17:02:23 <dholbach> #startmeeting
17:02:23 <meetingology> Meeting started Thu Sep  6 17:02:23 2012 UTC.  The chair is dholbach. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
17:02:23 <meetingology> 
17:02:23 <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
17:02:34 <dholbach> #topic Meet-Up with the ARB
17:02:37 <dholbach> how are you all doing? :)
17:02:59 <wendar> great, thanks :)
17:03:05 <coolbhavi> I am fine dholbach :) how about you?
17:03:14 <czajkowski> Thanks for coming folks
17:03:18 <dholbach> doing well, thanks :)
17:03:43 <dholbach> how is the restaffing of the ARB going?
17:03:44 <highvoltage> hey dholbach
17:03:48 <dholbach> hey highvoltage
17:03:53 <dholbach> I saw that Alessio volunteered
17:03:58 <highvoltage> (my attention span is really chopped up today)
17:04:19 <highvoltage> is this the CC catch-up with the ARB?
17:04:22 <dholbach> yes
17:04:24 <czajkowski> highvoltage: yup
17:04:27 <highvoltage> great.
17:04:31 <czajkowski> wendar: so how are things in the ARB going?
17:06:28 <dholbach> highvoltage, coolbhavi: I guess you can answer the questions too :)
17:06:33 <czajkowski> anyone can
17:06:34 <czajkowski> true
17:06:35 <czajkowski> sorry
17:06:56 <highvoltage> well, technically I resigned from the ARB a few weeks back and just opportunistically doing a little when I have a chance
17:07:03 <highvoltage> (and keeping up with the list)
17:07:31 <dholbach> how are you dealing with the aftermath of the app showdown?
17:07:33 <highvoltage> but I'm not sure I'm the best person to comment on it. the arb is kind of complicated :)
17:07:42 <dholbach> I saw a lot of activity in the last few weeks on the mailing list
17:07:43 <coolbhavi> dholbach, thanks! we are just going through the queue as a backdrop of successful app showdown :)
17:08:06 <czajkowski> highvoltage: in what way, I note this is the 2nd meeting of the ARB as we got to meet ye last cycle, so have things changed? improved or?
17:08:16 <dholbach> it was successful indeed :)
17:08:30 <wendar> I can vouch for the fact that coolbhavi has been amazing, reviewing apps at a record pace
17:08:41 <highvoltage> dholbach: indeed, there's been a lot of progress, I believe the majority of the apps had received feedback on them, a few of them have been published and I believe the majority of them still needs to be, but I think that's going ok
17:08:45 <wendar> and highvoltage managed 50 in a couple of weeks, which was super-human
17:08:51 <coolbhavi> thanks wendar :)
17:08:56 * highvoltage thought it was more than that :)
17:09:17 <wendar> highvoltage: 75? it was outrageous anyway
17:09:26 <coolbhavi> highvoltage, 53 votes as per the stats go :)
17:09:41 <highvoltage> I think it was around 90 iirc. being at debconf helped :)
17:09:48 <dholbach> awesome :)
17:09:48 <wendar> I do know that when I was working full-time on the queue in Feb and March, I was able to battle it down to only 20 apps in the queue
17:10:34 <wendar> but, my current job leaves me very little time for open source work, so I'm not much help anymore
17:10:56 <dholbach> did recent apps get a bit easier to review?
17:11:19 <wendar> yes, there have been some new tools put in place that help
17:11:39 <coolbhavi> btw I am trying to clear the amount of apps which have +3 votes by uploading them whenever I find time
17:11:42 <wendar> and many of the App Showdown submissions were cookie-cutter Quickly apps
17:11:52 <wendar> coolbhavi: thanks!
17:12:01 * dholbach likes cookie cutters :)
17:12:21 <wendar> yup, they simplify many things
17:12:32 <coolbhavi> wendar, +1 again quickly is quick to review :)
17:12:46 <dholbach> how was the response for the call for nominations?
17:13:06 <wendar> one, who looks like a great candidate
17:13:12 * coolbhavi saw one application on the list from alessio
17:13:26 <highvoltage> dholbach: re apps being easier to review, the fixes in quickly helped a lot. it would've been awesome if quickly was fixed before the showdown :)
17:13:34 <czajkowski> wendar: do you think it'll be easy to fill the roles, are more people expiring ?
17:13:48 <dholbach> maybe it'd make sense to reach out to some arb helpers?
17:14:00 <wendar> unfortunately, I don't think it will be, and we really need the help
17:14:21 <wendar> with the round of expiring memberships on Sept 13, we'll be down to 2 members
17:14:36 <czajkowski> why do you think it'll be hard?
17:14:45 <czajkowski> the work load? or is the board big enough?
17:15:03 <wendar> with the one new candidate, that'll be 3, which is the bare minimum needed to approve an app (and means every member has to vote on every app)
17:15:08 <coolbhavi> dholbach, seeing the response I think reaching out to helpers might be a good thing to do
17:15:21 <dholbach> and maybe blog about it again?
17:15:33 <czajkowski> wendar: doesn;t leave much for wiggle room
17:15:42 <wendar> dholbach: yes, new helpers would be good, or figuring out where the helpers we had during the App Showdown went?
