#title #ubuntu-meeting Meeting Meeting started by AlanBell at 18:03:05 UTC. The full logs are available at http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-02-26-18.03.log.html . == Meeting summary == ''LINK:'' https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda (funkyHat, 18:03:55) *Review last meetings action items *AlanBell to sort out fridge calendar entries (AlanBell, 18:06:01) *AlanBell to mail the list asking for help to add ban timeout removal to ubottu (AlanBell, 18:06:29) *Open items in the IRCC tracker *Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council *bug 788503 IRC Guidelines too #ubuntu centric - tsimpson (AlanBell, 18:10:52) ''LINK:'' http://ubottu.com/factoids.cgi?db=ubuntu&search=&order=popularity%20DESC&page=0 popular factoids (AlanBell, 18:18:44) ''ACTION:'' Pici to send mail to the list about the guidelines document to encourage edits and fixes to the FIXMEs (AlanBell, 18:21:24) *bug 884671 Ubuntu IRC operator recruitment is slow and ungainly - jussi (AlanBell, 18:21:53) ''LINK:'' http://paste.ubuntu.com/847836/ (funkyHat, 18:27:49) *bug 892500 eir is still not fit for purpose in #ubuntu -ikonia (AlanBell, 18:34:03) *bug 913541 there are a number of people with Ubuntu IRC cloaks who have expired from the ubuntumembers group - AlanBell (AlanBell, 18:34:33) ''ACTION:'' Pici to work on the list of expired members (AlanBell, 18:35:36) *bug 916247 devel wiki on ubottu.com needs some attention - AlanBell (AlanBell, 18:36:57) *Why would we allow recommending PPA's in a support channel? Background - oCean *Support in -offtopic? Background - oCean ''LINK:'' http://paste.ubuntu.com/858209/ (AlanBell, 19:08:24) ''ACTION:'' oCean to edit the guide to add advice on support questions in -offtopic (AlanBell, 19:34:35) *Ops applications from existing ops - Alan Bell *Supporters Guide document - Alan Bell ''LINK:'' https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/SupportersGuide (AlanBell, 19:35:54) *Any Other Business Meeting ended at 19:41:15 UTC. == Votes == * channel op applications from existing operators should be processed as and when they are received and the existing applications should be processed without further delay For: 3 Against: 0 Abstained: 0 * set a new policy to ask helpers to not recommend PPAs in #ubuntu For: 0 Against: 3 Abstained: 0 == Action items == * Pici to send mail to the list about the guidelines document to encourage edits and fixes to the FIXMEs * Pici to work on the list of expired members * oCean to edit the guide to add advice on support questions in -offtopic == Action items, by person == * oCean ** oCean to edit the guide to add advice on support questions in -offtopic * Pici ** Pici to send mail to the list about the guidelines document to encourage edits and fixes to the FIXMEs ** Pici to work on the list of expired members == People present (lines said) == * AlanBell (123) * Pici (59) * oCean (36) * LjL (35) * ikonia (33) * Myrtti (32) * popey (32) * bazhang (25) * h00k (25) * meetingology (23) * Tm_T (18) * funkyHat (15) * tsimpson (10) * Silverlion (10) * ubottu (8) * phillw (4) * pangolin (1) == Full Log == 18:03:05 #startmeeting 18:03:05 Meeting started Sun Feb 26 18:03:05 2012 UTC. The chair is AlanBell. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 18:03:05 18:03:05 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 18:03:16 hi all, who is here for the IRCC/IRC team meeting? 18:03:21 o/ 18:03:21 Howdy! 18:03:25 hello 18:03:26 hi 18:03:39 Could someone paste the agenda? I don't have my email handy on this computer. 18:03:39 ô/ 18:03:55 https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda 18:03:59 Thanks 18:04:04 _o/ 18:04:23 hey 18:04:59 ok, thanks for coming, lets get started then 18:05:06 #topic Review last meetings action items 18:05:21 hmm, sure there were some 18:05:39 hi 18:05:46 there were 18:06:01 #progress AlanBell to sort out fridge calendar entries 18:06:14 not done yet, will sort it before the next meeting 18:06:29 #progress AlanBell to mail the list asking for help to add ban timeout removal to ubottu 18:06:49 done, I mailed the list proposing a bots hack day for the global jam weekend 18:07:22 #topic Open items in the IRCC tracker 18:07:58 well we didn't raise an item in the tracker, but we are dealing with one issue where a user has made a complaint about a ban 18:08:15 any details? 18:08:38 it would have been a lot simpler if they had just gone to the -ops channel to get it resolved, it was quite routine 18:09:29 Oh. was this the issue raised to me in a /query? 18:09:41 no, don't think so h00k 18:10:06 They went outside the resolution process so we've just been talking to the ops that dealt with the user first. 18:10:37 ok, lets move on to bugs 18:10:39 #topic Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council 18:10:52 #subtopic bug 788503 IRC Guidelines too #ubuntu centric - tsimpson 18:10:53 Launchpad bug 788503 in ubuntu-community "IRC Guidelines too #ubuntu centric" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/788503 18:11:36 this is the one with a new draft here: http://notes.kde.org/ubuntuguidelines 18:11:58 they look pretty good to me, I think we need to wikify it and get it published 18:12:08 I think its making good progress myself 18:12:17 * h00k concurs 18:12:26 we might also review it a bit in light of the supporters guidelines that we were working on this week 18:12:59 would be nice to have them as a pair of documents that focus on different audiences 18:13:19 Agreed. 