[2019/06/03 02:53:49] meeting is in 10 min? [2019/06/03 02:54:58] 5 min now yes [2019/06/03 02:55:07] nobody created an agenda yet, so I threw up https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Meetings/2019/06 [2019/06/03 02:55:28] eh ? [2019/06/03 02:55:35] thanks [2019/06/03 02:58:45] +1 [2019/06/03 02:59:21] damnit.. its 3am UTC/4am BST :/ [2019/06/03 02:59:21] * Shentino passes around teas and sodas for refreshments before the meeting starts [2019/06/03 02:59:56] ah and 30s respect to the passing of grumpy cats and all other internet cats [2019/06/03 03:00:07] s/cats/ca/ [2019/06/03 03:00:11] including cheeseburger cat [2019/06/03 03:00:12] oh fuckit. [2019/06/03 03:00:21] y'all interpolate [2019/06/03 03:00:30] antarus: ? [2019/06/03 03:00:31] * veremitz raises glass to Shentino and falls quiet. [2019/06/03 03:00:34] s/ah/oh/g ? [2019/06/03 03:00:39] * Shentino hushes now for official meeting [2019/06/03 03:01:10] hi [2019/06/03 03:01:21] i was trying up other aganda [2019/06/03 03:01:22] hello [2019/06/03 03:01:38] alicef, antarus, prometheanfire, b-man, robbat2; this meeting is called to order! [2019/06/03 03:01:51] * b-man is here [2019/06/03 03:01:58] NeddySeagoon's asleep so we don't have a gavel ;-) [2019/06/03 03:02:19] robbat2: antarus is here so let's wait for his announce [2019/06/03 03:02:32] I'm happy with the delegation ;) [2019/06/03 03:02:38] or we are just getting confusion [2019/06/03 03:03:01] antarus: should be stated before the meeting [2019/06/03 03:03:06] such delegation [2019/06/03 03:03:10] not during the meeting [2019/06/03 03:03:32] * veremitz looks around for meetbot [2019/06/03 03:03:44] prometheanfire: reping, you're the only absent one [2019/06/03 03:03:53] * antarus rolls his eyes [2019/06/03 03:04:23] he was about in hardened earlier, fwiw. [2019/06/03 03:05:06] oh and here, derp. [2019/06/03 03:05:13] we have quorum meanwhile [2019/06/03 03:05:13] * veremitz sips drink and hushes [2019/06/03 03:06:00] i'll post the logs & minutes [2019/06/03 03:06:09] yo [2019/06/03 03:06:33] somebody else can do motions; antarus gets further emails by default [2019/06/03 03:06:51] antarus: call for the roll call [2019/06/03 03:06:57] I can do motions [2019/06/03 03:07:06] roll call then [2019/06/03 03:07:09] present [2019/06/03 03:07:11] o/ [2019/06/03 03:07:11] present [2019/06/03 03:07:30] present [2019/06/03 03:07:32] present [2019/06/03 03:08:02] alicef: ? [2019/06/03 03:08:11] alicef raised her hand via emote [2019/06/03 03:08:15] "o/" [2019/06/03 03:08:17] (that was hand raise action) [2019/06/03 03:08:17] present [2019/06/03 03:08:19] I'd think o/ works, but that's just me :P [2019/06/03 03:08:45] it always change the roll call :P [2019/06/03 03:08:50] It seems its a day of pedantry ;) [2019/06/03 03:09:04] i can show some cases of o/ roll call [2019/06/03 03:09:09] Shentino: I want to keep this short and efficent, can I ask that you not speak at least until open floor? [2019/06/03 03:09:15] motions please [2019/06/03 03:09:22] robbat2: agreed [2019/06/03 03:09:41] robbat2: at least cut the off topic [2019/06/03 03:09:47] ok, we have two critical items to sort out [2019/06/03 03:09:51] related of course [2019/06/03 03:10:27] the date of the AGM, and the date of recording for voting, and implicit to those the dates for the election [2019/06/03 03:10:50] legally we're required to set both [2019/06/03 03:11:07] i am travelling a lot in August [2019/06/03 03:11:17] ok [2019/06/03 03:11:33] we can choose next agm date as we did this time [2019/06/03 03:11:39] August 9-20th I'm completely unavailable [2019/06/03 03:11:55] travelling to betelguese's wedding in Helsinki amongst other things [2019/06/03 03:12:05] there's a chance I will be as well for a week, but that's totally up in the air (it'd be inbetween semesters type of thing) [2019/06/03 03:12:07] robbat2: We will send another mail for choosing the time [2019/06/03 03:12:25] alicef: no, we have to set it now, because it impacts the election dates [2019/06/03 03:12:32] ok [2019/06/03 03:12:39] i'm ok on this hour [2019/06/03 03:13:00] ok, 03:00 UTC, but what day? [2019/06/03 03:13:00] and I have no preference of days [2019/06/03 03:13:05] I will live on the west coast by then, so 0300 UTC is fine for me [2019/06/03 03:13:15] fine by me at 0300 UTC [2019/06/03 03:13:20] b-man: do you have any restrictions on date? [2019/06/03 03:13:27] no date restrictions [2019/06/03 03:13:33] prometheanfire: can you be specific what date range does not work for you? [2019/06/03 03:13:34] but I will be busy with OSS japan presentation and plumbers [2019/06/03 03:13:54] robbat2: ignore it for now, I don't have any dates yet [2019/06/03 03:14:34] oss japan is july 17-19 [2019/06/03 03:14:36] the agm is after the election, or it doesn't matter? [2019/06/03 03:14:41] strictly after [2019/06/03 03:14:57] traditionally the AGM has been the handover date [2019/06/03 03:14:59] and plumbers is September 9-11 [2019/06/03 03:15:02] after the election [2019/06/03 03:15:17] so early or late august [2019/06/03 03:15:29] aug 25, 0300 utc? [2019/06/03 03:15:38] ok, 2019/08/26 03:00 UTC; that's the evening of sunday 8pm on the Pacific coast [2019/06/03 03:15:55] oh yes, that one, when its a sunday in America ;) [2019/06/03 03:16:09] it's in 12 weeks time [2019/06/03 03:16:19] sunday, sure [2019/06/03 03:16:23] should be enough to set a date and hold an election [2019/06/03 03:17:13] ok, so then working backwards for other dates [2019/06/03 03:17:28] aug 25 is ok for me [2019/06/03 03:17:37] b-man: if you could explicitly confirm 2019/08/26 03:00 UTC too please [2019/06/03 03:17:43] good for me [2019/06/03 03:17:46] 26 ok for me too [2019/06/03 03:17:53] ok, so AGM date is set [2019/06/03 03:18:04] 2019/08/26 03:00 UTC ack [2019/06/03 03:18:21] so we need a recording date & election timeline [2019/06/03 03:18:24] we need to allow: [2019/06/03 03:18:36] enough time between now & recording for any final applicants for membership [2019/06/03 03:18:50] enough time between close of primary & AGM for a second round election if it comes to that [2019/06/03 03:18:54] 1 week enough time? [2019/06/03 03:19:02] for applicants [2019/06/03 03:19:22] 2 weeks for the second round election is what we've permitted in the past [2019/06/03 03:19:30] that would imply we would approve them without a meeting, or hold a meeting 1w from the record date [2019/06/03 03:19:49] yep, it'd be a quick meeting [2019/06/03 03:19:59] I think one week is more than enough but it depend on the nominations number [2019/06/03 03:20:25] I think 1w is probably not enough time, I'd probably advocate for 2 [2019/06/03 03:20:36] I can see that, some vacations are week long [2019/06/03 03:20:47] ok for me also two weeks [2019/06/03 03:20:56] Its june 3, we can record essentially, june 20, thats over 2 weeks away. [2019/06/03 03:21:00] one sec [2019/06/03 03:21:20] Then we start election 2 week nomination, 2 week voting; would basically conclude the election the last week in July [2019/06/03 03:21:30] and if we need a second election it would conclude still before the AGM [2019/06/03 03:21:49] antarus: sounds good [2019/06/03 03:21:54] wfm [2019/06/03 03:21:55] robbat2: thoughts? [2019/06/03 03:22:07] (i'm just typing up something to paste) [2019/06/03 03:22:27] is only one seat this time ? [2019/06/03 03:22:42] (at least one seat ;-) [2019/06/03 03:25:32] * antarus waits [2019/06/03 03:26:19] 2019/06/11: nominations open [2019/06/03 03:26:19] 2019/06/30: recording date [2019/06/03 03:26:19] 2019/07/10 00:00: nominations close [2019/06/03 03:26:19] (2 days for election setup) [2019/06/03 03:26:19] 2019/07/13 00:00: election open [2019/06/03 03:26:21] 2019/08/10 23:59: election close [2019/06/03 03:26:24] (1 day turnaround in case of second election) [2019/06/03 03:26:26] (2 weeks for second round) [2019/06/03 03:26:29] 