17:15:55 <coolbhavi> czajkowski, and the deadline was sept 5th IIRC
17:16:02 <dholbach> maybe it'd make sense to mail them?
17:16:07 <coolbhavi> for new nominations
17:16:07 <wendar> dholbach: I'm afraid we burned them out, or they got discouraged when they put in all that work preparing apps that then blocked on voting
17:16:29 <dholbach> is anyone from the expiring ARB members planning to come back again?
17:16:32 <wendar> czajkowski: yes, I think the workload is daunting right now
17:16:58 <czajkowski> wendar: so if you take away the app contest, how many apps would you normaly have?
17:17:04 <coolbhavi> wendar, +1
17:17:15 <wendar> czajkowski: of course, spreading that out over more members helps, but it's tough to recruit for such a workload
17:17:52 <czajkowski> did the ARB know the app contest was happening, so ye could plan ?
17:18:00 <dholbach> maybe the new members could try to reach out to the app developer community for some help with the reviews?
17:18:14 <wendar> dholbach: ajmitch will return. I'm not an Ubuntu Developer yet, so not qualified. (I'm one of the people who encouraged making UD a requirement, because I think it really should be)
17:18:30 <dholbach> that makes it harder
17:18:40 <coolbhavi> czajkowski, yes we were contacted by jono
17:18:48 <wendar> dholbach: coolbhavi's term is not ending until next year, and no one else is returning
17:19:12 <czajkowski> :/
17:19:26 <wendar> czajkowski: yes, it would have helped to have more advance notice of the app contest, we were scrambling at the last minute
17:19:46 <wendar> czajkowski: though, I don't think anyone expected it would be *that* successful
17:19:56 <coolbhavi> czajkowski, but we were taken off by the success it had because it was all quick I believe
17:20:05 <czajkowski> nods
17:20:14 <dholbach> maybe it'd make sense to extend the call for nominations then
17:20:16 <wendar> czajkowski: our usuall submission rate was about 5/week, which was managable by one person (me) full-time
17:20:27 <czajkowski> yea so that is a massive jump
17:20:53 <czajkowski> wendar: coolbhavi highvoltage do you think extending the deadline and possibly increasing the ARB would be a good idea
17:21:07 <czajkowski> I note there has been a lengthy discussion on ubuntu-devel on the ARB process
17:21:26 <coolbhavi> czajkowski, certainly +1 here we need members
17:21:48 <wendar> Improvements to the ABR process will help, but we are talking 6+ months of development work to get the tools in place
17:22:12 <wendar> in the mean-time we do still have a stack of developers waiting for a response, and it seems unfair to leave them waiting
17:22:26 <czajkowski> how invovolved were the aRB in the draftng of this process, I guess ye would know from hands on experience ?
17:22:30 <dholbach> sure, in the meantime, there needs to be an active team of ARB helpers + members
17:22:38 <wendar> by "extending the deadline" do you mean allowing more nominations after Sept 5th?
17:22:53 <czajkowski> wendar: yes
17:22:55 <coolbhavi> dholbach, yes agreed
17:23:05 <czajkowski> wendar: we could extend it another week or 10 days
17:23:10 <czajkowski> do you think that would help ?
17:23:22 <wendar> I'm happy to extend the deadline as long as needed, but what do we do about the expiring members?
17:23:33 <wendar> we can't approve apps with only 2 members
17:23:50 <czajkowski> yes that is a bit of an issue alright.
17:24:10 <czajkowski> and holding up apps with the vote, increases the backlog
17:24:16 <dholbach> I'm sure the TB can extend the expiration period
17:24:20 <wendar> czajkowski: the ARB did review the proposal before it was posted to ubuntu-devel, and contributed substantial changes
17:24:29 <dholbach> of course I can't speak for the TB, but the CC has done this various times before
17:24:32 <czajkowski> wendar: good to hear.
17:24:35 <dholbach> and if only for a ocuple of weeks to get things organised
17:24:40 <czajkowski> dholbach: +1
17:24:49 <coolbhavi> wendar, can we mail luke to get him involved here? I havent seen him for ages though
17:25:25 <wendar> coolbhavi: I don't expect much from him, and have been considering him "expired" with the rest, even though his term lasts until next year
17:25:44 <coolbhavi> hmm
17:25:54 <dholbach> in that case we should reach out to him
17:25:58 <dholbach> I can do that if you like
17:26:00 <wendar> coolbhavi: he signed up when we promised "no more than 5 hours/week" so I don't think he had enough time available
17:26:16 <coolbhavi> ok
17:26:36 <wendar> dholbach: you can, or I can, but be gentle
17:26:42 <dholbach> of course
17:27:01 <wendar> dholbach: it's really just a question of whether he has any time, and if not well let him go with no hard feelings
17:27:09 <dholbach> exactly
17:27:35 <dholbach> I can also help liaise with the TB to get an extension of your terms, so there's a bit more time for nominations
17:27:52 <dholbach> how do you like the new spec - do you think that'd be our best shot at solving the apps problem?