18:13:42 i think maybe we should put some of the more important factoids in the guidelines in addition, to me it seems sometimes the guidelines mention things that aren't an issue often, while those that are are relegated to factoids... 18:13:50 but that could easily turn into guideline-creep, so not sure 18:15:03 LjL: Do you have an example? 18:15:04 what would be a good next step on this, I want to do an #action item for it 18:15:56 Pici: well, for instance see !etiquette - the fact that we (well, i) felt the need to consolidate a few "good behavior" factoids into one comes close to a set of guidelines 18:17:53 * Silverlion agrees with LjL 18:17:55 Pici: maybe we should do it with method, i.e. grep and find which factoids are most often used, and if they're guideline-like factoids, include them 18:18:31 a common sense review of the factoids DB in general may be in order 18:18:33 Sounds doable 18:18:34 it's not been done for a while 18:18:35 doing things like trying to link to official wiki pages etc 18:18:44 http://ubottu.com/factoids.cgi?db=ubuntu&search=&order=popularity%20DESC&page=0 popular factoids 18:19:39 oh look, how convenient 18:19:46 anyhow, next steps? is it ready to go on the wiki? 18:20:08 well it can't be ready, there are still some "FIXME's" in it 18:20:09 that doesn't mean it can't be edited still, just gets edits at a slower pace and people can subscribe to updates 18:20:30 I think we should send out the whole thing to the list to enourage edits. 18:20:56 sounds good 18:20:56 the whole thing wiki, or as-is in the...multi-user-editor that I can't remember the name of? 18:21:24 #action Pici to send mail to the list about the guidelines document to encourage edits and fixes to the FIXMEs 18:21:24 * meetingology Pici to send mail to the list about the guidelines document to encourage edits and fixes to the FIXMEs 18:21:53 maybe it should be put on the wiki provisionally and an email sent out, that way it's probably easier to track changes than with the current "editpad"?= 18:21:53 #subtopic bug 884671 Ubuntu IRC operator recruitment is slow and ungainly - jussi 18:21:54 Launchpad bug 884671 in ubuntu-community "Ubuntu IRC operator recruitment is slow and ungainly" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/884671 18:22:01 h00k: whichever is more up-to-date. I'd prefer to keep things on the wiki though, I like seeing edits as the come in. 18:22:51 yes, lets put it on the wiki then. Etherpad is good for fast uncontrolled edits and drafting things, the wiki is good for more controlled edits 18:23:02 etherpad. that's it. 18:23:24 ok, IRC recruitment, I did some scripty things to look at the queues 18:26:00 bother, can't find the pastebin link I did, will have to run it again later 18:26:11 * Silverlion pays attention now as a recruit 18:26:20 unless anyone can find it in -ops-team from last week 18:26:30 * h00k checks 18:26:44 anyhow, I listed everyone in the queues, and highligted those who are existing operators 18:27:13 most of the existing ops who are in a queue are lined up for #ubuntu-server 18:27:34 I think we should just process all existing core ops applications for additional channels 18:27:35 I thought we processed that queue already? 18:27:49 http://paste.ubuntu.com/847836/ 18:27:54 AlanBell: http://paste.ubuntu.com/847836/ 18:28:03 d'aw. funkyHat wins. 18:28:13 * funkyHat does a dance 18:28:21 thats the one I was looking for, thanks 18:28:27 hold on, how do I read that 18:28:56 My method not so efficient. cat, grep > alan, cat grep paste, review. 18:29:02 so **** Team **** channel name marks a new channel, those under it are in the pending queue 18:29:09 Myrtti: If theres a !! in front of your nick then you're already an op somewhere. 18:29:14 !! marks someone already a member of an ops team somewhere 18:29:15 AlanBell: I am only a bot, please don't think I'm intelligent :) 18:29:30 silly ubottu 18:29:47 ah alright 18:30:02 I don't have any issues approving people who are already an op somewhere. 18:30:15 They're already vetted imo. 18:30:22 got me worried there for a few minutes, there's some nicks on those lists that I'd be worried about 18:30:34 nice way to raise my heartrate :-P 18:31:13 Myrtti: yeah, I am just proposing we do the !! ones without further delay 18:32:00 the rest I think we should do in batches to line up with training 18:32:04 Shall we vote on it? 18:32:11 yeah, lets 18:32:20 #voters AlanBell Pici funkyHat 18:32:20 Current voters: AlanBell Pici funkyHat 18:33:09 +1 18:33:11 #vote channel op applications from existing operators should be processed as and when they are received and the existing applications should be processed without further delay 18:33:11 Please vote on: channel op applications from existing operators should be processed as and when they are received and the existing applications should be processed without further delay 18:33:11 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) 18:33:18 +1 18:33:18 +1 received from AlanBell 