17:00:48 <astraljava> #startmeeting Ubuntu Studio collaborator meeting
17:00:48 <meetingology> Meeting started Sun Nov  6 17:00:48 2011 UTC.  The chair is astraljava. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot.
17:00:48 <meetingology> 
17:00:48 <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
17:00:56 <astraljava> Hello everybody.
17:01:07 <astraljava> Who's with us today?
17:01:08 <scott-upstairs> hello astraljava
17:01:10 <scott-upstairs> i am here
17:01:15 <stochastic> Hi
17:01:27 <stochastic> can't stay too long
17:01:28 <scott-upstairs> holstein and falktx said they would not be present today
17:01:44 <astraljava> Right, okay. Do we have an agenda?
17:01:45 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, how much time, do you have preferred topics to discuss now
17:01:54 <scott-upstairs> agend:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Meetings/2011September4
17:01:56 <scott-upstairs> agenda
17:02:20 <stochastic> just the sooner I get on the road today the happier I will be, preferably no more than 30min
17:02:21 <astraljava> Same as from the last one?
17:02:33 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, ack
17:02:44 <astraljava> Ok. What are the most important topics, Scott?
17:02:55 <scott-upstairs> astraljava, no, i unfortunately updated the wrong one (i.e. sept)
17:03:04 <astraljava> Ahh... okay, that's fine.
17:03:22 <scott-upstairs> so the agenda in the link is correct in scope, just not on the right wiki, i will resolve that after the meeting
17:03:45 <scott-upstairs> okay, i won't bother reading the old business in the meeting
17:04:07 <scott-upstairs> i will quickly explain the new development process for the ubuntu studio team
17:04:16 <scott-upstairs> we will be actively involved with the release planning team this cycle
17:04:21 <astraljava> #topic New development process
17:04:37 <scott-upstairs> we will collate a group of tasks we want into blueprints within launchpad
17:04:51 <scott-upstairs> kate stewart, the release manager, will approve them as she sees fit
17:05:20 <scott-upstairs> our progress will then be tracked on the status.ubuntu.com site
17:05:34 <scott-upstairs> if anyone has questions how this works, please let me know outside the meeting
17:05:42 <scott-upstairs> 
17:05:47 <astraljava> Sounds good, thanks.
17:05:51 <scott-upstairs> this is good because it forces us to be organized
17:06:12 <scott-upstairs> but it also holds us accountable as our progress (or lack of) will be extremely public
17:06:31 <scott-upstairs> but this also gives us a forum for resolution if someone is blocking us this cycle
17:06:35 <astraljava> That is true.
17:06:39 <scott-upstairs> done
17:06:52 <astraljava> Ok, any comments/questions regarding this topic?
17:07:24 <stochastic> just want to say that I'd love a step-by-step e-mail to be sent to the dev list regarding the process if that's possible
17:07:37 <stochastic> i.e. how do I get task x approved etc..
17:08:00 <stochastic> keep everyone in the loop
17:08:16 <astraljava> Sure, we can work something out, right Scott?
17:08:17 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, i can do that, but i should point out that this is something done only at the beginning of the cycle (i.e. getting blueprints approved)
17:08:26 <stochastic> okay
17:08:49 <scott-upstairs> i should probably also note this in a wiki somewhere, i'll work on that too
17:09:01 <scott-upstairs> i'm good
17:09:13 <astraljava> #action Scott document devel process in the wiki
17:09:13 * meetingology Scott document devel process in the wiki
17:09:22 <astraljava> #topic Release planning for Precise
17:09:37 <scott-upstairs> has anyone NOT looked at the release planning wiki?
17:10:03 <scott-upstairs> i don't want to over commit the team
17:10:06 <scott-upstairs> hi shnatsel
17:10:17 <shnatsel> hi scott-upstairs
17:10:24 <scott-upstairs> so i wanted to make sure that people agree with what is preliminarily planned
17:10:38 <stochastic> I like the scope of the release plan
17:11:01 <scott-upstairs> thank you starcraftman
17:11:04 <scott-upstairs> stochastic,
17:11:06 <astraljava> Yeah it shouldn't be impossible.
17:11:08 <scott-upstairs> sorry, starcraftman
17:11:45 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, any opinion on the scope of precise release planning https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/ReleasePlanning
17:12:23 <scott-upstairs> i think most of the tasks already have people (mainly me) associated with them, so we will be asking people to commit as well
17:12:44 <astraljava> We can't just do it now, as there's not many in here.
