[18:00:01] <@mgornyz> !proj council
[18:00:01] <willikins> mgornyz: (council@gentoo.org) arthurzam, dilfridge, eschwartz, floppym, mgorny, sam, ulm
[18:00:11] <-> You are now known as mgorny
[18:00:16] <@mgorny> today's agenda: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/0be1b01284ed905cbc076614c37b80aed5b4e9ce.camel@gentoo.org/T/#u
[18:00:23] <@mgorny> 1. Roll call
[18:00:28] -*- dilfridge here
[18:00:31] -*- sam_ here
[18:00:31] -*- ulm here
[18:00:33] -*- mgorny here
[18:00:35] -*- floppym here
[18:01:26] <@mgorny> arthurzam, ztrawhcse:
[18:01:39] -*- ztrawhcse here
[18:02:45] <@mgorny> anyone seen arthurzam around?
[18:03:28] <ztrawhcse> not since last night
[18:04:04] <@mgorny> does anyone have a contact handy?
[18:04:19] <@sam_> yes i'll signal
[18:04:29] <@sam_> done
[18:04:33] <@mgorny> thx
[18:04:52] <@mgorny> let's start with the boring part in the meantime
[18:05:00] <@mgorny> 2. Open bugs with Council participation [1]
[18:05:04] <@mgorny> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council#Open_bugs_with_Council_participation
[18:05:13] <@mgorny> bug 936211
[18:05:13] -*- dilfridge goes stand in the corner
[18:05:13] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/936211 "[Tracker] Gentoo Foundation dissolution"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; CONF; ulm:trustees
[18:05:23] <@mgorny> fwics nothing new here
[18:05:44] <@mgorny> bug961301
[18:05:45] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/961301 "[Tracker] Requests for metadata/AUTHORS"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; ulm:council
[18:05:55] <@mgorny> nothing here either
[18:06:03] <@mgorny> bug 961811
[18:06:04] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/961811 "Consider procuring Token2 PIN+ security keys for developers"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; tamiko:council
[18:06:11] <@mgorny> any updates from soap?
[18:06:26] <@soap> sorry, work is killing me
[18:06:45] <@mgorny> bug 962281
[18:06:46] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/962281 "Clean up consultants list"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; IN_P; negril.nx+gentoo:council
[18:06:53] <@sam_> I think this is sorted now?
[18:07:01] <@mgorny> yeah, i think so
[18:07:06] <@ulm> yes
[18:07:09] <@sam_> Need to check if we wrote the new policy on the wiki page
[18:07:21] <@sam_> ah, yes, we did
[18:07:21] <@mgorny> bug 965900
[18:07:22] <willikins> https://bugs.gentoo.org/965900 "GLEP 63: update key recommendations"; Documentation, GLEP Changes; CONF; mgorny:council
[18:07:23] <negril> 👍
[18:07:29] <@mgorny> waiting on token2
[18:07:39] <@mgorny> bug 980497
[18:07:39] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/980497 "Missing summary for 20260510 and 20260614 council meetings"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; ulm:dilfridge
[18:07:46] <@dilfridge> yes, I'll do it
[18:07:47] <@mgorny> dilfridge
[18:08:02] <@mgorny> plz check -private now
[18:08:31] <@dilfridge> that's also done 
[18:08:50] <@mgorny> bug 982282
[18:08:51] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/982282 "Update link to consultants after wiki page move"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Web Node Issues; CONF; ulm:infra-bugs
[18:09:19] <@ulm> not sure what is blocking this one
[18:09:38] <@ulm> patch is attached
[18:09:40] <@mgorny> mergeed now
[18:10:04] <@ulm> thanks
[18:10:05] <@mgorny> and bug 983925
[18:10:05] <willikins> mgorny: https://bugs.gentoo.org/983925 ""WSLtoo" WSL distribution using Gentoo trademark"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; jayf:council
[18:10:44] <@mgorny> opinions?
[18:11:17] <@mgorny> I see "© 2026 t3m3d. Independent Gentoo‑based spin. Not affiliated with the Gentoo Foundation."
[18:11:25] <ztrawhcse> under "additional information", Published by
[18:11:25] <ztrawhcse> > © 2026 t3m3d. Independent Gentoo‑based spin. Not affiliated with the Gentoo Foundation.
[18:11:40] <ztrawhcse> but the main features are full of "official" this, "official" that
[18:11:56] <@sam_> https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9nt1lhrm5xlr is the listing link (it's in URL in the bug but easy to miss)
[18:12:02] <ztrawhcse> which feels misleading
[18:12:15] <@ulm> looks like it is at least stretching or trademark usage policy
[18:12:19] <@sam_> ztrawhcse: yeah, I gree
[18:12:20] <@sam_> *agree
[18:12:26] <@mgorny> not sure about the logo
[18:12:49] <@floppym> I wonder what "offical OpenRC stage3" means.
[18:12:54] <@dilfridge> just ask to do it similar as for void
[18:13:01] <@ulm> is the logo only used in the screenshot?
[18:13:08] <@sam_> +1
[18:13:15] <@mgorny> i mean their logo, it looks derived from ours
[18:13:31] <@dilfridge> I guess there is no separate stage build, they just use ours and do config on top
[18:13:34] <ztrawhcse> they are charging $2 for it
[18:13:37] <@floppym> That logo looks nothing like the Gentoo logo at a glance.