18:33:19 Oops 18:33:20 +1 18:33:20 +1 received from funkyHat 18:33:23 +1 18:33:23 +1 received from Pici 18:33:24 you are just too fast today funkyHat 18:33:28 #endvote 18:33:28 Voting ended on: channel op applications from existing operators should be processed as and when they are received and the existing applications should be processed without further delay 18:33:28 Votes for:3 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 18:33:28 Motion carried 18:33:34 hehe 18:33:40 that was a close one. 18:33:51 :) 18:33:52 :P 18:34:03 #subtopic bug 892500 eir is still not fit for purpose in #ubuntu -ikonia 18:34:04 Launchpad bug 892500 in ubuntu-community "eir is still not fit for purpose in #ubuntu" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/892500 18:34:19 * Myrtti rubs her hands 18:34:23 yeah, we will be addressing that on the bot-jam day 18:34:33 #subtopic bug 913541 there are a number of people with Ubuntu IRC cloaks who have expired from the ubuntumembers group - AlanBell 18:34:34 mmm... robot jam 18:34:34 Launchpad bug 913541 in ubuntu-community "there are a number of people with Ubuntu IRC cloaks who have expired from the ubuntumembers group" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/913541 18:34:44 I have not done any more on this 18:34:59 I think some launchpad scripting could show us this quickly. 18:35:04 Pici: funkyHat: got some time to work on this? 18:35:11 Actually, I think someone might already have a script. 18:35:14 Pici: yes, we have the list 18:35:15 AlanBell: I'll take it. 18:35:36 #action Pici to work on the list of expired members 18:35:36 * meetingology Pici to work on the list of expired members 18:35:41 We just need someone to go throug it with a staffer? 18:35:50 Pici: too late, you've got it now 18:35:56 :D 18:36:00 s/someone/me/ 18:36:14 yeah, I did a few, you have to try to contact them, then get an unaffiliated cloak, or do a membership renewal as appropriate 18:36:57 #subtopic bug 916247 devel wiki on ubottu.com needs some attention - AlanBell 18:36:58 Launchpad bug 916247 in ubuntu-community "devel wiki on ubottu.com needs some attention" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/916247 18:37:35 this was despammed and locked down, we were going to transfer some of the content and close the wiki, just keeping the bug open whilst that happens, but it isn't a high priority 18:37:42 ok, that is the end of the bugs 18:38:07 #topic Why would we allow recommending PPA's in a support channel? Background - oCean 18:38:16 ok, oCean, you have the floor 18:38:22 Right, I already started at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/IRCteamproposal 18:39:26 In addition: I would prefer we would stop recommending PPA's altogether, instead of saying "recommend software sources in a logical order" as seen in the recent Supporters Guide 18:39:51 I like the idea of a ratings system for PPAs 18:39:56 Or we would still have these ambivalent situation where factoids and guides claim PPA's are not officially supported, but one can still go ahead, use any PPA, wreck their system, and use good time from helpers in the channels to get the PPA issues sorted 18:39:57 Me too 18:40:33 I really don't think we should put a blanket ban on PPAs. They are an important part of the ecosystem, and additionally, just like it's always been ok to suggest, say, compiling something from source - BUT ONLY AFTER pointing out its availability in repositories, if any, and ONLY WHILE giving appropriate disclaimers - I think it should be ok to suggest a PPA. It's bad to just "randomly recommend" a PPA, but that's another story. I don't think we should 18:40:34 be conflating the two. 18:40:35 some PPAs are supported, and #kubuntu will definitely still recommend some PPAs 18:40:42 I find it disappointing that PPAs are rejected en-masse and words like "wrecked" are being used about them 18:40:47 LjL: +1 18:41:01 popey: are you in #ubuntu a lot? 18:41:02 LjL: +1 18:41:02 +1 18:41:13 afk for short 18:41:24 oCean: what bearing does that have on the question? 18:41:47 popey: then you would notice that a large number of PPA's do wreck people's systems 18:41:57 it's not something I just came up with 18:42:19 Lets not make the mistake of saying that "since there are some bad PPAs that all PPAs are bad" 18:42:27 there are many PPAs that are not problematic 18:42:35 Pici, there are >10,000 active PPA's 18:42:36 It's true, PPAs can be very bad(tm), but there are some good PPAs that aren't problematic 18:42:45 many PPAs which are in fact maintained by the upstream developers, like unity for example 18:42:58 including the link to the PPA for gnome3 with the fact that a reinstall is the only way to fix was not a good idea 18:43:23 I very rarely use PPA's and it is impossible for me to know which PPA's are problematic and which are not. Even if upstream developers maintain them, they may not be well versed with packaging for Ubuntu... 