[20:00:07] <@mgorny> !proj council
[20:00:08] <willikins> (council@gentoo.org) arthurzam, dilfridge, mgorny, robbat2, sam, soap, ulm
[20:00:21] <@mgorny> it's meeting time!
[20:00:25] -*- robbat2 present
[20:00:27] <@mgorny> agenda: https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/6f55b6c5e0eed3530159368737303f8074560723.camel@gentoo.org/T/#u
[20:00:34] <@mgorny> 1. Roll call
[20:00:40] -*- ulm here
[20:00:43] -*- mgorny here
[20:00:44] -*- sam_ here
[20:00:52] -*- robbat2 here
[20:01:02] -*- soap_ here
[20:02:01] <@mgorny> arthurzam, dilfridge:
[20:02:26] <@sam_> I think ztrawhcse was proxying for arthurzam if I remember right
[20:03:02] -*- ztrawhcse here as arthurzam's proxy 
[20:03:05] <+ztrawhcse> hi
[20:03:22] <+Chewi> + https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/6b94bd2c0c4abcf97d7e552e974fdd1505e1b209.camel@gentoo.org/ on the agenda, if that's okay. sorry it was late.
[20:03:43] <@mgorny> let's leave that for open floor
[20:03:46] <+Chewi> cool
[20:04:33] <@sam_> i msg'd dilfridge on signal
[20:04:37] <@mgorny> thx
[20:04:51] <@mgorny> do we want to wait or should we proceed?
[20:05:45] <@sam_> let's give it a minute or two more
[20:09:16] <@mgorny> ok, let's proceed
[20:09:23] <@mgorny> 2. GLEP 63 update [1]
[20:09:31] <@mgorny> [1] https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/20251025162155.1216443-1-mgorny@gentoo.org/T/#t
[20:09:48] <@mgorny> i don't see any replies on the ml
[20:10:22] <@sam_> we had some discussion on the bug (Bug tag is missing, but it was in bug 963069)
[20:10:22] <@mgorny> there was some talk about keyservers on https://bugs.gentoo.org/963069#c10
[20:10:22] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/963069 "OpenPGP v5 (LibrePGP) and OpenPGP v6 (RFC 9580) formats are incompatible, GLEP63 should mention and handle this"; Documentation, GLEP Changes; UNCO; d:glep
[20:10:26] <@sam_> but it looks fine
[20:10:27] <@sam_> yeah
[20:10:28] <@robbat2> very straightforward; i think just move directly to vote for it
[20:10:44] <+ztrawhcse> I still want to know how to actually test compliance but that's not really a problem with the glep itself
[20:10:44] <@ulm> should be v4 not v2.3 :p
[20:11:02] <@mgorny> vote: approve GLEP 63 update in https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/20251025162155.1216443-1-mgorny@gentoo.org/T/#t
[20:11:12] -*- ulm yes
[20:11:14] -*- sam_ yes
[20:11:15] -*- robbat2 yes
[20:11:18] -*- ztrawhcse yes
[20:11:21] -*- mgorny yes
[20:11:27] -*- soap_ yes
[20:11:45] <@mgorny> thanks, 6 yes, 0 no, 0 abstensions, 1 missing
[20:11:48] <@mgorny> motion passed
[20:12:10] <@mgorny> on a related topic, do you think we should update the recommendation to rsa >= 3072 per gpg defaults?
[20:12:41] <+ztrawhcse> weeeeell we could also recommend ecc keys instead
[20:12:49] <@mgorny> we already do
[20:12:55] <@ulm> my zeitcontrol card doesn't support 3072
[20:13:22] <+Chewi> does it support 4096?
[20:13:32] <@ulm> 2048 max
[20:13:36] <@sam_> https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0063.html#bare-minimum-requirements 
[20:13:38] <@dilfridge> argh
[20:13:40] <@dilfridge> sorry
[20:13:40] <@dilfridge> here
[20:13:47] <@sam_> Primary key and the signing subkey are both of type EITHER:
[20:13:50] <@sam_>     RSA, >=2048 bits (OpenPGP v4 key format or later only),
[20:13:50] <@sam_>     ECC curve 25519.