2019/08/26 03:00: AGM [2019/06/03 03:27:00] 08/24 is the second election if needed [2019/06/03 03:27:05] 08/25 for results [2019/06/03 03:27:57] It feels a little close [2019/06/03 03:28:01] and the nomination period long [2019/06/03 03:28:12] but I suppose some folks will be off the entire month of June [2019/06/03 03:28:19] nominations can be independent of recording [2019/06/03 03:28:21] I'm happy with it if you are [2019/06/03 03:28:30] one sec, editing for a 2nd round [2019/06/03 03:28:37] meanwhile, to provoke debate [2019/06/03 03:28:40] robbat2: k [2019/06/03 03:28:50] i stood in because we had an out of cycle retirement [2019/06/03 03:29:01] and I feel that this year has been weird [2019/06/03 03:29:09] what means ? [2019/06/03 03:29:14] i stood in [2019/06/03 03:29:14] so I intend to step back and ask to be re-confirmed by the electorate [2019/06/03 03:29:30] and I'd like to ask more of the trustees to do the same [2019/06/03 03:29:32] alicef: s/stood/stepped/ [2019/06/03 03:29:42] alicef: you're regularly up for election [2019/06/03 03:29:44] robbat2: you will leave the seat ? [2019/06/03 03:30:03] robbat2: dosen't need that you remember me [2019/06/03 03:30:16] robbat2: I think you are the only out of cycle trustee atm [2019/06/03 03:30:23] robbat2: I'm asking about you [2019/06/03 03:30:44] Not to provoke debate [2019/06/03 03:30:49] but I also plan to resign [2019/06/03 03:30:55] both from the board, the foundation, and from Gentoo [2019/06/03 03:31:08] (can you use both for 3 things? who knows) [2019/06/03 03:31:11] antarus: that's a big change, this cycle? [2019/06/03 03:31:25] alicef: put myself delibately up for re-election, even if I would otherwise have a year [2019/06/03 03:31:25] aka next month or two? [2019/06/03 03:31:35] I mean I need to resign from the board soon to make my spot available [2019/06/03 03:31:40] robbat2: ok [2019/06/03 03:31:47] I will probably resign from the rest during the AGM in august [2019/06/03 03:32:09] ok, so we have at least 3 seats open for election now [2019/06/03 03:32:15] alicef, robbat2, antarus [2019/06/03 03:32:26] or whatever work I need to do to make that happen; I don't feel a strong need to resign such that we need to elect a new president for 2 months [2019/06/03 03:32:32] that seems pretty wasteful [2019/06/03 03:32:47] without antarus we also need a president election [2019/06/03 03:32:56] ok, that can be done at the agm [2019/06/03 03:32:57] yeah, specifically putting myself up for re-election, not resigning ahead of that [2019/06/03 03:33:08] selecting the next president [2019/06/03 03:33:20] antarus: ok [2019/06/03 03:33:24] the president is selected every year, so you would elect a new one even if I stayed on [2019/06/03 03:33:30] iirc we didn allow council to be trustees :P [2019/06/03 03:33:37] so maybe they can finally step up [2019/06/03 03:33:48] antarus: I accept that you want to do that, but ask that you DO accept a nomination to continue as a trustee [2019/06/03 03:34:06] i'll nominate you when the official period starts [2019/06/03 03:34:10] lol [2019/06/03 03:34:19] we can talk after class then [2019/06/03 03:34:22] ok [2019/06/03 03:34:26] because you've done more to TRY and find a CPA than previous boards [2019/06/03 03:34:40] sure you had crap luck with not one, but two leads [2019/06/03 03:34:41] so we intend for 3 seats to be open [2019/06/03 03:34:46] at least 3 seats [2019/06/03 03:34:59] prometheanfire, b-man: do you want to go for resigning/re-election as well? [2019/06/03 03:35:29] robbat2: I have no reason to do so and I don't really understand why you are. [2019/06/03 03:35:34] robbat2: I could go for reelection, make it a clean sweap [2019/06/03 03:35:43] I don't have much of a reason imo, but meh [2019/06/03 03:36:37] I'm also curious what robin's goal is here [2019/06/03 03:36:38] I think robbat just wants a clean mandate to carry on [2019/06/03 03:36:39] prometheanfire: I