19:03:47 <bdrung> #startmeeting
19:03:47 <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Nov  7 19:03:47 2011 UTC.  The chair is bdrung. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot.
19:03:47 <meetingology> 
19:03:47 <meetingology> Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired
19:04:26 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Review of previous action items
19:04:53 <bdrung> cody-somerville isn't here. so we probably can skip the review of his items.
19:05:31 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Continue discussion about our package set management workflows (review TB feedback)
19:05:56 <bdrung> i haven't found the time to catch up the mails from the last few days
19:06:54 <bdrung> should we move this point to the end?
19:07:23 <stgraber> sure
19:07:24 <tumbleweed> IIRC the only response was from sabdfl
19:07:42 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Creation of new desktop-extra package set
19:07:52 <stgraber> tumbleweed: well, it was discussed at the TB meeting, then sabdfl commented by e-mail after the meeting
19:08:06 <bdrung> [LINK] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2011-October/003374.html
19:08:25 <tumbleweed> stgraber: ah, I was in the plenaries... Anyway, we can discuss it later
19:09:23 <bdrung> do we have a sufficient package set description?
19:10:06 <micahg> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2011-November/003391.html
19:10:56 <bdrung> micahg: where is the description for ubuntu-desktop?
19:11:04 <micahg> the only thing that looks funny in there is ekiga, the rest is fine
19:11:11 <micahg> bdrung: it's a seed, no description needed
19:12:26 <bdrung> micahg: but desktop-extra wouldn't be a seed, would it?
19:12:30 <micahg> ubuntu-desktop packageset = basically anything in ubuntu-desktop excluding stuff in desktop-core and core
19:12:50 <micahg> bdrung: correct, so seb128 gave a rough description
19:13:11 <micahg> NOT IN ubuntu-desktop, but needed for a vanilla GNOME
19:13:56 <bdrung> is this precise enough? how sharp is "vanilla GNOME" defined?
19:14:56 <micahg> idk, perhaps an upstream GNOME link with their base components would be enough?
19:15:07 * micahg hunts for a SME
19:15:25 <bdrung> SME?
19:15:45 <micahg> subject matter expert
19:17:52 <micahg> bdrung: maybe we should table until someone pops up that can give us more info
19:18:00 <bdrung> k
19:18:20 <tumbleweed> or if that fails, invite a desktop person to the next meeting
19:18:51 <micahg> ideally the person who requested the packageset should be here, but maybe we didn't make that clear
19:19:02 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Serge Hallyn's application for upload rights for the Ubuntu Server package set.
19:19:09 <hallyn> \o
19:19:13 <bdrung> [TOPIC] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SergeHallyn/ServerDeveloperApplication
19:19:32 <bdrung> hallyn: can you introduce yourself?
19:20:06 <hallyn> Sure - I'm Serge Hallyn, member of server team.  I mainly watch the virtualization stack, libvirt, lxc, qemu-kvm, etc
19:22:06 <hallyn> I rarely make any changes without discussing them with someone else first, but sponsoring is much more work to ask of someone, so it seemed best to ask for server set upload rights
19:23:17 <bdrung> hallyn: how good is the relation between the server team and debian?
19:23:46 <bdrung> hallyn: IIRC e.g. qemu-kvm has big difference in both distributions
19:23:52 <hallyn> I like to think it's pretty good.  (getting ready to submit a bug back to debian from an ubuntu one right now)
19:23:56 * ajmitch had thought that hallyn was core dev already, tbh :)
19:24:06 <hallyn> yes, qemu-kvm is ac ompletely different package in ubuntu
19:24:22 <hallyn> after this next TLS I want to think about merging back
19:24:25 <hallyn> but not for LTS
19:24:29 <hallyn> (s/TLS/LTS :)
19:24:32 <stgraber> As I said on hallyn's wiki page, I've been sponsoring quite a few of his uploads (last being an lxc SRU last week), most were good to upload as-is, the few I changed were mostly to add some stuff that I wanted to bundle in the upload ;)
19:24:44 * micahg wonders if there will be a new TLS after the LTS
19:24:51 <bdrung> :)
19:25:06 <hallyn> (better than a TPS report i guess)
19:25:44 <bdrung> hallyn: is there something like a server team on the debian side or are you just working with a bunch of different maintainers?
