20:06:17 <ennael> #startmeeting
20:06:17 <Inigo_Montoya> Meeting started Mon Feb 13 20:06:17 2012 UTC.  The chair is ennael. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:06:17 <Inigo_Montoya> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
20:06:43 <ennael> #topic FOSDEM review
20:07:42 <ennael> ok so I was working on a blog post for general assembly but would be nice to have something about the booth
20:07:54 <obgr_seneca> I can do that
20:08:02 <obgr_seneca> I was there most of the time
20:08:02 <ennael> on a specific post
20:08:06 <ennael> ok
20:08:14 <ennael> adding one or 2 pictures
20:08:32 <misc> (decent picture, if possible, not one of the orgy in the evening)
20:08:34 <obgr_seneca> ok, did sebsebseb send you any?
20:08:44 <ennael> not for now
20:08:51 <obgr_seneca> misc: orgy, I must have mist that :(
20:08:56 <ennael> :)
20:09:16 <ennael> misc: any link to do with your conference also ?
20:09:25 <ennael> or it's completely disconnected from Mageia
20:09:51 <misc> ennael: the conference was about mageia, so no problem
20:10:03 <misc> I didn't take note for the Q/A about sysadmin
20:10:17 <misc> obgr_seneca: what about you for the Q/A about users facing stuff ?
20:10:34 <obgr_seneca> i will write something about it
20:10:54 <ennael> ok
20:10:57 * misc just remember of the joke of the fedora guy
20:11:05 <misc> ( they are funny, but you had to be there )
20:11:05 <obgr_seneca> I was planing to start a discussion about it with some ideas of mine on a dedicated wiki page
20:11:21 <ennael> #action obgr_seneca will write a blog post about Mageia booth in FOSDEM, together with misc conference about Mageia
20:12:52 <ennael> what about the meeting with other distros representatives ?
20:13:25 <misc> obgr_seneca said he will write about it
20:13:28 <obgr_seneca> ennael: that "local community" thing I was?
20:13:31 <ennael> oups sorry
20:13:51 <ennael> yep
20:13:51 <obgr_seneca> yep
20:15:01 <obgr_seneca> I will ask marja and trish to help on the post and perhaps jehane, she was listening to that community session
20:16:03 <ennael> ok
20:16:12 <ennael> what deadline for it ?
20:16:28 <obgr_seneca> end of week?
20:16:39 <ennael> ok
20:16:59 <ennael> anything else on that topic ?
20:17:18 <misc> the mail to send to orga@fosdem ?
20:17:20 <ennael> #action blog post about FOSDEM will be done for end of this week
20:17:25 <ennael> oh yes
20:17:26 <misc> someone volunteer to collect feedback ?
20:17:42 <ennael> I guess  blog post will help on it also
20:18:21 <rda_> shouldn't that make a series of posts? :) just one post will be huge.
20:18:41 <ennael> general assembly will be in another one
20:18:50 <misc> after voting , before ?
20:18:56 <ennael> before I guess
20:19:02 <obgr_seneca> rda_: perhaps one about the stand and fosdem in general and a second one about the local community thing?
20:19:24 <rda_> obgr_seneca: yep.
20:19:41 <rda_> could we summarize what posts are planned, and who authors what?
20:20:16 <ennael> we should publish all this quite quickly
20:20:16 <misc> yup
20:21:03 <ennael> we already have mails about report and financial doc on discuss
20:21:29 <obgr_seneca> yes, I think ga should be first to be posted
20:21:36 <obgr_seneca> then general fosdem
20:21:43 <ennael> ok we can do it wednesday
20:21:44 <obgr_seneca> and then local community one
20:22:59 <ennael> so I do the one about GA, obgr_seneca about community
20:23:09 <ennael> let say friday ?
20:23:13 <misc> friday
20:23:25 <obgr_seneca> ok
20:23:37 <rda_> and misc for general fosdem?
20:23:49 <misc> i fear to not have much time for that
20:23:53 <obgr_seneca> misc or me or both
20:24:08 <misc> I can help, but I was more focused on my own stuff :/
20:24:27 <rda_> ok, just to know who to sync with, in case.