17:12:55 <stochastic> I just wanted to briefly mention that I'd like to revisit the concept of putting a 'documentation' link on the desktop.
17:13:14 <astraljava> So I suppose we will ask people to assign themselves due some time?
17:13:18 <stochastic> This can fit under UI redesign and I'd be happy to help with that task in general
17:13:29 <scott-upstairs> astraljava, i agree, we don't need to assign everything today, just getting the agreement on the scope was enough to move forward with the release team
17:13:41 <astraljava> Ok.
17:14:10 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, there are several items for "new users" i would like to address as well, but unless they are liminted in scope or studid-simple i was planning on deferring them to later
17:14:20 <scott-upstairs> you can see them in the release planning page as well
17:14:29 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: I want more graphics apps. The doc is large, needs thinking.
17:14:44 <scott-upstairs> starcraftman, look under precise+1 -> new user support
17:14:56 <stochastic> quit it with the starcraftman
17:15:06 <stochastic> I see thanks
17:15:11 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: popups tend to not work usually
17:15:14 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, sorry again
17:15:19 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: they're too intrusive
17:15:39 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, that is just brainstorming, i expect others have better methods to accomplish the goals ;)
17:15:54 <astraljava> Yes, agreed.
17:15:56 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: also, you'll need the support to be somewhat localized... and adding bookmarks to firefox doesn't work, I've tried that.
17:15:58 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, also, we can certainly explore more graphic applications
17:16:17 <scott-upstairs> hi JonReagan
17:16:40 <scott-upstairs> as long as everyone is okay with the scope of precise development then we can discuss the particulars later
17:16:52 <stochastic> yup
17:16:53 <JonReagan> hello Scott  :)  Sorry I'm a bit late
17:16:55 <astraljava> Ok, anything else regarding this topic?
17:17:00 <shnatsel> astraljava: yes
17:17:19 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: when are you going to introduce workflows in the installer instead of broad categories? 12.10?
17:17:19 <astraljava> Go ahead.
17:17:34 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, that is the next topic actually ;)
17:17:39 <scott-upstairs> but it will be this cycle
17:17:41 <astraljava> Yes, thank you. :)
17:17:44 <shnatsel> ah :D
17:17:46 <shnatsel> great!
17:17:58 <astraljava> #topic Updating seeds based on workflows
17:18:02 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: why it's not in the planning doc then?
17:18:29 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, part of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/ReleasePlanning#live_dvd
17:18:40 <scott-upstairs> i'll explain a bit for those not familiar
17:19:18 <scott-upstairs> our goals is to do something similar to what tasksel did during the alternate installation where users could pick certain package sets to install or not install
17:19:37 <scott-upstairs> however, going to the live dvd will will use a GUI method that edubuntu is currently using
17:19:49 <scott-upstairs> and we will base this on work flows, instead of just broad categories
17:20:23 <scott-upstairs> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntustudio/+spec/livedvd has more resources
17:20:26 <scott-upstairs> 
17:20:40 <astraljava> Thanks. Comments/questions?
17:20:51 <shnatsel> do we need the alternate image at all?
17:20:52 <scott-upstairs> the exact work flows do not have to be decided this meeting but hopefully we can decide _which_ work flows we will support
17:20:59 <JonReagan> Ah, workflows meaning packages that would pertain to what people want to do with their system?
17:21:05 <scott-upstairs> if not the exact contents of each work flow
17:21:20 <shnatsel> JonReagan: yes, see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Workflows
17:21:22 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, i believe we should not make an alternate dvd
17:21:31 <scott-upstairs> err, alternate image
17:21:52 <shnatsel> I think so too
17:22:08 <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, rather than make a large cache of audio applications we want to support a smaller, less intrusive package set based on a smaller granularity
17:22:15 <scott-upstairs> we will targe what people actually want to accomplish
17:22:22 <scott-upstairs> rather than a broad generalized term
17:22:26 <JonReagan> gotcha, that makes a lot of sense
17:23:14 <scott-upstairs> everyone can see what is listed for the work flows at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/ReleasePlanning#live_dvd
17:23:29 <scott-upstairs> i'll send out an email to the list to solicit peoples opinions so we can make a decision next week
17:23:36 <astraljava> I'll just have a comment on this; let's not get carried away and add too many of those. This is going to be supported for 3 years.
17:23:49 <scott-upstairs> aye!  very, very good point
17:23:49 <shnatsel> astraljava: 5 years?