[20:14:28] <@ulm> for recommendation, 3072 is fine I think, but not as minimum
[20:14:29] <@mgorny> hmm, right, ztrawhcse is correct, we "recommend" RSA 2048 only
[20:14:45] <@sam_> oh I see
[20:14:47] <@mgorny> i think we didn't recommend ECC because nitrokey
[20:14:54] <@sam_> that should really be swapped
[20:14:59] <@sam_> ECC should clearly be the *recommendation*
[20:15:21] <@mgorny> maybe we should wait for token2, though?
[20:15:27] <@sam_> yeah
[20:15:29] <@ulm> yes
[20:15:31] <@sam_> let's file a bug after meeting to do this though
[20:15:39] <@sam_> it's important we don't forget about it, it's clearly dated
[20:15:40] <@dilfridge> let's wait for token2 and some practical experience
[20:15:52] <@mgorny> okay
[20:15:53] <@mgorny> moving on
[20:15:59] <@mgorny> 3. Open bugs with Council participation [2]
[20:16:03] <@mgorny> [2] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council#Open_bugs_with_Council_participation
[20:16:05] <@dilfridge> and then go for RSA >=3072 or ECC recommended
[20:16:30] <@mgorny> bug 936211
[20:16:31] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/936211 "[Tracker] Gentoo Foundation dissolution"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; CONF; ulm:trustees
[20:16:47] <@mgorny> any updates?
[20:17:10] <@dilfridge> there's a related item, the graphical trademark thingy
[20:17:25] <@dilfridge> robbat2: maybe you could summarize the status there?
[20:17:28] <@ulm> still quite a few donations via paypal
[20:17:49] <@ulm> (that haven't switched to SPI)
[20:17:55] <@robbat2> could I get assistance writing a request to ask remaining donors to switch over?
[20:18:03] <@robbat2> i had sent some at hte start of the year
[20:18:04] <@dilfridge> sure
[20:18:07] <@robbat2> but we still have more going
[20:18:13] <@ulm> yeah, I can try to help
[20:18:13] <@robbat2> so need clearer wording maybe?
[20:18:19] <@dilfridge> forward last one to me please and I'll write a polite reminder
[20:18:28] <@dilfridge> and put it up for review
[20:18:29] <@robbat2> SPI keeping their published books up to date seems to be hard for them :-(
[20:18:49] <@robbat2> i want to move expenses over, but it's a black hole how much income we have on the SPI side; 
[20:18:54] <@robbat2> no updates since July
[20:19:16] <@robbat2> *since the SPI treasurer's July repo
[20:19:18] <@robbat2> *report
[20:19:38] <@robbat2> their next meeting is tommorow
[20:19:41] <@mgorny> "repo" would be worrying xP
[20:19:42] <@robbat2> where I intend to inquire
[20:19:54] <@robbat2> they do have the underlying data in a repo
[20:20:02] <@robbat2> but I don't have access to it
[20:20:05] <@robbat2> only the public side of it
[20:20:06] <@dilfridge> a problematic word in that context :P
[20:20:47] <@mgorny> anything else, or moving on?
[20:20:54] <@dilfridge> out of curiosty what would you move nextß
[20:20:55] <@robbat2> non-SPI: I need to verify with the accountant that the tax filing for last fiscal is up to date
[20:21:12] <@robbat2> expenses to move next: likely Hetzner
[20:21:18] <@dilfridge> ack
[20:21:32] <@robbat2> do we want to discuss the trademark renewal now or hold for open floor?
[20:21:40] <@dilfridge> open floor is fine
[20:21:56] <@robbat2> dilfridge: you had want to consider another build box
[20:22:03] <@robbat2> did that get pitched to council?