20:24:37 <rda_> #info ennael to write GA blog post
20:24:50 <rda_> #info obgr_seneca to write local community blog post
20:24:51 <obgr_seneca> then take me aka ennael's favourite victim :D
20:25:02 <ennael> :)
20:25:06 <rda_> #info obgr_seneca to write general fosdem blog post
20:25:15 <rda_> #info posts to be published by this Friday
20:25:27 <rda_> #info feel free to get in touch with them before that
20:25:50 <ennael> anything else ?
20:26:28 <misc> I guess we could organise a debriefing
20:26:35 <misc> to know where we can improve next time
20:26:44 <obgr_seneca> on discuss?
20:26:52 <misc> yes or a wiki page
20:26:56 <ennael> ask for better weather ?
20:27:02 <ennael> or buy skis
20:27:09 <obgr_seneca> and better trains
20:27:34 <ennael> let's go for wiki
20:27:51 <ennael> somebody to create this page ?
20:28:14 <misc> I can
20:28:24 <ennael> ok
20:28:57 <ennael> #action debrief on wiki page to improve things for next year
20:29:23 <ennael> anything else ?
20:29:41 <rda_> seems good
20:30:01 <misc> #url https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Fosdem_2012/Debriefing
20:30:14 <ennael> thanks
20:30:21 <ennael> ok next topic
20:30:29 <ennael> #topic General assembly and financial report publication
20:30:45 <ennael> I guess this is nearly done as we plan a blog post
20:30:51 <ennael> what about vote about this ?
20:30:56 <ennael> it has to approved
20:31:00 <coincoin> hi, sorry to be late (not @home)
20:32:33 <obgr_seneca> approved by the board?
20:32:46 <ennael> association members ?
20:32:49 <rda_> obgr_seneca: members of the association. that is: board members + founders.
20:32:55 <rda_> (at this point)
20:33:02 <ennael> board=founders
20:33:07 <ennael> tjat should be easier
20:33:09 <ennael> that
20:33:28 <misc> I think it approved by association member
20:33:46 <ennael> as said rda_
20:34:25 <misc> so how do we proceed ?
20:34:39 <misc> send a email to say "if you disagree, please speak" ?
20:34:46 <misc> ( aka, accept by default )
20:34:46 <rda_> misc: yes
20:34:48 <ennael> in a given time
20:35:16 <rda_> technically, association members are https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Archive:Founders as of today (current board members are all among founders)
20:35:25 <misc> we have a alias for that :)
20:35:29 <rda_> (why is it in Archive: is another thing)
20:35:32 <rda_> misc: cool :)
20:35:56 <obgr_seneca> rda_: @archive good question, should be moved
20:36:02 <obgr_seneca> rda_: I'll do it
20:36:07 <ennael> ok basically general report is ready
20:36:13 <ennael> what abour financial one ?
20:36:15 <ennael> about
20:36:23 <rda_> coincoin: ping ?
20:36:26 <rda_> obgr_seneca: thx
20:36:38 <misc> ennael: you have a url ?
20:36:53 <ennael> we could send email tonight and ask answer before tomorrow same hour
20:37:15 <ennael> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Rapport_moral_2012
20:37:24 <ennael> Iw rote the french version and translated it
20:37:39 <ennael> trish reviewed my frenglish
20:37:44 <ennael> so it's ready
20:37:48 * rda_ hears applauses
20:38:07 <ennael> still we need the financial one
20:38:51 <rda_> coincoin: where can we get the financial report?
20:38:52 <misc> ennael: 1 week is rather short to approve it ( in theory, in practice, I think everybody will approve by default )
20:38:59 <misc> s/week/day/
20:39:07 <ennael> 2 days then ?
20:39:12 <ennael> then we can publish it
20:39:20 <ennael> on wednesday as planned
20:39:26 <misc> better 2 days , yes
20:39:40 <ennael> ok
20:39:45 <ennael> coincoin: ping ?
20:40:21 <ennael> valentine day is tomorrow
20:40:28 <ennael> we have to work tonight
20:40:53 <ennael> :)
20:41:30 <rda_> ok, or shall we move forward, and if coincoin can get back in touch before the end of the meeting
20:41:46 <obgr_seneca> I thought valentine day was canceled this year since 14-2-12=0 :)
20:41:58 <ennael> well it's rather blocking as we need his report to send this mail...
