesfull
[07:40] <thoreauputic> ah OK :)
[07:40] <LjL> *shrug* +1 then
[07:40] <Hawkwind> +1 as well
[07:41] <apokryphos> people who know about -ops are generally regulars anyway
[07:41] <tonyyarusso> true
[07:41] <Hawkwind> apokryphos: Very true
[07:41] <Seveas> I want to run this by you as well: should we forbid "op wars/fun kicking"?
[07:41] <LjL> right, and one thing
[07:41] <Seveas> -infinity from me
[07:42] <Hawkwind> I think it should be forbidden
[07:42] <gnomefreak> in public for no reason -1
[07:42] <LjL> if -ops is a place where people come to appeal bans -- how do they *get to know* about it?
[07:42] <DBO> -1
[07:42] <Hawkwind> Atleast in public channels
[07:42] <tonyyarusso> apokryphos: Although, there is some advantage to making it better known, as it would be good for people to know the recourse available.
[07:42] <Seveas> LjL, it should be advertised more
[07:42] <LjL> forbid them in the main channels, allow them in -offtopic channels
[07:42] <apokryphos> -s might be a start :P
[07:42] <gnomefreak> no
[07:42] <Hawkwind> LjL: -1 on that
[07:42] <DBO> LjL, that has been the unspoken rule on it thus far
[07:42] <gnomefreak> -offtopics needs to be forbidden as well
[07:42] <Seveas> +1 on ljls plan
[07:42] <tonyyarusso> I would like to say forbid in all Ubuntu channels, on the basis of complaints voiced even in #ubuntu-offtopic.
[07:42] <LjL> DBO: you got me :)
[07:42] <Hawkwind> It sets a bad example IMO
[07:43] <gnomefreak> as people have complained about it many times
[07:43] <Seveas> we should not forget to have fun
[07:43] <gnomefreak> last CC meeting it was brought up off topic for meeting
[07:43] <nalioth> but not everybody can have 'that' kind of fun
[07:43] <Hawkwind> It leads to a user feeling he/she can join in on the fun, and will lead to comments or something similar to what we had with bigfuzzyjesus
[07:43] <gnomefreak> Seveas: agreed keeps it in -ops?
[07:43] <thoreauputic> just put it in the /topic for offtopic, humorously
[07:44] <nixternal> man, i was in the wrong channel wondering why noone was talking
[07:44] <thoreauputic> " Ops may be kicking each other, pay no attention"
[07:44] <apokryphos> heh
[07:44] <Seveas> Hawkwind, bfj was inappropriate, not kicking
[07:44] <LjL> ...
[07:44] <LjL> +1
[07:44] <Seveas> thoreauputic, +2
[07:44] <tonyyarusso> I am personally somewhat uncomfortable with the practice (although I have participated on occasion), find it unprofessional and tarnishing our image to those less "in the know" who don't underdstand that it's just a form of fun, and in acknowledgement of the wishes of those who have lodged complaints.
[07:44] <DBO> tonyyarusso, lets keep in mind the ops are volunteers
[07:44] <apokryphos> there is the danger of overdoing things
[07:45] <tonyyarusso> Agreed we should have fun, but probably not in public channels.  If we do need to make a separate private channel that does not have Ubuntu in the name, I would be fine for it there.
[07:45] <nixternal> tonyyarusso: i believe that also falls under my "stop flexing your chest" clause, because in all reality that's all you are doing
[07:45] <gnomefreak> who reads tpics?
[07:45] <thoreauputic> tonyyarusso: in -offtopic I think it's harmless ( with a topic addition)
[07:45] <LjL> look, when people logged complains about that *to me*, they mainly said it was "unrequired scrolling". people also complained about the Planet Ubuntu notices from Ubugtu for the same reason.
[07:45] <Hawkwind> Seveas: True.  But it's *possible* he wouldn't have said that if the kicks/bans hadn't happened.  Not saying it wouldn't have, but it is something we have to consider
[07:45] <LjL> should we care about that?
[07:45] <tonyyarusso> DBO: True, although in my other volunteer organizations a level of professionalism is still a must.
[07:45] <thoreauputic> nixternal: no, it's just harmless fooling around :)
[07:45] <Seveas> LjL, I think no
[07:45] <nixternal> harmless and fooling around isn't for Ubuntu
[07:45] <mc44> Its also not just ops kicking ops though
[07:45] <Seveas> people will always find things to complain about
[07:45] <DBO> tonyyarusso, and for everything but peewees playhous (-offtopic) we maintain it
[07:45] <apokryphos> Shall we put it to a vote?
[07:46] <thoreauputic> nixternal: what is -offtopic for if not fun?
[07:46] <tonyyarusso> I love having @lart as an alternative, btw.
[07:46] <Seveas> thoreauputic, exactly
[07:46] <gnomefreak> i say make a channel for it or use -ops
[07:46] <nixternal> especially if others are around, if you do it in ops where all the ops are, then so be it, but in the public-public channels even offtopic, isn't right
[07:46] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, if funkicks go, lart should go as well
[07:46] <apokryphos> -1,0,+1 on op actions in -offtopic
[07:46] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: You think so?
[07:46] <Seveas> nixternal, some people like the unexplainable kicks in offtopic
[07:46] <nixternal> funkicks == flexing your chest (and most geeks don't have chests)
[07:46] <thoreauputic> people, keep a sense  of humour
[07:46] <tonyyarusso> Lart is nice in that all users can use lart equally.
[07:47] <nixternal> Seveas: thats why i don't hang out in offtopic anymore
[07:47] <gnomefreak> 80% or more of people dont read the topic anyway
[07:47] <tonyyarusso> At the very least, I would like to rule out funkicking regular users, even if it persists between ops.
[07:47] <LjL> tonyyarusso: errrwell...
[07:47] <DBO> tonyyarusso, except seveas, you cant lart seveas =P
[07:47] <gnomefreak> putting it in topic is usless
[07:47] <tonyyarusso> DBO: Good point ;)
[07:47] <thoreauputic> tonyyarusso: that I agree with
[07:47] <DBO> tonyyarusso, I agree, no kicking regular users for fun
[07:47] <mc44> Not that I mind being kicked :)
[07:47] <DBO> even if they are long time regulars and are in on the fun
[07:48] <thoreauputic> heheh
[07:48] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Honestly, they do amuse me as well.  But, if others have a problem with it, I consider the gain:loss ratio in favor of dropping it.
[07:48] <Seveas> see, having fun is good...
[07:48] <gnomefreak> how many new users join an -offtopic channel and it would look very bad
[07:48] <mc44> All I will say, is that if someone brings it up before the CC, I fear you will be overrulled
[07:48] <tonyyarusso> That's part of my worry.
[07:48] <tonyyarusso> I think we are beginning to draw a new crowd to Ubuntu that may not understand our humor.
[07:48] <gnomefreak> maybe keep it of #offtopic!offtopic? or whevber that channel is
[07:49] <Hawkwind> mc44: Not with Seveas on CC
[07:49] <mc44> Hawkwind: he has no vote :)
[07:49] <nixternal> my problem with the funkicking/flexing your chest is it can cause people to get that inferiority complex and feel belittled, thats why i don't like it
[07:49] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: everyone was new once - we all had to get used to stuff
[07:49] <tonyyarusso> Hawkwind: He is no longer
[07:49] <Seveas> Hawkwind, I'm not on the CC, nor will I be there anytime soon
[07:49] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, never been ;)
[07:49] <Hawkwind> Ah, I thought you were
[07:49] <PriceChild> Secretary isn't it?
[07:49] <Hawkwind> mc44: Ok, you win
[07:49] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Ah, nvm
[07:49] <Hawkwind> Hah
[07:49] <nixternal> users start thinking they aren't good enough because they can't get the +o, and next thing you know they join #gentoo and become ubuntu trolls
[07:49] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: i agree but there are many users now in -offtopic that dont like it but are scared to say something about it
[07:49] <Seveas> anyway, this is going nowhere -- can we please all write our arguments on the wikipage and reisit in a few days?
[07:49] <apokryphos> I actually thought this was going to be the shorted topic 8)
[07:49] <tonyyarusso> mc44: You likely make a good point.  High ups likely would not approve.
[07:49] <Seveas> revisit*
[07:50] <thoreauputic> *sigh*
[07:50] <nixternal> Seveas: +1
[07:50] <tonyyarusso> +1 on revisiting
[07:50] <apokryphos> *shortest
[07:50] <LjL> +1, revisit
[07:50] <DBO> 0
[07:50] <mc44> I propose an ##ubuntu-offCoCic for all your out of Code of Conduct fun :p
[07:50] <gnomefreak> this is something jono should be a part of as the community leader
[07:50] <Seveas> please all write your arguments on the agenda page, but respect when the page is locked because someone is also editing
[07:50] <apokryphos> e^0
[07:51] <thoreauputic> the whole thing is now moot anyway, because we have no consensus on it - thus it threatens to be divisive
[07:51] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: Agreed.  Jono input now would be good.
[07:51] <Seveas> thoreauputic, that's why I want people to write things down :)
[07:51] <gnomefreak> i havetn seen any compelling argument for its ok ion public other than have fun
[07:51] <thoreauputic> Seveas: yes, OK :)
[07:51] <Seveas> going to rush to the next topic now, want to make this < 2 hours
[07:51] <Seveas> Next up: kick/ban/abuse/appeal policy
[07:52] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: fun is a *very* compelling argument - let's not become puritans :))
[07:52] <Seveas> we have operator guidelines
[07:52] <Seveas> but they're a bit vague at some points, causing arguments between ops
[07:52] <gnomefreak> Seveas: can we make them less general/sign them is my only thoughts ont hat
[07:52] <Seveas> -1 on signing but +1 on less general
[07:52] <tonyyarusso> +1 on that
[07:53] <tonyyarusso> Why not signing?
[07:53] <DBO> PriceChild, they are pretty self evident really
[07:53] <DBO> just the finer points we are getting into
[07:53] <PriceChild> DBO, hope so :)
[07:53] <thoreauputic> DBO: I think it's called common sense ;)
[07:53] <tonyyarusso> So far, "don't be an idiot", hence "less general".
[07:53] <nixternal> well, most of the issues I have seen in the main channels require KLines anyways. But for those instances where an OP is needed, Strike 1 A Verbal/Written Warning, Strike 2 - Quiet Time ($time), Strike 3 - Goodbye
[07:54] <apokryphos> tha'ts way too vague
[07:54] <apokryphos> (to apply to all actions in a channel)
[07:54] <LjL> i'm very, very wary of guidelines going too much into the specifics. they're guidelines after all. they *should*, imho, set a few categories and general principles, but not "if user A does X, do action Y; if ..."
[07:54] <nixternal> because someone pastes 5 lines into the channel instead of using !paste doesn't require a ban
[07:54] <apokryphos> LjL: right
[07:54] <PriceChild> could i have a link please? :$
[07:54] <LjL> !guidelines
[07:54] <LjL> no
[07:54] <Seveas> LjL, a list of examples would be a good thing to have though
[07:54] <nixternal> apokryphos: which actions would that be to vague for?
[07:54] <DBO> nixternal, yes but if the paste continues a remove (with a message to rejoin or an invite back) or a simple temp mute is ok
[07:54] <tonyyarusso> Agreed on catagories.  Like, "hardspam", lightspam, offtopic, harassment, etc.  Could probably have a half dozen or so good ones.
[07:54] <apokryphos> nixternal: again, that's not clear. It depends on how they've done it
[07:55] <LjL> Seveas: i'm not sure. maybe, but it scares me a little tbh.
[07:55] <PriceChild> LjL, got it in -ops thanks
[07:55] <apokryphos> nixternal: some people flood quite clearly for attention. A +q or a /kick stops the flood.
[07:55] <nixternal> apokryphos: that is at the discression of the OP, but I think he/she should have very strong proof it was for attention
[07:55] <LjL> look in #ubuntu... should that be a ban? :)
[07:55] <Hawkwind> Shouldn't we really +q someone before we ever issue a kick/ban for atleast things like repeating/flooding ?