18:43:50 alan@deep-thought:/etc/apt/sources.list.d$ ls -l *.list | wc -l 18:43:51 I just really, really hope that the rating system suggested by popeys bug is implemented soon 18:43:51 oCean, it's always possible for a helper to refuse helping someone if they feel they're wasting their time while doing that. I rather think we've been too strict with the "not supported" lately; even if a user "wrecked" their system by doing something unsupported, does that really entitle us to actively stop people from helping with that? 18:43:51 17 18:43:59 some of us use PPAs a lot and they dont break at all 18:44:24 popey: Those present are hardly a representative group of Ubuntu users. 18:44:27 popey: you know yourself WFM isn't a valid answer... 18:44:41 i was merely pointing out a counter position 18:44:50 based on some evidence of a long time ubuntu user 18:44:53 LjL: I know, sure I want to help them too, but I'd rather have them not install the PPA's at all 18:45:09 Please realize that PPA's are suggested _all the time_ 18:45:20 hourly 18:45:28 little under 1000 mentions of PPA's in the last 3 months for #u alone 18:45:36 and webupd8 is the top o the list 18:45:38 that's without ubottu's explaining what ppa is 18:45:47 oh, that place :( 18:45:47 I think we need to remind folks that PPAs don't receive the same amount of testing that packages in the repositories do. 18:45:54 oCean: the root of the problem is that the official repositories contain 30000 packages. That's a lot, but it's hardly enough for a lot of users. Some users simply need/want packages that aren't there. Are we going to instantly mark a system as "not supported" as soon as something not from the official repositories is installed? Isn't that a very "app store" mentality? 18:46:12 Pici: we need to do that, and we need to point it out to helpers who neglect to mention that. 18:46:24 Pici: but that's a long shot from *banning* them. 18:46:30 (the PPAs, not the users) 18:46:36 LjL: Agreed. A blanket ban on PPAs isn't going to a) work, or b) be followed 18:46:37 PPA have effectively turned Ubuntu into a rolling release distro 18:46:55 LjL: I realize that, and of course I use PPA's myself. But there is a difference, because I know how to use them, judge them etc 18:47:06 lets review a few factoids 18:47:08 !ppa 18:47:09 A Personal Package Archive (PPA) can provide alternate software not normally available in the offical Ubuntu repositories - Looking for a PPA? See https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+ppas - WARNING: PPAs are unsupported third-party packages, and you use them at your own risk. See also !addppa 18:47:14 !ppa-purge 18:47:14 To disable a PPA from your sources and revert your packages back to default Ubuntu packages, install ppa-purge and use the command: « sudo ppa-purge ppa:/ » – For more information, see http://www.webupd8.org/2009/12/remove-ppa-repositories-via-command.html 18:47:27 for reference, 18:47:29 oCean: so teach people who to use them and judge them, rather than use them yourself and reject the use for others 18:47:35 thats a very elitest attitude to have 18:47:36 oh, never mind, AlanBell beat me. 18:48:01 I heartily agree with popey and LjL here. 18:48:26 I just wish 11.04 would go EOL quicker 18:48:34 ^ this 18:48:41 no! 18:48:47 why 11.04? 18:48:57 Pici: that would still leave us with the ambivalence of saying "is not supported", but you can do what you like and ask for help again 18:48:58 Buggy unity? 18:49:04 Unity there is :( 18:49:30 because either people install it to use Gnome2, or then they use a PPA to install Gnome3 on it, and it breaks. 18:49:41 oCean: well, there are various levels of "not supported", and just making it black and white is simply impossible 18:49:52 oCean: Backports is an official thing, yet it's less supported than the main repos, for instance. 18:49:57 either way it's the fall-between-cracks version that is infinite source of pain 18:50:09 oCean: And? For the majority of people who use PPAs, the PPA that they've used isn't the issue that they've come to #ubuntu to have solved. 18:50:13 LjL: ok, I understand not everything is black and white, so we have to be more explicit in what the levels of support mean 18:50:15 well this is what I mean about pointing to upgrades in a sensible order, if you are running 11.04 then upgrading through the release numbers is better than a mass of hybrid backports from PPAs 18:50:18 PPA are an important issue, and agreeing to help fix issues with / related to them 18:51:18 get it on webupd8, and it's part of the Ubuntu rolling release 18:51:38 I don't have problems helping people who have PPA's. But if problems are caused by PPA stuff or there's explicit problem with stuff from PPA, then it gets hairy 18:52:06 so what if Mintmenu is part of the PPA 18:52:11 From a personal perspective some of the work my team does at Canonical is put into PPAs. I'd be kinda annoyed if #ubuntu refuses to allow users to discover that work, by banning the primary method my team has to deliver it. 18:52:14 oCean: you have to rely on people's common sense a little. People can and will start recommending to do thing the "reasonable" way if we actively point out the issues when we encounter them in the channel. Ops are not just there to ban people, they're also there to give the channel a direction, and that not only by means of guidelines and meetings, but also by means of what they say in the channel day-to-day. 18:52:26 PPAs are not the only thing that cause those problems, any non-Canonical repository could. should be ban anything that isn't 100% official (as defined by Canonical)? 