20:42:18 <rda_> well, there are two things. publishing the reports.
20:42:22 <rda_> and approving the reports.
20:42:34 <misc> I am writing the mail for approval
20:42:36 <rda_> publishing doesn't require approvement.
20:42:45 <ennael> we have nothing to publish
20:42:46 <rda_> but approvement requires publishing.
20:42:53 <rda_> ennael: right.
20:43:02 <misc> ( basically, approve or face the wrath of kha^W PL^W the redhead tornado )
20:43:14 <rda_> but let's check this later in the meeting if he can get back online
20:43:15 <ennael> :)
20:43:18 <rda_> misc: :)
20:43:30 <ennael> ok
20:43:39 <ennael> shall we go to next topic ?
20:44:17 <rda_> yep
20:44:24 <ennael> #topic organize votes for board and council
20:44:44 <ennael> so as said in a mail and approved also
20:45:10 <ennael> we will add one more sit for board
20:45:14 <ennael> it means we need people to apply for it
20:45:58 <ennael> from council
20:46:45 <misc> technically, from association
20:46:56 <misc> even if the 2 are at the moment the same
20:47:07 <rda_> (and we will later organize the vote in board for secretary, treasurer and president)
20:47:14 <ennael> ok
20:47:15 <rda_> are there any candidates so far?
20:47:18 <rda_> :)
20:47:20 <misc> ( well, in fact no, since rtp is not in council per se, but in association )
20:47:22 <ennael> so we need an official mail for this
20:47:29 <obgr_seneca> won't we need two people since wobo won't candidate again?
20:47:43 <misc> ennael: i take care of the mail and this
20:47:46 <rda_> obgr_seneca: yes. two seats are open.
20:47:55 <ennael> misc: ok
20:48:09 <rda_> misc: k. if you need any help/review, feel free to ping me
20:48:24 <ennael> #action misc will send a email to ask for volunteers to apply for 2 sits in Mageia.org board
20:48:28 <obgr_seneca> about candidates: I would apply
20:48:28 <misc> rda_: well, i should more need to document the corner case :)
20:49:06 <ennael> deadline or it ?
20:49:09 <ennael> for
20:49:22 <misc> next week
20:49:52 <misc> next week, the mail is sent, we let 1 week for people to propose themself, and then we vote for 1 week
20:50:02 <misc> ( and 1 week to remember how to vote )
20:50:40 <ennael> what about planning the board also ?
20:50:49 <rda_> planning the board?
20:50:55 <misc> parse error
20:51:02 <ennael> oups
20:51:26 <ennael> the roles inside board
20:51:26 <ennael> same week as new sits
20:51:55 <misc> I guess that once we have a board, it can organize itself
20:51:55 * ennael is not that clear...
20:52:04 <obgr_seneca> shouldn't the "new" board do that?
20:52:12 <ennael> misc: yes but fix a date for it
20:52:16 <misc> ( not that it will change much but at least, we can discuss this without taking time from everybody )
20:52:18 <ennael> or it will be lost
20:52:33 <misc> ennael: the week after the board, for the first meeting ?
20:52:38 <misc> so let's say :
20:52:54 <misc> 20: mail is sent for proposition
20:53:10 <misc> 27: we start vote
20:53:27 <misc> 5/03: vote is closed
20:53:35 <misc> 6/3 first meeting of the board ?
20:53:57 <rda_> sounds good to me
20:54:00 <ennael> yep
20:54:08 <rda_> 20 is the day we release beta1 also
20:54:24 <ennael> well it should not take much time
20:54:29 <ennael> so we can go for it
20:54:39 <rda_> ok
20:55:34 <ennael> #action planning 20: mail is sent for proposition / 27: we start vote / 5/03: vote is closed / 6/3 first meeting of the board
20:56:09 <ennael> is that all ok on that topic ?