[07:55] <apokryphos> nixternal: again, this is hazy.   If it's repeated, then greater action needs to happen
[07:56] <nixternal> i see so many of us, develoeprs and everyone else saying the same if not worse most of the time...if you kick him, kick them
[07:56] <tonyyarusso> Hawkwind: Depends on the offense.  +1 that we give too many for minor things.
[07:56] <apokryphos> words only have demonstrable meaning in their context
[07:57] <gnomefreak> nixternal: depends is it a personal attack?
[07:57] <DBO> not in this case
[07:57] <LjL> i say it depends on the user. my own idea is that some things don't *need* to be in the CoC or guidelines to be understood as "bad" by *anyone*.
[07:57] <nixternal> so the next time a core dev goes off with the f-bomb, you better give him/her the same exact treatment
[07:57] <thoreauputic> people, give ops a bit of discretion in their decisions - we aren't robots
[07:57] <Hawkwind> Even if someone tells me *f you* to me personally, I don't like to instantly ban them
[07:57] <gnomefreak> did he spam it?
[07:57] <apokryphos> thoreauputic: +1
 people, give ops a bit of discretion in their decisions - we aren't robots
[07:57] <Seveas> +1
[07:57] <apokryphos> there are many cases where it's quite simply "use judgement"
[07:57] <gnomefreak> +1
[07:57] <DBO> +
[07:57] <PriceChild> +1 thoreauputic
[07:57] <thoreauputic> exaactly apokryphos
[07:57] <LjL> +1
[07:58] <apokryphos> anyone on the op team should be trusted to make decisions. They won't be infallible, but they need some trust.
[07:58] <nixternal> Fuck!
[07:58] <thoreauputic> +1
[07:58] <mc44> Its more important you have a fair and consistent appealks procedure, no?
[07:58] <nalioth> nixternal: ?
[07:58] <gnomefreak> nalioth: hes playing during a meeting
[07:58] <gnomefreak> lol
[07:58] <nixternal> i just said it, and didn't get kicked, why?
[07:58] <LjL> but, one thing i want to put forward is: we should, generally speaking, behave differently with people who misbehave because they *can't care less*, compared to people who *might* be doing it innocently
[07:58] <DBO> nixternal, context
[07:58] <Seveas> nixternal, because noone but me has access here and I was distracted for a minute
[07:58] <LjL> clearly, guessing this is at the discretion of the op
[07:58] <Hawkwind> nixternal: Kicking of ops in a public channel isn't allowed :-)
[07:58] <nixternal> haha Seveas
[07:59] <apokryphos> nixternal: words only have demonstrable meaning given their context
[07:59] <LjL> i can't kick in here anyway
[07:59] <gnomefreak> Hawkwind: i would add unless needed
[07:59] <nixternal> Hawkwind: who cares who they are, if they do the same thing that Aristotle did, then they better get kicked as well
[07:59] <gnomefreak> LjL: noone can but Seveas
[07:59] <gnomefreak> maybe nalioth
[07:59] <Hawkwind> nixternal: Hah
[07:59] <nixternal> it is hypocritical to kick him, but not Seveas, or me, or someother community member
[07:59] <nixternal> who drops an f-bomb
[07:59] <LjL> if i believe, from what i can see of what an user does, that they really *don't care* about decency, at all, i don't think 10 prior warnings are deserved
[07:59] <nixternal> or decides to say f your mum
[08:00] <apokryphos> nixternal: I'm not sure you've understood the thing everyone is saying here. Context, context.
[08:00] <apokryphos> it makes a big difference
[08:00] <DBO> nixternal, if that were the case we could simply program ubotu to do all the work and retire to bed early
[08:00] <nixternal> DBO: sounds like a plan
[08:00] <gnomefreak> ok how many warning is good before kick or kb?
[08:00] <LjL> nixternal: that's a good point. what about explicitly allowing ops to quiet (kicking or banning wouldn't make much sense) other ops *seriously*, when they misbehave themselves?
[08:00] <tonyyarusso> Agreed that we should try to be more consistent in our actions however, in general.  Many times we have people in -ops saying "but so and so was ____ and didn't get kicked!"
[08:00] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: it completely depends on the action. There's no mechanical process for any ban
[08:00] <Hawkwind> gnomefreak: Totally depends on the circumstances and the op personally
[08:00] <apokryphos> despite what anyone might think
[08:00] <Seveas> DBO, that's exactly why I hae so many onjections against "bots as ops"
[08:00] <DBO> LjL, we had an op go rampant not longo ago I believe
[08:00] <nixternal> that got got a warning and a kick at the same time
[08:00] <nixternal> head>desk
[08:00] <LjL> gnomefreak: i say, in general, 1) a verbal warning  2) a remove  3) a ban -- but it doesn't *always* have to follow this entire route IMHO
[08:01] <Seveas> LjL, +1 on quieting ops
[08:01] <apokryphos> There's nothing wrong with bots as ops presuming they don't get innocents
[08:01] <Seveas> LjL, although chanserv.py auto-unmutes
[08:01] <tonyyarusso> nixternal: I fully intended to remove if his next line was similar, however.
[08:01] <LjL> DBO, Seveas: even without taking extreme cases, i'm in favor of "friendly" mutes. if you're going a bit out with adrenalin, i should just mute you, and you shouldn't take that badly - i know it sounds weird, but i don't think it's a terrible idea
[08:01] <gnomefreak> bot = op + bugs
[08:01] <nixternal> tonyyarusso: +1
[08:01] <gnomefreak> you are gonna have bugs in it
[08:02] <Seveas> LjL, I fully agree
[08:02] <nixternal> but he never got that chance
[08:02] <PriceChild> On the forums, we can issue custom infractions, we can get them moderated, temp/permanently banned on our own (without input from the Admins.) Its a pretty close comparison. Any CoC or guideline violation and I don't think that any staff would ever challenge anothers decision on any temporary action. I think we should all be trusting other ops on everything up to bans
[08:02] <thoreauputic> we all have to consider things on a case by case basis - looking for a formula is not useful. Yake responsibility for your decisions
[08:02] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: not necessarily
[08:02] <LjL> also, users would find that nice, to see that ops aren't "above judgement"
[08:02] <apokryphos> thoreauputic: right
[08:02] <DBO> LjL, Im ok with getting muted when I get wild (like that one time 10 years ago, my hear rate got above 40)
[08:02] <PriceChild> s/up to bans/up to permenant bans/
[08:02] <nixternal> instead, we played judge and jury and executed a texan style speedy trial and hung his ass all in one fell swoop
[08:02] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: oh im just commenting on someone else who said bots as ops
[08:02] <LjL> DBO: heh
[08:02] <Seveas> DBO, zombie
[08:02] <DBO> nixternal, we kinda have to
[08:03] <mc44> nixternal: Its more important you have a fair and consistent and impartial appeals procedure, no?
[08:03] <DBO> nixternal, otherwise people sitting there spamming for russian brides who want your donger get to sit around for a bit
[08:03] <LjL> mc44: yes - and buy the moon, too :)
[08:03] <mc44> LjL: a pony for you, sir?
[08:03] <nixternal> DBO: come on man, those get the boot right away
[08:04] <DBO> nixternal, right, thats what Im saying, sometimes you just gotta hang the user
[08:04] <Seveas> Something else to think about: should operators back each other up in the -ops channel, even when they disagree a bit, and discuss their disagreements in privat?
[08:04] <LjL> mc44, seriously, a decent appeals procedure may help sometimes, but i think in general it would just tend to make things stagnate -- like, i start to be afraid of kicking because of the huge "paperwork" that results
[08:04] <nixternal> what aristotle did wasn't a russian mail order bride service, she dropped an f-bomb
[08:04] <thoreauputic> Look, the main reason I'm here today, for what it's worth, is to say * back each other up * and don't fight over others' decisions
[08:04] <nixternal> he/she who cares
[08:04] <Seveas> thoreauputic, I agree
[08:04] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: I'd say don't say anything if you disagree - otherwise you're just lying.
[08:04] <DBO> nixternal, normally I would have !ohmy | Aristotle that sucker
[08:04] <nixternal> Seveas: i have no problem backing an operator up no matter where its at, as long as i feel they were right, if they weren't, i will publically call it
[08:04] <DBO> but I was ok with a remove as well
[08:04] <gnomefreak> Seveas: op vs op needs not to be done at all but if its going to be it should go to the council in private
[08:04] <PriceChild> +1 thoreauputic
[08:05] <thoreauputic> If we want to be a team, then lets work as one
[08:05] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, but publicly arguing when someone appeals a ban is not something that makes us look consistent
[08:05] <apokryphos> right. we need some solidarity in our team
[08:05] <Seveas> I want to avoid that
[08:05] <DBO> nixternal, ops often have just a few seconds to try to make a decision
[08:05] <nixternal> Seveas: don't argue, vote +1, or 0
[08:05] <gnomefreak> the ops council is there for this reason not just users
[08:05] <nixternal> no need to state your peace until after the backup vote is complete
[08:05] <DBO> nixternal, sometimes the wrong one will be made, we have to learn to accept that will happen sometimes
[08:05] <gnomefreak> nixternal: cant prevent arguing
[08:05] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Correct.  Don't argue.  But I don't want to be expected to say "Billybob is right" if I don't think that's true.  I _would_ however, be happy to keep my mouth shut and take it in private later.
[08:05] <LjL> Seveas: right -- myself, i think "op vs op" can stay, because i don't think it's possible to really avoid that forever. but *not in the face of users*
[08:06] <LjL> which doesn't mean "hide that from users". just, users don't even want to see that, i think
[08:06] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, that's more reasonable than what I said :)
[08:07] <LjL> gnomefreak: do you think i should *always* go and "tell seveas" whenever you do something i don't agree with?
[08:07] <thoreauputic> LjL: if we strongly disagree, we can *ask* about a decision - i don't think that needs to be in public though
[08:07] <LjL> can't we try discussing it informally first?
[08:07] <mc44> Its about being fair, its about being open, its about being *ubuntu*, not blaming ops if afterwards a concil decides on reflection to remove a ban
[08:07] <gnomefreak> if the council is gonna handle disputes between ops and users it should be ther efor ops vs ops also
[08:07] <Hawkwind> I think now that we have made the -ops channel completely public and have made it clear it's a place for users to appeal a ban and that the banning op can only defend his actions, the fighting we had over this will come to an instant stop
[08:07] <Seveas> Hawkwind, I hope so
[08:07] <tonyyarusso> LjL: I know I much prefer chatting with the other person first at least
[08:07] <LjL> thoreauputic: i don't think it should be in public, either. but then i don't think we should ask for a decision *whenever* we have a conflict
[08:07] <gnomefreak> LjL: you try talkking to person first as guideliness states
[08:08] <gnomefreak> this is above that point
[08:08] <DBO> brb
[08:08] <LjL> i mean, for now when we had a conflict we either 1) brought up a mess or 2) kept or mouths shout
[08:08] <thoreauputic> LjL: it just boils down to being a decent person in the end, really :)
[08:08] <Seveas> jenda, I'll skip the ubuntu/member/cloaks part as that's not a policy decision, pure administrative
[08:08] <LjL> perhaps we could try discussing conflicts in a not-too-heated manner *before* 1 happens, when we don't feel it's worth to go to the council
[08:08] <DBO> DHL sucks [/offtopic]
[08:08] <gnomefreak> best judgment if you can give reason why it was bad ban provide it (this is where step down in CoC) should kick in
[08:09] <Hawkwind> LjL: True.  But I think this meeting has already proven we can all get along and that everyones door is open for discussion, as long as someone isn't being accused or embarrassed in public, everyone is fine with a bit of 'discussion'
[08:09] <thoreauputic> legalism breeds resentment
[08:09] <LjL> Hawkwind: then why weren't the matters we set up this meeting with discussed *before* it all happened in an explosion-like manner?
