path: root/meeting-logs/20180610.txt

19:00 <@slyfox> !proj council
19:00 <+willikins> (council@gentoo.org) dilfridge, k_f, mgorny, slyfox, tamiko, ulm, williamh
19:01 <@dilfridge> [23:20:01] <mgorny> i've asked soap if he'd be able to proxy for me just in case but haven't received a reply yet
19:01 <@slyfox> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/a5b6a88e117443ba86a5c310195ed65f
19:01 <@dilfridge> ^ this is from yesterday so semi-confirmation
19:01 <@slyfox> ^ our current agenda
19:01 <@slyfox> Let's start with "1. Roll call"
19:01  * WilliamH here
19:01  * slyfox here
19:01  * Whissi is here to proxy K_F 
19:01  * dilfridge here
19:01  * Soap__ here (for mgorny)
19:02 <@slyfox> tamiko, ulm ^
19:02 <@dilfridge> tamiko said he can't make it
19:02 <@WilliamH> slyfox: tamiko  won't be here
19:02  * ulm here
19:02 <@slyfox> \o/
19:02 <@slyfox> 6 of 7 then
19:02 <@dilfridge> we have quorum!
19:02 <@slyfox> 2. Proposal for procedure to appoint SPI liaison by dilfridge@
19:02 <@slyfox>     https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/70f054aac20e5c80f14590cc5cbf4418
19:03 <@dilfridge> right, so one short remark
19:03 <@slyfox> (dont expect my summary to be correct. I understood almost nothing)
19:03 <@dilfridge> I didnt intend that we vote on the details now.
19:03 <@dilfridge> My intention was that we decide whether to contact SPI, and start talking about the details.
19:03 -!- sultan [~sultan@unaffiliated/sultan] has joined #gentoo-council
19:04 <@dilfridge> "the details"= how the liaison is appointed
19:04 <@WilliamH> I would rather see us hold off on this since this is our last meeting and we don't know who will be elected for the council by next meeting
19:05 <@dilfridge> I mainly decided to bring this up again because I came to the conclusion that the council shouldnt feel constrained *not* to think about finances.
19:05 <+Soap__> this really is more a fork in the road decision
19:05 <+Soap__> dilfridge: double negative?
19:05 <@ulm> dilfridge: do I understand correctly that for the time being, talks to the SPI would be for information only and without commitment?
19:06 <+Soap__> so the council should think about finances?
19:06 <@dilfridge> yes, intended (I wanted to use the word "constrain" somewhere)
19:06 <@dilfridge> ulm: well, it would be signalling SPI "we are interested, let's talk about the details"
19:06  * WilliamH is with Soap__  The council in the past has had nothing to do with finances etc.
19:07 <@dilfridge> Soap__: yes
19:07 <@WilliamH> We are just the technical leadership of Gentoo and we handle appeals from comrel/qa.
19:07 <@dilfridge> since we're overseeing the entire technical development, it's kinda silly that the hardware is out of our control
19:08 <@dilfridge> but that's only part of the motivation
19:08 <+Whissi> Starting to talk with SPI shouldn't be a problem. We can always stop talking.
19:08 <@dilfridge> right, just that normally you don't do that in a frivolous way...
19:09 <+Soap__> why is this contentious?
19:09 <@dilfridge> meaning, starting to talk without being willing to commit something is stupid
19:09 <@WilliamH> That's exactly why we should not vote on this this meeting.
19:09 <+Soap__> like, what (if any) are the downsides to SPI?
19:09 <+Soap__> for me SPI seems liek a no-brainer
19:10 <+Whissi> Same for me. But K_F raised copyright concerns I didn't follow.
19:10 <@WilliamH> I don't know a lot of the history, but robbat2 does. I think we talked to spi in the past and they weren't interested.
19:11 <@slyfox> Can anyone formulate a point (a few points) we shoud decide on today?
19:11 <@dilfridge> WilliamH: that was a completely different approach, it was SPI taking over the entire foundation
19:11 <@ulm> WilliamH: if that will be the result, than at least we've tried
19:11 <@slyfox> Or should we have a bit more duscussion offline first?
19:11  * WilliamH would rather see more discussion before voting on something like this.
19:11 <+Soap__> dilfridge: whats the goal here? accounting and books by SPI without transferring foundation?
