21:01:08 <stgraber> #startmeeting
21:01:08 <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Apr  2 21:01:08 2012 UTC.  The chair is stgraber. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
21:01:08 <meetingology> 
21:01:08 <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
21:01:22 <stgraber> #topic Action review
21:01:43 <stgraber> soren: what's the status of "Soren agreed to send mail regarding meeting time changes from the prior meeting."?
21:01:55 <soren> Hm.
21:02:12 <soren> I don't think I ever got around to doing that, I'm afraid.
21:02:40 <stgraber> ok, I'll keep that one in the list then
21:02:42 <soren> Sorry, refresh my memory. We did agree to keep the UTC time, right?
21:03:04 <soren> So the e-mail was to share that decision with anyone else following the list?
21:03:05 <cjwatson> I believe so
21:03:18 <stgraber> yeah, I think the idea was to wait for everyone to be on DST (now done) and see if that works, if it does, then stay on UTC
21:03:37 <soren> Cool.
21:04:28 <stgraber> #topic ubuntu studio LTS status for 12.04
21:04:36 <stgraber> scott-work: hello
21:04:49 <scott-work> hello stgraber
21:05:01 <scott-work> et al
21:05:24 <stgraber> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/12.04/LTS-Proposal
21:06:24 <cjwatson> this is looking better-fleshed-out this time, thanks
21:08:17 <scott-work> i had some help :)
21:08:18 <stgraber> soren: marking your action has done, thanks for the e-mail
21:08:38 <cjwatson> the CVE review doesn't look too bad, indeed
21:08:46 * soren tips his hat in stgraber's general direction
21:09:01 * scott-work wants to note that a lightning storm is moving in and he might lose connection
21:09:19 <cjwatson> libav-extra is the main source of recent CVEs, but I guess that many of those are probably carried over from libav
21:09:57 * kees is late but here now.
21:10:03 <cjwatson> 2008 clearly sucked for AV packages ;-)
21:10:10 <stgraber> kees: cool, so we actually have quorum now, thanks for joining!
21:11:32 * stgraber runs an extra germinate diff with kubuntu and edubuntu added, to see what's truely unique to ubuntu-studio
21:13:51 <stgraber> roughly getting an extra 40 source packages out of the list (that will have to be coordinated with the other flavours)
21:14:22 <stgraber> so that's (if my script is correct) the list of source packages that are only shipped by ubuntu-studio: http://paste.ubuntu.com/912067/
21:14:33 <stgraber> and that's the same list but only for these with ubuntu delta: http://paste.ubuntu.com/912068/
21:15:02 <cjwatson> I think I'm OK with this at this point
21:15:33 <cjwatson> nothing is jumping out at me as obviously unsuitable, and the US team is clearly dedicated
21:15:40 <stgraber> the only scary thing I see in the list is linux-lowlatency
21:16:14 <stgraber> but I must admit not being too familiar with the delta between our standard kernel and linux-lowlatency
21:17:00 <cjwatson> that one did get explicitly discussed and agreed
21:17:12 <scott-work> stgraber:  it is very close the the -generic kernel and does not require the invasive patch ala -rt kernel
21:17:18 <stgraber> cool
21:17:20 * kees nods
21:17:29 <stgraber> are there any plan to make lowlatency variants of the LTS backport kernels?
21:17:30 <cjwatson> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-lowlatency
21:17:49 <scott-work> stgraber: i am unaware of any plans
21:18:34 <scott-work> at least at the current time
21:19:16 <stgraber> ok, any other question or are we ready to vote?
21:20:08 <soren> I have no further questions.
21:21:53 <stgraber> #startvote Ubuntu Studio 3 years LTS for 12.04
21:22:00 <stgraber> #vote Ubuntu Studio 3 years LTS for 12.04
21:22:00 <meetingology> Please vote on: Ubuntu Studio 3 years LTS for 12.04
21:22:00 <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)
21:22:16 <cjwatson> +1
21:22:16 <meetingology> +1 received from cjwatson
21:22:19 <stgraber> +1
21:22:19 <meetingology> +1 received from stgraber
21:22:21 <soren> +1
21:22:21 <meetingology> +1 received from soren
21:23:33 <kees> +1
21:23:33 <meetingology> +1 received from kees
21:23:58 <stgraber> #envote
21:24:00 <stgraber> #endvote
21:24:00 <meetingology> Voting ended on: Ubuntu Studio 3 years LTS for 12.04
21:24:00 <meetingology> Votes for:4 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
21:24:00 <meetingology> Motion carried
21:24:18 <stgraber> good, one more LTS flavour ;)
21:24:25 <scott-work> thank you :)
21:24:37 <micahg> o/
21:24:39 <cjwatson> thank *you*, you're the one who just signed up for a bunch of work ;-
21:24:41 <cjwatson> ;-)
21:24:50 <cjwatson> micahg: ?