17:23:58 <scott-upstairs> this LTS is supported for 5 years
17:23:58 <astraljava> shnatsel: No, that's just server edition.
17:24:02 <astraljava> Really?
17:24:05 <astraljava> All of it?
17:24:09 <scott-upstairs> astraljava, they have changed policy during uds
17:24:17 <astraljava> Holy c**p.
17:24:27 <scott-upstairs> they are trying to embrace corporations more
17:24:38 <astraljava> I stand corrected.
17:24:43 <scott-upstairs> we'll see where it goes and adjust later
17:24:46 <astraljava> Even more so.
17:25:08 <scott-upstairs> astraljava's point still remains, we should ease into this (even if it wasn't an LTS)
17:25:19 <scott-upstairs> and we still have the opportunity to adjust next cycle if we want to add something
17:25:27 <scott-upstairs> and backport back to precise if we feel something is worth it
17:25:38 <astraljava> Yep, thanks.
17:25:46 <scott-upstairs> so i am strongly suggesting we are cautious and prudent
17:26:05 <scott-upstairs> any further comments or questions at this time?
17:26:19 <shnatsel> now postponing workflows to 12.10 sounds like a good idea
17:26:29 <scott-upstairs> astraljava, can you make the bot recognize i should email the list about work flows?
17:26:37 <shnatsel> can we really develop and polish them in a cycle?
17:26:52 <astraljava> #action Scott to email lists regarding work flows
17:26:52 * meetingology Scott to email lists regarding work flows
17:26:53 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, do you really want to?  i would think getting the process established now would be good
17:27:14 <scott-upstairs> we can continue refining the work flows each cycle as needed then
17:27:31 <astraljava> I agree, this one is going to be present for a long time. Better include it now.
17:27:40 <shnatsel> I'm neutral on this.
17:27:47 <scott-upstairs> as long as we can give at least the same functionality as we did with the alternate cd i don't see a downside at this point
17:27:51 <stochastic> essentially the concept between selecting workflows and selecting a bunch of software bundles is the same, we just label and organize them slightly differently?
17:28:08 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, from the user perspective, i would say yes
17:28:31 <stochastic> okay, but we'd be re-arranging packaging from the dev perspective?
17:28:38 <shnatsel> stochastic: from dev perspective also
17:28:50 <shnatsel> stochastic: just requires much more fine-grained selection
17:28:50 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, i would say yes again
17:29:06 <astraljava> What does that mean exactly?
17:29:53 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, but i would describe it more as we are re-arranging the package sets but not really the packaging
17:30:02 <scott-upstairs> astraljava, which part are you asking about?
17:30:03 <stochastic> well I think it is a do-able concept with very few modifications required.  The largest problem will be selecting the ideal workflows to include - that's a big list.
17:30:20 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, agreed!  this is one reason to focus small on this set
17:30:21 <astraljava> Re-arranging packaging from dev perspective?
17:30:36 <scott-upstairs> also, not all work flows are a) complete or b) desired
17:30:51 <scott-upstairs> we should consider if we feel a large group of users actually desire a work flow
17:31:02 <stochastic> astraljava, we'd be heavily adjusting the content/labelling of the meta packages
17:31:24 <astraljava> Ok.
17:32:06 <scott-upstairs> any further comments or questions?
17:32:10 <stochastic> yes, this is a task best handled by a committee I think
17:32:20 <scott-upstairs> agreed!  oh, i defintely agree!
17:32:22 <stochastic> but done for 12.04
17:32:22 <JonReagan> +1 on that
17:33:05 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, please keep in mind we only need to decide _which_ work flows soon, not just _what_ exactly is in each one
17:33:11 <scott-upstairs> this may seem strange, but hear me out
17:33:21 <scott-upstairs> i think we should look at what the users want to do
17:33:22 <stochastic> yes, true
17:33:35 <JonReagan> would this mean some sort of survey?
17:33:36 <scott-upstairs> if we think we can support it, then we can consider it for inclusion
17:33:48 <scott-upstairs> then later we can fine tune the contents of the ones we will support
17:34:16 <scott-upstairs> obvsiously we WILL need to examine the contents first if we are not sure we can support it properly before deciding about inclusion
17:34:36 <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, it could, but perhaps we should discuss that in the next meeting
17:35:13 <scott-upstairs> i would be completely open to a meeting of anyone interested to discuss these things outside of this meeting
17:35:35 <astraljava> #action Have a separate meeting for work flows discussion
17:35:35 * meetingology Have a separate meeting for work flows discussion
17:35:45 <scott-upstairs> who would be interested in such a meeting?
