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