[08:09] <mc44> thoreauputic: but "backing each other up" shouldnt be automatic, people make mistakes
[08:10] <LjL> and it did explode, let's be honest
[08:10] <gnomefreak> LjL: i trust most of the ops to make a good ban.
[08:10] <Hawkwind> LjL: That's human nature.  We didn't feel we knew what page everyone else was on and what was what maybe.  Hard to say really
[08:10] <thoreauputic> mc44: of course - backing up just means being reasonable and not publicly lrting each other :) ( except in -offtopic of course *grin*)
[08:10] <gnomefreak> but i shouldnt have to watch my back after bnanning someone
[08:10] <LjL> Hawkwind: which might point to ... perhaps lack of enough communication?
[08:11] <kkathman> It seems that there are typically 3 parties involif an OP makes a bad ban, and its called in private, that gives the offending op a chance to privately apologize to the user, and gain respect.  The rest of the people dont need to see all the dirty laundry that happens in between right?
[08:11] <Hawkwind> LjL: I think some it also has to do with some of the ops are newer than others and aren't sure how everyone else works exactly
[08:11] <mc44> thoreauputic: right, I just mean that ops shouldnt feel undermined if their decision is overturned later
[08:11] <gnomefreak> thats one reason why i said read and sign guidelines
[08:11] <LjL> Hawkwind: see what Seveas quoted from me in his latest ML post, about that
[08:11] <thoreauputic> mc44: that's an ego issue really
[08:11] <Hawkwind> LjL: Sure, lack of enough communication is one point.  Which brings us to a point, that maybe we as an ops team should have a meeting atleast once a month or every other month to see what's on everyones mind
[08:12] <Seveas> Hawkwind, +1
[08:12] <gnomefreak> +1
[08:12] <thoreauputic> mc44: we all make mistakes, inevitably
[08:12] <Seveas> we should be more like a team than a group
[08:12] <Hawkwind> If all these other teams can do meetings, surely we can too :-)
[08:12] <thoreauputic> +1
[08:12] <LjL> +1 for meetings
[08:12] <Hawkwind> Seveas: I agree
[08:12] <DBO> Seveas, a team has structure, we need more of that then
[08:12] <mc44> Hawkwind: an ops team or an irc council?
[08:12] <Hawkwind> mc44: Honestly, both
[08:12] <gnomefreak> council when needed
[08:13] <tonyyarusso> +1 on mtgs - both all-team and council regularly, maybe with different frequencies.
[08:13] <gnomefreak> since its the 3 people
[08:13] <Hawkwind> Though the council members are part of the ops team, so it could really be rolled into one in most cases
[08:13] <Seveas> Hawkwind, indeed
[08:13] <thoreauputic> so, any objections to meetings ?
[08:13] <LjL> we meet each month or whatever, and we start saying "hey, 10 days ago i think you made a bad ban". that might work out better than bugging the "bad banner" immediately after the fact, because things have settled down meanwhile
[08:13] <mc44> right, I wanted to bring up that perhaps the council should not be made up enterily only of ops
[08:13] <Seveas> mc44, -1
[08:13] <thoreauputic> i think we have agreement on meetings?
[08:13] <LjL> however, that needs actions being tracked a bit
[08:13] <gnomefreak> if they are called to act they meet* otherwise what reason do they have if its gonna affect everyone ops meeting takes it
[08:13] <gnomefreak> mc44: -1
[08:14] <Hawkwind> mc44: -1
[08:14] <gnomefreak> cant trust non ops to do an ops job
[08:14] <Hawkwind> If the person is good enough for the IRC Council, then surely they are good enough to be an op
[08:14] <gnomefreak> thats why everyones not an op
[08:14] <LjL> -1 mc44, sorry, i have already enough pressure from the other ops to feel good with *another* organism watching my back
[08:14] <Seveas> Hawkwind, well said
[08:14] <Hawkwind> Seveas: Thanks
[08:14] <Seveas> speaking of the council, we have a vacancy
[08:15] <tonyyarusso> Unfortunately
[08:15] <mc44> ok, I didnt make my point very well :)
[08:15] <Seveas> ompaul is having a burn out and much diappointment
[08:15] <LjL> Seveas: could we talk a little *about* the person who created the vacancy? i can hardly believe it was decided purely due to the bigfuzzyjesus matter
[08:15] <tonyyarusso> btw, I thought someone had convinced him to come today?
[08:15] <gnomefreak> Seveas: again have resposiblities list and list of users quilified
[08:16] <Seveas> ompaul may come back, and I'd love it if he does
[08:16] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Agreeing with LjL - I think it would be useful for people to be aware there are other issues, as otherwise it could make him look bad wrongly.
[08:16] <thoreauputic> LjL: someone said to me that it was a "straw" - there's a limit for everyone
[08:16] <Hawkwind> LjL: Agreed.  I think there was plenty more to it than just the incident about the ban on that one person
[08:16] <Seveas> but I've talked to him a lot, and he needs the time off
[08:16] <gnomefreak> that whole point cant be done today as noone but seveas is here that was involved
[08:16] <Seveas> gnomefreak, which point?
[08:16] <Seveas> the bfj thing?
[08:16] <gnomefreak> Seveas: bring it up in metting
[08:16] <gnomefreak> meeting
[08:16] <DBO> Seveas, I feel wrong having his position filled in a permanent manner, if he comes back he should be welcomed with wide arms to his old position
[08:16] <Seveas> DBO, I was about to say that
[08:16] <thoreauputic> DBO: +1
[08:17] <gnomefreak> depends on how long hes gone
[08:17] <LjL> Seveas: then my vote (i don't think i'll give a vote *for* a specific person to take ompaul's place) is, whoever gets the place, ompaul should be able to come back, at least for some fixed amount of time, automatically, if he so decides
[08:17] <gnomefreak> since we dont know
[08:17] <Hawkwind> DBO: Maybe if/when he comes back, he could be given his position back and we instantly have 4 members of the IRC council
[08:17] <gnomefreak> Hawkwind: even party :(
[08:17] <Seveas> Hawkwind, we can discuss that when that time come
[08:17] <Seveas> s
[08:17] <DBO> like many of you, I was brought into op status mostly due to ompauls recommendation, we owe it to him to hold his seat if he wants it at a later date
[08:17] <tonyyarusso> +1 DBO , but also +1 perhaps on Hawkwind , although even number.  For a later date's discussion.
[08:17] <gnomefreak> council will do things ona  vote 2 +2 == no outcome
[08:17] <Hawkwind> gnomefreak: I think an even party isn't an issue really.  If we need 4, we have 4
[08:18] <Seveas> gnomefreak, look at TB and CC, most votes are unanymous
[08:18] <thoreauputic> gnomefreak: you have little faith it seems :)
[08:18] <Seveas> if not all
[08:18] <Hawkwind> gnomefreak: IMO, it's going to be very rare that a vote is needed on something where the outcome would be 2 - 2
[08:18] <apokryphos> I don't think it would be a problem. So we're agreed that it will be put on the page with the responsibilities?
[08:18] <Seveas> no
[08:19] <apokryphos> what will happen?
[08:19] <DBO> Seveas, I talked to ompaul privately, he was going to try to be here, do you know if hes still trying to make it?
[08:19] <LjL> could't we live with 2 council members for a while...?
[08:19] <DBO> +1 LjL
[08:19] <mc44> Surely the CC will make apoinments to the Irc council, not the IRC ops, though obviously you make the nominations
[08:19] <DBO> until we know what ompauls decision is
[08:19] <Seveas> I'd like to ask LjL now whether he'd be interested - LjL has surprised me many times by being insanely bright and making too much sense for a human being
[08:19] <PriceChild> haha :)
[08:19] <Seveas> DBO, ompauls decision is to leave
[08:20] <Seveas> there's no doubt there
[08:20] <DBO> Seveas, I reject your reality
[08:20] <tonyyarusso> mc44: AFAIK, the latter is actually the case currently.
[08:20] <Seveas> DBO, quit watching mythbusters :p
[08:20] <mc44> tonyyarusso: ok, but in the case of the Forums Council, the CC are approving people
[08:20] <LjL> Seveas, don't you think time counts something? i haven't been here for so long
[08:20] <PriceChild> and substitute my own!
[08:20] <tonyyarusso> mc44: (Another point on the agenda actually, kinda)
[08:20] <mc44> Seveas: will the CC be ack'ing the Irc council appointments?
[08:20] <Seveas> LjL, the surprises started way before you were an op
[08:21] <Hawkwind> LjL: I don't think time matters.  It's the job the person does overall and how well they do it from day one til present
[08:21] <apokryphos> LjL: some, but it shouldn't be a deciding factor.
[08:21] <tonyyarusso> LjL: Just bloody say if you're interested and see ;)
[08:21] <DBO> LjL, you're alright in my book =)
[08:21] <Seveas> mc44, once we have the IRC council filled again I will present it to the CC
[08:21] <mc44> Seveas: ok, great
[08:21] <apokryphos> rob has also said he'd like to be considered
[08:21] <apokryphos> but he couldn't make it today
[08:22] <LjL> +1
[08:22] <Seveas> apokryphos, I think I'd object to that, since we already have a freenode staffer on board
[08:22] <LjL> ok, i'm interested.
[08:22] <apokryphos> so?
[08:22] <mc44> Seveas: most other councils seem to be 4-5 people though :)
[08:22] <apokryphos> Seveas: Freenode staffers are sane 8)
[08:22] <LjL> but even if i take that position, then if ompaul comes back, i think it would be better to just have him take back his place rather than have 4 members
[08:22] <Seveas> apokryphos, jende is now freenode staff as well. I disagree with your statement ;)
[08:22] <apokryphos> LjL: why?
[08:22] <tonyyarusso> Increasing the council size may be a consideration, at 2 freenode staff out of 5 wouldn't be bad.  dunno
[08:23] <apokryphos> Seveas: scared of highlighting? :P
[08:23] <Seveas> apokryphos, scared of spellcheckers ;)
[08:23] <DBO> apokryphos, Seveas is lysdexic
[08:23] <LjL> apokryphos: well, why not make *everyone* part of the council? there's a right number for everything
[08:23] <nixternal> oh sh$# jenda is a f8$#*) freenode staffer?
[08:23] <nixternal> ;p
[08:24] <apokryphos> I think we'd need to have it to a vote, and also consider anyone else willing to go up. Is there anyone else? ;-)
[08:24] <Seveas> I think we've covered everything
[08:24] <LjL> also i am almost forgetting one thing: i am not an Ubuntu member.
[08:24] <apokryphos> (in the words of Brad Pitt Achilles)
[08:24] <apokryphos> LjL: never a problem :P
[08:24] <Seveas> LjL, that's only a matter of coming to the next meeting
[08:24] <DBO> LjL, speaking of which, you should get an unaffiliated mask
[08:24] <mc44> apokryphos: well he needs to be to be on an ubuntu council
[08:24] <apokryphos> really?
[08:24] <LjL> DBO: bah, why? if you want to play with my IP address, be my guest :)
[08:24] <mc44> yes
[08:24] <Seveas> mc44, no
[08:25] <apokryphos> mc44: why do you say that?
[08:25] <apokryphos> No-one should be forced to be an ubuntu member
[08:25] <apokryphos> and yet still take any position they'd like
[08:25] <mc44> right, but if you have a leadership position in ubuntu you should be a member
[08:25] <apokryphos> again, why?
[08:25] <PriceChild> Well what about this LCoC coming up?
[08:25] <nixternal> mc44: +1
[08:25] <apokryphos> I don't think it's necessary at all
[08:25] <Hawkwind> I thought to be a member of #Ubuntu you had to be a Ubuntu member ?
[08:25] <PriceChild> wouldn't he be obliged to sign that, and therefore the CoC in the future....
[08:25] <Hawkwind> Ermm, an op of #Ubuntu I mean
[08:25] <mc44> apokryphos: the CC do, I believe
[08:26] <tonyyarusso> I'm somewhat in favor or requiring membership for leadership positions, but do not feel strongly.  I _do_ feel strongly about signing the CoC.