17:35:47 <scott-upstairs> i would
17:35:49 <astraljava> o/
17:35:49 <stochastic> aie
17:36:02 <scott-upstairs> i'm sure holstein would be as well
17:36:04 <JonReagan> I'd be interested for sure
17:36:14 <scott-upstairs> good :)  basically everyone
17:36:30 <shnatsel> probably me too
17:36:37 <scott-upstairs> i can send out an email to coordinate times then
17:36:50 <scott-upstairs> is this a good time for almost everyone?  earlier?  later?
17:36:52 <astraljava> We just don't have everyone here, so we'll throw some suggestions for times on the -devel channel and mailing list later?
17:37:04 <astraljava> Ahh, one step ahead of me, sorry.
17:37:26 <stochastic> good time, but depends on the week as to if this day is free for me
17:37:32 <scott-upstairs> would someone else but me email the list for this purpose, i have enough tasks already
17:37:36 <astraljava> Good time for me.
17:37:48 <astraljava> I can do that.
17:37:48 <JonReagan> sure, I could send out an email
17:37:57 <astraljava> Oh okay, Jon, go ahead.
17:38:33 <astraljava> Moving on?
17:38:35 <scott-upstairs> is it okay if we move on?
17:38:36 <scott-upstairs> hehe
17:38:36 * stochastic needs to be leaving soon
17:38:43 <astraljava> #topic Meeting schedule
17:38:53 <JonReagan> Alrighty then.  What should be said?  Need a meeting to discuss workflows, ask for which time works best on Sunday?
17:38:57 <scott-upstairs> i have a few questions about making our meetings more effective
17:39:08 <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, stochastic needs to leave, can you and i coordinate after this meeting?
17:39:17 <JonReagan> absolutely
17:39:18 <scott-upstairs> how often should we have meetings?
17:39:35 <scott-upstairs> should we alternate times between meetings for our european friends?
17:39:39 <stochastic> bi-weekly or weekly would be good for informal, monthly for formal team meeting?
17:39:45 <scott-upstairs> should have stagger meetings with "informal" meetings in between?
17:40:02 <astraljava> I'm good for weekly.
17:40:09 <astraljava> Whatever the formality.
17:40:13 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, would you suggest using a regular time for the "informal" meetings?
17:40:34 <scott-upstairs> not asking you to actually suggest a time right now, just qualify if you think we _should_ use a regular time
17:40:45 <stochastic> yes, a set hour where it's generally anticipated that people would be around
17:40:47 <scott-upstairs> i have opinions but don't want to bias the group
17:40:48 <shnatsel> bi-weekly preferred here (I'm ok with not attending half of meetings, though, and you're probably OK with me missing too)
17:41:07 <scott-upstairs> lol shnatsel , you are important man!
17:41:15 <scott-upstairs> but i understand as well
17:41:24 <JonReagan> I'd be up for weekly meetings, we have an awful lot to do before the next release
17:41:36 <astraljava> Agreed.
17:41:57 <scott-upstairs> the general consensus i'm seeing is weekly meetings, but perhaps alternating "formal" and "informal"?
17:42:08 <shnatsel> weekly will definitely make the dev process more lively.
17:42:10 <scott-upstairs> both using an agreed time?
17:42:27 <JonReagan> for predictability, I'd say yes
17:42:34 <astraljava> Preferably, but subject to change if necessary.
17:42:40 <JonReagan> agreed
17:43:07 <stochastic> to explain 'formal' and 'informal' I think one would be in here, logged, with an agenda, the other, in -dev with minimal agenda
17:43:11 <scott-upstairs> perhaps we alternate times between week#1 and week#3 for the "formal meeting" and the same for #2 and #4 for "informal"?
17:43:23 <astraljava> Sounds good to me.
17:43:24 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, +1
17:43:55 <scott-upstairs> okay, let's go with that and we can make changes as necessary as astraljava and stochastic are saying
17:44:10 <scott-upstairs> any other comments or questions?
17:44:20 <stochastic> I really feel formal will only be needed monthly, but that's just a minor technicality that can be adjusted later
17:44:27 <astraljava> #action Move to bi-weekly formal and informal meetings alternating
17:44:27 * meetingology Move to bi-weekly formal and informal meetings alternating
17:44:34 <scott-upstairs> astraljava, what was that sign you suggested to let the chair know we are done with a topic?
17:44:37 <scott-upstairs> was it '..'
17:44:39 <scott-upstairs> i.e.
17:44:40 <scott-upstairs> ..
17:44:45 <astraljava> Yes, that would be good.
17:45:05 <astraljava> And asking for voices with o/ while someone is talking?
17:45:11 <astraljava> As in not interrupting the talk.
17:45:12 <scott-upstairs> if we can use .. to help the chair know when to move to the next topic, that would help the meeting progress
17:45:35 <scott-upstairs> okay, i didn't know that one :)
17:45:45 <scott-upstairs> everyone okay moving to next topic?
17:45:48 <astraljava> It helps to keep the talk coherent.
17:45:52 <stochastic> yup
17:46:02 <astraljava> #topic Other business
17:46:09 <scott-upstairs> i have no other business
17:46:19 <astraljava> Me neither.
17:46:36 <stochastic> I'd just like to say one brief thing
17:47:17 <stochastic> In the coming days it'd be nice if the devs could ponder how much social interaction they'd feel comfortable with on the new website.
17:47:45 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, would you be up to emailing the -dev list about this?
17:47:51 <stochastic> yes
17:48:00 <stochastic> will do
17:48:06 <scott-upstairs> this would be a good forum to aggregate opinions i think
17:48:12 <scott-upstairs> err, that would be
17:48:21 <scott-upstairs> ..
17:48:22 <stochastic> for now, ponder away, I'm on vacation for a couple days
17:48:32 <scott-upstairs> enjoy your vacation :)
17:48:48 <scott-upstairs> next topic?
17:48:50 <astraljava> #topic Next meeting
17:48:54 <scott-upstairs> oi :)
17:49:07 <scott-upstairs> okay, sounds like we will meet "formally" in two weeks
17:49:21 <scott-upstairs> same bat channel, same bat time?  (american joke)
17:49:35 <stochastic> sure
17:49:40 <astraljava> So according to the decision today, we shall meet formally here on 2011.11.20 1700 UTC
17:49:44 <stochastic> I might not make that meeting
17:50:01 <scott-upstairs> stochastic, should we reschedule the time?
17:50:06 <scott-upstairs> move it ahead a day?
17:50:10 <JonReagan> haha, that would work for me.  you mentioned earlier perhaps finding a time that would work for both europe and in the US?
17:50:25 <astraljava> And informally on #ubuntustudio-devel on 2011.11.13 1700 UTC, unless otherwise signalled.
17:50:33 <scott-upstairs> JonReagan, yes!  good point
17:50:41 <scott-upstairs> should the next "formal" meeting be euro friendly?
17:50:42 <stochastic> scott-upstairs, no need to move it, just uncertain schedule at this point
17:51:04 <scott-upstairs> perhaps move ahead 12 hours?
17:51:15 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, JonReagan, any suggestions?
17:51:27 * scott-upstairs is presuming that JonReagan is in a european time zone
17:51:30 <astraljava> That's gonna be 5 am. for me. Well, I can work it out.
17:51:40 <JonReagan> lol nope, I'm EST
17:51:50 <shnatsel> I'm GMT+4
17:52:12 <scott-upstairs> shnatsel, do you have a preference what we should do for the next meeting in two weeks?
17:52:21 <stochastic> either case would be fine for me 9am or 9pm
17:53:09 <stochastic> I like the idea of alternating, but I'm not sure how successful it will be :)
17:53:22 <astraljava> Let's have a voting on this later.
17:53:30 <astraljava> So we can wrap up here.
17:53:33 <shnatsel> scott-upstairs: last time I checked there was only one time that fits both european and american useras
17:53:36 <shnatsel> users
17:53:53 <shnatsel> I've found one, let me look it up...
17:54:01 <shnatsel> Asia is out ofc
17:54:23 * stochastic is out for now.  Will read the rest in meeting minutes
17:54:35 <stochastic> goodbye
17:54:40 <astraljava> Bye.
17:54:44 <scott-upstairs> bye stochastic ,enjoy the vacation :)
17:55:25 <scott-upstairs> i actually need to go as well, JonReagan can you email me about what we were going to work on together or catch me later this afternoon in IRC?
17:55:35 <scott-upstairs> poof
17:56:18 <astraljava> #action Decide alternating meeting times on channel/mailing list later
17:56:18 * meetingology Decide alternating meeting times on channel/mailing list later
17:56:27 <astraljava> #endmeeting