19:11 <@WilliamH> Not to mention we have an election coming up.
19:12 <@dilfridge> well, essentially the motion is the first two paragraphs of the mail (down to the double blank line)
19:12 <@dilfridge> Soap__: "opening a second account and seeing how things work out"
19:12 <@dilfridge> Soap__: "getting tax-deductible donations"
19:12 <+Soap__> also the whole IRS crap?
19:12 <@WilliamH> Soap__: I believe robbat2 is fixing that.
19:13 <@dilfridge> the IRS crap is the problem of the foundation, and is precisely the reason why my (not-yet-relevant) draft for the liaison rules excludes foundation staff
19:13 <+Soap__> but will this do IRC automatically, i.e. 95% of the foundation burden is offloaded?
19:13 <+Soap__> IRS*
19:13 <@dilfridge> (so the two things run legally and financially separate)
19:13 <+Soap__> like, from 2019-onwards, IRS forms are done by SPI?
19:14 <@dilfridge> no, because SPI does stuff for the money they handle, and the Foundation does stuff for their money
19:14 <+Whissi> From my understanding, current foundation is in trouble. Any donation we receive today can be lost due to our tax problems. Opening another channel for donations via SPI would allow us to keep receiving donations which will be safe in case we won't resolve the tax issue...
19:14 <@WilliamH> Soap__: no. the foundation would still be responsible for their forms.
19:14 <+Soap__> so the idea is, for all future transactions, to try and channel them through SPI?
19:15 <@WilliamH> Whissi: I don't think they are in trouble, robbat2 is handling it I thought.
19:15 <@dilfridge> Whissi: I dont think it is that bad, but *unless* the IRS situation is completely resolved, nobody will want to "take over" their stuff
19:15 <@dilfridge> Soap__: well, let's take it slow and just offer both paths
19:15 <@dilfridge> and see how it goes
19:15 <@WilliamH> Whissi: There seems to be a lot of inaccurate information out there about how bad off the foundation is.
19:16 <@WilliamH> Whissi: it is more a perception by some than reality I think.
19:16 <@dilfridge> the foundation is doing OK, thanks to robbat2 and in spite of quantumsummers,
19:16 <+Soap__> dilfridge: I dont see any downsides to this, so I would go for it
19:16 <@dilfridge> but they do not have a viable long-term model, since they are short on people for the work
19:16 <@WilliamH> I think the foundation is not as bad off as some have made it out to be.
19:17 <+Whissi> Up to my knowledge, the final deadline is ~August/September. If we won't be able to resolve it until deadline, IRS or whoever is responsible will take actions against foundation.
19:17 <+Whissi> Final actions.
19:17 <@dilfridge> it was bad in the past, right now it's getting OK, the future is unclear
19:17 <@dilfridge> Whissi: this is waaay older than one year
19:17 <@WilliamH> dilfridge: that isn't their fault, anyone who wants to run for trustee can do so.
19:18 <@slyfox> 15 minutes into the meeting. Should we use first two paragraps as-is from the https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/70f054aac20e5c80f14590cc5cbf4418 email to vote on? 
19:18 <@slyfox> If no objections i'll post it here as-is
19:18 <@dilfridge> I would not worry too much about the IRS status, but no other *financial organization* will want to take over unless it is resolved.
19:18 <@WilliamH> dilfridge: ++ wrt IRS status
19:19 <@dilfridge> slyfox: wfm
19:19 <@WilliamH> imo a lot of fud has been spread wrt the trustees
19:19 <@slyfox> Allright. Decision time:
19:19 <@slyfox> The Gentoo council shall directly contact "Software in the Public Interest 
19:19 <@slyfox> Inc." (SPI), with the intention of Gentoo becoming a SPI Associated Project.
19:19 <@slyfox> The intention is for SPI to become an *additional* service provider of the 
19:19 <@slyfox> Gentoo developer community for Accepting Donations, Holding Funds, and Holding 
19:19 <@slyfox> Assets. The SPI project liaison shall be appointed by the Gentoo council.
