19:02 <utkarsh2102> #startmeeting Developer Membership Board
19:02 <meetingology> Meeting started at 19:02:57 UTC.  The chair is utkarsh2102.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
19:02 <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
19:03 <utkarsh2102> \o
19:03 <utkarsh2102> hellu, today's agenda is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda.
19:04 <utkarsh2102> sil2100 and bdmurray are out until 10th, so..
19:04 <utkarsh2102> but we're still curate, so let's proceed to applications
19:04 <utkarsh2102> #topic MOTU Applications
19:05 <utkarsh2102> #subtopic Frank Heimes
19:05 <utkarsh2102> hey, we haven't yet decided the outcome of Frank's application yet
19:06 <utkarsh2102> cf: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2022-September/002028.html
19:07 <utkarsh2102> we have 3 +1s, 2 +0s, and 1 -1.
19:07 <utkarsh2102> net: 2 +1s, how do we proceed here?
19:07 <utkarsh2102> rbasak, seb128, kanashiro?
19:09 <seb128> let me open the wiki and read the rules again...
19:09 <utkarsh2102> #link https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2022-September/002028.html
19:09 <rbasak> Because some DMB members decided to abstain from voting after considering that application, we basically need votes from all DMB members in order to proceed. Otherwise the application effectively gets declined by default.
19:10 <kanashiro[m]> I think we can elaborate more the text here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Voting
19:10 <kanashiro[m]> it is not so clear
19:10 <rbasak> But I suggest that we proceed with the applications from the applicants who are actually here.
19:10 <utkarsh2102> okay, carried over then (:
19:11 <utkarsh2102> can someone bring this up on the thread, please? rbasak?
19:11 <utkarsh2102> moving on for now..
19:11 <alexghiti47> (sorry flaky connection)
19:12 <utkarsh2102> #subtopic Alexandre Ghiti
19:12 <utkarsh2102> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlexandreGhiti/MOTUDeveloperApplication
19:12 <utkarsh2102> alexghiti47:
19:12 <utkarsh2102> alexghiti: hey! please introduce yourself :D
19:13 <alexghiti47> Hi everyone, I'm from France, I work in Foundations at Canonical exclusively on RISC-V support where I contributed most in the kernel
19:13 <alexghiti47> On a daily basis I work on bringing up the images and improving support for Ubuntu RISC-V
19:14 <alexghiti47> And I help the team to fix various packages when needed :)
19:14 <utkarsh2102> awesome, thank you!
19:15 <utkarsh2102> open for questions - rbasak, seb128, kanashiro: go, go, goooo :)
19:16 <rbasak> alexghiti47: hello! So let's dive in. Once you've added a delta to a package as part of +1 maintenance, how do you ensure that the package continues to be maintained in Ubuntu given that it will no longer autosync?
19:18 <alexghiti47> Hmm not sure here, can you expand a bit more the question?
19:19 <rbasak> Take https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/node-gulp-coffee/3.0.2-1ubuntu1 for example.
19:19 <rbasak> I assume that upload happened because of +1 maintenance?
19:19 <rbasak> What will happen with that package next?
19:19 <alexghiti47> Maybe yes
19:20 <rbasak> For example, what will happen in Ubuntu if Debian were to upload 3.0.2-2?
19:20 <alexghiti47> There will be a "merge" conflict that someone will have to fix: make sure the delta is still relevant or not
19:22 <rbasak> How will such a conflict be detected?
19:23 <utkarsh2102> ...and who'll fix that? :)
19:23 <alexghiti47> Technically, I don't know, but I guess when Ubuntu 'opens the doors' to the Debian packages, a software will detect such cases and publish a report.
19:24 <alexghiti47> It depends on the maintainer, at foundations we often have "merge party" where we deal with main packages with such issues.
19:24 <rbasak> OK. We don't have time here, but I think you need to work on your understanding of the merge process :-(
19:25 <alexghiti47> Ok
19:25 <utkarsh2102> question: let's say you want to fix a bug in Focal, how'd you go about it?
19:26 <alexghiti47> I'd check if it is required to be fixed in more recent releases and fix it there first, and then SRU to focal.
19:26 <utkarsh2102> what steps are you going to take and ensure before the upload to Focal?
19:27 <alexghiti47> As I said, it needs to be fixed first in more recent releases to make sure there are no regressions when updating
19:28 <utkarsh2102> ok, thanks! what if you want to fix a bug that isn't fixed upstream?
19:29 <alexghiti47> It depends on the 'emergency' of the fix, but in non-urgent situations, first I'd send it upstream, and wait for the patch to merged there.