[08:26] <apokryphos> we can ask people to be ubunteros to have positions, but not membership
[08:26] <DBO> Hawkwind, nope
[08:26] <LjL> Hawkwind: honestly i'm not sure i even understood that one right.
[08:26] <nixternal> apokryphos: well it used to show you that you have contributed and can be somewhat trusted as a member which was supposedly the stepping stone to bigger and better things
[08:26] <nixternal> hopefully that hasn't changed
[08:26] <apokryphos> membership means practically nothing in this case, anyhow
[08:26] <DBO> it means exactly nothing
[08:26] <LjL> Hawkwind: s/even/ever/
[08:26] <Hawkwind> LjL: IIRC nalioth has stated if you want to be an op of #Ubuntu you have to be a member of the Ubuntu team or something
[08:26] <apokryphos> nixternal: like you said: it could be, but it doesn't have to be.
[08:26] <gnomefreak> if you mean op should be memebers im kinda all for that
[08:26] <DBO> Hawkwind, well he was wrong then
[08:26] <apokryphos> Hawkwind: that was the general process
[08:26] <LjL> Hawkwind: true, but i've seen that stated differently by other people... and i'm an op, anyway
[08:27] <DBO> I was approved by the CC to op in there, check the mask =)
[08:27] <Hawkwind> DBO: Then the wiki needs to change, as it states so there
[08:27] <gnomefreak> but one big issue with that. loco teams may not have members but still need ops in thier channels
[08:27] <PriceChild> DBO, you don't need to have a cloak to be a member...
[08:27] <tonyyarusso> I became an op in #ubuntu without being a member, but was "strongly encouraged" to get it "shortly", and was approved at the next mtg a week and a half later, fwiw.
[08:27] <PriceChild> DBO, any opt out of the cloak
[08:27] <Hawkwind> I'm an op of #Kubuntu and not a Ubuntu member, so it's very confusing to say the least
[08:27] <DBO> PriceChild, I know, I was just providing an easy allusion
[08:27] <LjL> at any rate, i'm not against getting membership. show up at a meeting? sure. i mostly just don't like the idea of putting up a Wiki page about myself.
[08:27] <PriceChild> k
[08:27] <apokryphos> Hawkwind: me, LjL and DBO are also not members, and op in many ubuntu-related channels
[08:28] <Seveas> being an op means contributing to the ubuntu community
[08:28] <Seveas> so being an op helps in becoming a member
[08:28] <tonyyarusso> Also, gnomefreak had some concerns about other aspects of how people become ops - would he like to bring those up?
[08:28] <gnomefreak> Seveas nalioth possible cloak one being ubuntu/memeber/op/nick or for oters that are not memebeers /unaff.../op/nick
[08:28] <Seveas> not the other way around
[08:28] <Hawkwind> I ask because I was once going to try to be an in #Ubuntu too since it seems we need more ops there, or atleast at one time.
[08:28] <mc44> apokryphos: in the Forums Governance spec: "The nominees active status as an Ubuntu member (essential)."
[08:28] <apokryphos> exactly
[08:28] <Seveas> gnomefreak, nope
[08:28] <apokryphos> mc44: they can do that, fine.
[08:28] <apokryphos> mc44: but there's no *Ubuntu* rule about it, and I think it'd be silly if there was.
[08:28] <mc44> apokryphos: the same will apply to an irc council the CC approves
[08:29] <gnomefreak> we need one way to become an op (everyone should have the same chance)
[08:29] <apokryphos> mc44: membership is not forced upon anyone.
[08:29] <LjL> i have to type /away now. sorry for the triviality but... there is something i can't miss, namely dinner. see you in a half hour
[08:29] <Seveas> gnomefreak, the way to become op is to stand out and be asked
[08:29] <mc44> apokryphos: it is if they wish to be in a leadership position, I am merely stating the position of the CC here
[08:29] <Seveas> LjL, bon appetit
[08:29] <apokryphos> I say all Op-requests should have to go through the IRC council or the CC
[08:29] <DBO> LjL, I'd like to chat with you later, lemme know when you are back =)
[08:29] <nixternal> Seveas: then how in the hell did i get added tot he team?
[08:29] <gnomefreak> Seveas: me you nalioth so on had to be approved by CC right?
[08:29] <apokryphos> mc44: please direct me to where the CC says that.
[08:30] <Seveas> apokryphos, the irc council was created to not have to go to the CC for everything
[08:30] <apokryphos> Seveas: exactly, which is why it shouldn't be required for giving ops
[08:30] <mc44> apokryphos: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ForumsGovernance
[08:30] <Seveas> apokryphos, the CC doesn't
[08:30] <Seveas> mc44, forums != irc
[08:30] <apokryphos> mc44: key there is *Forum*
[08:30] <mc44> Seveas: the document was created BY the CC
[08:30] <apokryphos> mc44: key there is *Forum*
[08:30] <mc44> specifically to legitimise the Forums Council
[08:30] <Seveas> mc44: key there is *Forum*
[08:30] <nixternal> !repeat | apokryphos
[08:30] <nixternal> ;)
[08:31] <mc44> I may be wrong
[08:31] <nixternal> damn, didn't work
[08:31] <thoreauputic> mc44: yes :)
[08:31] <DBO> no ubotu
[08:31] <PriceChild> mc44, it was RADICALLY changed by the forums staff though
[08:31] <mc44> by that I believe is the position  of the CC
[08:31] <Hawkwind> Is the key there *Forum* by chance :-)
[08:31] <nixternal> hahahaha
[08:31] <Seveas> Hawkwind, it seems to be
[08:31] <mc44> PriceChild: mako and sabdfl insisted on that clause
[08:31] <Hawkwind> Heh
[08:31] <nixternal> speaking of forums...well i would rather not
[08:31] <PriceChild> mc44, which clause?
[08:31] <PriceChild> nixternal, shh :)
[08:31] <gnomefreak> mc44: it was up to vote
[08:31] <Seveas> nixternal, heh
[08:31] <mc44> PriceChild: about council memebrs being ubuntu members
[08:31] <PriceChild> nothing wrong with forums.... :P
[08:32] <apokryphos> mc44: forum council members
[08:32] <Seveas> thoreauputic, it is
[08:32] <thoreauputic> :)
[08:32] <Hawkwind> What about going through current ops lists(specifically #Kubuntu) and cleaning them up with ops who are no longer active and possibly replacing them with new ops who are active ?
[08:32] <mc44> apokryphos: yes, and the IRC council, if it wants the same legitimacy, will have to be the same
[08:32] <PriceChild> mc44, yeah that was insisted, but is fine for staff to be non-members, as it should be fine for ops to be non-members
[08:32] <gnomefreak> #ubuntuforums is what i think they mean
[08:32] <apokryphos> Hawkwind: my first plan once I get approval from Riddell
[08:32] <thoreauputic> mc44: does not follow
[08:32] <Seveas> Hawkwind, +1 on removing, that'll be the job for apokryphos
[08:32] <nixternal> OMG, lets leave the forums stuff out, cuz i am bubbling right now trying to hold this back
[08:32] <mc44> PriceChild: yes, Im only talking about council memebrs here
[08:32] <gnomefreak> removing?
[08:32] <PriceChild> mc44, ok sorry
[08:32] <Hawkwind> apokryphos: I'd like to recommend atleast one person when the time comes
[08:32] <Seveas> gnomefreak, removing inactiv ops from access lists
[08:33] <mc44> thoreauputic: you dont believe irc will be held to the same standard?
[08:33] <gnomefreak> agreed
[08:33] <apokryphos> Hawkwind: sure, I'll ping you to keep you up-to-date
[08:33] <apokryphos> mc44: yes
[08:33] <Hawkwind> apokryphos: Thanks :-)
[08:33] <apokryphos> mc44: because we'll all object ;-)
[08:33] <mc44> apokryphos: and the CC will not approve you, IMHO
[08:33] <Seveas> mc44, the standard is behaviour, not membership. But in case of the forums membership was forced to enforce behaviour
[08:33] <PriceChild> mc44, I do believe forums and irc governance could have a lot in common
[08:33] <apokryphos> IMHO, they will.
[08:33] <thoreauputic> mc44: can we stay on topic? There are universal standards, and specific ones agreed for cases
[08:33] <gnomefreak> Seveas: how would we define who is op in where?
[08:34] <nixternal> mc44: we have a special weapon named Seveas to get us past that :)
[08:34] <mc44> thoreauputic: im sorry, I was answering questions asked of me. I shall shut it now
[08:34] <tonyyarusso> It would be good to have the system for new ops to become so laid out somewhere, both for non-ops wondering and our own sake if we have a nomination to make, regardless of what the process is.
[08:34] <Seveas> gnomefreak, that's very ad-hoc now, but topic for another meeting
[08:34] <apokryphos> and: what is the requirement for being in the Launchpad IRC Op team
[08:34] <gnomefreak> k
[08:34] <apokryphos> ok, till the next meeting then
[08:34] <Hawkwind> Will new ops be voted on by current ops.  Let's say Seveas nominates johndoe as a possible new op.  Does he just get the position or will it be voted ?
[08:34] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: your there arnt you?
[08:34] <Seveas> apokryphos, currently: being op in a main ubuntu channel (ie: all but locoteams)
[08:34] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: yeah
[08:34] <gnomefreak> all ops should be listed there
[08:34] <thoreauputic> mc44: that wasn't intended to mean you need to be quiet :)
[08:34] <PriceChild> Hawkwind, opinions of current ops taken into account then final decision by council?
[08:34] <Seveas> Hawkwind, IRC coucil votes
[08:35] <mc44> thoreauputic: ok :)
[08:35] <PriceChild> Seveas, ^
[08:35] <thoreauputic> :)
[08:35] <apokryphos> Seveas: there are many smaller channels that aren't locoteams
[08:35] <Seveas> PriceChild that's how it goes now
[08:35] <PriceChild> gd gd :)
[08:35] <Seveas> apokryphos, true
[08:35] <Hawkwind> Ah ok, good
[08:35] <Seveas> apokryphos, the definition of that team is up for debat, but not now
[08:35] <DBO> ok we are extremely tangented here Seveas, can you pull us back to whatever work item we're on so we can take action?
[08:35] <Seveas> (I'm expecting a visitor within minutes)
[08:35] <apokryphos> ok. Shall we move on?
[08:36] <Seveas> DBO, we were talking about how it is decided who are ops and council
[08:36] <gnomefreak> break him away from his game :)
[08:36] <Seveas> which is the last point
[08:36] <apokryphos> can we talk about cloaks?
[08:36] <Seveas> unless someone has someting else
[08:36] <apokryphos> who should be able to give the ok?
[08:36] <Seveas> apokryphos, what' to talk about?
[08:36] <gnomefreak> ok so the IRC council will vote on ops right?
[08:36] <Seveas> what's*
[08:37] <Seveas> cloaks are available for all ubuntu members
[08:37] <apokryphos> Currently, who can tell staffers to ok people for cloak membership
[08:37] <Seveas> I need to approve them to freenode staff
[08:37] <Seveas> and only I can do that
[08:37] <apokryphos> right, which is the question
[08:37] <apokryphos> Seveas: rob says that doesn't have to be the case
[08:37] <Seveas> but when the council is working and acked by the CC, we can fill out other contact forms
[08:37] <apokryphos> he says that staffers can do "whatever Ubuntu tell us to do"
[08:38] <Seveas> which is what I intend to do
[08:38] <Seveas> this is just blocked on administrativa
[08:38] <apokryphos> hm, and what happens with the contact forms?
[08:38] <apokryphos> who approves them?
[08:38] <nalioth> apokryphos: they are submitted and never seen again
[08:39] <Hawkwind> Hah
[08:39] <nalioth> apokryphos: one of the top 3 staff members
[08:39] <apokryphos> but surely it's not staffers that approve it
[08:39] <Seveas> apokryphos, the ubuntu side of contact forms can only be approved by me, but I want that to be approved by the CC
[08:39] <apokryphos> why only you?