21:25:26 <micahg> just wanted to point out libav-extra has been folded into libav, but I guess it's not applicable for the LTS as well that next cycle it's likely to drop to universe, but again not relevant, sorry
21:26:03 <cjwatson> I guess it'll just mean less work overall?
21:26:04 <micahg> and libav-extra is usually uploaded in concert with libav by the security-team
21:26:36 <stgraber> good to know
21:26:39 <micahg> well, it'll be more work in 12.10 as the security team won't be supporting it anymore, but in 12.04 it's fine
21:27:05 <cjwatson> ah, I see
21:27:07 <cjwatson> OK
21:27:28 <stgraber> Riddell: ping
21:27:30 <micahg> it's still separate sources in precise
21:27:32 <Riddell> hi
21:27:38 <stgraber> #topic Kubuntu Future
21:27:49 * ScottK looks up.
21:27:56 <Riddell> as you'll know canonical doesn't want to support kubuntu in future
21:28:14 <Riddell> so I wanted to check the tech board was fine to have an ubuntu flavour sponsored by other companies
21:28:25 <Riddell> I know it's not an especially techy question
21:28:49 <Riddell> but if e.g. we had to change name because canonical didn't want it sponsored by other companies it would need tech board support
21:29:22 <Riddell> ..
21:29:30 <cjwatson> We're fine having flavours not sponsored by Canonical, so I don't see why another company would be a problem if it were working within Ubuntu community processes
21:30:02 <cjwatson> Has anyone suggested that it might be a problem?
21:30:06 <Riddell> yes we'd certainly want to be within the ubuntu project properly
21:30:08 <kees> yeah, I can't imagine a problem with this.
21:30:28 <ScottK> I think Riddell is checking in advance out of an abundance of caution.
21:30:38 <Riddell> yes
21:31:14 <cjwatson> Non-Canonical corporate investment in Ubuntu seems like the kind of thing we should welcome with open arms, TBH
21:31:27 <cjwatson> I can't speak for trademark issues, that's above my pay grade :)
21:31:48 <Riddell> lovely thanks, that's all I wanted
21:32:08 <cjwatson> (Is this actively on the cards, or is it checking in advance - or can you not say right now?)
21:32:30 <Riddell> there's various companies who have contacted me to go "waa we depend on kubuntu, how can we help"
21:32:38 <Riddell> so maybe
21:32:56 <stgraber> the other flavours have been running for years without Canonical sponsorship (outside of the base infrastructure) and I don't see much difference between having some funding coming from another company vs community funding/resources
21:33:03 <soren> Sorry, I've completely missed this. Where has this decision been published?
21:33:22 <Riddell> soren: canonical not supporting kubuntu?
21:33:29 <soren> I guess I don't pay much attention to Kubuntu "forums" (in the broadest possible sense of "forums")
21:33:33 <soren> Riddell: Yes.
21:33:42 <Riddell> don't you follow the #riddell hashtag on twitter?!
21:33:48 <soren> No.
21:33:49 <Riddell> I'm insulted
21:33:52 <Riddell> :)
21:33:52 <ScottK> Apparently not Jono's blog either.
21:33:54 <soren> Yo ushould be.
21:33:55 <cjwatson> soren: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2012-February/005782.html
21:34:00 <soren> I follow everyone but you.
21:34:03 <soren> :)
21:34:16 * soren hugs Riddell
21:35:24 <soren> ScottK: Perhaps not quite as religiously as some. :)
21:35:33 <ScottK> ;-)
21:36:13 <stgraber> FWIW there's also a list of what Canonical provides to all approved flavours here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RecognizedFlavors
21:37:04 <stgraber> I'm happy to have that wiki page extended with resources provided by other companies/individuals though edits to that page should probably be done by the TB
21:37:18 <cjwatson> makes sense
21:37:45 <cjwatson> although maybe links to a separate page unless they're resources committed for flavours in general rather than for a single flavour
21:38:02 <stgraber> I probably should add myself to that list as I'm providing daily upgrade testing for all flavours that have a profile defined in update-manager
21:38:18 <stgraber> cjwatson: indeed, makes sense
21:39:19 <stgraber> Riddell: anything else on this topic?
21:39:27 <Riddell> not from me thanks
21:39:49 <stgraber> #topic Select a chair for the next meeting
21:40:02 <stgraber> everyone happy to let mdz chair the next one?
21:40:12 <kees> sure
21:40:14 <soren> Sure.
21:40:20 <soren> stgraber: Thanks for stepping up this time!
21:40:28 <stgraber> soren: np
21:40:39 <stgraber> #topic AOB
21:40:41 <stgraber> anything?
21:40:48 <kees> nothing from me
21:40:52 <soren> nope
21:41:31 <stgraber> ok, thanks everyone for attending
21:41:32 <cjwatson> nor I
21:41:34 <stgraber> #endmeeting