19:19 <@slyfox> No transfer of funds or assets of any kind between SPI and the Gentoo 
19:19 <@slyfox> Foundation is stipulated (it would be the trustees' responsibility anyway), so 
19:19 <@slyfox> any (dys)function of the Gentoo Foundation has no impact on this new business 
19:19 <@slyfox> relationship. Equally, the business relationship with SPI shall have no impact 
19:19 <@slyfox> on the current function of the Gentoo Foundation. Essentially, the proposal is 
19:19 <@slyfox> that we start with an empty account at SPI. (I'll be happy to make the first 
19:19 <@slyfox> donation.)
19:20  * slyfox abstains
19:20 <@dilfridge> (we can omit the last bracket from the motion :)
19:20  * dilfridge yes (after all I'm proposing it)
19:20 <@WilliamH> why abstain?
19:20  * Soap__ yes
19:20  * WilliamH no
19:21  * ulm yes
19:21  * Whissi yes
19:22 <@slyfox> my personal perception of the council@ not being involved into financial or legalese (copyright) stuff but i'm fine with others doing it :)
19:22 <@slyfox> Moving on to "3. Open bugs with council involvement"
19:22 <@ulm> but we won't be, as the SPI would handle it
19:22 <@slyfox> Picking bugs one by one from bugzies search at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council#Open_bugs_with_Council_participation
19:22 <@WilliamH> ulm: we would be though because someone would have to work with spi
19:22 <@slyfox> bug #637328 Document GLEP Cha security@gentoo.org IN_P --- GLEP 14 needs to be updated 
19:23 <+willikins> slyfox: https://bugs.gentoo.org/637328 "GLEP 14 needs to be updated"; Documentation, GLEP Changes; IN_P; mgorny:security
19:23 <@slyfox> Is anyone around to have an update on it? I guess K_F would be the pest person
19:23  * slyfox adds a note to the bug
19:23 <+Whissi> Security project is making progress. Hopefully we will be able to show you something next meeting.
19:23 -!- sultan [~sultan@unaffiliated/sultan] has quit [Quit: leaving]
19:24 <@slyfox> \o/ Posting to the bug as an update
19:24 <@slyfox> bug #642072 Gentoo C unspecif council@gentoo.org CONF --- Joint venture to deal with copyright issues 
19:24 <+willikins> slyfox: https://bugs.gentoo.org/642072 "Joint venture to deal with copyright issues"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; mgorny:council
19:25 <@ulm> nicely progressing
19:25 <@ulm> we have settled on a policy with a Gentoo DCO and without a FLA/CLA
19:26 <+Soap__> DCO?
19:26 <@ulm> and I am going to post it as GLEP 76 tonight
19:26 <@ulm> "Gentoo Developer's Certificate of Origin"
19:26 <@slyfox> Good. That's the https://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/glep-copyrightpolicy.html , right?
19:26 <@WilliamH> Soap__: similar to what the kernel does.
19:26 <@ulm> yes, that one
19:26 <@ulm> any last-minute comments? now is the chance :)
19:26 <+Soap__> ulm: gist of it?
19:27 <+Soap__> if I work on gentoo, they get copyright?
19:27 <@dilfridge> no
19:27 <@ulm> no, you keep the copyright
19:27 <@WilliamH> ulm: It will require signed-off-by in our commits
19:27 <@ulm> but you have to certify that it's free software and has traceable origin
19:27 <@dilfridge> "if you want to get your work into gentoo, you need to certify (Signed-off-by) that you can legally do so (follow the license)"
19:27 <@WilliamH> like the kernel
19:27 <@ulm> WilliamH: right
19:28 <+Soap__> ulm: so ebuilds are mien then?
19:28 <@dilfridge> https://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/glep-copyrightpolicy.html#id20
19:28 <+Soap__> the copyright header is void?
19:28 <@WilliamH> What does that mean wrt the mandatory copyright by gentoo everywhere in the tree?
19:28 <@dilfridge> ^ the text block here
19:28 <@WilliamH> I guess repoman will need to be fixed to not check that?
19:28 <@slyfox> sounds reasonable
19:28 <@dilfridge> the copyright header is replaced by something more flexible
19:29 <@ulm> WilliamH: repoman will have to be updated indeed
19:29 <+Whissi> Will that sign-off become a requirement in future?