18:52:44 I don't see a solution, other than simply educating users 18:53:32 Educating our helpers will go a long way in getting people to understand the risks of PPAs and benefits of PPAs. 18:53:34 maybe someone messes things up, and they need to reinstall. we help them backup their data and get a working system again. they gain experience 18:53:39 relying on common sense when some users will not even read the channel topic 18:54:09 bazhang: +1 18:54:17 bazhang, oCean: if users are all idiots, then we might as well give up. 18:54:29 I thought the idea why we're still here is that we think they aren't. 18:54:41 LjL: no, but we might try our best to limit them in the possiblities to ruin their systems 18:54:41 I kind of favour providing more information for people to make decisions about what they do with their systems 18:54:49 I have no problem with Ubuntu being a rolling release distro, buts let be honest, thats what the floodgate of PPA is doing 18:54:50 That's why the rmrf command is an alias, right? 18:55:14 Again, its not the users we need to convince, its our helpers. The people who are there every day are the best people to educate about this sort of thing. They'll do all the legwork when it comes to telling the users who can't manage to read our channel topic. 18:55:18 i disagree with bazhangs assertion 18:55:38 that did not highlight me 18:55:38 Pici: yes, but there are many "drive-by" helpers 18:55:42 there's a chasm between ubuntu plus a bunch of PPAs, and a rolling distro 18:55:43 oCean: but that command being an alias doesn't really stop them from doing on their systems what they need. Likewise, "sudo" instead of root doesn't, because they can do everything with "sudo". They simply CAN'T do everything by ONLY using the official repositories. 18:55:59 it's not our place to decide what "users" should and should not be able to do with their system. we can warn, inform, and educate. but we can't tie their hand and stop them from doing what they choose to do 18:56:09 oCean: and there are many regular helpers and ops who will correct them. 18:56:21 there's a new kernel, I'm on Lucid, I want it 18:56:38 ok, I wonder if we are going round in circles at this point, perhaps we should draw this topic to a close 18:56:48 LjL: yes, sure. But would an explicit statement, more then just "not supported" be valuable? 18:56:49 et voila there is a PPA for it 18:57:08 oCean: how is drive by helpers suggesting bad PPAs going to be stopped by banning suggesting PPAs? 18:57:12 So, if we're not about to say "don't use PPA's" we definitely need to be more explicit with that 18:57:19 bazhang: And I'm sure that we'll all tell you that you're probably going to have issues with it, but you're going to install it anyway. 18:57:24 oCean: no, as it would completely destroy the possibility for experienced helpers to suggest reasonable PPAs when appropriate. 18:57:35 funkyHat: because then we would have means to tell them "please don't suggest ppa's" 18:57:54 LjL, please explain where the reasonable PPA are 18:58:04 there are some times when adding a PPA for a specific problem is warranted 18:58:12 LjL: yes, that's true, that's what happens when one uses Ubuntu. Not everything is in the repositories 18:58:24 oCean: you can still tell them "please don't suggest PPAs without first having informed them about the software availability in the repositories, and without giving the due disclaimers about PPAs not being part of Ubuntu" 18:58:27 they all look good to me. and some are very very tempting to install to be honest 18:58:35 you could always do that, it's always been done, with all things, even before PPAs existed 18:58:51 Root cause might be that the ubuntu distribution does not provide everything a users wishes. Too bad 18:58:51 #vote set a new policy to ask helpers to not recommend PPAs in #ubuntu 18:58:51 Please vote on: set a new policy to ask helpers to not recommend PPAs in #ubuntu 18:58:51 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) 18:58:54 -1 18:58:54 -1 received from AlanBell 18:59:02 -1 18:59:02 -1 received from funkyHat 18:59:13 -1 18:59:13 -1 received from Pici 18:59:17 #endvote 18:59:17 Voting ended on: set a new policy to ask helpers to not recommend PPAs in #ubuntu 18:59:17 Votes for:0 Votes against:3 Abstentions:0 18:59:17 Motion denied 18:59:33 PPAs are more accountable than random source packages out there as well. 18:59:45 ok, I think we should focus on providing more information about the types of PPA out there 18:59:51 you could have just vetoed on Snowball 19:00:00 that would be great. how to rate them 19:00:11 Do we have any stats for which PPAs are "bad" from #u experience? 19:00:17 All 11.000 of 'em :( 19:00:23 hehe 19:00:41 10999 (handbrake is ok) 19:01:03 #topic Support in -offtopic? Background - oCean 19:01:20 Also on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/IRCteamproposal 19:01:40 I seem to recall discussions about ppa ratings at least a year ago either on -devel@ or one of the launchpad lists... I wonder if there is progress 19:01:41 This is an other matter we discussed in -ops or -team, but I don't think there was consensus 19:01:56 yeah, and I have a mail from Mark that relates to this a little 19:02:31 so yesterday we discussed a separate topic of canonical sending people to #ubuntu to discuss the android hybrid thing 19:02:51 that is going to be addressed, but one of the things from sabdfl's response was . . . 