[08:39] <nalioth> apokryphos: it is "approved" by the CC before it is sent to freenode staff
[08:40] <Seveas> apokryphos, currently, I'm the only contact but I don't do such things without CC approval
[08:40] <apokryphos> so you're saying you want it to be changed so that the CC approves all cloaks?
[08:40] <Seveas> yup
[08:40] <apokryphos> Seveas: you are the only contact but that doesn't necessitate that you're the only one who can ok the cloaks
[08:40] <Seveas> err no
[08:40] <gnomefreak> i like that idea
[08:40] <Seveas> IRC council
[08:40] <gnomefreak> yeah better
[08:40] <Seveas> i have a visitor now, so I'm out
[08:41] <apokryphos> now I understand ;-)
[08:41] <anto9us> Hi everyone, sorry I missed most of the meeting, I had a meeting with a potential client. Was the suggestion I posted to the mailing list discussed? Specifically, a no-ops council
[08:41] <Seveas> sorry
[08:41] <tonyyarusso> anto9us: Barely.
[08:41] <nalioth> apokryphos: he wants more folks to be able to request staff cloakage
[08:41] <thoreauputic> thanks Seveas :)
[08:41] <gnomefreak> anto9us: it was denied afaik
[08:41] <DBO> Seveas, ok thank you
[08:41] <apokryphos> nalioth: agreed
[08:41] <DBO> anto9us, denied
[08:41] <jenda> what's under discussion now? (sorry for being slow)
[08:41] <anto9us> ok, will the IRC Council comprise of any non-ops?
[08:41] <apokryphos> jenda: we just covered cloaks
[08:41] <gnomefreak> jenda: nothing i think its over
[08:41] <jenda> ok
[08:41] <mc44> anto9us: yes, its my fault for not making a better argument
[08:41] <apokryphos> Are there any other issues?
[08:42] <mc44> :-/
[08:42] <apokryphos> they can still be discussed
[08:42] <anto9us> mc44, I should have been here really :)
[08:42] <tonyyarusso> There are some good points by rob on nalioth's wiki - not "discussion" issues but good for everyone to read.
[08:42] <tonyyarusso> Mostly covered already as well.
[08:42] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: im looking at agenda and i think thats it (flexing your ops) maybe?
[08:42] <anto9us> will the IRC Council comprise of any non-ops?
[08:42] <thoreauputic> Mentors for new ops? Is that an idea?
[08:42] <DBO> anto9us, no
[08:42] <mc44> anto9us: no
[08:43] <tonyyarusso> thoreauputic: I like it.
[08:43] <PriceChild> thoreauputic, i like that
[08:43] <jenda> anto9us: there seems to be no logical reason for it.
[08:43] <mc44> anto9us: unless of course you bring it up before the CC when Seveas proses it
[08:43] <apokryphos> thoreauputic: I think that's a good idea
[08:43] <gnomefreak> thoreauputic: we can do that
[08:43] <apokryphos> even if you're familiar with operating you still need to know some things
[08:43] <anto9us> well, excuse me for saying so, but it's very much a clique then isn't it?
[08:43] <nixternal> ls
[08:43] <thoreauputic> maybe I can write to the list about it then
[08:43] <nixternal> oops
[08:43] <tonyyarusso> I had somewhat informal mentors, mostly nalioth and apokryphos, but a specific pairing kind of thing could be useful.
[08:43] <apokryphos> everyone's had quasi-mentors, but never officially or anything
[08:43] <DBO> nixternal, we are not your terminal
[08:43] <jenda> nixternal: and yes, jenda is a freenode staffer now ;)
[08:43] <gnomefreak> anto9us: if you know the rules good enough to be on a coucil you can become an op
[08:43] <thoreauputic> apokryphos: right
[08:43] <Hawkwind> anto9us: As I stated earlier, if a person is good enough to be a member of the IRC Council, then they are good enough to be an op
[08:44] <mc44> Hawkwind: but they may not want to be an op :-/
[08:44] <anto9us> gnomefreak, that's really not the point
[08:44] <jenda> anto9us: and conflict of insterest is highly unlikely.
[08:44] <tonyyarusso> anto9us: Likely beyond the scope of this meeting anyway if it needs much discussion, since we're shooting for being done in 15 minutes.
[08:44] <PriceChild> mc44, then they shouldn't be on the council
[08:44] <Hawkwind> mc44: Doesn't matter, that's the decision that's been made
[08:44] <mc44> Hawkwind: yes, I wasnt trying to debate it again
[08:44] <Hawkwind> mc44: If they don't want to be an op, then they don't deserve to be on the IRC Council
[08:44] <Hawkwind> mc44: I wasn't either.  I was stating more so anto9us could see
[08:44] <mc44> apologies
[08:44] <apokryphos> thoreauputic: yeah, raise that on the list, Good idea.
[08:45] <thoreauputic> apokryphos: OK will do within the day if possible
[08:45] <DBO> I got dinner with my other half in 15, Im stepping out to freshen up =)
[08:45] <apokryphos> cool
[08:45] <apokryphos> Anything else? Otherwise we can adjourn for today 8)
[08:45] <apokryphos> I think it's been very productive =)
[08:45] <gnomefreak> +1 for adjourn
[08:45] <mc44> I think Ive been very annoying :)
[08:45] <thoreauputic> I second adjournment :)
[08:46] <thoreauputic> mc44: nah, you're fine :)
[08:46] <anto9us> is next meeting scheduled yet?
[08:46] <Hawkwind> anto9us: Not yet
[08:46] <gnomefreak> anto9us: no
[08:46] <Hawkwind> We should actually do that
[08:46] <anto9us> ok, thanks
[08:46] <Hawkwind> That way it's officially in these logs
[08:46] <gnomefreak> 2 weeks?
[08:46] <apokryphos> someone raise that on the list
[08:47] <apokryphos> I'd say at least a month
[08:47] <gnomefreak> that will give us tiome to go over any changes
[08:47] <tonyyarusso> We should make some sort of scheduling table to see what works for most.
[08:47] <gnomefreak> time*
[08:47] <thoreauputic> with the hholidays, a month seems realistic
[08:47] <tonyyarusso> The marketing team has a nice thing on their wiki section for that
[08:47] <Hawkwind> I'd say 2 weeks since there are things Seveas wanted us to comment on the list about and revisit it soon
[08:47] <gnomefreak> oh crap i forgot
[08:47] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: what?
[08:47] <apokryphos> Hawkwind: msot of those are meant to be dealt with on the list though
[08:47] <gnomefreak> Hawkwind: cristmas newyears and stuff people might be traveling
[08:47] <tonyyarusso> True.
[08:48] <tonyyarusso> We may need to make it a month even if that's not ideal, because of the holidays.
[08:48] <gnomefreak> lets go for early jan?
[08:48] <apokryphos> It'd be nice if someone could write up the minutes for the meeting, today, too.
[08:48] <tonyyarusso> Early jan is good on my end mostly.
[08:49] <tonyyarusso> I'm no good for minutes-writing - I'm completely incommunicado for the next two days.
[08:49] <gnomefreak> i have to leave town in mid jan. and will be gone til feb AFAIK
[08:49] <apokryphos> shall we say 17 Jan?
[08:49] <apokryphos> well, I think we should raise the date on the list first
[08:49] <gnomefreak> i think i leave 13th or 14th
[08:49] <gnomefreak> cant rememb
[08:49] <gnomefreak> er
[08:50] <tonyyarusso> Yes, throw out a few dates on the list, but let's get a ballpark.
[08:50] <apokryphos> We have to clear this place for Edubuntu people. Let's take discussion to -ops
[08:50] <gnomefreak> that or weekend after
[08:50] <tonyyarusso> Sounds good.
[08:50] <mc44> apokryphos: the new improved *public* ops? :)
[08:50] <apokryphos> Good stuff, thank you everyone. :)
[08:50] <apokryphos> mc44: sure
[08:50] <thoreauputic> OK --->> ops
[08:50] <tonyyarusso> That was a good meeting.
[08:50] <anto9us> -ops is public now?
[08:50] <tonyyarusso> anto9us: yes
[08:50] <thoreauputic> very positive meeting - thanks everyone
[08:51] <mc44> thanks for listening to me
[08:51] <mc44> :)
[08:51] <tonyyarusso> mc44: Drop any future comments with any of us in the future too
[08:52] <mc44> tonyyarusso: yes, but next time Ill have anto9us make a more convincing argument :)
[08:53] <tonyyarusso> mc44: Yes, I don't think we fully understand we're he's coming from yet.
[08:53] <anto9us> I'll formulate a detailed reasoning
[08:53] <anto9us> I think it's mostly there in the mailing list, just fragmented
[08:53] <nalioth> i believe the Edubunut meeting is on the way here
[08:54] <nalioth>  #ubuntu-ops is available for this
[08:54] <anto9us> ok, thanks
[08:54] <tonyyarusso> yeppers
[08:58] <highvoltage> t-2m
[09:00] <stgraber> @schedule Zurich
[09:00] <Ubugtu> Schedule for Europe/Zurich: Current meeting: Edubuntu | 21 Dec 22:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 27 Dec 13:00: Edubuntu | 28 Dec 09:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 02 Jan 21:00: Technical Board | 03 Jan 21:00: Edubuntu
[09:00] <stgraber> Looks like I'm just at time :)
[09:02] <RichEd> back in a minute
[09:04] <RichEd> Hi all ...
[09:04] <RichEd> ogra: any technical news ?
[09:04] <rodarvus> hi there
[09:04] <zul> @schedule montreal
[09:04] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Montreal: Current meeting: Edubuntu | 21 Dec 16:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 27 Dec 07:00: Edubuntu | 28 Dec 03:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 02 Jan 15:00: Technical Board | 03 Jan 15:00: Edubuntu
[09:05] <ogra> not really, edsadmin (the new user/groups admin tool) for edubuntu-network-auth-server is in the new queue
[09:05] <ogra> apart from that i was busy with merges and poking around in ldap
[09:05] <LaserJock> ogra: is that only for network auth?
[09:05] <LaserJock> edsadmin
[09:05] <ogra> yeps
[09:06] <ogra> thats the replacement for the user and groups tool
[09:06] <LaserJock> ok, but what about local users and groups?
[09:06] <LaserJock> I'm not really sure how all that works, I should read up
[09:07] <LaserJock> I was hoping it would be relatively simple to tie user/group managment to the menu GUI
[09:07] <ogra> if edubuntu-network-client is installed, the menu entry for users and groups is replaced by esdadmin
[09:07] <ogra> or if edubuntu-network-server is installed ...
[09:08] <ogra> so as long as the machine has one of these installed, the machine is either client or server in the edubuntu network and has no local users
[09:08] <LaserJock> so you get one or the other
[09:08] <rodarvus> ogra: *no* local users?
[09:08] <ogra> (apart from the defaul system users indeed)
[09:08] <rodarvus> :)
[09:09] <highvoltage> kewl
[09:09] <ogra> well thats about it, oh, and gcompris is at version 8.2.2
[09:10] <LaserJock> I saw that
[09:10] <cbx33> sorry I'm late guys
[09:10] <RichEd> hi pete
[09:10] <cbx33> hey RichEd
[09:10] <cbx33> where are we?
[09:10] <stgraber> Sorry, I didn't really follow the discussions about edubuntu-network-server, is any Windows compatibility planned ? (through Samba for example) ?
[09:10] <highvoltage> on testing, there's been only some response, which is ok considering that Feisty is only at the first alpha release.
[09:10] <willvdl> cbx33: edsadmin
[09:11] <ogra> stgraber, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/edubuntu-network-auth-client and https://blueprints.launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/edubuntu-network-auth-server have all the inf
[09:11] <ogra> o
[09:11] <cbx33> ok...I have a piece for tech ogra so let me know when ;)
[09:11] <ogra> i'm done
[09:11] <stgraber> thx
[09:11] <highvoltage> the only bug seemed to be about the gdmsetup program not starting up. testing will continue to get more aggressive as alpha releases become available.