will nominate you, if you go for reelection. [2019/06/03 03:36:52] * prometheanfire shrugs [2019/06/03 03:37:05] confirmation that everybody thinks we're actually doing a good job [2019/06/03 03:37:09] prometheanfire: I think you did a really good work as president [2019/06/03 03:37:20] instead of the rotten tomatos & crickets that we hear [2019/06/03 03:37:40] robbat2: give council a chance to step in it too :D [2019/06/03 03:37:41] I think that is mostly around taxes [2019/06/03 03:37:52] I didn't do as good around taxes as I should have [2019/06/03 03:37:53] I think the minimum board is 3 [2019/06/03 03:37:54] FWIW [2019/06/03 03:38:00] according to NM state law [2019/06/03 03:38:03] and I will prep the paperwork here soon [2019/06/03 03:38:12] robbat2: not sure that the opinion can change by reelection [2019/06/03 03:38:14] so you would have to keep at least 1 of the 3 nominated and voted in [2019/06/03 03:38:14] My move is almost complete. [2019/06/03 03:38:34] anyway, I want to keep the meeting to 1h [2019/06/03 03:38:40] can we please approve the schedule? [2019/06/03 03:38:44] the ballot does include none-of-the-above [2019/06/03 03:38:51] schedule works for me [2019/06/03 03:38:51] one sec, almost have the 2nd pass schedule ready [2019/06/03 03:38:59] I'm happy to discuss strategy of resignations and whatnot, we don't need to resign in the meeting ;) [2019/06/03 03:39:42] we can self nominate, imo this is to allow fresh blood in if desired [2019/06/03 03:39:48] 2019/06/16 xx:xx: nominations open [2019/06/03 03:39:48] 2019/06/30 xx:xx: *July Meeting & recording date [2019/06/03 03:39:48] 2019/07/07 00:00: nominations close [2019/06/03 03:39:48] 2019/07/10 00:00: election open [2019/06/03 03:39:48] 2019/08/10 23:59: election close [2019/06/03 03:39:51] 2019/08/07 xx:xx election turnaround day [2019/06/03 03:39:53] 2019/08/09 00:00: second election open [2019/06/03 03:39:56] 2019/08/23 23:59: second election closes [2019/06/03 03:39:58] 2019/08/24 xx:xx: second election results [2019/06/03 03:40:01] 2019/08/26 03:00: AGM [2019/06/03 03:40:14] robbat2: ack [2019/06/03 03:40:18] motion to approve election shedule [2019/06/03 03:40:23] robbat2: ack [2019/06/03 03:40:24] * b-man yay [2019/06/03 03:40:35] robbat2: we also need the manifest time ? [2019/06/03 03:40:55] manifestos you mean? [2019/06/03 03:40:56] there's a chance I will NOT be present for a July meeting, but I will be able to vote by email within a day or so [2019/06/03 03:41:09] like some time for write the manifestos and show it around [2019/06/03 03:41:17] the nomination period is a month [2019/06/03 03:41:22] aye [2019/06/03 03:41:23] I assume they coincide [2019/06/03 03:41:24] 3 weeks now [2019/06/03 03:41:26] not a month [2019/06/03 03:41:35] ah, sure still plenty of time ;) [2019/06/03 03:41:57] and I'd like note for the record, that if a new dev wants to get recorded AND run for election, go right ahead [2019/06/03 03:41:59] robbat2: just something that I remember we did previous years, I don't mind to skip it [2019/06/03 03:42:15] and merge with nomitation [2019/06/03 03:42:22] the foundation has approved EVERY applicant for membership ever [2019/06/03 03:42:40] alicef: yes, no explicit candidicacy period [2019/06/03 03:42:51] robbat2: ok [2019/06/03 03:42:59] everyone ok on this ? [2019/06/03 03:43:01] I vote aye on the new schedule [2019/06/03 03:43:09] * b-man aye [2019/06/03 03:43:10] it would be good to have published manifestos prior to election start [2019/06/03 03:43:10] aye [2019/06/03 03:43:28] If the candidate is nominated they should publish their manifesto [2019/06/03 03:43:35] manifestos are NOT required [2019/06/03 03:43:48] nowhere in articles of incorporation, bylaws, or anything else [2019/06/03 03:43:58] ok well optionally [2019/06/03 03:43:59] I vote aye on the new schedule [2019/06/03 03:44:00] I didn't mean to say it is required [2019/06/03 03:44:17] alicef: yay or nay