20:56:19 <misc> yep
20:56:32 <tmb> yep
20:57:17 <ennael> ok looks like boklm is not arount for now
20:57:33 <ennael> let switch to last topic
20:57:33 <ennael> #topic beta 1 release
20:57:51 <misc> ( gsoc 2012 also )
20:57:56 <ennael> oups yes
20:58:07 <ennael> so beta 1 is planned for 21/02
20:58:11 <misc> ( and I think I know what boklm wanted for the email, he sent a proposal on the ml )
20:58:19 <obgr_seneca> 20/02
20:58:19 <coincoin> back
20:58:19 <ennael> ok
20:58:31 <ennael> obgr_seneca: nope
20:58:33 <ennael> see https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Mageia_2_development#Development_Planning
20:58:43 <obgr_seneca> oh, sorry
20:58:47 <ennael> :)
20:59:00 <ennael> 1 day is 1 day :)
20:59:08 <ennael> so we need to organize things for it
20:59:20 <ennael> I will start building DVDs tomorrow I guess
20:59:25 <ennael> what about live CDs ?
20:59:27 <ennael> tmb: ?
21:00:18 <tmb> nothing yet, I have started reading up on blinos changes, and will try to figure out the missing parts
21:00:39 <leuhmanu> maybe we can use the fedora tools ?
21:00:41 <ennael> would be nice to have at least 1 or 2 isos for tests
21:01:13 <ennael> leuhmanu: changing tool on beta stage is not a good thing
21:01:34 <leuhmanu> yes indeed
21:01:51 <ennael> we need also to organize isos tests
21:02:11 <ennael> so either we have somebody to organize it on QA team or I take my matches and do it
21:02:21 <obgr_seneca> who does organize them? Stormi? coincoin?
21:02:40 <ennael> we need somebody available
21:04:27 <rda_> Stormi: ping?
21:04:57 <ennael> ok I don't mind doing it we need to go on
21:04:59 <Stormi> if coincoin can't then I can do it
21:05:08 <ennael> I will mail qa-discuss anyway
21:05:40 <obgr_seneca> Stormi: I will be there at least during the day, only smart phone tethering in the evenings right now
21:05:59 <ennael> #action ennael will mail qa-discuss about Qa tests for beta1 and launch it
21:07:49 <misc> ok, something to add ?
21:08:15 <ennael> nope we will have to talk about this in packager meeting also
21:09:18 <misc> indeed
21:09:32 <ennael> ok
21:09:47 <ennael> #topic manage mail publication
21:10:03 <ennael> so boklm proposal
21:10:03 <ennael> boklm: ?
21:10:03 <ennael> or misc
21:10:15 <boklm> ok
21:10:40 <boklm> I sent this mail a few months ago: https://ml.mageia.org/l/arc/council/2011-11/msg00011.html
21:10:41 <ennael> ah :)
21:10:56 <boklm> for a proposal to change privacy policy
21:11:08 <boklm> current policy is on this page: https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Privacy_policy
21:11:25 <boklm> and it says :
21:11:28 <boklm> - no redistribution of users personal identifying data outside of Mageia.org scope
21:11:40 <boklm> - user data must only be accessed per user approval and for its own use/benefit
21:12:30 <boklm> but this is not exactly what we do now, and this prevent us from publishing email address of packagers for instance
21:13:19 <rda_> I answered, but got no further feedback (or maybe my answer was deceptive)
21:13:36 <obgr_seneca> personally I think we should publish packagers mail addresses, everyone lese does and sometimes it's needed to get in touch with specific packagers
21:13:37 <boklm> so instead of current policy, I propose that we do not store any private information in ldap except password, and say that everything in ldap should be considered public and can be published
21:13:49 <rda_> but I see no obstacle to adapt the privacy policy (which is more a set of intents at this time), so that contributors emails/ids are public
21:14:18 <misc> obgr_seneca: but we had at least 1 person who wanted to not have his email published and who contacted us to get it removed
21:14:24 <ennael> publishing emails can help cross distro work and with upstream projects
21:14:32 <rda_> misc: then these people should not contribute
21:14:44 <obgr_seneca> ennael: +1
21:14:44 <boklm> or they should use a public email address
21:14:51 <rda_> and we should make a clear manifesto to be approved when creating a user account
21:14:53 <ennael> yep I agree on thi
21:14:54 <ennael> s
21:15:00 <obgr_seneca> misc: is he still with us? If it#s the one I have in mind he left
21:15:02 <misc> well, we have also some obligation regarding privacy due to european law
21:15:14 <misc> obgr_seneca: not, this was a user who added a bug report
21:15:40 <boklm> what is european law saying ?
21:15:42 <rda_> misc: but not regarding email addresses, if we make it clear that such a specific address will be made publicly available
21:15:48 <misc> boklm: european, i didn't look
21:16:25 <misc> but I kn ow some people who asked to have their email removed and cleaned during the time I was active in aufml
21:16:25 <rda_> it's not because it's an email address that we can't make it public. if the rules to contribute are: get an email we will all use to contact you, it will be public, that is fair.
21:16:37 <misc> and I think we cannot say know, so keeping email publication as minimal as possible would avoid us this problem
21:16:57 <misc> mhh
21:17:01 <misc> cannot say "no"
21:17:24 <obgr_seneca> I still think, at least packagers email addresses should be public
21:17:26 <rda_> we could say no, if the terms of use/contribution are clear and specific. we just didn't focus on that before.
21:17:36 <boklm> we can clean email references of people who request it
21:17:38 <obgr_seneca> sometimes you do have to contact a packager from another distro
21:18:14 <misc> boklm: well, that's a chore
21:18:21 <rda_> (wikipedia has extensive such terms of use - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use - what do other projects do in this regard?)
21:18:57 <misc> there is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:PrivacyPolicy
21:19:21 <misc> obgr_seneca: packager have aliases, that's not a problem
21:19:48 <rda_> misc: this looks good too
21:19:48 <obgr_seneca> not apprentices, and they are named in the changelogs as well
21:20:38 <boklm> we are already publishing emails on mailing lists and bugzilla, but nobody requested to have their email removed
21:20:42 <rda_> the point is, I don't see how it could make sense to contribute to a community project, and deny it from using a public email address to identify/contact you
21:20:53 <misc> boklm: there is one person who asked for it
21:21:08 <misc> ansii forwarded it, and asked on irc
21:21:15 <misc> ( forgot the name, it was some week ago )
21:21:21 <ennael> it's just non sense imho
21:21:24 <rda_> misc: I remembered of that
21:21:34 <misc> ( and I am not speaking of tux99 )
21:21:42 <obgr_seneca> there are always weird people arround
21:22:06 <obgr_seneca> misc: he was the only one who objected publicly, and he was always kind of weird
21:22:13 <misc> obgr_seneca: well, i also know one of the french translator who did the job of cleaning her email everywhere
21:22:19 <rda_> that's not a matter of being weird or not
21:22:52 <misc> and from what I have seen on the ldap, there is lots of people who object to the fact we ask for name
21:23:03 <misc> ( given the name they give )
21:23:08 <boklm> they are not obliged to give their real name
21:23:21 <misc> boklm: then we should make it clear, just ask for display name
21:23:51 <misc> because if we ask for name and first name, people expect to give their real name ( since that's the way most form work )
21:24:01 <boklm> we don't check if the name is real, and we don't say that it has to be their real name
21:24:55 <misc> well, the form is labelled "personal information"
21:25:00 <boklm> or we can add some text to say that name doesn't have to be real
21:25:08 <rda_> right, we could improve the UI and just ask for the display name (would be even simpler, regarding local customs)
21:25:22 <rda_> but the issue here is about having the email address available publicly
21:26:07 <misc> i think that since we told to people that we would not distribute it, changing the rules of the game would not be fair
21:26:19 <rda_> shall we review the fedora privacy policy, and see if it fits what we would want?
21:26:23 <boklm> we can send them an email to say that everything can be public in one month
21:26:42 <boklm> and give them one month to change their email in ldap if they don't want this email to be public
21:26:53 <rda_> misc: when did we say we would not redistribute? the current privacy policy is still a draft open for comments.
21:27:07 <rda_> boklm: one month is a bit short
21:27:26 <misc> especially since changing email will break bugzilla, phpbb and sympa
21:27:27 <rda_> but calling for such a change, and notifying all registered users could be a solution
21:29:34 <rda_> ok, so what do we do?
21:29:55 <misc> well, i would say that we should make sure people can change their email safely before asking them to change
21:30:07 <misc> We are aware of the issue since more than 1 year :/
21:30:14 <obgr_seneca> yep
21:30:40 <ennael> well doing something now is better than asking about this avery 6 months
21:30:43 <rda_> how can we test that changing email can safely be done?
21:31:19 <misc> ennael: as long as someone volunteer to fix the database by hand, that's ok for me
21:31:29 <boklm> we can do it first for packagers
21:31:48 <misc> so who want to dwell into sympa source code to know where the email should be changed ?
21:32:04 <rda_> privacy policy must be simple, straight, for everyone who has an account in the ldap.
21:33:01 <rda_> we're delving into specifics here. can we write a plan with the steps to check?
21:33:11 <misc> well, saying "we will not publish, but if you use this and this and this, it will be published" should be simple enough
21:34:24 * obgr_seneca should leave now, sorry
21:34:27 <rda_> boklm: misc: could you write a plan by email, to council, about that? with: goal, issues, steps to verify, actions to take.
21:34:46 <boklm> ok
21:34:49 <rda_> (or I can help to structure this, but will need your input)
21:34:50 <obgr_seneca> see you tommorow, I will read up the rest on the log
21:35:10 <rda_> obgr_seneca: see you
21:35:10 <misc> we can open a wiki page
21:35:10 <boklm> yes
21:35:32 <rda_> misc: boklm: go ahead, and if you have 10 minutes after the meeting, we can gather about this
21:36:17 <rda_> #action misc & boklm design a plan to properly manage the publicity of contributors email address in the project
21:36:40 <rda_> is there a bug open about this?
21:37:14 <misc> I doubt
21:37:59 <rda_> would help too, but maybe once the wiki page is up and we're in sync
21:38:04 <rda_> anything to add to this?
21:38:06 <rda_> next topic?
21:38:29 <boklm> nothing for me
21:38:40 <ennael> #topic gsoc 2012
21:38:44 <ennael> misc: your turn
21:38:59 <misc> ok
21:39:03 <misc> so to keep short
21:39:11 <misc> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.mageia.user/6120
21:39:28 <misc> basically, gsoc 2012 is coming
21:40:01 <misc> and as each year, the question is "should we participate or not "
21:40:11 <misc> the mail contain a TODO list :
21:40:36 <misc> like 'finish the wiki page, review the condition, etc'
21:41:01 <misc> ( in fact, i think I should have started by "does everybody know what is gsoc" )
21:41:58 <misc> ok, I assume that everybody know
21:42:05 <rda_> :)
21:42:33 <misc> so, participation or not ?
21:42:45 <ennael> depends if we have precise project
21:43:08 <Stormi> improve packagekit support maybe ?
21:43:35 <misc> ennael: i did propose 2 project, and ask for others
21:43:36 <rda_> it needs at least one project and, a mentor for this project
21:43:54 <boklm> I think projects currently on wiki pages can be useful, so it can be good to participate
21:44:02 <rda_> misc: let's go for it then
21:44:22 <misc> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/SummerOfCode2012#Projects_Proposal
21:44:54 * boklm maybe has some ideas
21:45:10 <misc> rda_: then we need a backup for managing this
21:45:28 <misc> and someone to fill the needed information ( as said in the mail )
21:46:20 <rda_> misc: the backup is, per project, or for the whole thing as well?
21:46:28 <misc> rda_: both
21:48:19 <misc> anyway, better to answer on the -discuss mail, i guess
21:49:09 <misc> since everybody is sleepy
21:49:16 <ennael> :)
21:49:17 <rda_> hmmm
21:49:18 <rda_> yes
21:49:20 * rda_ will reread the application summary
21:49:26 * misc should say add something controversial
21:49:41 <misc> "partitipation to the gsoc and making gnome 3 the default desktop"
21:49:44 <rda_> misc: ? you want someone to add something controversial on discuss ?
21:49:48 <rda_> ha :)
21:49:50 <misc> rda_: no, here
21:49:55 <ennael> too big even now
21:49:57 <rda_> I may apply to be a backup for the organization => that's controversial !
21:50:09 <misc> ennael: that what you always tell me
21:50:15 <ennael> tsss
21:50:25 <ennael> shall we end meeting? :)
21:50:38 <misc> yes
21:50:45 <ennael> ok
21:50:50 <ennael> #endmeeting