[09:12] <ogra> i havent seen that one ...
[09:12] <cbx33> ok, can I take the stand
[09:12] <RichEd> go for it cbx33
[09:12] <cbx33> "Fly me to the moon and let me....play among the stars..."
[09:12] <cbx33> sorry
[09:12] <cbx33> I was talking to aliasvegas earlier
[09:12] <cbx33> and sbalneav
[09:12] <LaserJock> heh, I thought it was his intro
[09:13] <cbx33> we came up with a concept I wanted to put before people
[09:13] <cbx33> on the ldm login screen....
[09:13] <cbx33> what do people think of this https://wiki.ubuntu.com/EdubuntuArtwork/Palette?highlight=%28palette%29
[09:13] <cbx33> with a real working analog clock
[09:13] <cbx33> and.....a MOTD section
[09:14] <cbx33> it's just a conecpt....but borders on tech/art
[09:14] <willvdl> ooh, I like the message idea
[09:14] <cbx33> I'm willing to code up the clock if people think it's a good enough concept
[09:14] <ogra> to much graphics for ldm ... you cant do any fullscreen graphics, it slows it down to much
[09:14] <willvdl> nobody will be able to miss that
[09:14] <cbx33> willvdl: we were thinking of literaslly /etc/motd
[09:14] <highvoltage> cbx33: that is seriously cool
[09:14] <cbx33> ogra: ok
[09:15] <cbx33> no way we can compress or do something seriously funky.....i guess that owuld take us to spec stage
[09:15] <ogra> if you manage to keep the graphics small it would be fine indeed :)
[09:15] <highvoltage> cbx33: would the real analogue clock also come from the gdesklets code? :)
[09:15] <cbx33> yeh?
[09:15] <cbx33> highvoltage: could do....or we could write our own
[09:15] <RichEd> artwork looks very slick i must say
[09:15] <cbx33> it's just a concept....hmmm....
[09:16] <cbx33> we could possibly use a canvas and draw it....?? what d'ya think ogra ?
[09:16] <cbx33> instead of using a screen shot?
[09:16] <willvdl> so admins could easily add MOTD's to the pool?
[09:16] <cbx33> yes
[09:16] <cbx33> we could even have it on a rotating basis
[09:16] <ogra> it is a canvas
[09:16] <willvdl> or maybe fortune?
[09:16] <cbx33> then all is cool
[09:16] <cbx33> willvdl: as you wish
[09:16] <ogra> so you can draw what you like indeed :)
[09:16] <cbx33> ogra: I'll take a look at that if you think it's a good idea
[09:17] <ogra> just keep the smallness of bitmaps in mind, thats all i demand, ldm is slow enough ;)
[09:17] <cbx33> ok
[09:17] <ogra> sure, go ahead
[09:17] <willvdl> nice
[09:17] <cbx33> ogra: is it pixel sizes that kill
[09:17] <cbx33> or just overall size ?
[09:17] <ogra> bytes
[09:17] <cbx33> ok
[09:17] <cbx33> gimme a limit
[09:17] <ogra> its a matter of network and bandwith
[09:17] <cbx33> I'll try to work to it with graphics.....
[09:18] <cbx33> if not I'll look at drawing
[09:18] <ogra> currently the logo in 200x50px or something is the limit, dunno how big you can go
[09:18] <willvdl> cbx33, presumably scaling down the palette would do the trick?
[09:18] <cbx33> Whatsisname: that was my idea
[09:18] <cbx33> whoops
[09:18] <cbx33> willvdl: that was my idea
[09:19] <highvoltage> imho the graphics for the login manager only makes a small difference compared to the rest of the data a thin client reads to boot off from the network. but ogra is right, no need to make it slower :)
[09:19] <cbx33> maybe have a more rraytrace type shadow instead of shadowmaps
[09:19] <cbx33> RichEd: sounds good
[09:19] <cbx33> ooh
[09:19] <ogra> RichEd, thats what gdesklets does ....
[09:19] <cbx33> if this works...we could have a deskbar applet that reads the same info
[09:19] <willvdl> ActiveDesktop
[09:20] <cbx33> willvdl: wash your mouth out
[09:20] <cbx33> :p
[09:20] <RichEd> where it us a text feed, and local HTML rendering
[09:20] <willvdl> sorry, shouldn't use capitals :)
[09:21] <cbx33> so good to experiemnt with then eh?
[09:21] <ogra> sure
[09:21] <cbx33> cool
[09:21] <RichEd> It would need a simple tool to edit the news / message to show the principal ... it may be a small "selling feature" when doing a demo.
[09:21] <sbalneav> Hello
[09:21] <cbx33> and now SCP
[09:21] <sbalneav> Sorry I'm late
[09:21] <cbx33> np sbalneav I just pitched your MPTD idea
[09:21] <RichEd> hey sbalneav :) wassup ?
[09:21] <willvdl> hey
[09:21] <cbx33> MOTD
[09:21] <cbx33> it's a big hit
[09:22] <ogra> MOTD ?
[09:22] <ogra> sbalneav, hey
[09:22] <cbx33> ogra: we'll leave it till after christmas if you like
[09:22] <cbx33> message of the day
[09:22] <sbalneav> Stylin' and Profilin' :)
[09:22] <ogra> ah
[09:22] <LaserJock> RichEd: there are some apps that show things like MOTD or system logs in the background
[09:22] <cbx33> can we sched a meeting for SCP
[09:22] <LaserJock> perhaps we could adapt something like that
[09:22] <ogra> cbx33, tomorrow ?
[09:22] <sbalneav> ogra: got a quick patch for you, I'll try to get it in my bzr tree by end of day.
[09:22] <cbx33> ogra.....ok what time
[09:22] <cbx33> early is good for me
[09:23] <cbx33> like 9-11 UTC kinda time
[09:23] <cbx33> 9am :p
[09:23] <cbx33> too early for you?
[09:23] <ogra> hmm, thats bad for me ...
[09:23] <RichEd> LaserJock yes ... I am sure it it 90% possible at the moment ... with some tweaks to make it look like a school announcement to be noticed.
[09:23] <cbx33> ok
[09:23] <cbx33> what about evening?
[09:23] <ogra> i'd prefer 14UTC or something around that or evening
[09:23] <cbx33> RichEd: we could tie it into the artwork...so to have a space on the wallpaper...
[09:23] <cbx33> ogra: 14 UTC is gonna be probably travel time for me
[09:23] <cbx33> evening would work better
[09:24] <cbx33> I'll have to confirm
[09:24] <RichEd> cbx33: that was my first impression before I saw the login box ... i figured it was a wallpaper.
[09:24] <cbx33> yeh
[09:24] <ogra> oki, we need to be done before 20:00UTC ... i have a meeting at 21 UTC
[09:24] <cbx33> ok
[09:24] <nixternal> doh, sorry, im here :)
[09:24] <cbx33> we'll get there one day ;)
[09:24] <ogra> lets say 18:00 UTC
[09:24] <cbx33> hmmm.bad for me :p
[09:25] <ogra> 19 ?
[09:25] <cbx33> ogra: let's carry this on in pm
[09:25] <cbx33> no point holding up the meeting
[09:25] <ogra> ok
[09:25] <ogra> well, then tech is done
[09:25] <cbx33> ogra: one more
[09:25] <cbx33> did you get my patch this time?
[09:25] <RichEd> Some tech related news from Rodarvus is that he will be winding up his X responsibilities for the distro team and starting to focus more directly on education work in 2007.
[09:26] <ogra> cbx33, yes
[09:26] <ogra> looks fine to me
[09:26] <cbx33> ogra: is it good to go?
[09:26] <cbx33> excellent....
[09:26] <rodarvus> \o/
[09:26] <highvoltage> :-D
[09:26] <willvdl> rodarvus: woot++
[09:26] <highvoltage> rodarvus: are you still working on OLPC stuff?
[09:27] <rodarvus> no, unfortunately this is also on hold. (for other reasons)
[09:27] <RichEd> highvoltage: the thai government have dropped their entire OLPC involvement
[09:27] <sbalneav> Who's going to be X maintainer now?
[09:27] <highvoltage> i read :-/
[09:27] <rodarvus> yeah :)
[09:27] <willvdl> I heard someone refer to it as the $200 laptop the other day. Must be inflation
[09:27] <rodarvus> so, I'll be working on the education team (for real) from now on :)
[09:27] <RichEd> so rodarvus will stay on top of the OLPC initiative, but it is not a delivery focus
[09:28] <willvdl> Yay whiteboards! ?
[09:28] <RichEd> yep ... coming to that ...
[09:28] <rodarvus> sbalneav: afaik it will be a team effort (as it was before I arrived), until Canonical finds the right person
[09:28] <highvoltage> willvdl: OLPC said that the initial laptops will actually cost US$200-US%350 to manufacture, but that it should come down to US$100 as the unit quantities scale up
[09:28] <willvdl> ah
[09:29] <sbalneav> ogra: I suppose we should file a bug for the X memory preseed.
[09:29] <sbalneav> So it doesn't get lost in the shuffle.
[09:29] <ogra> yeah
[09:29] <ogra> dunno who merges xserver-xorg, seb128 is listed on merges.ubuntu.com for it
[09:30] <RichEd> rodarvus' initial focus will be testing / integration and CD build
[09:30] <ogra> the fix needs to go into that package ...
[09:30] <LaserJock> awesome
[09:31] <RichEd> and he's also going to look at the other education related devices out there that come into the frame ...
[09:31] <cbx33> coool
[09:31] <cbx33> rodarvus: \o/
[09:31] <rodarvus> :)
[09:31] <ogra> rodarvus, hacking kernel drivers for electronic whiteboards ?
[09:31] <willvdl> this is good news indeed
[09:31] <RichEd> so he's chatting to willvdl about finding out the situation with smartboards / interactive whiteboards
[09:31] <highvoltage> cool, there's talk that Via will release a laptop that's closer to a 'real' laptop for US$350-US$400, I think that's going to make some inroads into many areas.
[09:31] <rodarvus> ogra: no way :)
[09:32] <ogra> heh
[09:32] <cbx33> rodarvus: oh in that case...maybe you can help me out ;) with my interactive whiteboard
[09:32] <RichEd> i.e. where are they now w.r.t. open source ... do they need help getting compatile etc.
[09:32] <cbx33> I have some info on hitachi
[09:32] <rodarvus> a brazilian company called Positivo released a 400US$ laptop, for a national program for poor students
[09:32] <cbx33> who do I speak to?
[09:32] <rodarvus> this is not "market reality"
[09:32] <rodarvus> (yet)
[09:32] <rodarvus> but will, in the future
[09:32] <rodarvus> the sad part is that they have a very good (and close) relationship with Microsoft
[09:33] <rodarvus> and the thing will run XP Starter Edition
[09:33] <rodarvus> cbx33: sure, I can try :)
[09:33] <highvoltage> eek!
[09:33] <cbx33> hang on I'll pm you
[09:33] <RichEd> so if anyone gets interesting news in this area, or has contacts, send an email to rodarvus
[09:33] <willvdl> rodarvus, do you if it's true that AMD ship 14000 PICs a month into Brazil?
[09:33] <rodarvus> any emails/news/info will be appreciated :)
[09:34] <RichEd> highvoltage & willvdl : rodarvus will also look at the microclient junior / nohrtec appliance to see what help they need with xubuntu or xfce
[09:34] <rodarvus> willvdl: I don't have any numbers, but its a reasonable number, I'd say.
[09:35] <RichEd> So on the one hand, rodarvus will have a core dev focus, helping with the Edubuntu product
[09:35] <willvdl> "Smart" (makers of original whiteboard) have linux support. THey are NEPAD partner...sortof
[09:35] <cbx33> good to have you (back) rodarvus
[09:35] <LaserJock> does my calculator count as an educational device? perhaps it could run micro-Edubuntu :-)
[09:35] <RichEd> And on the other will be some specualtion / strategic stuff ... where you can all help with sending education related h/w news
[09:35] <cbx33> LaserJock: Casio 9850-G
[09:36] <rodarvus> yeah, its good to be back :)
[09:36] <willvdl> RichEd, working with Norhtec guys on that?