on the schedule? [2019/06/03 03:44:21] Just that candidates have *plenty* of time to publish one if they want [2019/06/03 03:44:30] antarus: already replayed yay [2019/06/03 03:44:45] ack [2019/06/03 03:44:46] the motion passes [2019/06/03 03:44:50] ok, that's the formal new business concluded [2019/06/03 03:44:55] we have open bugs [2019/06/03 03:44:55] antarus: my qustion on the manifestos was only for understandig how it work out [2019/06/03 03:45:15] alicef: anybody accepting a nomination should hopefully respond with a blurb. FIN [2019/06/03 03:45:52] antarus: I have a request regarding the CPA search [2019/06/03 03:45:55] robbat2: was not specified in the schedule [2019/06/03 03:46:06] robbat2: maybe we can make it more clear [2019/06/03 03:46:21] since there is no privacy restrictions, I would like a page that publically tracks every CPA & referral we've gotten [2019/06/03 03:46:25] including dates [2019/06/03 03:46:43] FWIW... I will generate the paperwork to request tax exemption and retroactive status. [2019/06/03 03:46:56] Unless there are objections to that still... [2019/06/03 03:47:10] yay for me [2019/06/03 03:47:29] b-man++ [2019/06/03 03:47:30] alicef: ok, we can include that mention re manifestos in the text [2019/06/03 03:47:32] robbat2: I'm not sure I have exact dates, but I have notes / emails for most of these [2019/06/03 03:48:13] antarus: notes are ok, maybe you can blank out personal data [2019/06/03 03:48:24] robbat2: wfm [2019/06/03 03:48:35] antarus: even just the month would be useful [2019/06/03 03:48:40] I mean I don't planon publishing their phone numbers [2019/06/03 03:48:44] b-man: one of your roles as secretary is to verify the membership list against the subscribers to the foundation-announce list, and send out an email ASAP about the recording & AGM dates [2019/06/03 03:48:46] antarus: yes [2019/06/03 03:48:50] but I think its reasonable to provide dates and names [2019/06/03 03:49:01] robbat2: rgr [2019/06/03 03:49:24] b-man: you can resend such work to me, if you are busy in other things [2019/06/03 03:49:45] alicef: thx [2019/06/03 03:49:49] ok, open bugs [2019/06/03 03:50:16] ok [2019/06/03 03:50:17] bug 668682: I added Patrick's legal chinese name. any objections or other concerns? he never responded to alice's request [2019/06/03 03:50:34] I updated it recently [2019/06/03 03:50:41] None. [2019/06/03 03:51:07] I think if he dosen't have it on the passport should be added as CN [2019/06/03 03:51:09] but if is in the passport need to be should be added as SN/givenName. [2019/06/03 03:51:11] But not without the requiring party consent. [2019/06/03 03:51:17] bug 684170: I think re cannot require valid email addresses to continue forever for simple technical reasons [2019/06/03 03:51:19] robbat2: https://bugs.gentoo.org/684170 "Copyright policy: should we require working (delivering) e-mail addresses?"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; mgorny:council [2019/06/03 03:51:41] we didn't even vote to the previous one... [2019/06/03 03:51:42] robbat2: agreed (cannot require valid email addresses to continue forever for simple technical reasons) [2019/06/03 03:51:51] we vote in the bugs [2019/06/03 03:52:07] I think the email address is part of how we decide if a commit is legitimate [2019/06/03 03:52:14] prometheanfire: not in the 668682 [2019/06/03 03:52:20] alicef: at that point in time, yes [2019/06/03 03:52:21] whether a particular address is or not, is debatable, similarly to the actual author's name [2019/06/03 03:52:29] antarus: at that point in time, yes [2019/06/03 03:52:41] prometheanfire: what? where [2019/06/03 03:52:43] ? [2019/06/03 03:52:47] alicef: mistab [2019/06/03 03:53:10] I'm suggesting that we are allowed to use the email address when deciding whether to accept a commit or not [2019/06/03 03:53:28] but I'm also not saying that the email address needs to work / be deliverable / etc. [2019/06/03 