19:30 <utkarsh2102> thanks!
19:30 <utkarsh2102> I see there are some issues in your uploads like missing the bug number, typo in code (as a result, a package had to be re-uploaded, et al), how are you going to take care of it once you have the upload rights yourself?
19:31 <rbasak> I don't have any further questions.
19:32 <alexghiti47> I have to admit that it is easy to do such mistakes when you know someone is going to ensure those mistakes won't happen. And sometimes I may be too much in a hurry: so I'd take a break before uploading anything and re-read the whole diff.
19:33 <kanashiro[m]> on this matter: what would you do if you are in doubt regarding a version number?
19:33 <kanashiro[m]> where would you search for some information?
19:33 <alexghiti47> In doubt about anything, I'd ask a colleague
19:34 <alexghiti47> I'm lucky I have experienced developer around me, so it is easy to search for the answer
19:34 <kanashiro[m]> wouldn't you be able to try to find some information by yourself? For a SRU for instance
19:35 <kanashiro[m]> do you know any doc?
19:35 <alexghiti47> Of course I'd read first the wiki but some aspects may be 'hard' so in doubt, I'd ask before doing a mistake
19:37 <utkarsh2102> quick q: what if a package version 1.2.3-4ubuntu1 is in all releases from Focal onward and you have a bug to fix. What versions will you pick for which release? and why?
19:37 <utkarsh2102> kanashiro: sorry, I didn't want to take over - I just wanted to put my question out there because of timing issues. Please feel free to carry on with your question first. :)
19:38 <utkarsh2102> once you're done, alexghiti47 can answer mine.
19:38 <kanashiro[m]> I was looking for a link to a wiki page, please go ahead and answer utkarsh2102 's question
19:38 <alexghiti47> utkarsh2102: I'd append ~20.04, ~22.04 and so on so that upgrade process would work correctly.
19:40 <utkarsh2102> right, so the version becomes?
19:41 <alexghiti47> 'inferior' in terms of version comparison (not sure that's what you mean)
19:41 <rbasak> I think he wants the actual full package version strings that you would use.
19:41 <utkarsh2102> I just want you to tell me the versions you'd use. That's it. :)
19:42 <utkarsh2102> for -devel, Jammy, Focal
19:43 <alexghiti47> 1.2.3-4ubuntu1 in kinetic, 1.2.3-4ubuntu1~22.04 for jammy, 1.2.3-4ubuntu1~20.04 in focal
19:43 <seb128> alexghiti47, question, do you usually read emails from launchpad? I sponsored once a merge from you on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/newt/+bug/1958502 and you never replied to my comments ... any reason you didn't follow up? it's also a bit related to Robie's question earlier since it still feels to me that some of the delta on that package could be reduced
19:43 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1958502 in newt (Ubuntu) "Please merge newt 0.52.21-5 (main) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist, Fix Released]
19:44 <utkarsh2102> uh? are you sure you'd use "~"?
19:46 <alexghiti47> utkarsh2102: I would say yes, but obviously that's wrong. I'd check the doc before anyway.
19:46 <alexghiti47> seb128: I must have missed your answer, sorry about that.
19:48 <utkarsh2102> thanks, no more questions from me.
19:48 <utkarsh2102> alexghiti47: btw, you can check "dpkg --compare-versions 1.2.3-4ubuntu1~22.04 gt 1.2.3-4ubuntu1" and see what happens :)
19:48 <utkarsh2102> any more questions? seb128, kanashiro?
19:48 <kanashiro[m]> no
19:49 <utkarsh2102> ok, waiting for seb128.
19:50 <seb128> no more question from me
19:51 <utkarsh2102> ok, thanks. Proceeding to votes..
19:51 <utkarsh2102> #vote Alexandre Ghiti to get MOTU rights
19:51 <meetingology> Please vote on: Alexandre Ghiti to get MOTU rights
19:51 <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, -1 or +0 in channel (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1|-1|+0 #channelname')
19:51 <rbasak> -1 reasons to follow
19:51 <meetingology> -1 reasons to follow received from rbasak
19:53 <seb128> +0 reasons to follow
19:53 <meetingology> +0 reasons to follow received from seb128
19:54 <utkarsh2102> -1 reasons to follow
19:54 <meetingology> -1 reasons to follow received from utkarsh2102
19:58 <seb128> we are reaching the hour so I will have to drop, thanks everyone
19:58 <utkarsh2102> kanashiro!?