19:26:21 <hallyn> bdrung, different maintainers, though mostly I just work through the debian bug system.  (i do sit on the mailing lists)
19:26:44 <bdrung> do the other dmb members have questions in the pipe?
19:26:52 <stgraber> I don't
19:26:52 <hallyn> I've said this before, but am intending to seek a sponsor soon to get debian DD so I can feel more closely involved
19:27:23 <micahg> hallyn: do you have an interest in any of the other packages in the server packageset besides the few you've uploaded?
19:27:28 <hallyn> (thank you for not pointing out redundancy)
19:27:57 <hallyn> micahg, yes.  For general helping out in early-release syncs for instance
19:28:27 <bdrung> ready to vote?
19:28:30 <micahg> yep
19:28:33 <stgraber> yep
19:28:34 <tumbleweed> sure
19:29:38 <bdrung> [VOTE] Should Serge Hallyn get upload rights for the Ubuntu Server package set?
19:29:38 <meetingology> Please vote on: Should Serge Hallyn get upload rights for the Ubuntu Server package set?
19:29:38 <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me)
19:29:46 <bdrung> +1
19:29:46 <meetingology> +1 received from bdrung
19:29:47 <stgraber> +1
19:29:47 <meetingology> +1 received from stgraber
19:29:53 <tumbleweed> +1
19:29:53 <meetingology> +1 received from tumbleweed
19:29:56 <geser> +1
19:29:56 <meetingology> +1 received from geser
19:29:59 <micahg> +1
19:29:59 <meetingology> +1 received from micahg
19:30:26 <bdrung> [ENDVOTE]
19:30:26 <meetingology> Voting ended on: Should Serge Hallyn get upload rights for the Ubuntu Server package set?
19:30:26 <meetingology> Votes for:5 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
19:30:26 <meetingology> Motion carried
19:30:37 <bdrung> hallyn: congrats
19:30:40 <hallyn> thanks :)
19:30:54 <micahg> bdrung: jbicha is here if you want to go back to the desktop-extra packageset
19:31:03 <stgraber> hallyn: congrats!
19:31:05 <micahg> at least I think he is
19:31:07 <jbicha> hi, sorry for missing the beginning of the conversation
19:31:13 <micahg> congrats hallyn
19:31:17 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Creation of new desktop-extra package set
19:31:18 <jbicha> http://git.gnome.org/browse/jhbuild/tree/modulesets
19:31:58 <jbicha> we could use whatever is not in main from gnome-suites-core, gnome-suites-core-deps, and gnome-apps
19:33:10 <bdrung> jbicha: does a script/tool exist to format the .modules file nicely for our usecase?
19:34:03 <bdrung> micahg: ekiga is listed in gnome-apps
19:35:13 <jbicha> I don't know what format you need it in, and I don't know if it comes in a simpler format
19:35:55 <micahg> yeah, I see, I'm just wondering how related it is, but I guess that's fine
19:36:53 <bdrung> a plain list of package instead of an xml file would be easier to read, but the xml is sufficient
19:36:54 <jbicha> there's also http://git.gnome.org/browse/jhbuild/plain/modulesets/ but it's the same thing
19:38:10 <bdrung> The description of desktop-extra would be then: "Every package that is NOT in ubuntu-desktop, but needed for a vanilla GNOME. Vanilla GNOME is defined by upstream in gnome-suites-core, gnome-suites-core-deps, and gnome-apps http://git.gnome.org/browse/jhbuild/tree/modulesets"
19:38:58 <bdrung> this sound precise enough for me. thought?
19:39:11 <bdrung> s/thought/thoughts/
19:39:17 <jbicha> that's fine, how about "NOT in main" instead?
19:39:19 <micahg> I wish I could see a textual list of those files before voting
19:39:41 <micahg> yes, this would be a universe only packageset I think
19:40:06 <stgraber> I also would like to see an actual list matching this criteria before voting. The description is fine to review additions afterwards though
19:40:24 <stgraber> (especially as I'll likely be the one who needs to implement the package set, having a list makes it easier ;))
19:40:34 <bdrung> the current list is posted here: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2011-October/003374.html
19:40:52 <jbicha> bdrung: that list wasn't compiled straight from the jhbuild list though
19:41:46 <bdrung> we could decide on that list and modify it later using the package description
19:41:57 <jbicha> I could make a list and email it to the DMB list
19:42:25 <micahg> well, still, I'd prefer a textual list of those .module files before agreeing to use them as criteria for future additions
19:42:38 <bdrung> jbicha: can i give you that action item?