[09:36] <cbx33> now that'd rock ;)
[09:36] <LaserJock> I've got a TI-92 that people have called a computer
[09:36] <cbx33> heh
[09:36] <cbx33> ok where are we?
[09:36] <RichEd> willvdl: well they have approached us, and say that they have clients using the device and linux ... and they would like to suggest ubuntu to the clients
[09:37] <LaserJock> tech doc?
[09:37] <rodarvus> (on the phone, will be back in a minute)
[09:38] <willvdl> ah. Nigeria
[09:38] <willvdl> Trying to turn their clients into a LoCo
[09:38] <highvoltage> their clients?
[09:38] <highvoltage> that sounds interesting!
[09:38] <RichEd> willvdl: they have OEM clients who use the Nohrtec appliances in building an end-products
[09:39] <RichEd> and the OEM clients do not want to pay for a win licence out of their own margin
[09:39] <willvdl> :)
[09:39] <willvdl> long story
[09:39] <RichEd> table side menus that are interactive and let you order from a touchscreen ...
[09:40] <highvoltage> 22:37 < LaserJock> tech doc?
[09:40] <highvoltage> willvdl?
[09:40] <willvdl> well, I always get tech doc and community doc confused
[09:41] <LaserJock> well, it's sort of the same thing isn't it?
[09:41] <willvdl> but Topic Based Help has been moved into the trunk. I'm getting up to speed as we go
[09:42] <willvdl> https://wiki.edubuntu.org/EdubuntuWikiCleanup has been going well and is an important excercise
[09:42] <LaserJock> we should see if we could get a new yelp front page for Edubuntu
[09:43] <LaserJock> for TBH that would include the Ubuntu stuff plus LTPS, etc.
[09:43] <willvdl> would make sense
[09:44] <LaserJock> Don Scorgie would be a good resource for that
[09:44] <willvdl> who is he?
[09:44] <LaserJock> but maybe Matthew East could too
[09:44] <LaserJock> one of the main Gnome doc devs
[09:44] <LaserJock> he's the upstream upstream for yelp
[09:45] <willvdl> next stop is to rejuvinate the handbook. any thoughts on how TBH would impact it?
[09:45] <LaserJock> well, I think it would sort of give it the "bite-sized" flavor
[09:45] <cbx33> well handbook is going well
[09:46] <cbx33> nixternal: and sbalneav are working on it right?
[09:46] <sbalneav> There's a bit more work to be done on the LTSP side.  Specifically, what's REALLY needed is a good solid "debugging thin clients" section.
[09:46] <ogra> ++
[09:46] <sbalneav> Yes, I'll work on that, and all LTSP related stuff.
[09:47] <highvoltage> sbalneav: please shout if you need anything
[09:47] <ogra> i9'll look into merging vagrants ltsp-chroot script
[09:47] <ogra> so we'll have a commandline maintenance tool
[09:47] <LaserJock> I think many of the empty sections could be filled from the Ubuntu docs
[09:47] <cbx33> nice
[09:47] <ogra> and dont forget ltsp manager ...
[09:48] <willvdl> sbalneav, I'll help with the outlines etc. and can contribute on the softer stuff
[09:48] <willvdl> Are there any thoughts on a Desktop Guide like the other distros? Or is the Handbook to take this role?
[09:49] <ogra> i thought the handbook was supposed to ...
[09:49] <LaserJock> I see the handbook as Desktop Guide + LTSP + ESA
[09:49] <ogra> but that might have changed over time, i'm not surte anymore
[09:49] <cbx33> indeed
[09:50] <willvdl> that answers question fine, thanks
[09:50] <LaserJock> I would grab desktop guide material from Ubuntu
[09:50] <RichEd> willvdl: how would you see the difference (if any)
[09:50] <willvdl> none really
[09:50] <willvdl> only in name
[09:50] <willvdl> there is ubuntu desktop guide & book
[09:50] <highvoltage> willvdl: it might be a good idea to define the role of what the handbook is? I think a big problem with the handbook has been that there hasn't been a clear definition of what it's supposed to be
[09:50] <willvdl> we have book as guide
[09:51] <RichEd> desktop guide sounds very end-user specific ... whereas the handbook is a guide for user as well as admin ?
[09:51] <willvdl> gotcha
[09:51] <willvdl> I prefer handbook
[09:51] <RichEd> yep. me 2
[09:51] <willvdl> besides, it gets difficult to think of edubuntu in terms of the desktop and server guide
[09:51] <LaserJock> well, with TBH we don't use the word "Guide" anymore
[09:52] <LaserJock> it's all about the topic, doesn't matter from which content it comes
[09:52] <willvdl> ah yes, saw that discussion
[09:52] <willvdl> but eventually the topics get pulled into something
[09:53] <LaserJock> a "One doc to rule them all" approach is nice, but difficult to manage and get people involved as it can be a bit overwhelming, IMO
[09:53] <willvdl> LaserJock agreed.
[09:53] <willvdl> The nice thing about TBH is it gets easier to pull together a doc for an audience
[09:53] <LaserJock> yep
[09:53] <willvdl> on demand
[09:54] <willvdl> just takes some major forward planning :)
[09:54] <willvdl> anyhoo, TBH is in trunk
[09:54] <willvdl> I wanted to ask about the other "docs" as such
[09:55] <willvdl> Release Notes: they appear for betas, and releases right?
[09:56] <RichEd> yep ... from my experience ... a release triggers a doc
[09:57] <LaserJock> yep
[09:57] <willvdl> where do the beta release notes go?
[09:57] <LaserJock> wiki
[09:57] <willvdl> I've noticed some old ones in the wiki
[09:57] <LaserJock> I think the herds and beta/RC go on the wiki
[09:58] <willvdl> cool. they then get poached into the svn at release time?
[09:58] <RichEd> they should also be available as a link to download / save next to any .iso release
[09:58] <willvdl> RichEd, they are all on help.u.c
[09:59] <RichEd> yep, but if say a new release requires a certain hardware spec, then it is polite to let a user check that out before downloading an .iso which he does not have enough RAM to run for example.
[10:00] <willvdl> yip. they are made available with the releases. not exactly sure where though
[10:00] <RichEd> I am envisaging a kind of a readme before you upgrade / download requirement.
[10:01] <RichEd> wiki page is fine ... I just am commenting that it should also be listed next to the download file.
[10:02] <willvdl> I'm looking on releases.ubuntu.com anyon know where they go?
[10:03] <ogra> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/EdgyReleaseNotes ?
[10:03] <willvdl> ogra, meaning RichEd is right, I don't see them on releases.ubuntu.com...
[10:04] <ogra> no, they arent there
[10:04] <ogra> probably they should be linked from the html ..
[10:04] <ogra> colin maintains the template afaik
[10:05] <willvdl> will check with him
[10:06] <willvdl> so we maintain r-notes in wiki and the then end up in svn before release so that we have formatted copies right?
[10:07] <ogra> dunno if there are any formatted copies...
[10:07] <ogra> i only know the wiki version
[10:08] <ogra> and thats the one that gets linked from the release announcement etc
[10:08] <willvdl> kubuntu do it
[10:08] <willvdl> no big deal. just checking.
[10:09] <ogra> well, it would make sense to ship them probably ...
[10:09] <LaserJock> release notes get shipped in the -docs
[10:09] <ogra> ah
[10:09] <ogra> now you see how much developers look into docs :P
[10:09] <LaserJock> we have an old one from jerome in svn alreday
[10:10] <LaserJock> exactly
[10:10] <ogra> yep, together with an about page iirc
[10:10] <willvdl> LaserJock, did Jerome normally handle that?
[10:10] <LaserJock> long ago
[10:10] <LaserJock> it's basically unmaintained and dormant
[10:10] <willvdl> OK. should be easy enough to poach wiki page info
[10:11] <ogra> btw, jerome was disabled from the council, we should talk about a successor (and elect one at the next EC meeting)
[10:12] <willvdl> which is next year right?
[10:12] <LaserJock> should we take nominations?
[10:12] <sbalneav> What's happened to Jerome?
[10:12] <highvoltage> sbalneav: his new job consumed him
[10:12] <willvdl> sbalneav, job is taking time
[10:12] <cbx33> willvdl: when I heard you say that I thought...NEXT YEAR...that's ages aw.....oh no it isn't
[10:12] <highvoltage> cbx33: less than two weeks hey :)
[10:12] <willvdl> it's tomorrow. no wait that's the end of the world
[10:13] <highvoltage> 42
[10:13] <cbx33> heheh
[10:14] <willvdl> OK. release notes, no problem
[10:14] <willvdl> About Edubuntu, looking at it, it appears to be another flavour of the release notes anyway
[10:15] <LaserJock> should be an ESA doc except maybe less marketing flavored :-)
[10:16] <willvdl> LaserJock, I struggle to differentiate between R-Notes and About-Ubuntu
[10:16] <willvdl> in terms of content
[10:18] <willvdl> ogra, do you write the release notes?
[10:18] <ogra> usually i add the tech bits
[10:19] <willvdl> gotcha
[10:19] <ogra> there were release notes i wrote in the past ...
[10:19] <ogra> but during the last two releases it was rather an edubuntu doc team effort ...
[10:20] <willvdl> R-Notes + About E + Handbook should keep us very busy on the tech doc side
[10:20] <ogra> sounds like
[10:20] <willvdl> ESA and the related wiki bits are very exciting
[10:21] <cbx33> heheh
[10:21] <cbx33> ESA was well planned
[10:21] <willvdl> sooo many opportunities for it
[10:21] <cbx33> inderdaad
[10:22] <cbx33> Artwork?
[10:22] <cbx33> are we there yet mommy?
[10:22] <willvdl> ESA should basically become Edubuntu Marketing: covering leaflets etc. to promotional material
[10:23] <willvdl> what I'm still getting head around is trying to find out where targetted docs for specific audiences would lie... Handbook derivitives? Or ESA?
[10:24] <cbx33> would lie?
[10:24] <cbx33> as in storage?
[10:24] <LaserJock> I'd keep the R-Notes, About E, and Handbook in doc team svn as static docs
[10:24] <willvdl> storage and in development
[10:24] <ogra> cbx33, no in "chating the reader"
[10:24] <LaserJock> and the rest go on the wiki or a edubuntu-marketing bzr repo
[10:25] <ogra> :P
[10:25] <willvdl> LaserJock, agree
[10:25] <willvdl> ESA is currently in docteam svn
[10:26] <cbx33> yes
[10:26] <willvdl> it's something we can plan around. I guess first priority is working on the actual handbook
[10:27] <willvdl> before looking at what different audiences would want
[10:27] <cbx33> yes
[10:27] <cbx33> I'd like to get ESA updated
[10:27] <LaserJock> yeah, first things first
[10:27] <cbx33> before feb
[10:27] <cbx33> well before Jan really
[10:27] <willvdl> sweet. I got enough info thanks guys
[10:27] <LaserJock> I'd actually move ESA out of the doc team repo into a bzr repo for edubuntu-marketing
[10:27] <cbx33> RichEd: what kinda stuff can we get for BETT interms of leaflets etc
[10:28] <cbx33> LaserJock: sounds good
[10:28] <RichEd> cbx33: I will be speaking to Chris Kenyon about budget.
[10:28] <willvdl> LaserJock, cbx33: might be good idea to rename ESA to something more marketingy
[10:29] <RichEd> We should be able to print our first eduction brochure for a test run at BETT
[10:29] <cbx33> willvdl: that is the plan
[10:29] <cbx33> ESA was our internal code name
[10:29] <cbx33> RichEd: that would be awesome
[10:29] <cbx33> I'll need that info asap
[10:29] <cbx33> so I can dedicate time to ESA with will
[10:29] <willvdl> cbx33 ++ & woot
[10:29] <cbx33> unless you want Canonical to handle it
[10:29] <RichEd> Can we do something meaninful with a double sided single page ?
