Hehe i did reply to Robert to late or too quickly :p
Colin Close <[email protected]> a écrit : >On Tuesday 26 Nov 2013 20:40:59 Robert Xu wrote: >> Ping? Did ANYONE take meeting logs?! >> On Nov 26, 2013 12:09 PM, "Robert Xu" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Speaking of meeting... Where are the meeting logs? >> > On Nov 26, 2013 12:05 PM, "Robert Xu" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> On Nov 26, 2013 12:02 PM, "Tomasz Paweł Gajc" <[email protected]> >wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Please do not hurry up with this, as we decided to run >development as a >> >> project with some order. >> >> > As far i know this is my task to keep the roadmap with schedules >and >> >> more. >> >> > >> >> > On today's meeting we decided to give a go for a 2014 Release >with only >> >> necessary changes, yet not so intrusive, thus this will add for us >more >> >> time to work on more feature rich release for 2015. Also a roadmap >for 2014 >> >> will be presented for RFC till end of this week. >> >> >> >> Sure, that's fine. I just wanted to post what I had from Prague. >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Robert please do not treat this as some kind of offeensive >intention >> >> from my side, I just really need to work in a teamwork spirit >rather than >> >> spliting everything in small things. >> >> >> >> That's no problem. I missed the meeting, that's also partially my >fault :P >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> >> > > >Robert, >The meeting was a bit disorganised since there was no agenda because >both Bero and Arisel were away from base we had an interesting visitor. >Here is what log I have. >Best, >Colin > >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [11:59:43] Join crisb has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:00:04] <crisb> bero: hi >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:04:07] <fedya|2> bero: ping >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:04:31] <crisb> me first! ;) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:05:02] <fedya|2> crisb: [01:33:48] <fedya> >bero: ping >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:05:08] <fedya|2> crisb: not, me ;) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:05:29] <fedya|2> crisb: bero still away more >for 2 days >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:05:30] <fedya|2> hmhm >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:05:49] <crisb> i hope he did not get lost on >the way home from prague :) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:30:12] <arisel> If he'll not react until >tonight I'll send him a text message :) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:30:34] <arisel> but he's a grown-up guy, with >lots of travel experience, so I'm sure everything went right. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:31:25] <arisel> crisb, itchka: maybe I'm not >the one who should be asking, but the one answering, but however: until >the updates-repo is there, how shall I deal with fixes? Do them, not >publish them, notify you? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [12:52:51] Join n3npq has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:15:09] Quit _TPG has left this server (Remote >host closed the connection). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:15:45] Join _TPG has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:23:42] <fedya|2> arisel: crisb: take a look >on this >http://file-store.rosalinux.ru/api/v1/file_stores/4f2cf7c47f0151642286c4725fb3dbb5146d6d5d.log?show=true >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:29:16] <franciscopk> we have a public rsync? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:29:41] <franciscopk> mirror public rsync* >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:31:37] <fedya|2> franciscopk: Matthew Dawkins >knows it >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:32:23] <franciscopk> which nick or email? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:32:59] <fedya|2> franciscopk: mdawkins >[email protected] >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:35:12] <crisb> denis mentioned >mirror.rosalinux.com in prague meeting but looks like we're still not >added to that >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:37:24] <franciscopk> we may have one in >Brazil, offered by Federal University of Paraná >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:38:23] Join pcpa has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:40:40] Quit Megaf has left this server (Ping >timeout: 264 seconds). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:44:26] <franciscopk> fedya|2: thanks >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:47:42] <itchka> arisel: Please do not publish >any fixes just notify us: Perhaps we should just start a >personal/public repo that we can all access for the time being so at >least we can test the updates. Would that work in the interim? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:47:51] <franciscopk> pcpa: rosa doesnt >support uefi+secure boot. we plan to bring this to Mandriva OEM. >OpenMandriva intend to support? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:50:41] <itchka> franciscopk: At the moment we >have a problem with this. I think our kernel is out of sync uefi-secure >boot we have support in the kernel but nowhere else. I have not been >able to prove this yet but the cooker list has a mail from nicco about >it. ROSA are requesting the reversal of some kernel switches. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [13:51:45] <franciscopk> hmmm >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:06:23] Quit _TPG has left this server (Remote >host closed the connection). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:06:56] Join _TPG has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:14:55] <pcpa> franciscopk: there are >countless threads about secure boot around. At first we will work only >with computers that allow disabling it. Later need to check what to >do... I would prefer to just subvert it with some loader, and not have >to ask/pay microsoft to sign our kernel... >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:17:15] Join linukiss has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:17:59] Join bero_ has joined this channel >(c2e40d0d@arklinux/developer/bero). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:21:43] Quit linukiss has left this server >(Client Quit). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:22:07] <itchka> bero_: :) You are still >alive!! >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:24:17] Quit bero_ has left this server (Ping >timeout: 250 seconds). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:24:22] Join linukiss has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:25:11] Join bero|2 has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:25:18] <n3npq> pcpa: FYI: uefi is gonna >become harder with M$ demanding that nextgen win doze MUST use TPM 2.0 >by Jan 2015. Sooner you start, the better. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:26:13] <bero|2> ROSA is doing some work there >that we can "steal" >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:27:26] <n3npq> bero|2: good for ROSA. theft >is only the starting point. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:28:23] <bero|2> sure >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:29:14] <n3npq> bero+2: what is happening with >TPM 2.0 at Linaro? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:29:24] <bero|2> My point is that they're >already doing the basic stuff so we don't have to redo it independently >when they're about to finish >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:30:55] <n3npq> they are doing "secure boot" >which isn't the right application because its grotty/nasty debug. TPM >2.0 isn't anywhere I can find (Oct 1st search) in linux desktops and >secure boot. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:31:19] Join klebedeff has joined this channel >(c2e40d0d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.194.228.13.13). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:31:19] <bero|2> n3npq: We just created a new >"security" working group that is supposed to take care of that - lots >of new hires there, but none of the "old guys" know what they're up to >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:31:31] <n3npq> "isn't anywhere" -- Intel and >kernel have checkins. no visible devel anywhere else >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:32:50] <n3npq> bero|2: good for the security >committee, sigh. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:34:23] <bero|2> I'll probably know more about >it after the next conference in February, that's where we usually see >what the other WGs have been up to >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:34:54] <bero|2> But I'll ask David for an >update before >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:35:28] <n3npq> bero|2: FYI TPM 2.0 emulator >lurks on my todo++ … I have compiling code from draft lacking the >pieces that TCB is charging $2K membership fee to see. >reversing/duplicating marshaling code isn't hard, just tedious >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:36:39] <bero|2> I'll check if I can get hold >of those pieces >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:37:26] <n3npq> meanwhile emulator isn't >feasible for "secure boot" (which is why the wrong application imho). >M$ and Intel (and ARM) collude to force consumer buys >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:37:50] <n3npq> bero|2: NDA tainting is my >worry >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:39:17] <n3npq> bero|2: and RPM+TPM is my goal >… a "trusted" installer would solve a bazillion broblems >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:39:23] <n3npq> problems >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:39:34] <klebedeff> "secure boot" is >unfortunately what the likes of ARM are asking for first... Not sure >how/if we can circumvent NDA tainting without having some cleanroom >implementation w/ people who have read the NDAed docs >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:41:16] Quit bero|2 has left this server (Ping >timeout: 264 seconds). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:41:29] <n3npq> klebdeff: NDA tainting is an >issue for me, not OMA. I have entirely "clean" implementation straight >from specs. OMA just needs to tithe >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:42:38] Join bero|3 has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:43:47] Quit klebedeff has left this server >(Ping timeout: 250 seconds). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:43:55] Quit linukiss has left this server >(Quit: Konversation terminated!). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:44:31] <bero|3> btw, anyone here for the >meeting? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:44:35] Join benatto has joined this channel >([email protected]). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:44:58] <benatto> hi all >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:45:06] <itchka> bero|3: I'm here >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:46:16] <bero|3> _TPG? arisel? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:48:53] Join bero_ has joined this channel >(50bb6b34@gateway/web/freenode/ip.80.187.107.52). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:49:44] * bero_ thinks everyone is still >halfway in Prague >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:51:01] <bero_> chwido: bite anyone not here >for the meeting >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:51:02] * chwido thinks about biting anyone >not here for the meeting but decides to not to. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:51:22] <denis_silakov> meanwhile, I remember >about mirror.rosalinux.com, but still didn't have a chance to ask >necessary guys to add omv there >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:51:28] <bero_> *chwido contemplates and >follows the command >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:51:53] <bero_> denis_silakov: That would be >great, we're short on mirrors >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:52:12] <itchka> bero_: arisel said he was >travelling to Cologne this morning so he may be on the train. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:54:27] <bero_> Let's wait a bit... >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:54:42] <bero_> _TPG: ping >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:55:22] Part denis_silakov has left this >channel. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [14:58:57] Quit bero_ has left this server (Ping >timeout: 250 seconds). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:01:42] <_TPG> bero, ping >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:01:57] <_TPG> Hi, sorry for being late >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:02:04] Join mdawkins has joined this channel >(9877fffb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.152.119.255.251). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:02:09] <_TPG> i think i got cold :< >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:02:12] <mdawkins> .o/ >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:02:31] <bero|3> hi mdawkins, _TPG >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:02:40] <mdawkins> wassup bero|3 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:03:10] <_TPG> anyways i think we should take >a steps to freeze te 2013.0 repo and allow only publish to QA guys >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:03:17] Join bero_ has joined this channel >(50bb6b34@gateway/web/freenode/ip.80.187.107.52). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:03:51] <mdawkins> i agree, but are we gonna >do backports on it? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:03:53] <itchka> _TPG: I hope it has already >been done. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:04:10] <_TPG> itchka, dunno never recieved >any status on this >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:04:13] <bero_> _TPG: already done for main - >not sure whether or not we want to do it for >contrib/non-free/restricted given they're not really parts of the >release >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:04:43] <_TPG> bero_, good then, main is >mandatory to have frozen for publish without QA >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:05:06] <_TPG> so... >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:05:49] <bero_> mdawkins: Definitely some >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:06:05] <itchka> Please enlighten an ignorant >one: What is the difference between updates and backports? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:06:12] <_TPG> itchka, sure >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:06:37] <_TPG> itchka, updates are packages >with same versions but only patches or some minor changes >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:06:54] <bero_> itchka: updates: Essentially >vital bugfixes we want everyone to have, backports: Stuff like a KDE >4.11.3 update >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:07:17] <n3npq> itchka: "freeze" means no >updates, only security fixes, usually. back ports often easiest way to >do security updates unless too much changes. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:07:17] <_TPG> itchka, backports are just new >versions of software which may or may not be compatible with repository >software >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:07:44] <_TPG> so many good answers :p >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:07:53] <mdawkins> wow, i'm pretty sure i know >the difference >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:07:57] <itchka> Thank you I understand. We >need backports for preliminary testing for new release? Does this help? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:08:02] <mdawkins> that's kinda a backhanded >slap >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:08:27] <_TPG> itchka, backports needs testing >too >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:09:10] <itchka> _TPG: Everthing new in repos >must be tested!! >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:09:12] <_TPG> itchka, anyways ABF does not >support backports repo structure, as denis silakov responded on ml a >testing repo can be used >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:09:37] <bero_> Also, now is probably the >right time to think about having 2 cookers (devel tree + sanitized >version) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:09:42] <itchka> _TPG: All make sense now >thank you. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:09:48] <mdawkins> there's no reason we can't >setup an upgrade/testing repo for 2013.0 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:09:56] <mdawkins> just lock main >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:10:09] <bero_> mdawkins: agreed >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:10:22] <mdawkins> we can get creative and >think a bit out of the box >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:10:27] <_TPG> bero, i'd suggest that we >should take steps toward 2014.0 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:10:34] <itchka> mdawkins: Good idea >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:10] <bero_> _TPG: agreed >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:10] <mdawkins> well we need a release >schedule before we can plan anything for 2014.0 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:25] <_TPG> my sugestion on Prague was to >copy 2013.0 as a 2014.0 and then provide some updates like kde-4.12, >xorg-1.15, kernel etc. but no more >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:29] <mdawkins> we honestly should start >setting goals and dates now >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:41] <_TPG> mdawkins, working on this >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:48] <mdawkins> _TPG: isn't that what >cooker is for? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:11:59] <_TPG> mdawkins, i think cooker is for >2015 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:12:04] <mdawkins> why make a static 2014.0 >repo yet >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:12:22] <mdawkins> really??? what's going on? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:12:22] <_TPG> i mean doing this we can quite >efficently provide 2014 with minimum effort >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:13:09] <mdawkins> when is 2014.0 slated for? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:13:22] <_TPG> mdawkins, i'll propose this >sooon >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:13:25] <_TPG> -o >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:13:27] <bero_> mdawkins: We were discussing >having a rather early 2014.0 with just a few major updates, with a >2014.1 or 2015.0 following afterwards based on cooker. The idea is >essentially to get a 2014.0 release out w/ all fixes and a few key >updates quickly >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:13:48] <mdawkins> bero_: 6 months??? or >sooner? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:13:53] <n3npq> mdawkins: features first, then >work backwards from the date. you know the date will change. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:14:02] <_TPG> bero_ yes that was the idea and >it think this is best idea ever :p >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:14:16] <_TPG> mdawkins, i think sooner than 6 >months >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:14:25] <mdawkins> just realize this, don't >break the idea of cooker -> to stable release >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:14:42] <_TPG> mdawkins, updating kernel, >xorg, kde and provide some new artwork will not take more than 6 months >imho >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:14:43] <bero_> mdawkins: Nothing finalized >yet, but I'd say a lot sooner >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:14:52] <mdawkins> you wanna keep the idea of >constantly being able to upgrade in mind >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:15:37] <_TPG> so if we will follow this >agile-release idea, then we will have like 10 month to work hard on >2015 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:15:38] <mdawkins> so let's set the goals up >to be quite minimal, but i'd highly discourage breaking away from >cooker >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:08] <bero_> mdawkins: agreed, 2014.0 is >essentially just an interim release to keep end users updated while we >do the "interesting" work in cooker >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:20] <_TPG> mdawkins, speaking of cooker - >currently there are too much inconistenyc between cooker and 2013 >because of late git branching >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:20] <mdawkins> if we break away from the >cooker model, we will resemble rosa's devel model quiet quickly >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:25] <bero_> Think of 2014.0 as 2013.0-SR1 >in M$ terminology >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:26] <itchka> mdawkins: I don't think that >was ever the intention >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:34] <_TPG> people were updating 2013 and >simply forgoting about cooker >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:16:53] <mdawkins> then that needs to stop >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:01] <_TPG> so some packges are like >foo-1-2 in cooker but in 2013.0 you got foo-1-4 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:08] <mdawkins> 2013.0 has been released >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:21] <mdawkins> it needs to be locked down >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:30] <_TPG> mdawkins, this is a lesson >learned that git branching should be done just a few days before final >release >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:45] <mdawkins> and why hasn't it been >done? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:52] <mdawkins> or locked? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:17:55] <_TPG> done what ? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:06] <_TPG> i do not know >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:10] <mdawkins> who has the power to lock >submission to the 2013.0 branch >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:18] <itchka> mdawkins: This happened >because people were not respecting the freeze on cooker. It was the >only way to ensure we got some sort of release. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:32] <_TPG> but this time we need keep an >eye on this >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:42] <mdawkins> so step one >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:44] <_TPG> good to know that 2013.0/main >is locked >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:47] <mdawkins> lock 2013.0 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:18:58] <bero_> mdawkins: 2013.0 is already >locked, has been since Monday >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:19:17] <mdawkins> bero_: both repo and git? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:19:42] <_TPG> now what has left is just to >prepare release plan for 2014.0 and get some new ideas and features >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:19:51] <bero_> _TPG: I agree that the >branching happened way too early this time -- but I'm not sure how else >to address the problem of people happily throwing "break it all" stuff >at cooker during hard freeze >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:20:08] <bero_> mdawkins: I'm not sure we can >actually lock git down, let's talk to the abf guys >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:20:34] <_TPG> bero_, Bero we can not turn >back time, so we have to live with this. Anyways it was not so bad, >finally we did the release :p >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:20:51] <mdawkins> bero_: I hope we can lock a >branch >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:21:02] <_TPG> bero_, remove write access ?> >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:21:04] <bero_> _TPG: agreed, but we have to >find a better way for the next release >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:21:15] <mdawkins> and only allow submits to >cooker >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:21:24] <bero_> _TPG: my fear there is that it >will lead to "contributor drain" >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:21:42] <_TPG> bero_, true and i think we will >need some brainstorimg session on new ideas not only for distro feature >but also for abf and repo stuff >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:21:48] Quit marja has left this server (Ping >timeout: 245 seconds). >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:22:13] <n3npq> instead of denying access with >terms like "freeze" and "lock", you should set up gating acceptance >criteria for entry into 2013 (or any other pool) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:22:41] <mdawkins> why don't we simply ask >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:22:42] <mdawkins> ? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:22:45] <_TPG> n3npq, like what ? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:22:52] <mdawkins> i just checked now >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:22:55] <_TPG> n3npq, please explain more ? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:23:02] <mdawkins> all my commits to git have >been to master >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:23:03] <n3npq> and forcibly eject any >update/backport that fails the gating criteria >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:23:05] <mdawkins> and not 2013.0 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:23:30] <mdawkins> i'd suggest this >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:23:39] <mdawkins> lock all git commits to >just cooker >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:23:57] <_TPG> seems fine >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:24:00] <mdawkins> and only allow a designated >person to build on a test/update channel in 2013.0 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:24:06] <n3npq> _TPG: you need to focus on >positives, not negatives. freeze/lock inevitably become control >discussions that boil down to some people can and some people can't >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:24:16] <mdawkins> and let cooker be cooker >again >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:24:52] * _TPG is going on sick leave >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:25:20] <mdawkins> ? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:25:27] <bero_> _TPG: get well soon >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:03] <bero_> mdawkins: _TPG was mentioning >earlier that he's getting a cold, I think he's referring to that, not >to any of the discussion >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:04] <itchka> I guess even _TPG has to go >for a walk sometimes. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:21] <mdawkins> yep, we all do >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:24] <mdawkins> get well >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:42] <n3npq> _TPG: an example of failing >the acceptance criteria is obvious … too much stuff breaks. the process >problem is usually not knowing the set of coupled changes well enough >to back out >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:47] <_TPG> well i catched some cold in >prague >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:49] <bero_> chwido just read the word walk >-- now he'll probably wake up and force me to walk him ;) >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:26:49] <chwido> bero_: Error: "just" is not a >valid command. >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:00] <_TPG> anyways long time ago i've >prepared this https://wiki.openmandriva.org/en/2014.0/Specifications >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:05] <mdawkins> well lets do this >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:14] <mdawkins> we wanna release in 3 >months right? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:31] <mdawkins> and mainly just push fixes >and updates correct? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:32] <_TPG> some of these features are more >like for 2015 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:43] <_TPG> mdawkins, pretty much yes >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:46] <mdawkins> and no major development >changes? >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:27:59] <_TPG> mdawkins, major stuff goes for >2015 >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:28:06] <mdawkins> poifect >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:28:12] <mdawkins> ok lets start there >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:28:22] <_TPG> as we do not have much >manpower, and we need to keep world updated with our grat releases >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:28:23] <mdawkins> let's declare the scope as >such >[Tuesday 26 Nov 2013] [15:28:44] <mdawkins> i'm guessing upda -- Best regards, meilleures salutations (K9-Mail Android) Raphaël Jadot