03:53:29] no for the [2019/06/03 03:53:34] The email and the name are identifying attributes of the commit. [2019/06/03 03:53:36] 684170 [2019/06/03 03:53:59] antarus: so I can use bob@example.com? [2019/06/03 03:54:07] prometheanfire: absolutely [2019/06/03 03:54:09] why not email and matching gpg sig? [2019/06/03 03:54:11] prometheanfire: yes why not [2019/06/03 03:54:33] because example.com is more or less no ones domain [2019/06/03 03:54:33] prometheanfire: I think its up to the committer as to whether to trust that or not, isn't it? [2019/06/03 03:54:35] veremitz: We are already technically enforce the gpg sig [2019/06/03 03:54:50] b-man: sure, so why not matching email? [2019/06/03 03:54:51] antarus: sure [2019/06/03 03:54:55] veremitz: It does... [2019/06/03 03:54:56] prometheanfire: that is your problem [2019/06/03 03:55:02] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-3 [2019/06/03 03:55:04] veremitz: the key or a subkey must match teh email [2019/06/03 03:55:17] we only require signatures from the committer [2019/06/03 03:55:20] b-man: I don't think that's specified in glep67/8 [2019/06/03 03:55:21] that was my point more than anything (the domain is reserved) [2019/06/03 03:55:25] not from the author of a commit [2019/06/03 03:55:39] prometheanfire: i could use alice@foo.me and than throw it away [2019/06/03 03:55:42] the committer is certifying the DCO though [2019/06/03 03:55:54] prometheanfire: what is the different and how you can enforce it [2019/06/03 03:56:02] difference [2019/06/03 03:56:38] alicef: the something special about example.com specifically, no one can use it as 'theirs' it's reserved by the ietf [2019/06/03 03:56:43] b-man: why wouldn't the committer insist on comparable standards? ie. delegate responsibility/etc [2019/06/03 03:56:49] i think it can be expanded to: does jsut the committer have to certify the DCO/GCO; or both the committer AND author [2019/06/03 03:56:54] sorry, this is OT for now .. [2019/06/03 03:57:02] prometheanfire: mgorny is not only talking about example.com [2019/06/03 03:57:13] the example is a github noreply address [2019/06/03 03:57:16] prometheanfire: he was talbing also about opinionable email [2019/06/03 03:57:21] talking [2019/06/03 03:57:25] where is pretty clear the email will be discarded by machines [2019/06/03 03:57:36] robbat2: just the commiter as they certify para 4 based on the author's work. [2019/06/03 03:57:39] I think you have two avenues here [2019/06/03 03:57:47] Let's just block *@users.noreply.github.com [2019/06/03 03:57:54] antarus: i can use my spam email, you have no way to find the differences [2019/06/03 03:57:57] 3min or defer ;) [2019/06/03 03:58:04] I think (1) the email helps identify the committer, to me its no different than their name [2019/06/03 03:58:21] that's the 'easy' example because you know up front it's not valid; just forcing people to jump through hoops to use another email doesn't really provide any value [2019/06/03 03:58:22] we require the name, the email does not matter [2019/06/03 03:58:25] (2) Its some method of contacting the committer, earlier comments remark on the technical infeasibility of (2) [2019/06/03 03:58:40] robbat2: It stops the *known* dead mailbox [2019/06/03 03:58:44] email dosen't matter [2019/06/03 03:58:53] the name is enough of an issue tbf :) [2019/06/03 03:58:55] if we want a way of contacting the committer that is not the trustees responsibility to enforce [2019/06/03 03:59:01] if someone is falsifying it [2019/06/03 03:59:11] I tend to support (1): the email helps uniqify names, use it as an identifier [2019/06/03 03:59:17] requiring name is already enough and we should implement nickname usages with a list [2019/06/03 03:59:19] veremitz: i asked Shentino to not speak until open floor, I ask the same of you [2019/06/03 03:59:26] the foundation doens't care about delivery or anything like that [2019/06/03 03:59:32] antarus: we can