19:42:53 <jbicha> bdrung: yes
19:43:04 <bdrung> jbicha: if you write a script, you could share that with us
19:43:38 <bdrung> [ACTION] jbicha to create a list of packages from the .modules files
19:43:38 * meetingology jbicha to create a list of packages from the .modules files
19:44:03 <bdrung> then let's way with voting after getting the list
19:44:55 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski's application for upload rights for linux-* packages.
19:44:59 <herton> o/
19:45:14 <bdrung> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HertonKrzesinski/PerPackageUploaderApplication
19:45:15 <bdrung> herton: can you introduce yourself?
19:45:50 <herton> I'm Herton R. Krzesinski, I work with ubuntu kernel stable team, looking at the stable updates, tracking regressions, etc.
19:47:35 <herton> I'm doing a lot of stable updates lately, so it seemed a good thing to get upload rights, instead of bugging Steve Conklin or Brad Figg to sponsor them (they also work/worked on the stable kernel stuff)
19:48:26 <sconklin> +1 - sponsoring Herton's uploads has become very boring in the last six months
19:49:42 <bdrung> herton: are you involved in the community outside of the kernel area?
19:51:06 <herton> not at the moment. I have been in UDS, talked with some people, but my are of expertise is more kernel, so I'm more interacting with community in the bug reports about it
19:51:52 <micahg> herton: the earliest upload I see is at the beginning of June, is there evidence of earlier uploads?
19:52:23 <bdrung> herton: you criticise the political structure inside the project. Does this criticism applies only for getting upload rights or are there other places, too?
19:52:38 <herton> micahg: that sounds right, June is when I started pushing the ubuntu kernel updates
19:54:28 <herton> bdrung: for a newcomer it's not very easy to understand everything at the start I think how to get involved, may be there is some improvements that could be done
19:54:59 <micahg> herton: were you aware that we generally require 6 months of sustained contributions before granting upload rights?
19:55:11 <bdrung> herton: did you started with contributing to the kernel package?
19:56:02 <sconklin> Herton has been preparing kernels for longer than six months, and making contributions during that time. It's only that he's started actually doing uploads in the last 6 months
19:57:08 <micahg> sconklin: in the Ubuntu kernel git tree?
19:57:13 <sconklin> yes.
19:57:20 <sconklin> looking for dates now
19:57:49 <micahg> sconklin: I figured as much since he joined the team 10 months ago, but just wanted to be sure
19:58:03 <micahg> er...9 months
19:58:27 <cnd> micahg, I didn't know of any specific 6 months of work for PPU uploads
19:58:38 <cnd> I thought that was for motu or more expansive sets
19:58:44 <micahg> cnd: it's for membership in general not upload rights specifically
19:59:33 * micahg is worried bdrung's question got lost above
19:59:46 <cnd> ok, maybe this is butting up against the ppu vs ubuntu membership thing mentioned last week
19:59:49 <apw> i will point out that herton has been contributing to the kernle since 2009 though outside of ubuntu
20:00:02 <bdrung> sconklin: do you have a link handy to one commit as prove?
20:00:11 <herton> my first contribution to the ubuntu kernel was to bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/636091
20:00:13 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 636091 in linux (Ubuntu Maverick) "Touchpad stops working when wifi/3G connects" [Medium,Triaged]
20:00:26 <tumbleweed> herton: I'm also interested in your comments about bureaucracy. I remember thinking that it was very bureaucratic before I got involved. But I can't remember quite where, and I wouldn't know what documentation needs changing
20:00:38 <micahg> yep, noted in changelog for March
20:01:13 <micahg> herton: thanks
20:01:29 <sconklin> bdrung: no, I can't find it. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I can tell you he has contributed going back some time, as apw pointed out
20:02:08 <bdrung> k
20:02:35 <ogasawara> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-oneiric.git;a=commit;h=41d202d80e829c0a489119ad63d7ece08a9786da
20:02:46 <ogasawara> ^^ he's actually been contributing since 2007
20:02:52 <micahg> the bug that herton linked shows an upload where he was included in the changelog in March which IMHO is sufficient here
20:03:00 <tgardner> commit 41d202d80e829c0a489119ad63d7ece08a9786da is July of 2007, the first of many
20:03:15 <bdrung> herton: one of my questions got lost: did you start contributing to ubuntu by contributing to the kernel?