19:58 <kanashiro[m]> +0 I am not so confident Alex knows where to find the relevant info when he needs, relying on other people all the time does not sound good to me. Moreover, he does not seem to fully understand all the development process, like package merges. On the other hand, he has been doing some good work in the Foundations team, I'd tell you to start to pay more attention to the details and prepare your packages to be sponsored as it was
19:58 <meetingology> +0 I am not so confident Alex knows where to find the relevant info when he needs, relying on other people all the time does not sound good to me. Moreover, he does not seem to fully understand all the development process, like package merges. On the other hand, he has been doing some good work in the Foundations team, I'd tell you to start to pay more attention to the details and prepare your packages to be sponsored as it was received from kanashiro[m]
19:58 <kanashiro[m]> not needed, get used to that.
19:59 <utkarsh2102> alexghiti47: hey, thanks for applying. You're good at what you do, all it needs is a bit of polishing. For instance, I was happy with the basic questions but then versioning thing (amongst other things) didn't inspire enough confidence atm. But that said, you're almost there. Just do a bit more work with your sponsors for a few more weeks and you're ready to re-apply. Make sure you get the concepts behind the (basic) Ubuntu
19:59 <utkarsh2102> procedures right. I am happy to work with you on sponsoring stuff, too - I know you've got a bunch of people around already, however. So that said, I reallyyyyy look forward to your application soon (if this one doesn't go through). Thanks a bunch, again! \o/
19:59 <rbasak> Reasoning for my -1 vote:
19:59 <rbasak> I think you need to work on your understanding of the merge process. If you don't know how to ensure that packages to which you've added a delta continue to receive maintenance from that point, I don't think it's appropriate to be uploading to the archive without supervision from a sponsor. How we deal with delta is really fundamental to how Ubuntu development works, and I fear a lack of
19:59 <rbasak> understanding will lead to unnecessary or languishing delta and out-of-date packages.
19:59 <rbasak> It's also concerning to me that you aren't familiar enough with SRU process to either know our conventions for the package versions to use, or know where to look for the documentation guidelines on package version strings.
19:59 <rbasak> Sorry, we didn't have time to go into more details of your understanding in case there are other areas I'd like you to be familiar with, but you can see what knowledge I think you should have at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RobieBasak/DMB/CoreDev (that applies to MOTU too, except for component mismatches and MIRs which involve uploads to main only). I'm sorry that this is only coming up now at the time
19:59 <rbasak> of your application; I am disappointed that those who endorsed you didn't spot this gap at an earlier stage.
19:59 <utkarsh2102> #endvote
19:59 <meetingology> Voting ended on: Alexandre Ghiti to get MOTU rights
19:59 <meetingology> Votes for: 0, Votes against: 2, Abstentions: 2
19:59 <meetingology> Motion denied
20:00 <utkarsh2102> :(
20:00 <rbasak> I appreciate the work that you are doing though - the uploads I glanced at all looked good to me.
20:00 <alexghiti47> Thanks guys!
20:00 <rbasak> So please keep doing that!
20:00 <utkarsh2102> seconded!
20:00 <seb128> reason for my vote is while I believe the technical skills are mostly there, there is a lack of understanding of the purpose and goals. Like delta should be minimized and sent to Debian rather; which would benefit them and lower our maintaince workload
20:01 <utkarsh2102> #subtopic Heinrich Schuchardt
20:01 <utkarsh2102> xypron: hey, sorry, we don't have time anymore :(
20:02 <xypron> Shall I update the date in the agenda?
20:02 <utkarsh2102> would you mind grabbing another slot which doesn't have an applicant yet?
20:02 <utkarsh2102> xypron: yes, please, thank you!
20:02 <rbasak> Let's get an item into the agenda to limit the meeting maxmimum to one application.
20:02 <rbasak> utkarsh2102: would you mind doing that when you update the agenda please, to avoid locking conflicts?
20:02 <utkarsh2102> xypron: once done, follow up on your mail to devel-permissions@ to let us know your new date. TIA!
20:02 <rbasak> Else I'd happily do it right now.
20:02 <utkarsh2102> uh, I forgot
20:03 <utkarsh2102> #action Utkarsh to announce alexghiti47's application status.
20:03 * meetingology Utkarsh to announce alexghiti47's application status.
20:03 <utkarsh2102> rbasak: please do that!
20:04 <utkarsh2102> I'll clean up the remaining bits, if needed
20:04 <kanashiro[m]> thanks for chairing utkarsh2102
20:04 <utkarsh2102> awesome! :D
20:04 <utkarsh2102> thank you, everyone! \o
20:04 <kanashiro[m]> o/
20:04 <utkarsh2102> #endmeeting