use it but don't need to use it (the email) [2019/06/03 03:59:44] so I vote no on this bug [2019/06/03 03:59:51] would be better if the email can be at least approved in some way [2019/06/03 03:59:52] robbat2: noted [2019/06/03 03:59:54] I vote no as well [2019/06/03 04:00:04] I vote no [2019/06/03 04:00:14] I also vote nay [2019/06/03 04:00:33] to clarify, what's the actual motion text ;--) [2019/06/03 04:00:58] motion: Copyright policy: should we require working (delivering) e-mail addresses? [2019/06/03 04:01:01] yay or nay [2019/06/03 04:01:02] * b-man abstains [2019/06/03 04:01:03] require working (delivering) e-mail addresses for commits [2019/06/03 04:01:23] yes, I still vote nay [2019/06/03 04:01:44] ok im still on no, I think working email can be optional [2019/06/03 04:02:42] prometheanfire: ? [2019/06/03 04:02:51] i don't see any other bugs that need voting/immediate discussion from the trustees [2019/06/03 04:02:59] I already voted nay [2019/06/03 04:03:03] anybody else got other specific bugs they want to raise? [2019/06/03 04:03:10] robbat2: we still need the open discussion [2019/06/03 04:03:19] yes, open floor etc comes later [2019/06/03 04:03:32] i mean specific bugs other trustees want first [2019/06/03 04:04:11] I may start asking around for tax stuff (talking with some financial type people over the next week or two [2019/06/03 04:04:16] b-man: you working on bug 676314 ? [2019/06/03 04:04:18] https://bugs.gentoo.org/676314 "Bylaw reformat proposal https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-nfp/message/c58501db83a9a459c407a156a8c01850"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; IN_P; antarus:trustees [2019/06/03 04:04:18] just a notice more than anything [2019/06/03 04:04:41] I think that is the only pending bylaw change [2019/06/03 04:04:49] https://bugs.gentoo.org/676322 we didn't close this yet [2019/06/03 04:05:02] 676322 we didn't close this yet [2019/06/03 04:05:06] there's no vendor requests, no funding requests, one sponsor request, no advertising, no membership requests [2019/06/03 04:05:11] bug 676322 we didn't close this yet [2019/06/03 04:05:13] alicef: https://bugs.gentoo.org/676322 "Update the member quorum number to 1/10th of members; the default in NM statute: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-nfp/message/443c7d847564b0c4391b434db05d1f34"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; IN_P; antarus:trustees [2019/06/03 04:05:15] antarus: I have the rst files done, but there seems to be a lack of understanding [2019/06/03 04:05:41] alicef: we could close it as it's already failed [2019/06/03 04:05:42] yeah, both 676322 and 676314 need some discussion, related to the reformatting to new repos [2019/06/03 04:05:52] alicef: close then [2019/06/03 04:05:55] let's take those outside the meeting [2019/06/03 04:05:57] closed* [2019/06/03 04:06:09] (as in I have closed it thusly) [2019/06/03 04:06:34] ok, that's bugs done [2019/06/03 04:06:49] antarus: you win on the closing time [2019/06/03 04:06:50] I am fine with taking them outside of the meeting, but I need folks to answer clearly on what they want. [2019/06/03 04:06:54] :) [2019/06/03 04:06:57] routine new business stuff: [2019/06/03 04:07:01] 1 new sponsor request, bug 680910 [2019/06/03 04:07:03] robbat2: https://bugs.gentoo.org/680910 "Request for IntegriCloud to be added to sponsors, in return for a Power9 dedicated box for ppc64 development"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; CONF; m.j.everitt:trustees [2019/06/03 04:07:30] the concern was a lack of manpower, not hardware [2019/06/03 04:07:53] I'm not sure the ppc64 team needs more hw, we could alway get more from osuosl imo [2019/06/03 04:08:02] more is nice, but only if used [2019/06/03 04:08:18] the only other query I have there: is the diversity of hardware useful? [2019/06/03 04:08:20] Looks like alicef would like to use it for CI? [2019/06/03 04:08:35]