20:03:30 <herton> tumbleweed: the wiki has a lot information scattered, it takes some time to read and understand all the membership process. May be a better description in one page of all memberships, a organization structure or picture could help
20:03:32 <micahg> ogasawara: yes, but not to Ubuntu :), we were wondering about Ubuntu specific contributions
20:03:36 <bdrung> e.g. can the bureaucracy come from the kernel package bureaucracy?
20:04:00 <herton> bdrung: yes. In ubuntu I'm started contributing only with the kernel
20:04:18 <tumbleweed> herton: yeah, we are planning on revamping that page
20:05:17 <ogasawara> micahg: hrm, I'd consider a contribution to the upstream kernel a contribution to ubuntu as well since we do base all our bits on upstream
20:05:48 <tumbleweed> ogasawara: sure, but that isn't related to Ubuntu membership
20:06:29 <micahg> ogasawara: it's irrelevant in this case anyways, since he does have 6+ months of Ubuntu contribution
20:06:35 <bdrung> ogasawara: contributing to an upstream project (here the kernel) doesn't grant you ubuntu membership
20:07:51 <bdrung> i am wondering if we should have an other format for presenting the information than using a wiki
20:08:09 <bdrung> a wiki tend to be not structured enough
20:08:39 <geser> like?
20:08:55 <tumbleweed> the packaging guide?
20:09:04 <bdrung> that's the question.
20:09:05 <stgraber> we're already past our allocated time for the DMB meeting, should we vote?
20:09:20 <bdrung> k, let's vote.
20:09:41 <bdrung> before vote: do we have a package set for the kernel?
20:09:49 <apw> yes
20:09:59 <micahg> http://people.canonical.com/~stgraber/package_sets/precise/kernel
20:10:01 <stgraber> yes, we have a package set and associated team for the kernel
20:10:37 <geser> IIRC they are the only one who can upload kernels (not sure if core-devs can do it or not)
20:10:38 <stgraber> ouch, the uploaders part is a mess, yeah for LP bugs... /me goes to poke #launchpad to fix that one too
20:11:05 <stgraber> geser: ubuntu-core-dev is part of ubuntu-kernel-uploaders
20:11:27 <bdrung> [VOTE] Should Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski get upload rights for the kernel package set?
20:11:27 <meetingology> Please vote on: Should Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski get upload rights for the kernel package set?
20:11:27 <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me)
20:11:35 <geser> +1
20:11:35 <meetingology> +1 received from geser
20:11:40 <tumbleweed> +1
20:11:40 <meetingology> +1 received from tumbleweed
20:11:59 <stgraber> +1
20:11:59 <meetingology> +1 received from stgraber
20:12:08 <bdrung> +1
20:12:08 <meetingology> +1 received from bdrung
20:12:34 <micahg> +0 I'm reluctant to give a +1 w/out a dev release sponsored upload
20:12:34 <meetingology> +0 I'm reluctant to give a +1 w/out a dev release sponsored upload received from micahg
20:12:52 <bdrung> [ENDVOTE]
20:12:52 <meetingology> Voting ended on: Should Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski get upload rights for the kernel package set?
20:12:52 <meetingology> Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:1
20:12:52 <meetingology> Motion carried
20:13:17 <bdrung> herton: congrats
20:13:32 <herton> thanks!
20:13:56 <bdrung> should we end this meeting now and defer the remaining application to the next meeting?
20:14:49 <tumbleweed> micahg: in the case of kernel packages, that doesn't concern me too much
20:15:12 <micahg> tumbleweed: if not for the dev release, why are upload rights required?  kernel packages go through a PPA anyways
20:15:14 <bdrung> SRUs need more care than -dev uploads
20:15:28 <micahg> indeed
20:16:11 <bdrung> anyone not having time to process the last applicant?