19:29 <@slyfox> perhaps it's worth showing a few blurb examples in GLEP itself
19:29 <@ulm> Whissi: yes
19:29 <@WilliamH> Whissi: yes
19:29 <+Soap__> dilfridge: can I just sign over copyright? knowing when to change that LARGEST-CONTRIBUTOR sounds like unnecessary busywork for me
19:29 <@dilfridge> yes, likely git-hook enforced
19:30 <@dilfridge> Soap__: no, because you're german
19:30 <@ulm> Soap__: don't change it if you don't care
19:30 <+Whissi> How is that possible? I.e. how do we deal with code from today which isn't signed?
19:30 <@dilfridge> german law doesnt allow copyright transfer :)
19:30 <+Soap__> dilfridge: well, german in switzerland technically :P
19:30 <+Soap__> (but swiss law has the same clause)
19:30 <@dilfridge> ok you just spared me having to look it up :D
19:31 <@ulm> Whissi: the transition plan hasn't been worked out in detail
19:31 <+Whissi> OK :)
19:31 <+Soap__> it sounds like EAPI 0
19:31 <@WilliamH> The old code will go away eventually in theory.
19:31 <@dilfridge> maybe start with the current header and add to it?
19:31 <@ulm> but I think we won't remove all foundation copyright lines on day 0 :)
19:31 <+Soap__> i.e. will take 15 years to have all ebuilds properly tagged
19:31 <@slyfox> Let's move on to next item
19:31 <@slyfox> bug #650964 Gentoo I Mailing infra-bugs@gentoo.org IN_P --- gentoo-dev ML: Implement council decision on user whitelisting 
19:31 <+willikins> slyfox: https://bugs.gentoo.org/650964 "gentoo-dev ML: Implement council decision on user whitelisting"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Mailing Lists; IN_P; k_f:infra-bugs
19:32 <@slyfox> any infra@ reps around?
19:32 <+Whissi> !proj infra
19:32 <+willikins> Whissi: (infra@gentoo.org) a3li, alicef, antarus, blueknight, grknight, idl0r, jmbsvicetto, maffblaster, mgorny, prometheanfire, robbat2, zlogene, zx2c4
19:32 <@slyfox> otherwise I'll ask for update in the bug
19:33 <@slyfox> asked: https://bugs.gentoo.org/650964#c17 . Moving on
19:33 <@slyfox> bug #655734 Gentoo I Mailing council@gentoo.org CONF --- Access/status of gentoo-managers@l.g.o 
19:33 <+willikins> slyfox: https://bugs.gentoo.org/655734 "Access/status of gentoo-managers@l.g.o"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Mailing Lists; CONF; mgorny:council
19:33 <@slyfox> AFAIY this item is FYI
19:34 <@slyfox> [y/n/a] Council: 5/0/1 Trustees: 3/0/0
19:34 <@ulm> yes, and copyright team has got access
19:34 <@slyfox> \o/
19:34 <@ulm> so I think the bug can be closed
19:34 <@slyfox> Worth closing the bug?
19:34 <@slyfox> -ETOOSLOW
19:35 <@slyfox> Closed
19:35 <@slyfox> 4. Open floor
19:35 <@slyfox> \o/
19:36 <@slyfox> Here come great opportunity for community to express their cheers, worries or random updates :)
19:36 <+b-man> Man, TomWij retired :(
19:37 <+Soap__> wasnt TomWij like bikeshedded to death by the forum?
19:37 <+b-man> Soap__: I don't forum... so I am not sure
19:37 <@WilliamH> I don't either.
19:37 <+Soap__> b-man: neither do I, I prefer my sanity
19:37 <+b-man> Haha
19:38 <@WilliamH> The forums have some pretty crazy stuff
19:38 <+Soap__> s/some/only
19:38 <@WilliamH> don't get me started
19:38 <+Soap__> 90/100 threads are about collective systemd bikeshed hate
19:39 <@dilfridge> or worse
19:39 <@WilliamH> There's at least one where I was attacked personally, but afaik no one did anything about it and it is still available.
19:39 <+Soap__> the forums really are the somalia of gentoo
19:39 <+Soap__> mob rule
19:39 <+Whissi> Don't talk bad about our users!
19:40 <+Soap__> sadly, half the people participating in those lynch fights
19:40 <+Soap__> are "staffers"
19:40 <+Soap__> anyhow
19:40 <+Soap__> slyfox: I guess we're done?
19:40 <+Whissi> slyfox: I have nothing to contribute.
19:40 <@slyfox> yup
19:41 <@slyfox> I hereby declare meeting done!