[18:14:00] <@floppym> If I stare at it long enough, I can kind of see it.
[18:14:08] <ztrawhcse> Ot
[18:14:16] <@mgorny> yeah, i think it's far enough
[18:14:17] <ztrawhcse> It is difficult to notice the cos
[18:14:20] <@ulm> colours are similar, but tey are not even part of the trademark
[18:14:44] <ztrawhcse> because seems like the microsoft store doesn't show you a cost description on product pages, only on search pages lol
[18:14:46] <@mgorny> so a request to put "unofficial" in the name?
[18:15:06] <ztrawhcse> but I was suspicious because "discover more" shows lots of other distros by the same publisher, all of which cost money
[18:15:36] <@ulm> if they mention "wheel sudo" it probably means there's not much else :)
[18:15:40] <@floppym> Personally, I don't really see much of an issue here.
[18:16:14] <@mgorny> yeah, i think "gentoo based spin" is clear enough that it's not an official Gentoo product
[18:16:16] <ztrawhcse> my main concern is that they are a) charging money for it, b) the description makes it very hard to tell at a glance that this isn't officially approved
[18:16:21] <@mgorny> wouldn't hurt to ask them to add "unofficial" there
[18:16:36] <ztrawhcse> for a) it is not directly a problem but it decreases my likelihood to give them a pass for b)
[18:16:37] <@dilfridge> charging money is not really a problem
[18:16:48] <@ulm> so contact them? directly, or via lawyer?
[18:16:48] <@sam_> floppym: it came up because of a user being surprised it was there and not being totally sure if we had approved it
[18:17:13] <@sam_> so I'd say ask them to treat like Void, as dilfridge said (i.e. add "unofficial", and stop saying "official" so much), and that be all
[18:17:17] <@mgorny> kinda funny void is free, and exherbo costs half as much
[18:17:18] <@sam_> anyone disagree with that?
[18:17:25] <ztrawhcse> if you are charging money for this, you're doing this as a commercial business, it behooves you to not engage in false advertising
[18:17:32] <@floppym> I feel like if they said "based on official OpenRC stage3", that would make it clear to me.
[18:17:35] <@ulm> sam_: sounds good
[18:17:46] <@mgorny> ulm: directly
[18:18:06] <ztrawhcse> I could forgive the enthusiasm of a user who created a thing and is offering it to the world free of charge to share their work, that is not what is going on here
[18:18:21] <@floppym> But yeah, I agree that asking them to make that "official" less ambiguous makes sense.
[18:18:45] <@mgorny> do we need some vote? imo not to mail
[18:18:52] <@dilfridge> nah
[18:19:06] <@mgorny> worst case we can report to microsoft store
[18:19:12] <@dilfridge> no need to become overyl formal yet
[18:19:28] <@mgorny> also, kinda wondering if gentoo is PEGI 3 xD
[18:19:46] <@mgorny> we have a lot of "offensive" stuff
[18:19:57] <@dilfridge> systemd?
[18:20:07] <@floppym> Oh lol, it says ESRB E for me. ^_^
[18:20:12] <@floppym> E for Everyone
[18:20:31] <@mgorny> do we have a volunteer to do the contacting?
[18:21:32] <ztrawhcse> it does have one content warning: "Photosensitive seizure warning"
[18:21:38] <ztrawhcse> interesting...
[18:22:05] <@dilfridge> that you can more or less apply to anything outputting stuff on a screen
[18:22:16] <@mgorny> okay, i'll do it
[18:22:20] <@mgorny> (if i find a contact address0
[18:22:25] <@floppym> Thanks! ^_^
[18:22:29] <@mgorny> 3. Open floor
[18:22:38] <@mgorny> do we want to discuss sponsorships?
[18:22:44] <@mgorny> (publicly or privately?)
[18:22:57] <@dilfridge> not really council purview
[18:22:58] <@dilfridge> yet
[18:23:09] <@dilfridge> let's do it aftewards in -infra?
[18:23:11] <@ulm> yes, it's a little early
[18:23:32] <@mgorny> okay, anything for open floor then?
[18:23:38] <@dilfridge> I mean the main point to be discussed is technical (what do we want? who are you?)
[18:23:39] <@sam_> it's only been a few days, and plan is to try look at the requests today 
[18:24:02] <@mgorny> yeah, i mostly mentioned it because everyone's around now
[18:24:16] <@dilfridge> the main point is, we should talk about it, so someone (me? robbat2?) can reply
[18:24:30] <@dilfridge> but its not a council thing yet imho
[18:24:34] -*- sam_ nods
[18:24:44] <ztrawhcse> hmm, I'm still waiting for jstein to discuss giving me access to mastodon, we never cross-posted the sponsorship article there yet
[18:24:46] <@sam_> by next meeting we should have done something with it i'd say, but not yet
[18:25:06] <@dilfridge> robbat2 could also reply on his own because he knows stuff, I dont
[18:25:10] <@sam_> nonetheless probably good to have this in the logs as it's a nice initiative we did :)
[18:25:15] <@sam_> https://www.gentoo.org/news/2026/10/07/infrastructure-sponsors-wanted.html
[18:25:35] <@dilfridge> and the response is rather nice so far
[18:28:42] -*- mgorny bangs the gavel
[18:28:45] <@mgorny> thanks, everyone!
[18:29:13] <@sam_> thanks!
[18:29:14] <@ulm> thanks for chairing