[20:22:03] <@dilfridge> that's my open floor thing
[20:22:27] <@dilfridge> not on the list
[20:22:42] <@mgorny> bug 961301         
[20:22:43] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/961301 "[Tracker] Requests for metadata/AUTHORS"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; ulm:council
[20:22:49] <@sam_> we finally have none pending :D
[20:22:56] <@dilfridge> time to file one? :D
[20:23:08] <@mgorny> bug 961811         
[20:23:09] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/961811 "Consider procuring Token2 PIN+ security keys for developers"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; tamiko:council
[20:23:34] <@dilfridge> I saw two DHL and one Royal Mail tracker 
[20:23:38] <@sam_> mine hasn't arrived yet, I believe someone's has
[20:23:39] <@dilfridge> I think :)
[20:23:47] <@ulm> mine has arrived
[20:23:50] <@robbat2> 4 of them should have been shipped
[20:24:00] <@robbat2> arthurzam, ulm, mgorny, sam
[20:24:02] <@mgorny> robbat2: do you have some tracking numbers?
[20:24:16] <@sam_> (please don't post them publicly)
[20:24:17] <@robbat2> no; i picked the cheapest shipping option
[20:24:32] <@robbat2> i have some feedback about their ordering system
[20:24:37] <@ulm> mgorny: they should be in the order confirmation mails
[20:24:48] <@mgorny> weird, almost every international shipping should have some no
[20:24:50] <@robbat2> the cheapest option did not gaurentee shipping
[20:25:19] <@robbat2> i'm going to paste my feedback on their ordering system
[20:25:41] <@robbat2> - Billing address entry is painful
[20:25:44] <@robbat2> - Implicit "email" at the top is actually the billing email
[20:25:47] <@robbat2> - no seperate email for the shipping address option
[20:25:50] <@robbat2> - phone numbers required
[20:25:55] <@robbat2> - Ordering logs you out each time at the en !!
[20:25:57] <@robbat2> *end
[20:26:02] <@robbat2> - shipping to Isreal via regular post shows a warning about month-plus timelines; alterate is EUR30 shipping!
[20:26:08] <@robbat2> - Ordering form makes bad assumptions about addressing. Need: Address; Phone; Town/City; County/State; Post/Zipcode; Country
[20:26:12] <@robbat2> - Ordering: return to merchant flow does not continue automatically only "Thanks for completing the payment."
[20:26:27] <@robbat2> - Ordering: some countries have a drop-down only for County/State
[20:26:34] <@robbat2> (end of feedback)
[20:27:05] <@robbat2> I really want to see how Sam's one arrives. the dropdown has a very weird list of demographic regions of Wales
[20:27:17] <@robbat2> that don't line up to current political names or boundaries
[20:27:27] <+Chewi> XD
[20:27:36] <@mgorny> robbat2: i really do hope they can provide a proper ordering system for mass orders
[20:27:47] <+Chewi> yeah, the UK uses archaic regions for postal purposes
[20:28:07] <@robbat2> Chewi: except that the regions don't line up to even those
[20:28:26] <@robbat2> the EU has the wonderful NUTS; i wish postal systems used it
[20:28:35] <+Chewi> I usually just leave out the region, it seems more confusing than helpful. postcode alone gets it the right street.
[20:28:56] <@robbat2> the field is mandatory, and validates with whitespace trimmed
[20:30:11] <@robbat2> anyway; please do let me know the arrival dates
[20:30:18] <@robbat2> so we can see how long it actually takes
[20:30:27] <@robbat2> i still want a US candidate to receive one
[20:30:31] <@sam_> I will do
[20:30:45] <@sam_> were all orders placed at the same time?
[20:30:52] <@robbat2> within a few hours
[20:30:55] <@sam_> ulm receiving his several days ago surprised me
[20:31:02] <@dilfridge> sam's tracking number just shows nothing at all on the royal mail site
[20:31:04] <@mgorny> apparently mine was sent from Germany
[20:31:34] <@robbat2> their system logging out on each order; and then having to wait for a OTP sent to email for logging in again each time was painful
[20:32:12] <@mgorny> okay, we'll know more next meeting
[20:32:21] <@mgorny> bug 963069
[20:32:22] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/963069 "OpenPGP v5 (LibrePGP) and OpenPGP v6 (RFC 9580) formats are incompatible, GLEP63 should mention and handle this"; Documentation, GLEP Changes; UNCO; d:glep
[20:32:23] <+ztrawhcse> if we really need someone in the US to get one I suppose I could volunteer. wasn't originally going to offer since I wasn't sure whether it's worth the hassle
[20:32:27] <@mgorny> this was the glep update above
[20:32:34] <@dilfridge> but, swiss mail says, friday 3:50, departure to foreign destination (SA.. ..T)
[20:32:57] <@robbat2> ztrawhcse: please DM me which link; your shipping details: Address; Phone; Town/City; County/State; Post/Zipcode; Country
[20:33:21] <@mgorny> let's move on
[20:33:23] <@mgorny> 4. Open floor
[20:33:37] <@robbat2> who has open floor items?
[20:33:38] <@mgorny> we have chewi's https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/6b94bd2c0c4abcf97d7e552e974fdd1505e1b209.camel@gentoo.org/
[20:33:48] <@dilfridge> we have the build box
[20:33:48] <@robbat2> i need to discuss the trademark renewal, with action items
[20:34:18] <+ztrawhcse> robbat2: will do (after we finish)
[20:34:19] <@mgorny> Chewi: are you still around/
[20:34:20] <@ulm> I have a question about progress of eapi 9 implementation in portage
[20:34:59] <@robbat2> Chewi: i have no solid plan if OSL fails; a variety of half-baked options; it will be a painful migration
[20:35:02] <+Chewi> mgorny: yep
[20:35:08] <@mgorny> Chewi: the floor's yours
[20:35:52] <+Chewi> as the mail said, the OSUOSL seems to be back on its feet, but I'd like to know what backup plans we have, if any, in case the next big funding call falls
[20:36:27] <@sam_> there's some mirror admins who I feel are reliable that it could be worth reaching out to about possibly hosting hw
[20:37:27] <@robbat2> while we need the hosting: the larger problem is going to be human power to move, unrack, rerack, configure, and then day 2 support of hardware
[20:37:35] <+Chewi> have we become any less dependent on the lab since things started looking bad?
[20:37:51] <@robbat2> more of the builds are now in hetzner
[20:37:53] <+Chewi> I know we have some stuff in Hetzner etc
[20:37:56] <+Chewi> cool
[20:38:05] <@robbat2> but no infra movement away from OSL
[20:38:30] <@robbat2> if we split the stuff in 3 groups: infra services / critical builds / alt-arch+dev
[20:38:54] <+Chewi> that would be helpful
[20:39:02] <@robbat2> critical builds can move to hetzner entirely, budget permitting
[20:39:12] <@robbat2> alt-arch+dev stuff needs the most human touch
[20:39:39] <@robbat2> infra services: needs a *secure* home; and not single sourced on one provider ideally
[20:39:49] <+Chewi> I mean it's one thing to keep the lights on in the short term, but I'm also concerned about funding in the long term, assuming we can't afford to just put everything in Hetzner indefinitely
[20:40:53] <@mgorny> on a semi-related note, should we have a council-assigned tracker bug for codeberg?
[20:41:07] <@dilfridge> yes
[20:41:08] <+Chewi> again, my side is willing to talk about it, but ultimately we don't mind where it goes, Flatcar just need Gentoo to survive :)
[20:41:26] <@dilfridge> Chewi: you are entirely correct, it's just not an easy problem
[20:41:28] <@robbat2> it would be easily be >=1000EUR/mo for infra boxes at Hetzner
[20:41:33] <@sam_> I think we should definitely look at hosting more there if you can offer it, doesn't mean we have to yank everything out of osuosl
[20:41:52] <+Chewi> of course
[20:41:53] <@sam_> we should start with just two machines or so, wire them up in puppet, and discuss services
[20:41:56] <@dilfridge> my dream would be that we find some other university / HPC center that is willing to give us (part of) a rack
[20:41:59] <@robbat2> we make good use of killdeer+kingbird being beefy systems where we run many VMs
[20:42:30] <@dilfridge> but when I tried that here in Regensburg once, the response was bureaucratic obstructionism
[20:42:31] <@mgorny> robbat2: these numbers accounting for all our current use or "predicted actually needed"?
[20:42:55] <+ztrawhcse> iirc hetzner already sponsors a box for us, yes?
[20:43:15] <@robbat2> mgorny: current use; outside of the storage bytes & increasing build times I feel the growth curve is very low
[20:43:34] <@robbat2> builds+releng+distfiles getting bigger are an issue
[20:43:38] <@robbat2> for growth side
[20:43:42] <@robbat2> IO is expensive
[20:44:34] <@robbat2> any other direct questions on the OSUOSL topic?
[20:44:38] <@robbat2> want to save time for the other topics
[20:44:47] <@robbat2> dilfridge: I think yours is quick?
[20:44:55] <@dilfridge> yes
[20:44:58] <+Chewi> I take it Codeberg is only for source hosting, not building anything
[20:45:03] <@dilfridge> yes
[20:45:06] <+Chewi> ok, thanks
[20:45:17] <+ztrawhcse> codeberg doesn't even have good builders to begin with
[20:45:27] <@mgorny> dilfridge: the floor is yours
[20:45:28] <@dilfridge> ok what I would like to bring up, also based on suggestions from others, is
[20:45:56] <@dilfridge> our main build machine for binary packages, stages, isos, milou.amd64, is often fully loaded
[20:46:19] <@dilfridge> meaning, with 16 cores and 32 threads, load 64 for over a week for example
[20:46:25] <@dilfridge> (I limit builds there)
[20:46:39] <@dilfridge> we discussed upgrading it in the past, but
[20:46:47] <@dilfridge> I think there is a better solution
[20:47:03] <@dilfridge> https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/matrix-ax/
[20:47:09] <@dilfridge> milou is an AX102
[20:47:28] <@dilfridge> instead of doing an expensive upgrade at double the price (and other offers are comparable)
[20:47:34] <@dilfridge> just add a second identical machine
[20:47:55] <@dilfridge> the builds can be split easily
[20:48:08] <@dilfridge> * binary packages amd64: one does x86-64, the other x86-64-v3
[20:48:20] <+Chewi> sounds good to me. adds some redundancy too.
[20:48:25] <@dilfridge> * arches are split over the machines, by number of stage3
[20:48:45] <@mgorny> makes sense
[20:48:47] <@dilfridge> that's it from me
[20:49:06] <@mgorny> we'd need a formal approval, but we can do that on the bug
[20:49:14] <@dilfridge> ok I can file one
[20:49:16] <@mgorny> robbat2: sounds good?
[20:49:46] <+ztrawhcse> it would be interesting if we could get hetzner to offer us a sponsorship for a bigger box, I know they have done so for other distros (to provide build servers, specifically)
[20:50:05] <@dilfridge> ztrawhcse: the bigger box has a lot more cores, but the cores themselves are slower
[20:50:21] <+ztrawhcse> but if we need to spend it that sounds reasonable 
[20:50:38] <@dilfridge> if you do the cheap calculation, cores x base clock, the result is roughly the same
[20:50:56] <@robbat2> hetzner sponsors 1 box, up to EUR60/mo [AX52]
[20:51:22] <+ztrawhcse> yeah my thinking is mainly that if they're willing to sponsor a box, it's possibly easier to ask to sponsor a bigger box than to ask to sponsor two boxes
[20:51:36] <@dilfridge> that's a different one anyway
[20:51:46] <@robbat2> we can see about asking
[20:51:55] <@robbat2> but let's start w/ the AX102 plan
[20:52:12] <@robbat2> we have some other older hosts at Hetzner that could use refreshing for minor consolidation as well
[20:52:19] <@dilfridge> wagtail?
[20:52:39] <@dilfridge> (anongit)
[20:53:35] <@robbat2> multiple; but anyway
[20:53:43] <@robbat2> i approve from the finance side
[20:53:52] <@mgorny> robbat2: thanks. let's move on to trademarks
[20:53:58] <@robbat2> it would not exceed present paypal monthly income
[20:53:59] <@mgorny> dilfridge: please remember to file the bug
[20:54:06] <@dilfridge> will do (tomorrow likely)
[20:54:07] <@robbat2> trademarks
[20:54:16] <@robbat2> as planned, I bundled the renewal together
[20:54:33] <@robbat2> submitting the *same* proof documentation for both trademarks
[20:54:58] <@robbat2> the word mark was due earlier; the image mark was the one that opened for renewal this past June
[20:55:22] <@robbat2> the *word* mark was approved; but the image mark they have rejected the proof I provided; requesting more
[20:55:59] <@robbat2> the rejection specifically:
[20:56:00] <@robbat2> Specifically, the specimen shows use
[20:56:01] <@robbat2> for stickers, t-shirts, coffee cups, notebooks, bumper stickers, wall clocks, mouse pads. The goods in
[20:56:04] <@robbat2> the registration comprise the following: Computer software, namely operating system software that
[20:56:08] <@robbat2> automatically configures and optimizes performance on the underlying hardware and is adapted for a
[20:56:11] <@robbat2> (end paste)
[20:56:14] <@robbat2> large number of usage scenarios and applications, namely, secure servers, development workstations,
[20:56:17] <@robbat2> professional desktops, gaming systems and embedded solutions. The specimen must be used on or in
[20:56:20] <@robbat2> connection with the goods and/or services listed in the registration. TMEP §1604.12(a).
[20:56:42] <@robbat2> last time we renewed; we included images of the gentoo CDs with artwork printed
[20:56:44] <@dilfridge> should I send a photo of my laptop with the stickerß
[20:56:45] <@dilfridge> ?
[20:57:04] <@robbat2> the problem is apparently that stickers don't "count"
[20:57:11] <@mgorny> robbat2: do screenshots count?
[20:57:27] <@robbat2> i included a screenshot of the Gentoo website already
[20:57:31] <@mgorny> or perhaps photos of hardware running gentoo, with gentoo artwork on desktop?
[20:57:44] <@robbat2> so the question is what to do differently
[20:57:55] <@robbat2> photos of systems running gentoo, with the *logo* clearly visible
[20:58:06] <@robbat2> https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78323020&docId=PROARR20251031122053&linkId=1#docIndex=0&page=2
[20:58:16] <@robbat2> for their "examples of specimens"
[20:58:30] <+Chewi> like the logo in the LibreOffice banner?
[20:58:40] <+ztrawhcse> finally a use case found for neofetch?
[20:58:52] <@sam_> was thinking that
[20:59:01] <@robbat2> i don't follow re neofetch?
[20:59:11] <@sam_> users often post screenshots of neofetch which includes an ascii gentoo logo
[20:59:19] <@mgorny> not sure if the ascii logo would count
[20:59:41] <+Chewi> I think the LibreOffice one would look suitable for people who have no clue about this stuff
[20:59:42] <@dilfridge> libreoffice banner has the gentoo logo indeed
[20:59:44] <@mgorny> do we have some other distros we could ask about how they managed?
[20:59:56] <@dilfridge> obviously I cant log out now
[21:00:09] <@dilfridge> but isnt the lightdm login screen customized?
[21:00:33] <@robbat2> action items here:
[21:00:37] <@mgorny> i'm sure people are using gentoo wallpapers too
[21:00:50] <@dilfridge> we should add a gentoo logo on startup
[21:00:50] <@robbat2> 1. find out which other distributions have trademarked logos; and their submissions that were accepted
[21:00:54] <@dilfridge> grub theme
[21:01:04] <@robbat2> 2. reproduce same in a semi-commercial setting
[21:01:11] <@robbat2> 3. submit to USPTO
[21:01:36] <+NeddySeagoon> What did we submit last time?
[21:01:51] <@sam_> already answered: CDs
[21:02:05] <@robbat2> NeddySeagoon: image of the Gentoo LiveDVD https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78323020&docId=PROARR20251031122053&linkId=1#docIndex=10&page=1 
[21:02:25] <@ulm> could we produce some usb memory sticks with the g logo and put them up for sale somewhere?
[21:02:31] <@sam_> (I do think we should try sell USBs with livegui etc o-)
[21:02:38] <@robbat2> and this conference shot: https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78323020&docId=PROARR20251031122053&linkId=1#docIndex=5&page=1
[21:02:50] <@sam_> what about our fosdem stand pics?
[21:03:25] <@robbat2> you can see what I submitted this year: https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78323020&docId=PROARR20251031122053&linkId=1#docIndex=2&page=1
[21:03:49] <@robbat2> i think they got stricter in enforcing rules
[21:03:53] <@robbat2> and we got lucky with the word mark
[21:04:14] <@robbat2> any questions re the action items? would like to have help on parts 1 & 2
[21:05:17] <@sam_> I'll look into 1) and go from there but please not just me
[21:05:20] <@mgorny> robbat2: could you file a tracking bug?
[21:05:21] <@sam_> we need as much help as possible there
[21:05:23] <@sam_> ^^ that too
[21:05:33] <@robbat2> yes; I can file bugs for it
[21:06:03] <@dilfridge> I can help, but I'll be travelling soon again, with fluctuating availability
[21:06:17] <@robbat2> i think the research will be the hardest part
[21:06:34] <@mgorny> i'll ask at dayjob if we know anyone
[21:06:37] <@robbat2> for any of that: find a linux distro with a logo, that is trademarked; find their trademark registration number, look it up at USPTO
[21:06:52] <@dilfridge> good plan
[21:06:53] <@robbat2> ideally recent, since the rules got stricter
[21:07:04] <@robbat2> and you only have to renew every 9-10 years
[21:07:27] <@robbat2> any more questions re trademark renewal?
[21:08:36] <@ulm> do we need help from a lawyer?
[21:09:23] <@robbat2> i would like us to have a plan & prepared materials, then ask a lawyer to review them for meeting the formal requirements
[21:09:36] <@sam_> how long do we have?
[21:09:49] <@robbat2> same hard deadline in June 2026
[21:09:53] <@sam_> ok
[21:09:56] <@robbat2> (USPTO must have it before then)
[21:09:59] <@dilfridge> that gives us some time
[21:10:03] <@robbat2> maybe worth a discussion of deadline
[21:10:07] <@sam_> so we've got time but this stuff is slow of course
[21:10:11] <@robbat2> we must complete the process by then
[21:10:16] <@sam_> yes
[21:10:24] <@robbat2> if submit something, and it gets refused again
[21:10:29] <@robbat2> that deadline is the same
[21:10:35] <@sam_> lovely..
[21:10:36] <@robbat2> so sooner is better
[21:11:02] <@mgorny> if we don't renew time, we have to register it again?
[21:11:13] <+NeddySeagoon> Get legal advice in parallel with data gathing
[21:11:32] <@robbat2> mgorny: there is an out there, but it's expensive, and might not be granted
[21:12:08] <@mgorny> also, what would it mean for us if we only had the name but not the logo trademarked? would it block others from creating a similar logo with "gentoo" name?
[21:12:29] <@robbat2> they could make a similar logo; without the name
[21:12:40] <@dilfridge> that's a mess we want to avoid I think
[21:13:20] <+NeddySeagoon> we could not enforce the logo use guidelines
[21:15:27] <@robbat2> any more questions here; so we can move on to ulm's item?
[21:16:23] <@mgorny> ulm: the floor is yours
[21:16:57] <@ulm> sam_: could we get a brief update on implementation status of eapi 9 in portage?
[21:17:14] <@sam_> I already gave an update last week and I gave you a private update about some of my personal circumstances
[21:17:26] <@sam_> I don't see this as appropriate for a council meeting, though
[21:18:01] <@sam_> I haven't had much time for portage other than doing a release and handling regressions
[21:18:14] <@sam_> in general, regressions and bug fixes take priority over new features (not just in portage)
[21:18:20] <@soap_> patches welcome :>
[21:18:31] <@sam_> if you want to help with that, take bugs off my hands or otherwise free up more of my time, if you cannot work on patches yourself
[21:18:37] <@sam_> exactly ;)
[21:18:52] <@ulm> well, I did quite a few of the features
[21:19:23] <@sam_> and I thank you for that, it just doesn't mean you should ask again after I already gave you an update not long ago (and with additional private detail)
[21:19:27] <+ztrawhcse> okay but that's not related to how work progresses onward after that
[21:19:38] <@ulm> "patches welcome" isn't really fair
[21:19:51] <@sam_> is it fair to badger me after I already gave you an update?
[21:19:53] <+ztrawhcse> the general principle of "patches welcome or do other things to free up my time" is applicable at all times.
[21:20:20] <@ulm> sam_: it's not about you personally, it's about the status of the implementation
[21:20:24] <+ztrawhcse> sending a bunch of patches is very good but it doesn't obligate someone else to then match your effort with their own patches 
[21:20:29] <@sam_> but I already gave you an answer, it will not have changed since then..
[21:20:55] -*- mgorny passed on the trademark question
[21:24:10] <@mgorny> ulm: perhaps you want a tracker bug for the council?
[21:24:20] <@mgorny> are we done for today?
[21:24:27] <@ulm> it's only interesting that when some special purpose feature is needed in portage then it gets implemented, but when an eapi feature comes along that shares 90% of the implementation then nobody cares
[21:24:41] <@sam_> please do not take me being busy as "nobody cares"
[21:24:44] <@sam_> that is insulting and unfair
[21:25:02] <@ulm> sam_: again, this is not about you
[21:25:21] <@dilfridge> let's stop this please. each of us also has a non-gentoo life.
[21:25:22] <@sam_> why ask me about it specifically then, and not mention the update I'd given you already, and ask despite that?
[21:25:26] <@sam_> yes, i think that's for the best
[21:25:28] <+ztrawhcse> a tracker bug for this sounds great! that way people who are interested in putting in effort towards EAPI 9 know what to work on 
[21:25:43] <+ztrawhcse> let's not make this about querying specific people about whether they have put in enough effort 
[21:26:03] -*- mgorny sends ulm and sam_ to the corner
[21:26:10] <+ztrawhcse> example: I have *no* idea what to work on if I wanted to
[21:26:16] <@mgorny> any other open floor items?
[21:26:34] <@dilfridge> ztrawhcse: running kde? :P
[21:26:55] <+ztrawhcse> kde enforcement is being delayed for EAPI 10
[21:28:00] <@ulm> and eapi 11 will rewrite ebuilds in xml, for the obligatory zynot joke :)
[21:28:35] <@dilfridge> <no />
[21:29:34] <@robbat2> 2003 called; it wants the bad jokes back
[21:30:16] <@dilfridge> nobody except us remembers zynot anyway
[21:30:19] -*- mgorny bangs the gavel
[21:30:22] <@mgorny> thanks, everyone
[21:30:30] <@dilfridge> thank you
[21:30:37] <@dilfridge> we'll manage this somehow.
[21:30:43] <@sam_> thakns