17:27:57 <wendar> I hate to make the one really good candidate wait for more nominations
17:28:09 <wendar> could we recruit him and then do another round of nominations?
17:28:18 <dholbach> yes, I guess that should be possible too
17:28:28 <coolbhavi> dholbach, that would be great but I go with wendar here
17:28:37 <dholbach> I can start the conversation with the TB tomorrow
17:28:55 <wendar> sure, that sounds good
17:29:00 <dholbach> excellent
17:29:19 <wendar> I'm  not sure if the other members want their terms extended, but I'm certainly happy to continue until we restaff
17:29:33 <dholbach> cool, I'll include everyone in the discussion
17:29:49 <coolbhavi> dholbach, great
17:30:06 <dholbach> how do you like the new spec - do you think that'd be our best shot at solving the apps problem?
17:31:04 <wendar> As I've mentoned elsewhere, I don't 100% agree with the new spec. But, we desperately need some work in the direction of automated packaging/sandboxing.
17:31:42 <dholbach> agreed
17:31:43 <wendar> And I'm confident we can hit a good agreement for the next 6-month cycle of work.
17:31:57 <dholbach> coolbhavi, highvoltage - how do you feel about it?
17:32:15 <coolbhavi> dholbach, by an initial read its much better than existing one and one part I liked was removing manual reviews which were the bottlenecks this showdown I believe
17:32:41 <wendar> I'm actually really encouraged by the discussion on the ubuntu-devel list. It's lengthy, but the tone is quite healthy. A night and day difference from the initial discussion when the ARB was launched. :)
17:33:57 <dholbach> and it seems to be quite focused on one particular part of it :)
17:34:08 <highvoltage> dholbach: the new spec? well, dropping the /opt requirements will bring more problems than it solves, afaict
17:34:42 <wendar> highvoltage: yes, I'm also in favor of keeping the /opt requirement
17:34:43 <dholbach> it will be interesting to see how the discussion works out and which new solutions will be presented
17:34:52 * coolbhavi seconds highvoltage
17:35:31 <dholbach> I think all my questions are answered - Gwaihir, czajkowski, pleia2?
17:35:35 <highvoltage> I don't like the opt requirement, it is inconvenient, it does add a challenge, it does make it harder to get that same package into the debian/ubuntu archives, but it's also the only way you can prevent filename clashes reliably
17:35:46 <pleia2> no, I'm good for now
17:36:00 <Gwaihir> dholbach, I'm good for now too
17:36:38 <czajkowski> no I'm ok thanks.
17:36:45 <dholbach> ok, I'm happy to help with the restaffing
17:36:52 <dholbach> I hope we get some more good candidates :)
17:37:18 <dholbach> is there anything else from you, the ARB, which we CC folks could help with?
17:38:00 <coolbhavi> dholbach, I'm fine here as my only concern was restaffing
17:38:06 <wendar> we really appreciate the time to talk, it's helpful
17:38:19 <pleia2> thanks for coming :)
17:38:22 <dholbach> cool :)
17:38:30 <dholbach> thanks a lot! :)
17:38:37 <coolbhavi> wendar, I have a suggestion here
17:39:10 <wendar> coolbhavi: yup?
17:39:55 <coolbhavi> maybe we can elaborate the ubuntu developer requirement and state that we arent looking out for MOTU/Core dev explicitly as a requirement?
17:40:23 <coolbhavi> then we can get more applications I guess
17:40:25 <wendar> the call for nominations did say "not a requirement"
17:40:52 * ScottK thought it was supposed to be a requirement.
17:40:56 <wendar> but, we can certainly work to make the second call even more welcoming
17:41:08 <wendar> ScottK: being an Ubuntu Developer is a requirement
17:41:18 <ScottK> OK.
17:41:21 <wendar> ScottK: being MOTU/core-dev isn't
17:41:32 <ScottK> Right.  That bug still exists.
17:41:42 <coolbhavi> yes but the general feeling is ubuntu developer straight goes to MOTU/core dev
17:41:50 <coolbhavi> ScottK, +1
17:42:02 <wendar> well, they could be a Kubuntu developer
17:42:07 <wendar> that'd be fine
17:42:22 <wendar> or a DD
17:42:27 <wendar> (as well as UD)
17:42:46 <coolbhavi> fine with me though :)
17:42:49 <dholbach> :)
17:42:52 <dholbach> perfect
17:42:57 <dholbach> anything else or shall we move on?
17:43:09 <wendar> nothing from here, thanks!
17:43:26 <dholbach> thanks again :)
17:43:32 <dholbach> #topic any other business?
17:43:50 <coolbhavi> dholbach and the CC: thanks for your time!
17:44:01 <dholbach> the only thing I have on my list is the CoC update and I think it's still with YokoZar - I mailed him today about it
17:44:04 <dholbach> but that's all I have
17:44:07 <dholbach> anyone else?
17:44:15 <czajkowski> nope
17:44:19 <czajkowski> all good thanks dholbach
17:44:41 <pleia2> nope
17:45:00 <dholbach> alright then
17:45:06 <dholbach> have a great rest of your day everyone
17:45:08 <dholbach> and thanks for coming
17:45:10 <dholbach> #endmeeting