20:16:29 * tumbleweed has time
20:16:42 <Laney> I don't think you should be considering components for packagesets
20:17:25 <micahg> Laney: in this case where it's shadowing a seed based packageset, it makes sense IMHO
20:17:34 <stgraber> bdrung: yeah, I think I have time for one more
20:17:48 <Laney> no, it makes sense in relation to the other set
20:18:35 <bdrung> [TOPIC] Stephen M. Webb's application for upload rights for the uTouch package set
20:19:16 <bdrung> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StephenMWebb/DeveloperApplication
20:19:30 <bdrung> bregma: can you introduce yourself?
20:19:51 <bregma> sure
20:20:16 <bregma> I'm a software developer, a member of the uTouch team developing touch-based sofwtare for Ubuntu
20:20:31 <bregma> I also occasionally fix other unrelated bugs, for Ubuntu and Debian
20:21:32 <bregma> I have also spent the better part of a decade packaging all kinds of software for other Debian-based distros
20:23:07 <micahg> bregma: what makes you want to join a "cabal of cliquish members"
20:23:14 <bdrung> bregma: do you have a debian qa page?
20:23:56 <bregma> micahg, cliques are only a problem when you're not a member
20:25:18 <micahg> well, some would say that just their existence would be problematic which I think "cliques" is something we try to shy away from in Ubuntu
20:25:19 <bdrung> bregma: are you active on the ubuntu devel irc channels?
20:25:47 <bregma> bdrung, from time to time
20:26:22 <bregma> I mean, I'm usually on the channel, but rarely can answer anything before someone better able can
20:26:50 <jbicha> if Ubuntu development appears to be "a very closed cabal of cliquish members", then we're doing something very wrong
20:27:23 <bregma> yes
20:27:28 <bdrung> bregma: can you give an example in which the ubuntu development appeared as a "closed cabal of cliquish members"
20:27:35 <bregma> but I wrote that on a day I was frustrated
20:28:07 <bregma> well, I asked on #ubuntu-devel what the best format to submit a bug was
20:28:19 <bregma> and the answer was "it doesn't matter" from several responses
20:28:44 <bregma> so I submitted a merge request to the ubuntu source package
20:29:06 <bregma> and the immediate response from a maintainer was 'we don't do things that way"
20:29:44 <bregma> I guess I should have gone back to change my develop application when i was less annoyed but I got busy with UDS and I forgot
20:29:51 <bdrung> some prefer patches and other merge proposals
20:30:09 <tumbleweed> naah, it's good to shed light on problems, that's why that's in the t emplate
20:30:28 <bregma> I understand, but it does not mean it' does not appear like a shibboleth
20:30:29 <bdrung> it's important to talk about problem.
20:30:40 * tumbleweed is guessing desktop team (which uses non-UDD bzr branches, but plans to migrate, from what I heard at UDS)
20:30:48 <bregma> the docs and wiki are stymying
20:30:56 <micahg> debcheckout can be your friend sometimes :-/
20:31:07 <tumbleweed> and probably an enemy too :P
20:31:43 <tumbleweed> bregma: hrm, how didyou get an @ubuntu.com address without membership?
20:31:45 * ajmitch still gets confused as to the 'right' way to do things as well, it's not like you're alone in that
20:32:07 <bregma> I've since seen all the changes proposed to the developer application process and other processes, so I realize it's just hard to know what's not easy to learn if you're already on the inside
20:32:46 <bregma> tumbleweed, the guys at Canonical gave it to me, I assume so uploads don;t balk
20:33:00 <bdrung> are there other problematic areas beside getting the correct format of your contribution?
20:33:51 <bregma> just the problem of trying to figure out how the whole system works... I am not a fan of wikis for finding information
20:34:34 <bregma> I didn;t intend to sound like a grouch or anything
20:35:06 <bregma> but a lot of my experience with figuring out how things works ends up with a "well, you just gotta know"
20:35:09 <bdrung> you are not the only one who finds wikis sub-optimal for presenting information
20:35:14 <micahg> bregma: any address is fine for a changelog entry (ubuntu.com preferred once earned)
20:36:06 <bregma> as a long-time Unix developer, I'm used to having to know what the command is before I can find which command to use, c'est la vie
20:36:17 <cnd> micahg, it's a lintian warning if it's not @ubuntu.com, IIRC
20:36:38 <micahg> cnd: only if DEBEMAIL is set to an ubuntu dot come address
20:36:53 <micahg> oops..ubuntu.com
20:37:12 <cnd> hmm? DEBEMAIL is used for the changelog entry
20:37:25 <bdrung> yes if you use dch
20:37:50 <bregma> I do not believe I've used my ubuntu.com mail address for anything except mailing list subscriptions any way
20:37:56 <bdrung> every question asked?