19:03:01 * if there is a better IRC channel for general "hello, I'm interested in X with Ubuntu, where should I go?", then let me know and I'll update the team to use that for the cases where they do judge the audience to be developer or at least highly technical in nature. 19:03:21 is #ubuntu-offtopic that place? 19:03:28 no. 19:03:39 Or at least not in -offtopic's current state. 19:03:42 #ubuntu-phone ? 19:03:49 I didn't think so either, is there a place for it? 19:03:50 bazhang: not really 19:03:53 bazhang: that's not general channel (: 19:04:02 AlanBell: -irc? 19:04:06 no 19:04:08 no 19:04:22 bazhang: it is plausibly a reasonable place for it in this specific instance, but Mark was asking in general terms 19:04:22 shortly put, we currently don't have such place 19:04:41 AlanBell, ok 19:05:02 I don't think we currently have a place, and if we want to, we need the participation of our developers to make it work. 19:05:10 sorry - but what is the point of sending people to a channel with no info ? 19:05:24 ikonia: a very good point 19:05:26 Pici: yes, sabdfl can't just expect us to come up with places to discuss things nobody knows about out of a hat 19:05:31 "hi I'm interested" - ok "sit there in this dead channel...." 19:05:44 why not ask people to subscibe to an announce mail list so they get news when there is news 19:05:46 ikonia: zombie channel is more to the point 19:05:55 or undead 19:06:07 ikonia: People want to interact and ask questions. 19:06:27 it's worse than dead, it's just users pingponging questions and rumours around, possibly making things worse than if there were no such discussion at all 19:06:31 but there is no answer 19:06:34 Hi, tell me more about this product" 19:06:36 There is nothing to tell 19:06:49 why can't we say "there is nothing to tell at this time, subscribe to the accounce mailing list" 19:06:56 why point people to a channel full of nothing 19:07:07 Again, we would need the people in-the-know to be present before we could tell users to go there. 19:07:11 well they are going to stop doing that 19:07:57 Unless the tech board (or whatever) wants us to start funneling into -devel to ask questions, I don't see another way of fixing this. 19:07:58 "if there is a better IRC channel for general "hello, I'm interested in X with Ubuntu, where should I go?", then let me know" 19:08:05 and I dont want to point people to -devel 19:08:05 in fact, this wasn't really a private email, you might as well see all of it 19:08:06 that is question we can figure out an answer 19:08:15 -devel don't know about it either 19:08:24 http://paste.ubuntu.com/858209/ 19:08:43 just feed back to canonical "IRC is useless without information, I suggest setting up a mailing list for people to subscrive to so you can make an annoucment when you have something to announce" 19:08:57 ikonia: I did, basically 19:08:58 so let's keep "discussion of nonexistant products" issue separate from general place-to-go channel issue 19:09:06 I have to go now. I just wanted to say about #ubuntu-offtopic that I don't think we should have a "no support" policy because EVEN WITHOUT having such a policy yet, I've already seen people going to extremes by shutting discussions down as they were remotely support-like. #ubuntu-offtopic shouldn't discourage talking about Ubuntu. Instead, let the people there NICELY suggest "have you tried asking in #ubuntu?", let's enforce a stricter "no repeating" 19:09:08 rule than in #ubuntu, and let's not allow banned people to obtain support in #ubuntu-offtopic. 19:09:31 ^ I concur with this 19:09:34 yeah, I agree with not supporting banned people, certainly 19:09:44 Agreed. 19:09:51 AlanBell and the response i better than I understood when you mentioned it, so thank you 19:10:18 I don't think I understand what you just said ikonia, but okay ;) 19:10:35 I think #ubuntu-offtopic should be the place for discussion about ubuntu that isn't support, or we should have #ubuntu-discuss or #ubuntu-chat or something for that 19:10:40 Pici: it was in relation to the android email 19:10:58 AlanBell: I've aksed for this many times and it's just a non-starter 19:11:14 why? 19:12:07 I've grown to dislike -offtopic as a channel name 19:12:10 AlanBell: people want -offtopic to be random stuff 19:12:31 to do what ever you feel like saying inside the !o4o and !coc guidelines 19:13:01 that's what "offtopic" means? 19:13:03 I wanted to bring the offtopic channels together and have a bit of community discussion around ubuntu as a project 19:13:13 technical/non-technical, just "stuff" 19:13:27 As much as the channel sometimes annoys me, I think that -offtopic is fine and another Ubuntu-centric discussion channel would be better. 19:13:31 folks: wouldn't it be better to have just ONE Offtopic chan? 19:13:31 rather than having 4 - 5 offtopic channels of people just saying words 19:13:40 like the community cafe on the forums? 