[10:29] <cbx33> directly
[10:29] <cbx33> yes
[10:30] <cbx33> though to me
[10:30] <cbx33>  a trifold stands out more
[10:30] <RichEd> We'd do a full mock up with text and layout flow.
[10:30] <willvdl> current ubuntu leaflet is trifold
[10:30] <cbx33> yeh trifold makes the best impression
[10:30] <RichEd> And then Chris could run it though the design guys before a final commercial print.
[10:31] <RichEd> I'd argue though, that given the short timing, we go for a once off test run for BETT.
[10:31] <willvdl> cbx33 although we do have the templates that Chris and Christina worked on
[10:31] <cbx33> true
[10:31] <cbx33> well...you guys know more about marketting than I
[10:31] <willvdl> (must get updated ones. note to self)
[10:32] <cbx33> to me.....single sheet means....less effort spent
[10:32] <willvdl> RichEd, we have a poster design too...
[10:32] <nixternal> yay, sorry about that, emergency surgery had to be done on my truck before i left tongiht :)
[10:33] <RichEd> yes ... cbx33 mentioned that
[10:33] <nixternal> cbx33: i will be working more on the handbook post xmas
[10:33] <willvdl> showed you in San Fran?
[10:34] <RichEd> ah that may have been it.
[10:34] <cbx33> nixternal: nice
[10:34] <willvdl> nixternal: excellent. looking forward to seeing TBH in action
[10:34] <RichEd> Pete: how many week days between new year and the show ?
[10:34] <cbx33> not many
[10:35] <cbx33> 10
[10:36] <cbx33> i know it's tight
[10:36] <RichEd> So probably not enough time for the whole formal multiple quotes & proof / approval cycle. I think we should expect to prepare as close to print ready as possible, and then we hava an ad hoc run.
[10:36] <cbx33> agreed
[10:36] <cbx33> I'm happy to produce copy etc..........
[10:36] <willvdl> well we have decent existing work
[10:36] <cbx33> but probably havn't got the softweare to produce proper print layouts
[10:37] <RichEd> cbx33: there should eb ebough time for a final reassemble into print form
[10:37] <cbx33> so just get it up to date
[10:37] <cbx33> good good
[10:37] <RichEd> should be enough
[10:37] <cbx33> I'll make sure it's finished before Jan 1st
[10:38] <cbx33> phew
[10:38] <willvdl> ++
[10:38] <cbx33> and then you guys can do what you will ;)
[10:38] <RichEd> cbx33: I'm happy to work on that with you
[10:38] <cbx33> RichEd: ++
[10:38] <cbx33> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/EdubuntuSchoolAdvocacy
[10:38] <cbx33> here is the WIP for comments suggestions
[10:38] <cbx33> please read the current ESA and comment
[10:38] <RichEd> I'll send comments tomorrow some time.
[10:38] <cbx33> on missing parts
[10:38] <cbx33> like SCP
[10:39] <willvdl> which is on doc.ubuntu.com?
[10:39] <cbx33> hmm
[10:39] <cbx33> LaserJock: ?
[10:39] <cbx33> should be
[10:39] <cbx33> it's in the doc repo
[10:39] <willvdl> it is
[10:39] <cbx33> http://doc.ubuntu.com/edubuntu/school-advocacy/C/index.html
[10:40] <willvdl> got access?
[10:40] <LaserJock> yeah
[10:40] <LaserJock> it's on there
[10:40] <willvdl> woot
[10:41] <cbx33> ok I just made a change to the wiki
[10:41] <cbx33> with a new link directly to it
[10:41] <cbx33> Can someone set us up a bzr tree?
[10:42] <cbx33> or shall we use svn for now?
[10:42] <LaserJock> well, if you have a team on LP it's right there
[10:42] <cbx33> ok
[10:42] <sbalneav> Somebody set up us the bzr bomb
[10:42] <sbalneav> What you say?
[10:42] <cbx33> heh
[10:42] <cbx33> right docs covered?
[10:43] <cbx33> I have to shoot fairly soon - would like to get Artwork in before I do
[10:43] <willvdl> LaserJock, meaning an LP team can just create a bzr branch just like that?
[10:44] <LaserJock> yeah
[10:44] <LaserJock> access is limited to people who belong to the team
[10:44] <LaserJock> write access that is
[10:45] <willvdl> cool
[10:45] <willvdl> lets move to artwork?
[10:45] <cbx33> thanks
[10:46] <cbx33> ok
[10:46] <cbx33> well you've all seen the conecpt lisa came up with
[10:46] <cbx33> thanks also to sbalneav for his idea about MOTD
[10:46] <sbalneav> :)
[10:46] <cbx33> we'd love some comments on that design
[10:46] <cbx33> it is _only_ a concept at this stage
[10:47] <cbx33> but we thought it fresh and bringing a new level of profressionalism to edubuntu
[10:47] <willvdl> any comments on design? meaning it has a "school" look to it?
[10:47] <cbx33> yes
[10:47] <cbx33> and anything relaly
[10:48] <cbx33> like it
[10:48] <cbx33> hate it
[10:48] <cbx33> heheh you decide
[10:49] <willvdl> I guess usual question of applicability to tertiary ed springs to mind
[10:49] <cbx33> yeh
[10:50] <cbx33> anyone else.....we're going to come up with some more ideas/themes soon...
[10:50] <cbx33> then post to mailing list
[10:50] <cbx33> hopefully kick start some ideas off there
[10:51] <willvdl> I guess we can get that debate going in artwork team circles
[10:51] <LaserJock> mostly what I'd like to see is like 3-4 different themes for preschoo, elementary, and secondary/uni
[10:51] <LaserJock> I can pick what I like but I'm horrible at making it up from scratch
[10:52] <willvdl> then admin can apply theme...
[10:52] <cbx33> LaserJock: that's the plan......remember last release we were just on person
[10:52] <cbx33> s/on/one
[10:52] <willvdl> and did good
[10:52] <cbx33> thanks willvdl ;) - Lisa is happy ;)
[10:53] <RichEd> anything else anyone ... we are coming up to pumpkin time ...
[10:54] <cbx33> hehe
[10:54] <highvoltage> well,
[10:54] <highvoltage> I've been feeling lost the last bunch of months or so in terms of ubuntu contributions
[10:55] <highvoltage> but recently I started learning more about debian-installer and ubiquity, and I'm learning a lot from colin
[10:55] <cbx33> cool
[10:55] <highvoltage> and really enjoying it.
[10:55] <RichEd> colin ? colin watson ?
[10:55] <willvdl> cjwatson
[10:56] <ogra> RichEd, yes, he's looking for young blood for the installer :)
[10:56] <RichEd> ahh ....
[10:56] <cbx33> right you guys done with artwork ?
[10:56] <cbx33> I'm gonna have to shoot
[10:56] <cbx33> thanks for all the help guys
[10:56] <cbx33> I'll do my best to sort out ldm/ESA and anything else I've said I'll do
[10:57] <highvoltage> so possibly in future releases of ubuntu I could do some installer tweaks if needed
[10:57] <willvdl> cbx33, great
[10:57] <highvoltage> (sorry for strange delay, lost my connection there for a while)
[10:57] <highvoltage> RichEd: yes
[10:57] <highvoltage> goodnight guys!
[10:57] <RichEd> highvoltage: it would be useful to keep rodarvus loosley in the installer loop
[10:58] <cbx33> bye all
[10:58] <willvdl> ciao
[10:58] <RichEd> We may need some assistance with the Edubuntu on 2CDs ... ad-on .iso setup.
[10:58] <highvoltage> ah yes.
[10:58] <cjwatson> that's not really tightly related to the installer IMO
[10:59] <cjwatson> CD image building, yes, but the explicit intent of the way we did that spec was to decouple it from installer considerations
[10:59] <RichEd> cjwatson: but loosely, connected
[10:59] <cjwatson> I actually don't see how
[10:59] <cjwatson> we can discuss it later perhaps, I don't mean to derail your meeting, just a point of information
[10:59] <highvoltage> cjwatson: our meeting pretty much just ended
[10:59] <willvdl> thanks
[10:59] <cjwatson> in any case my point is that implementing that spec doesn't require any installer modifications IMO
[11:00] <highvoltage>  we can add it to the next meeting agenda, if needed.
[11:00] <RichEd> acknowledged. Just terms of making the process smooth and seamless for a user, we want an integration of experience.
[11:00] <ogra> RichEd, edubuntu ion 2Cds is rather about gnome-app-install integration
[11:00] <ogra> and update-manager integration ...
[11:01] <cjwatson> right, when I personally talk about the installer I very specifically mean initial install only, which is how the code is structured
[11:01] <cjwatson> d-i and ubiquity
[11:01] <ogra> right ...
[11:01] <cjwatson> ok, that's not so much what highvoltage has been looking at :)
[11:02] <highvoltage> RichEd: perhaps table it as a documentation discussion in the next meeting
[11:02] <RichEd> okay.
[11:02] <cjwatson> anyway, I only saw this due to a nick highlight, so I'll go away again ;)
[11:02] <RichEd> thanks ... for paying attention ... not for going away :)
[11:02] <cjwatson> heh
[11:03] <RichEd> Well in winding up ... for those of you who are not aware of it, there is a week's break for the company between Xmas and New Year.
[11:03] <RichEd> So the meeting next week may be sparsely polulated.
[11:03] <willvdl> cjwatson, that was me :)
[11:03] <RichEd> *populated
[11:03] <highvoltage> RichEd: noted.
[11:04] <highvoltage> RichEd: would it perhaps be wise to postpone next weeks meeting?
[11:04] <ogra> no, lets just skip it
[11:04] <RichEd> highvoltage: next week won't be any formal meeting
[11:04] <highvoltage> kind of what I meant :)
[11:04] <RichEd> And so then in conclusion THANKS for a GOOD 2006 ...
[11:04] <highvoltage> RichEd: ok, so if anyone wants to chat, they can? then they could just as well do it in #edubuntu :)
[11:05] <ogra> yeah !
[11:05] <highvoltage> :)
[11:05] <willvdl> Agreed. You folks are fantastic
[11:05] <RichEd> And looking forward to a big 2007 for Edubuntu.
[11:05] <ogra> willvdl, you too ;)
[11:05] <highvoltage> hear hear!
[11:05] <RichEd> I hope everyone has some rest and relaxation over xmas.
[11:05] <willvdl> I for one will be technically challenged for the week :)
[11:05] <RichEd> If in doubt, leave the laptop / notebook at home when going out of the house.
[11:06] <ogra> out ?
[11:06] <ogra> hmm
[11:06] <highvoltage> heh
[11:06] <willvdl> unless your wife/GF has hers
[11:06] <willvdl> then it's OK
[11:06] <RichEd> To bars. and places where Will get's technically challenged.
[11:06] <highvoltage> (even when in the shower)
[11:06] <RichEd> eat drink and be merry
[11:06] <willvdl> 2 minutes or 2 meters?
[11:06] <RichEd> and come back recharged in the new year.
[11:06] <ogra> miles ?
[11:06] <highvoltage> 2 meters
[11:07] <willvdl> 2parking meters?
[11:07] <highvoltage> willvdl: yes, 2 parking meters :)
[11:08] <RichEd> going once ...
[11:08] <willvdl> ok, getting silly cause it's late...
[11:08] <RichEd> going twice ...
[11:08] <RichEd> 2006 is now gone.
[11:08] <ogra> yay
[11:08] <highvoltage> sold to the man with the funny hat!
[11:08] <RichEd> Thanks and goooodnight from me.
[11:08] <ogra> night all
[11:09] <highvoltage> night ogra and RichEd and willvdl and others who are lurking!
[11:09] <willvdl> night
[11:09] <willvdl> I'll do minutes again