20:38:10 <tumbleweed> bregma: I see you've touched packages outside the packageset you are applying for
20:38:25 <tumbleweed> are you intending to apply for MOTU at some point?
20:38:43 <bregma> some day
20:38:57 <micahg> bregma: is there a reason you've only had one sponsor and therefore one endoresement?
20:39:15 <micahg> *for the utouch stuff at least
20:39:20 <tumbleweed> micahg: I've sponsored uploads for bregma too
20:39:32 <micahg> tumbleweed: yes, but you haven't commented on the APP
20:39:51 <micahg> even as a character witness
20:39:52 * tumbleweed tends to comment when asked. I was replying to "one sponsor"
20:39:55 <cnd> micahg, for the utouch package set, the number of people available to sponsor is small
20:40:16 <micahg> cnd: core devs can sponsor as can MOTUs depending on the package
20:40:33 <bregma> I've had several sponsors, I just feel really uncomfortable asking for an endorsement
20:40:50 <cnd> yes, I understand, it just seems like the criteria should be lower for ppu
20:41:06 <bregma> there's room in Ubuntu for the less social, too
20:41:17 <tumbleweed> heh
20:41:46 <cnd> tbh, I'm tired of sponsoring bregma's uploads :)
20:41:58 <cnd> he's quite capable
20:42:02 <micahg> indeed, for one package I might agree, but for a set, I would think that there should be multiple people reviewing their work before agreeing
20:42:19 * tumbleweed sees that he had no problem's with bregma's uploads either (2 sponsorships). They were in perfect shape
20:42:37 <tumbleweed> but I wouldn't endorse from two uploads
20:42:48 <cnd> there's only one person who uploads utouch packages outside of abnormal cases
20:42:50 <bdrung> tumbleweed: even for a package set?
20:43:07 <micahg> bregma: right, but part of uploading is knowing when to ask others and being able to ask others is important
20:43:26 <cnd> and that person endorses bregma to add to the pool :)
20:45:00 <tumbleweed> bdrung: yeah, I'd probably have left a comment
20:45:10 <bdrung> are we are ready to vote or do we need more time to discuss this topic?
20:45:39 <tumbleweed> ready
20:45:50 * stgraber too
20:45:56 <micahg> ready
20:46:17 <bdrung> [VOTE] Should Stephen M. Webb get upload rights for the uTouch package set?
20:46:17 <meetingology> Please vote on: Should Stephen M. Webb get upload rights for the uTouch package set?
20:46:17 <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me)
20:47:33 <tumbleweed> +1
20:47:33 <meetingology> +1 received from tumbleweed
20:48:19 <bdrung> +1 but more than one endorsement would be better
20:48:19 <meetingology> +1 but more than one endorsement would be better received from bdrung
20:48:34 <stgraber> +1
20:48:34 <meetingology> +1 received from stgraber
20:48:38 <geser> +1
20:48:38 <meetingology> +1 received from geser
20:48:43 <micahg> +0 the work itself seems fine and there have been no quick uploads subsequently to fix issues, but I'm concerned about communication with others, it's not just about being social, but about peer review as well, even comments by other sponsors would have been helpful
20:48:43 <meetingology> +0 the work itself seems fine and there have been no quick uploads subsequently to fix issues, but I'm concerned about communication with others, it's not just about being social, but about peer review as well, even comments by other sponsors would have been helpful received from micahg
20:49:05 <bdrung> [ENDVOTE]
20:49:05 <meetingology> Voting ended on: Should Stephen M. Webb get upload rights for the uTouch package set?
20:49:05 <meetingology> Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:1
20:49:05 <meetingology> Motion carried
20:49:26 <bdrung> bregma: congrats.
20:49:32 <micahg> bregma: congrats
20:49:55 <cnd> thanks all!
20:50:08 <bdrung> bregma: for your next application i recommend to take micahg's voting comment to heart
20:50:09 <bregma> thank you
20:50:24 <bdrung> #endmeeting