19:13:58 Silverlion: IRC can't be separated into threads like forums can. 19:14:16 Not without creating separate channels 19:14:20 #ubuntu-ubuntu-discussion, #ubuntu-what-you-had-for-lunch, #ubuntu-break-from-support, 19:14:25 :( 19:14:29 People like their spaces, and having more than one offtopic channel doesn't seem to be hurting 19:14:32 Silverlion: one? 19:14:32 h00k, heh 19:14:43 or going to the other direction - #x-ot, #k-ot, #u-ot, #l-ot 19:14:53 should there be ONE CHAN TO RULE THEM ALL? 19:14:55 :-P 19:14:56 the point of offtopic is that it's not one topic, it's the exception to the "an IRC channel has a specific topic" rule 19:15:03 Tm_T: i wanted to "melt" the -offtopic chans together and name it "community cafe" 19:15:23 tsimpson: good point. 19:15:31 funkyHat: it's also not building anything, there are people spread out in each channel that are "quality" yet there have little to say mixed in with people just saying radonom stuff 19:15:37 tsimpson: there should be tons of topics, fully agree 19:16:01 ok, some interesting suggestions there, but I think we are not going to make any decisions on this today 19:16:05 It's nice to have a place to talk about $stuff, and not $ubuntu-stuff all the time, 19:16:11 that way we do have a better overview and can create some community feeling 19:16:26 h00k: +10 19:16:52 which is nice to take a break from #ubuntu in there, but also included are people who don't help 19:16:52 Silverlion: not going to happen, it's been considered for years, and see where we are (: 19:16:53 the -ot channels are already the cafe for each group? 19:16:56 Silverlion: I've suggested that before, it didn't go over well. (although that was a lonjg time ago) 19:17:05 * popey returns to see #ubuntu-phone stuff 19:17:15 I don't see why -offtopic can't have multiple topics going on at the same time. Just like in #ubuntu where you don't answer every questions asked. 19:17:19 * popey would like to help fix the issues there. Suggestions welcome. 19:17:56 popey: get the people who know what they are talking about to engage with the channel 19:18:43 well. 19:18:58 yeah, I know that might not be possible 19:19:00 the problem there is that #ubuntu-phone was never supposed to be for the current announced convergence device 19:19:03 we do have a (dead) #ubuntu-mobile going unused 19:19:18 it was meant for discussion of a phone running ubuntu 19:19:31 yes, we do appreciate that 19:19:31 not the converged device that you've been talking about 19:19:45 do we need to channels to discuss topics that should be discussed here? 19:19:47 so directing people there means they dont actually get to talk to the 'right people' 19:19:52 popey: did you see the email that is going out to people who register an interest in the hybrid thing? 19:20:02 i only saw your pastebin above 19:20:03 popey: but it was the best channel for example I could think out quickly when people started asking about "where can I discuss" 19:20:12 Myrtti: sure, i appreciate that 19:20:28 so, before I forget, where are we with -offtopic? 19:20:38 popey: http://paste.ubuntu.com/858223/ 19:21:15 ok, and mark has said that will be fixed? 19:21:48 popey: yes, I brought it up here because mark was asking about a general channel to send people to for discussions 19:21:53 popey: Since you're more on the developer side of things for this, would you prefer users/power users/non-ubuntu developers dropping in on a team channel (like -devel, -kernel -x, whathaveyou) or a separate technically focussed discussion channel? 19:22:25 Purely for asking questions about new ubuntu tech, not tech support. 19:22:42 well, i setup -phone, -tablet and -tv for exactly that kind of thing 19:23:15 h00k: :) Yeah, I raised two points: 1) don't shut down support questions, just suggest a regular support chan might be more appropriate 2) don't support banned users in -ot 19:23:26 I'm happy for people to ping me in those channels if there are questions that have not been answered 19:23:45 and would like to help create a FAQ for each to help direct people to the 'right' answers 19:23:50 would that help? 19:23:55 it would, yes 19:24:04 popey: And if those channels already have developers who are willing to answer user questions present, then I think we just need to work out a way to publicize those channels. 19:24:12 they do 19:24:18 also, operators there? 19:24:21 -tv has had lots of discussion with the guys who actually wrote it 19:24:51 I think we sorted out some of the op stuff the other day. 19:25:26 cool. 19:26:21 ok, lets deal with the specific points oCean raised in this topic 19:26:36 1) don't shut down support questions, just suggest a regular support chan might be more appropriate 19:27:00 just suggest *that* 19:27:26 2) don't support banned users in -ot (which is a sensible exception/enhancement to #1) 19:27:34 including crossposting? 19:27:54 bazhang: crossposting should be avoided 19:28:12 I post in #ubuntu , wait 2 mins, then to -ot 19:28:40 I think the only time where it is reasonable for support to be answered in -ot is when a user casually mentions some annoyance and someone has an idea to fix it. 19:29:27 there are often jokey answers when support is asked in -ot 19:29:37 well "support" is such a wide subject that it's difficult to simply say "no support questions" 19:29:47 I am struggling to figure out what change is being requested here, it seems like a request for a common sense approach 19:30:28 AlanBell: that, there's currently no common sense applied consistently as far as I can see 19:30:47 "no support" is slapped hardhandedly occasionally 19:30:50 there is actually support in -ot, for example on subjects which are offtopic for #u, but as soon as someone asks an ubuntu question, we jump on him saying "don't ask support here" 19:31:25 oCean: yeah, soft redirect is better approach when its reasonable in the first place 19:31:46 I'll say after LjL "let the people there NICELY suggest "have you tried asking in #ubuntu?", let's enforce a stricter "no repeating" 19:31:58 maybe this should be something added to the supporters guide, what to do if someone asks a question in the wrong channel 19:32:31 oCean but there also has to be common sense the other way 19:32:49 oCean: users like bullgard who just don't want to play by the rules use -offtopic as #ubuntu 19:33:16 I have no issue with support discussion in #ubuntu-offtopic, it would be a welcome uplift from random stuff 19:33:20 whilst we are the new kids on the block, maybe some thing like Welcome to the general chat area | Please use #lubuntu for support | ? 19:33:34 but I think if we have a support channel, guiding users to it for support is the better option for proper "I need help" issues 19:33:35 ikonia: true. We should be stricter, especially with such users 19:33:45 oCean: perhaps you could add some bits to the guide advising helpers how to deal with support requests in offtopic channels 19:33:59 oCean: a better balance to actually help support discussion, while "questions" or specific issues can be guided to the support channel 19:34:01 AlanBell: fine with me 19:34:05 are there any factoids that might need changing? 19:34:16 90 minutes mark btw 19:34:29 Myrtti: halfway then (: 19:34:31 what's the point of having a support channel to use offtopic and an offtopic channel to not do support, to be asked support questions 19:34:35 #action oCean to edit the guide to add advice on support questions in -offtopic 19:34:35 * meetingology oCean to edit the guide to add advice on support questions in -offtopic 19:34:47 Myrtti: yes, I am aware, the last bits won't take long at all 19:35:00 AlanBell: I know you are aware, just reminding others ;-) 19:35:00 ok, next item we have already addressed 19:35:08 hmm, actually there probably should be a "Support questions in #ubuntu" in the -ot topic 19:35:08 #topic Ops applications from existing ops - Alan Bell 19:35:13 I though it was there, but apparently not 19:35:17 we are going to deal with that, moving straight on 19:35:25 #topic Supporters Guide document - Alan Bell 19:35:36 tsimpson: I'll fix now 19:35:54 https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/SupportersGuide 19:36:19 we put this together this week, still accepting edits and improvements, an email went to the list about it 19:36:28 an excellent resource. thanks for making it. 19:36:38 ikonia, tsimpson we might consider the wording, since "support in #u" does shut down the possibility for a question in -ot 19:36:43 I think a factoid pointing at it would be a good idea, we can try and come up with one later (not right now) 19:36:48 yeah 19:36:57 the #ubuntu-offtopic topic already had "non-support" in it 19:37:02 why the need for this stronger wording 19:37:04 oCean: check topic now 19:37:12 when many are saying here we should have all BUT a stronger thing against support there 19:37:19 and we should probably blog about the supporters guide so planet readers see it (yes jussi, I know) 19:37:20 ikonia: I saw it, fine with me now 19:37:38 thanks ikonia :) 19:37:54 LjL: hopefully nothing too harsh in there now, just a little more clarify ? 19:37:54 ok, thats all I want to say on the supporters guide for now 19:38:02 clarity even 19:38:05 #topic Any Other Business 19:38:11 Whatever 19:38:18 does anyone have any other burning topics (I know we are over time) 19:38:25 I'm still writing the ops guide... 19:38:33 brain turns into mush. 19:38:41 I had something in mind, but as usual, have forgotten it already /: 19:38:44 I think we'll need to go back and discuss some of these other issues at a later time, but that was rather obvious anyway. 19:38:45 Myrtti: can we decide a date (I don't want you spending too much time on it) 19:38:51 ikonia: so now let's expect some people to say "NO GO AWAY SUPPORT IN #ubuntu" even louder than before. 19:38:59 LjL: hopefully not 19:39:04 *shrug* 19:39:26 We'll face that when we see it. 19:39:26 LjL: "support questions might be better served in #u" ...lenghty one but softer tone /: 19:39:32 AlanBell: you're allowed to kick me about it on Wednesday, if I'm not done by then, I give up and let someone else continue on writing it. 19:39:59 it's in Etherpad and I'll toss the link around for a selected few then 19:40:04 either way 19:40:23 can't possibly kick you, but will tickle you on wednesday :) 19:40:39 Myrtti: let me know if you need any help 19:40:43 ok, any more . . . 19:40:59 Tm_T: you I might poke with the URL in the next half hour 19:41:05 (:) 19:41:06 next meeting will be on a week day evening in a couple of weeks 19:41:15 #endmeeting Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology)