diff options
authorGeorgy Yakovlev <>2020-12-13 13:23:57 -0800
committerGeorgy Yakovlev <>2020-12-13 13:24:22 -0800
commit00d405e8a1795b648fdc984bc50534f29bf99d35 (patch)
parentSummaries for 20200913 and 20201011 meetings. (diff)
Log for 20201213 meeting
Signed-off-by: Georgy Yakovlev <>
2 files changed, 623 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20201213.txt b/meeting-logs/20201213.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..141b263
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-logs/20201213.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,607 @@
+ 11:00:29 am <@gyakovlev> !proj council
+ 11:00:30 am <+willikins> ( dilfridge, gyakovlev, mattst88, slyfox, ulm, whissi, williamh
+ 11:00:37 am <@gyakovlev> ^ meeting time
+ 11:00:39 am <@mattst88> o/
+ 11:00:52 am <@gyakovlev> 1. Roll Call
+ 11:00:54 am -*- gyakovlev here
+ 11:00:56 am -*- ulm here
+ 11:00:56 am -*- slyfox here
+ 11:01:02 am -*- mattst88 here
+ 11:01:02 am -*- dilfridge here
+ 11:01:08 am -*- Whissi here
+ 11:01:13 am -*- WilliamH here
+ 11:01:22 am <@gyakovlev> today's agenda is :
+ 11:01:32 am <@gyakovlev> should have pasted before roll call
+ 11:01:53 am <@gyakovlev> anyway, everyone is here, let's move to 2. Shutting down the Off the Wall forum
+ 11:02:28 am <@gyakovlev> since this is a very controversial topic, any ideas how we proceed on that one?
+ 11:02:54 am <@gyakovlev> need an item that sounds like a motion.
+ 11:03:05 am <@dilfridge> shrug, we could do a round if statements, solicit input, then vote
+ 11:03:12 am <@dilfridge> of
+ 11:03:14 am <@ulm> discussion is still ongoing, so maybe we shouldn't make a final decision today
+ 11:03:35 am <@dilfridge> we had a lot of time to discuss it
+ 11:03:41 am <@Whissi> I agree with ulm. But for me it would depend on the motion.
+ 11:03:43 am <@mattst88> I'm against further delays. This has been a known issue since at least Feb 2019
+ 11:03:59 am <@dilfridge> so I'm against further delays
+ 11:04:20 am <@gyakovlev> ok there are 2 options in the original proposal
+ 11:04:21 am <@gyakovlev>
+ 11:04:28 am <@mattst88> I don't see any compelling reason to delay, and I don't think a motion to shut it down today should necessarily close the door to a well-moderated off-topic forum in the future
+ 11:04:39 am <@ulm> how about following antarus's suggestion, give forum mods some time (3 months?) to fix things, and make it clear that otw will be shut down if nothing happens?
+ 11:04:47 am <@gyakovlev> just listing, do not vote yet 1) Shut down OTW OR 2) Replace or supplement forum mods
+ 11:05:15 am <@dilfridge> ulm: do you expect things to improve?
+ 11:05:16 am <@WilliamH> ulm: I'm open to that.
+ 11:05:27 am <@mattst88> but I think we shouldn't use the "oh but if we had more time to do $XYZ we could moderate it better" is a reason to keep the current OTW open; rather that's a reason to support reopening it later, and perhaps under new management
+ 11:05:28 am <@WilliamH> 90 days should be plenty of time for them to fix it.
+ 11:05:52 am <@Whissi> I agree with ulm again. But I wouldn't give them 3 months. New software and new moderation must be deployed in January. So I would put this on agenda in February... if nothing happened... it's over.
+ 11:06:03 am <@mattst88> They've had plenty of time and they don't even agree that moderation isn't adequate
+ 11:06:06 am <@dilfridge> as a point of reference, the software update has been queued for many years, I doubt it will materialize in the next days
+ 11:06:16 am <+antarus> the only person who can do the upgrade currently is me
+ 11:06:17 am <+antarus> fwiw
+ 11:06:32 am <@Whissi> antarus: And can you make it in next 30 days?
+ 11:06:34 am <@mattst88> I suggest: Close OTW today, and if and when the software upgrade materializes, consider our options
+ 11:06:41 am <+antarus> if you want ot hold me accountable for it I'm fine with that
+ 11:06:41 am <@dilfridge> ++
+ 11:07:12 am <@ulm>
+ 11:07:17 am <+antarus> Whissi: my plan was to get it done over christmas, yes.
+ 11:07:20 am <@ulm> "I suspect that OTW will not continue for much longer in its present form. That's regardless of any council activity."
+ 11:07:26 am <@mattst88> there's no way to hold you accountable in any reasonable fashion. if you do nothing in the next 30 days we can't even retire you
+ 11:07:32 am <@ulm> that's from a forum moderator
+ 11:08:12 am <@dilfridge> ulm: and if you go through the other posts on that page you see examples of the moderation quality
+ 11:08:26 am <@ulm> dilfridge: yes, I'm well aware :(
+ 11:08:27 am <@mattst88> ulm: I think that's far too little, far too late, especially since the author has been very active in all of the mailing list threads, singing a very different tune
+ 11:08:30 am <+Soap__>
+ 11:08:48 am <+antarus> mattst88: I think the idea is that we would fold the OTW forums if both (upgrade, different-moderation) did not take place
+ 11:09:13 am <@dilfridge> let's fold otw now and re-establish it once the software update is complete
+ 11:09:19 am <@dilfridge> (from scratch)
+ 11:09:19 am <@mattst88> antarus: I understand, but what's the value in letting the current OTW continue to exist?
+ 11:09:23 am <@Whissi> From my POV there is no need for an immediate action today since OTW isn't public anymore. I am still lacking a clear signal from forums mods that they understand the message, agree with us that something has to change. But I am willing, also as sign that *we* want to resolve this together, to delay until Februar meeting. But February would be my deadline.
+ 11:09:54 am <+antarus> mattst88: I suspect the risk is that all the mods would object / resign /etc
+ 11:10:05 am <+antarus> versus coming to something that is more agreeable
+ 11:10:27 am <@mattst88> No comment
+ 11:10:50 am <@dilfridge> I can't really see someone as forum-mods team lead who argues about the use of "slut" and "Führer" as insults
+ 11:11:05 am <@dilfridge> if the team stands behind him, then I pretty much see it as non-reformable
+ 11:11:10 am <@ulm> that's one single moderator, though
+ 11:11:20 am <@mattst88> Just look at the comments left on the posts reported by Soap and sam_
+ 11:11:28 am <@gyakovlev> he's the most vocal one and is the lead though.
+ 11:11:36 am <@dilfridge> recently elected as team lead, and none of his team members protested in any way
+ 11:11:37 am <+antarus> sadly there is no audit trail for the moderation comments
+ 11:11:38 am <@WilliamH> That's the problem, he's the lead.
+ 11:11:39 am <@mattst88> I don't know which moderator is leaving them, but they are clearly out of step with most of us
+ 11:11:54 am <+antarus> this is one thing I believe the forums software upgrade could fix
+ 11:12:12 am <@dilfridge> you mean an upgrade in desultory's brain?
+ 11:12:31 am <@Whissi> No, the reported postings from Soap__ and sam_ are bad. Really... we also have to recognize that until November, no one really gave a fuck about it. Everyone let it happen. So I am not really going to blame them for postings from June or before that. Make a break now. Now, everyone should understand things are changing. But forget about the past.
+ 11:12:53 am <+antarus> dilfridge: no
+ 11:13:15 am <+antarus> if yuo are asking if there is a gap between the community and some moderators, I agree
+ 11:13:26 am <@mattst88> Whissi: I don't understand your point -- I'm saying that a moderator left edits on Sam and Soap's comments (where they made the reports) and argued that many of the reported posts are not bad
+ 11:13:44 am <+antarus> your choice seems to be "we should remove moderators that don't agree with the community standards"
+ 11:13:53 am <+Soap__> "Of the random set I surveyed, I did not find any posts that, in my opinion, rose to the level of a violation."
+ 11:13:54 am <@mattst88> Whissi: when the original posts happened... I don't know and I don't think it matters. The moderator is *currently* saying that many of the posts are not bad
+ 11:14:18 am <@Whissi> mattst88: But based on the idea that they are fighting for free speech. For me it looks like they haven't understand that Gentoo is not protecting free speech. That we only care about our CoC.
+ 11:14:39 am <+Soap__> Whissi: and you wont get them to accept that
+ 11:14:47 am <@mattst88> antarus: yes, and I would suggest that removing some moderators that are out of step with the community standards should be something that happens in order to consider reopening an off-topic forum
+ 11:14:50 am <@Whissi> That's the important question I have not answer for yet.
+ 11:15:05 am <@Whissi> If they will stick to free speech I agree with what dilfridge said.
+ 11:15:21 am <@mattst88> Whissi: they /have/ stuck to that position, for the last month of discussion
+ 11:15:29 am <@mattst88> even to the point of claiming that Gentoo is a 'common carrier'!
+ 11:15:33 am <@dilfridge> as mattst88 says
+ 11:15:47 am <@gyakovlev> ok just discussing is not going anywhere, maybe we do a quick vote on should we vote right now?
+ 11:15:47 am <@gyakovlev> like vote on: shutting down right now, or postpone original agenda item until after Christmas break (Feb meeting).
+ 11:15:50 am <+zlogene> mattst88: no, for the past few years
+ 11:16:17 am <@mattst88> I don't know how you can reasonably claim that the lack of signal/answers from the forum moderators is reason to give them further delay
+ 11:16:24 am <@mattst88> This is *entirely* desultory's strategy
+ 11:16:32 am <@gyakovlev> ^^
+ 11:16:34 am <@Whissi> I am not sure if they are defending just their position or are really insisting accepting a new policy from their POV.
+ 11:16:35 am <@mattst88> This is exactly what he did when he fought the discussion in 2019 to a standstill
+ 11:16:36 am <+antarus> uhhh
+ 11:16:45 am <@WilliamH> Can we remove him as the council?
+ 11:16:48 am <@dilfridge> so far, all contributions were procedural criticism, which is an exclusive delay tactics
+ 11:16:56 am <+antarus> mattst88: mostly because you flubbed it IMHO ;)
+ 11:17:05 am <+antarus> I still haven't seen any kind of actual timeline of events from the council
+ 11:17:17 am <+antarus> this is another one of those "hey read these 2000 emails, then you will understand the arguments"
+ 11:17:20 am <+antarus> its rediculous
+ 11:17:31 am <@dilfridge> and already on 10.11. in several mailing list posts the conclusion was clear, citing a random one: "There are two options: moderate it better, or shut down the section."
+ 11:17:34 am <@mattst88> antarus: again, procedural arguments. I think you'll note that there was only like 1 person who objected to my suggestion that we shut the forum down
+ 11:17:46 am <+antarus> someone has to take point on summarized what happened, what the prposals actually were, when tey should be inacted
+ 11:17:54 am <+antarus> even the 1 year delay; neitehr side did anything
+ 11:18:04 am <@dilfridge> ok let me summarize
+ 11:18:05 am <+antarus> the delay was in effect pointless because no one drove any kind of solution from eitehr side
+ 11:18:08 am <@Whissi> So I would maybe contact every single one and ask them directly: Do you agree on our CoC and understand that forums has to enforce CoC, too. Are you willing to help us? Yes/No. With deadline.
+ 11:18:22 am <@mattst88> antarus: neither side did anything -- because the forum mods *don't want to do anything* and everyone else was tired of trying to force them to do anything
+ 11:18:25 am <@dilfridge> (I spent the last 1.5h re-reading the emails and turning my brain into mush)
+ 11:18:56 am <@dilfridge> desultory made two suggestions as reply to the agenda thread
+ 11:19:10 am <@WilliamH> dilfridge: what were they?
+ 11:19:12 am <@dilfridge> he termed them as options 3 and 4 (following up to my 1 and 2)
+ 11:19:17 am <+antarus> mattst88: you could have told them "you have 1 year to fix OTW moderation" and then I'd be happy to axe it after 1 y of forums doing nothing
+ 11:19:25 am <@dilfridge> 3 = coc does not apply in non-public areas
+ 11:19:25 am <@dilfridge> 4 = council is not responsible for social conflicts
+ 11:19:27 am <+antarus> but thats not what *was written*
+ 11:20:04 am <@dilfridge> as far as I could see after about 90min of reading, this was the net contribution
+ 11:20:25 am <@ulm> antarus: one year to go through 1 million posts? that's not enough time
+ 11:20:33 am <@mattst88> antarus: I think this is a really pedantic argument. they disagreed with any oversight 22 months ago; they disagree with any oversight today
+ 11:20:47 am <+antarus> ulm: only 10000 posts in the past 365d ;)
+ 11:21:01 am <+antarus> I don't actually expect them to moderate the older posts.
+ 11:21:09 am <+antarus> but this is a nitpick at this point
+ 11:21:30 am <@WilliamH> Well, the older posts could be just removed.
+ 11:21:36 am <+antarus> I have one other question
+ 11:21:39 am <@Whissi> No. We will delete current OTW and start a new forum and just copy over some important/useful threads. Really no need to manually go through all the old postings. That's history and we should make a clear cut.
+ 11:21:39 am <@mattst88> Can we do a quick poll and see who's willing to consider shutting OTW down today?
+ 11:21:48 am <@gyakovlev> antarus: also people should have common sense right? if many people are triggered by something and voice it, mod team should ( as I think ) at least start looking into it. just waiting for clear order or ultimatum is kinda strange. it's in the air, waiting for formal decision is counter-productive from all points of view.
+ 11:21:50 am <+antarus> which is if we axe otw, what do you do when all the mods resign?
+ 11:21:52 am <@WilliamH> I don't go to the forums for accessibility reasons, but I'm just throwing thoughts around.
+ 11:22:10 am <@dilfridge> antarus: freeze forums until a new team stands
+ 11:22:14 am <+antarus> I assume some of you who would say 'who cares' or 'that is my goal all along'
+ 11:22:35 am <@dilfridge> and the general procedure should be the same as when council re-formed qa
+ 11:22:36 am <@mattst88> antarus: Speculative and I'm happy to handle that problem if it happens
+ 11:22:59 am <@dilfridge> there we have precedence
+ 11:23:12 am <@mattst88> Can we do a quick poll and see who's willing to consider shutting OTW down today?
+ 11:23:13 am <@Whissi> mattst88: Go on and formulate a motion for your test vote.
+ 11:23:43 am <@mattst88> Whissi: well, I was hoping to capture people's votes that would vote yes contingent on some other condition as well
+ 11:23:57 am <@gyakovlev> ****
+ 11:23:57 am <@gyakovlev> Poll:
+ 11:23:57 am <@gyakovlev> 1) Cast votes on OTW motion today
+ 11:23:57 am <@gyakovlev> 2) Postpone till Feb meeting
+ 11:23:57 am <@gyakovlev> ****
+ 11:23:57 am <@gyakovlev> ^ please vote
+ 11:24:07 am <@dilfridge> 1
+ 11:24:10 am <@mattst88> 1
+ 11:24:10 am <@slyfox> 1
+ 11:24:11 am <@gyakovlev> 1
+ 11:24:12 am <@Whissi> 2
+ 11:24:13 am -*- ulm 2
+ 11:24:16 am <@WilliamH> 2
+ 11:24:49 am <@WilliamH> Ok, let me come up with a motion.
+ 11:24:53 am <@gyakovlev> ok seems majority is to vote today.
+ 11:25:23 am <@gyakovlev> there are 2 options in the email
+ 11:25:23 am <@gyakovlev> 1) shut down OTW
+ 11:25:23 am <@gyakovlev> or
+ 11:25:23 am <@gyakovlev> 2) replace or supplement forum moderators with people willing to fulfill the
+ 11:25:23 am <@gyakovlev> moderator role in OTW
+ 11:25:28 am <@Whissi> This will not end good. Imagine we will vote against closing today... but we still agree that something must change. But the signal will be different :/
+ 11:25:32 am <@WilliamH> The software upgrade can be done over Christmas right antarus?
+ 11:25:54 am <@WilliamH> so the new software would be in place by Jan?
+ 11:25:55 am <@ulm> gyakovlev: but do we have any people who could take over as forum mods?
+ 11:25:58 am <@dilfridge> gyakovlev: I dont see 2 as a realistic option.
+ 11:26:00 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: my question to you is why would you want to let OTW stay open until then?
+ 11:26:01 am <@gyakovlev> Whissi: what will software update change?
+ 11:26:10 am <@gyakovlev> I meant WilliamH ^
+ 11:26:30 am <@dilfridge> besides, imho retiring mods (since they are developers) would have to go through comrel
+ 11:26:39 am <+antarus> WilliamH: I think if we dont' get the uprade done in the next bit...I dunno what will happent to the whole forum.
+ 11:26:52 am <+antarus> I'll commit to doing it over christmas
+ 11:26:53 am <@WilliamH> gyakovlev: I'm just going by what I've read since I don't go to the forums... They make it sound like it would give them better moderating abilities.
+ 11:27:04 am <@Whissi> gyakovlev: Easier moderation, allow for warning/point system to be consistent... like you get warned, banned... life time ban if you still don't learn anything....
+ 11:27:07 am <@ulm> part of the problem is that forums (or at least otw) are pretty much detached from the dev community
+ 11:27:15 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: but they don't agree that more moderation needs to happen!
+ 11:27:22 am <@dilfridge> ulm¨
+ 11:27:26 am <@dilfridge> ulm++
+ 11:27:38 am <@WilliamH> mattst88: are we sure that the whole team feels that way?
+ 11:27:55 am <@WilliamH> ulm++
+ 11:27:58 am <@dilfridge> well, it seems like they are mostly happy to have desultory speak for them
+ 11:28:25 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: no one has said they think more moderation needs to happen, AFAICT, and they seem to be happy to let desultory speak for the team
+ 11:28:34 am <@WilliamH> dilfridge: heh, maybe there's a feeling he'll replace them if they don't go along. We don't really know.
+ 11:28:39 am <@mattst88> and it's not like the discussion began yesterday
+ 11:28:52 am <+antarus> Yeah I am sad that the rest of the mod team never talks
+ 11:29:02 am <+antarus> I've only spoken to NeddySeagoon and Chiitoo
+ 11:29:06 am <@mattst88> > Last elected: 2020/05/20
+ 11:29:07 am <+antarus> the rest of the mods are silent
+ 11:29:19 am <@Whissi> Well, we can only be sure if we ask them directly and apply a deadline for the reply.
+ 11:29:20 am <@gyakovlev> I think not having to deal with OTW + new software will make their job easier and more plesant
+ 11:29:31 am <@dilfridge> and desultory's flourish does not help their point
+ 11:29:41 am <@WilliamH> dilfridge: I agree wrt desultory
+ 11:29:52 am <+antarus> WilliamH: ...which part? :)
+ 11:30:03 am <+FreedomBear> I'm catching up here... Council absolutely can remove forum mods.
+ 11:30:21 am <@gyakovlev> ok let's cut it
+ 11:30:24 am <@gyakovlev> ####
+ 11:30:24 am <@gyakovlev> shut down OTW ( Off the wall ) subforum on gentoo-forums
+ 11:30:24 am <@gyakovlev> yes/no votes
+ 11:30:24 am <@gyakovlev> ####
+ 11:30:30 am -*- Whissi is also a little bit concerned that people not active in the forum and the *good* OTW stuff are having a strong opinion and are willing to shutdown something they don't care about
+ 11:30:31 am <@mattst88> I propose that we shutdown (i.e., lock, hide) OTW today, and when the forum software update happens that they claim will allow them to do better (or whatever their claim is), they can bring a motion to reopen an off-topic forum
+ 11:30:38 am <+NeddySeagoon> ?? I have to do the grocery order or we will starve next week - is it quick?
+ 11:30:50 am -*- mattst88 votes yes
+ 11:30:56 am -*- Whissi votes no
+ 11:30:59 am -*- dilfridge yes for now
+ 11:31:02 am <@WilliamH> I propose a slight change.
+ 11:31:07 am <@dilfridge> (for shutting down now)
+ 11:31:21 am -*- WilliamH no -- I want to propose a change
+ 11:31:39 am -*- gyakovlev yes ( shut down now )
+ 11:31:58 am -*- slyfox abstains
+ 11:32:06 am -*- ulm no
+ 11:32:22 am <@WilliamH> My change would be to re-open after the upgrade.
+ 11:32:29 am <@gyakovlev> that's a tie
+ 11:32:32 am <@WilliamH> which antarus has committed to doing next week
+ 11:32:38 am <@dilfridge> tie means motion not carried
+ 11:32:44 am <+antarus> oh god is that next week? lol
+ 11:32:52 am <@slyfox> SURPRISE
+ 11:32:57 am <@WilliamH> sorry, Christmas week is in two weeks
+ 11:33:00 am <@dilfridge> hrhr
+ 11:33:12 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: that's horrible. they should absolutely not be able to reopen with only new software in place
+ 11:33:33 am <+NeddySeagoon> WilliamH: I would ramp down the exintig OTM and ram up a new one. As discussions wthu the council members at FOSDEM 2019
+ 11:33:36 am <+antarus> WilliamH: I'm not quite understanding the practical difference in the two proposals
+ 11:33:41 am <@WilliamH> mattst88: then we give them two meetings to clean it up.
+ 11:33:49 am <@mattst88> antarus: new software is necessary but not sufficient
+ 11:33:53 am <@WilliamH> and if it isn't cleaned up it gets shut down for good.
+ 11:33:55 am <@Whissi> mattst88: No, of course not. They have to re-open with new guidelines... no free speech anymore. CoC is what is critical.
+ 11:34:02 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: and why do you want to keep the current thing open until then?
+ 11:34:18 am <+FreedomBear> slyfox: do you ever actually vote on anything (i.e. not abstain)? Especially controversial topics.
+ 11:34:22 am <+antarus> mattst88: I think its less about that aspect, and more about what the repalcement forum will look like
+ 11:34:30 am <+antarus> (which is why i am confused)
+ 11:34:41 am <@mattst88> let them propose a motion to open a new off-topic forum with claims of how they'll better moderate it than they did OTW
+ 11:35:06 am <@slyfox> FreedomBear: past council meetings and summaries are available. feel free to check out.
+ 11:35:30 am <@dilfridge> FreedomBear: please...
+ 11:35:37 am <+FreedomBear> slyfox: yea. I see mostly abstentions. Sad. I'll vote accordingly next round.
+ 11:35:44 am <+antarus> WilliamH: so fwiw the only difference between the motion we voted on and your motion is that your motion automatically re-opens the forum after the upgrade?
+ 11:35:53 am <+antarus> (is my understanding of the differenecs)
+ 11:35:59 am <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: is approximately what we discussed at FOSDEM.
+ 11:36:11 am <+NeddySeagoon> Need to got back to groceries.
+ 11:36:26 am <+antarus> NeddySeagoon: sorry I didn't mean to literalyl summon you ;)
+ 11:36:33 am <@WilliamH> Nothing is official until we are out of this meeting... Someone tell me what's in that link.
+ 11:37:05 am <@Whissi> WilliamH:
+ 11:37:14 am <+NeddySeagoon> antarus: Groceries trum council meeting, so we can't safely shop for ourselves.
+ 11:37:17 am <@Whissi> (it's a posting from NeddySeagoon in the forum)
+ 11:37:54 am <@Whissi> I must say that I am really happy to see such a posting.
+ 11:38:10 am <@Whissi> It gives me some faith that we can resolve this together.
+ 11:38:17 am <@ulm> "Die Botschaft hör ich wohl, allein mir fehlt der Glaube"
+ 11:38:21 am <+Soap__> apparently it required reporting offensive posts "the proper way"
+ 11:38:22 am <@ulm> (I hear the message well but lack Faith's constant trust.)
+ 11:38:29 am <+NeddySeagoon> Whissi: Weren't you at FOSDEM what that was dincussed?
+ 11:39:07 am <@Whissi> NeddySeagoon: Yes... but you posted this just a few hours ago.
+ 11:39:07 am <@dilfridge> NeddySeagoon: the point is a bit, that fosdem was long ago
+ 11:39:24 am <+FreedomBear> Whissi: you always put too much faith in people.
+ 11:39:32 am <@gyakovlev> Whissi: I kinda agree, if it works, that's how it should be done ideally. the question is " will it work that way?"
+ 11:39:37 am <@dilfridge> and wouldn't it be, kinda, nice to see initiative from forum mods as well?
+ 11:39:39 am -*- NeddySeagoon needs to beat the grocery deadline ... Its not new newn to you or dilfridge
+ 11:40:01 am <@dilfridge> so basically we had this discussion long ago and nothing happened at all
+ 11:40:18 am <@dilfridge> and now, when we're sick of it, things get delayed by procedural debate
+ 11:40:29 am <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: I still only represet me. Not the team
+ 11:40:39 am <@Whissi> But finally at least someone in the team is moving. Let's concentrate on the positive things.
+ 11:40:41 am <@WilliamH> Ok, I need to back up... blame the amount of info going on in here... and my screen reader...
+ 11:40:41 am <+antarus> so set actual deadlines and act on them
+ 11:40:43 am -*- antarus shrugs
+ 11:41:04 am <@WilliamH> I'm requesting a clarification...
+ 11:41:20 am <@Whissi> Yes, let's make a deadline. If we don't close today... we can still close in February. It's not like January will make the problem bigger.
+ 11:41:39 am <@WilliamH> Were we voting to close otw permanently earlier or just until the upgrade happens....
+ 11:42:04 am <+FreedomBear> dilfridge: exactly. Delayed again. Some with the inability to make a decision and some showing the same faith in others that have proven to have negative effects in other projects.
+ 11:42:07 am <+FreedomBear> Disheartening.
+ 11:42:08 am -*- NeddySeagoon puts a few groceries in his basket, so the webside does not time out ...
+ 11:42:26 am <@Whissi> The motion we just voted on was for a permanent close.
+ 11:42:30 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: we are voting to close it today. I see no reason why an off-topic forum could not be reopenen in the future
+ 11:42:48 am <@dilfridge> I see no problems with an off-topic forum in principle
+ 11:42:53 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: but I would suggest a new motion be made to do that, with some claims about how they're going to moderate it better
+ 11:43:02 am <@mattst88> This is what I said a few times already
+ 11:43:03 am <@dilfridge> I see problems with an off-topic forum and the current set of moderators.
+ 11:43:07 am <@ulm> FreedomBear: please stop
+ 11:43:26 am <FreedomBear> ulm: I am stating factual information. If that is an issue then please feel free to boot me.
+ 11:43:43 am <@Whissi> gyakovlev: /mode +m please
+ 11:43:46 am <@mattst88> This is why I was asking for an informal poll to see what people's conditions were
+ 11:44:33 am <@dilfridge> anyone wants to say something constructive please dm one of the council members
+ 11:45:15 am <+zlogene> devs are voiced, so we are safe
+ 11:45:20 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: I think the forum upgrade is a necessary but not sufficient condition to reopen. Please acknowledge and say where you agree or not
+ 11:46:12 am <@WilliamH> mattst88: I've always said that they need to clean up otw based on what I've heard about it. I was just saying it seems that the upgrade would make it easier to do that.
+ 11:46:12 am <@Whissi> To make sure there is no misunderstanding: Nobody expect that a forum upgrade alone will fix it. Of course, the forum upgrade must be used as a cut to also establish and enforce new rules.
+ 11:46:27 am <@WilliamH> Whissi++
+ 11:46:30 am <@mattst88> WilliamH: Yes, we know! Are you not understanding what I'm saying?!
+ 11:46:50 am <@gyakovlev> since there was a misunderstanding of the agenda item, can we re-cast a vote TODAY on revised item "Shut down OTW today, with possibility of re-creating off-topic forum area later after forum software/tools update, with stricter rules (TBD)"
+ 11:46:57 am <@gyakovlev> so we don't wait till next meeting
+ 11:47:23 am <@slyfox> sounds ok
+ 11:47:26 am <@dilfridge> moment
+ 11:47:30 am <@dilfridge> better wording
+ 11:47:40 am <@ulm> quoting from that NeddySeagoon post: "the current OTW should be made read only in a few weeks, and dropped entirely at the forum upgrade". this generally sounds like the right roadmap
+ 11:47:50 am <@Whissi> ack
+ 11:47:53 am <+Soap__> ulm: whats the commitment?
+ 11:47:57 am <@ulm> assuming that it's going to happen
+ 11:47:59 am <+Soap__> needs an ETA
+ 11:48:01 am <@dilfridge> "Shut down OTW today, with possibility of re-creating a new off-topic forum from scratch after software update, with stricter rules"
+ 11:48:07 am <@ulm> :
+ 11:48:13 am <@ulm> Soap__: "few weeks"
+ 11:48:28 am <+Soap__> ulm: 80 weeks is a "few" for desultory
+ 11:48:35 am <@ulm> *sigh*
+ 11:48:37 am <+antarus> ulm: advise you pick actual days
+ 11:48:47 am <+Soap__> no ambiguity
+ 11:48:49 am <+mgorny> dilfridge: also plz clarify 'shut down'
+ 11:48:52 am <@ulm> "few" is what I can cound with my fingers
+ 11:48:52 am <+antarus> is there a council meeting in Jan?
+ 11:48:55 am <@ulm> *count
+ 11:49:03 am <+Soap__> ok, 5 weeks
+ 11:49:14 am <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: That will make the forum unmanagable. The overlap is key to a smooth transition.
+ 11:49:28 am <@Whissi> I agree on what NeddySeagoon said.
+ 11:49:33 am <@dilfridge> Motion: Shut down OTW today (i.e. make unaccessible and wipe the database if possible), with the option of re-creating a new blank off-topic forum from scratch after the software update, with stricter rules."
+ 11:49:56 am <@Whissi> It's not like we will allow new CoC-violating postings during transition, right NeddySeagoon?
+ 11:49:58 am <+antarus> yeah thats not something I'm comfortable doing
+ 11:50:11 am <+antarus> I'm not going to delete the whole forum
+ 11:50:29 am <+antarus> (e.g. the underlying data)
+ 11:50:50 am <@mattst88> I don't think that aspect (wiping the database) is important for me, FWIW
+ 11:50:52 am <@dilfridge> feel free to make a backup beforehand, but it shouldnt be in the live db
+ 11:51:05 am <@dilfridge> but as mattst88 says, that is not the important point
+ 11:51:14 am <@WilliamH> Yeah I don't agree with wiping the db either.
+ 11:51:15 am <+antarus> well then I'm happy to violate that part of the order ;)
+ 11:51:18 am <+NeddySeagoon> No. Create a new repacement. With stricter rules, once that up and in use watch activitf in OTW. Shet OTW after at most two weeks.
+ 11:51:37 am <@mattst88> dilfridge: so let's drop the part about wiping the DB?
+ 11:51:39 am <@ulm> NeddySeagoon: +1
+ 11:51:41 am <@dilfridge> Motion: Shut down OTW today (i.e. make it fully unaccessible), with the option of re-creating a new blank off-topic forum from scratch after the software update, with stricter rules."
+ 11:51:51 am <+antarus> thanks
+ 11:51:53 am <@ulm> especially for the 2 weeks part
+ 11:52:54 am <@mattst88> Are any of ulm, slyfox, Whissi, WilliamH willing to support dilfridge's motion?
+ 11:53:13 am <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: OTW has been there 18 years, why thu indecent haste?
+ 11:53:34 am <@mattst88> NeddySeagoon: we've been over that repeatedly
+ 11:53:35 am <@dilfridge> there will always be haste at some point, if the main resistance is delay tactics
+ 11:53:42 am <@ulm> mattst88: I don't really see how this moting is different from the first one?
+ 11:54:04 am <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: The forums need a smooth transiton
+ 11:54:10 am <@Whissi> Could someone outline what you expect from closing it today?
+ 11:54:15 am <@dilfridge> NeddySeagoon: the forum needs a clean break
+ 11:54:16 am <@mattst88> ulm: because WilliamH didn't seem to understand that we weren't shutting the door on the possibility of a better moderated off-topic forum in the future
+ 11:54:42 am <@dilfridge> Whissi: the forum needs a clean break between the current mess and whatever comes afterwards
+ 11:54:54 am <@dilfridge> moderation won't magically become better
+ 11:55:41 am <@Whissi> No, but we need a transition path and it's not like we would continue to allow new CoC violating postings. At least this would be my requirement to keep it for the transition.
+ 11:55:52 am <@dilfridge> honestly, when this whole discussion started I was much more for giving the forum admins more time
+ 11:55:52 am <+NeddySeagoon> Nope it needs a smooth transition. If you want an OTW close hate, I'll offer 31 Dec 2020,
+ 11:56:10 am <+NeddySeagoon> date*
+ 11:56:26 am <@dilfridge> however, in the meantime just about every interaction has been extremely negative (see forum-mods lead), so...
+ 11:56:29 am <@Whissi> 31 Dec sounds good to me.
+ 11:56:32 am <+Marecki> Whissi: And who will enforce not allowing new CoC-violating postings?
+ 11:56:39 am <@ulm> +1 for 31 Dec
+ 11:56:40 am <@Whissi> mattst88: Do you see a way to add it to the motion?
+ 11:56:41 am <@gyakovlev> how about this?
+ 11:56:42 am <@gyakovlev> 1. set OTW read-only (deadline 20 Dec 2020)
+ 11:56:42 am <@gyakovlev> 2. Create clean empty off-topic subforum (deadline 20 Dec 2020)
+ 11:56:42 am <@gyakovlev> 3. Make OTW non-accessible (deadline 1 Jan 2021)
+ 11:56:42 am <@gyakovlev> 4. Upgrade the software ( sotft Deadline - 13 Feb 2021)
+ 11:57:01 am <@WilliamH> NeddySeagoon: that's fine by me.
+ 11:57:07 am <@dilfridge> no
+ 11:57:13 am <@dilfridge> too soft
+ 11:57:39 am <@mattst88> Can a council member finally answer me this: What value is there in leaving OTW open for another couple of weeks?
+ 11:58:20 am <+NeddySeagoon> Getting a new forum up bf 20 Dec is a big ask. Its terms of reference need to be agreed in the mods team, and possibly the council.
+ 11:58:35 am <+antarus> I think the value is mostly in attempting to get support from the mods on the new compressed timeline
+ 11:58:40 am <@ulm> mattst88: it's been there for many years, so I don't think 2 more weeks would matter
+ 11:58:56 am <@dilfridge> so let's just shut down otw and get a new one up with the new software? I guess that might speed it up...
+ 11:59:01 am <@WilliamH> antarus++ ulm++
+ 11:59:13 am <@ulm> I much prefer 31 Dec with support from at least one forum mod, over a controversial today
+ 11:59:22 am <@Whissi> This!
+ 12:00:30 pm <@mattst88> ulm: if it doesn't matter... then you shouldn't really care whether it's made inaccessible today or in two weeks
+ 12:00:53 pm <@Whissi> It should be clear what will happen next in case all of this was just hot air. I mean, I am willing to put this on agenda in January in case the plan didn't work (no need to wait for Feb in that case).
+ 12:01:15 pm <@dilfridge> suggestion:
+ 12:01:22 pm <@dilfridge> 1. set OTW read-only (now)
+ 12:01:22 pm <@dilfridge> 2. Create clean empty off-topic subforum (when possible)
+ 12:01:22 pm <@dilfridge> 3. Make OTW non-accessible (deadline 1 Jan 2021)
+ 12:01:22 pm <@dilfridge> 4. Upgrade the software (deadline 13 Feb 2021)
+ 12:01:42 pm <@mattst88> I would support that
+ 12:01:53 pm <@Whissi> NeddySeagoon: Your thoughts on that?
+ 12:02:01 pm <@Whissi> antarus: Are you going to make it in that timeframe?
+ 12:02:03 pm <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: That will make OTW spread all ovor the forums. So no.
+ 12:02:46 pm <@ulm> shift the deadline for 1. to 2020-12-31 as well?
+ 12:03:17 pm <+antarus> Whissi: I hope so
+ 12:03:30 pm <+antarus> I've done 2 upgrades and they have all failed
+ 12:03:32 pm <+NeddySeagoon> Get the new forum up PDQ. Its that delayed we lose our cut over date. OTW goen no later that 31-Dec. come what may.
+ 12:03:35 pm <+antarus> beause of various excitements
+ 12:03:49 pm <+antarus> so it will take more elbow grease, but it should get done
+ 12:03:52 pm <@dilfridge> now, here's a question
+ 12:03:58 pm <+NeddySeagoon> antarus: ^^ does not need new SW
+ 12:04:08 pm <@dilfridge> how can we ensure that the "new OTW" turns out better?
+ 12:04:12 pm <@mattst88> NeddySeagoon: honestly, bullshit. No one is going to start threads about alt-right conspiracy theories in Portage & Programming
+ 12:04:26 pm <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: Sign into the rocum and read it ?
+ 12:04:44 pm <+antarus> NeddySeagoon: does not need new SW?
+ 12:04:48 pm <@mattst88> dilfridge: we can't. it's just promises that next time will be better, all while leaving the current awfulness in place until then
+ 12:05:06 pm <+NeddySeagoon> mattst88: I'll buy you a bacon buttie if that sort of thing doesn't happen
+ 12:05:08 pm <@mattst88> and I might mention: promises from only one member of the forums team
+ 12:05:37 pm <@dilfridge> (who keeps pointing out regularly that he doesnt speak for the team)
+ 12:05:51 pm <@mattst88> NeddySeagoon: at least if they posted it in Portage & Programming the forum mods wouldn't argue that it's a fine topic for the Gentoo Forums, hopefully
+ 12:06:27 pm <@Whissi> I understand that we will add a lot of faith in what NeddySeagoon is promising us. But I am willing to do that one last time if this will allow us to do that 'together'.
+ 12:06:32 pm <+NeddySeagoon> mattst88: That sort of thin happens from time to time even with OTW.
+ 12:07:10 pm <@dilfridge> what we'd actually need here is a statement from the team lead
+ 12:07:10 pm <@gyakovlev> 1. Create clean empty off-topic subforum (deadline 20 Dec 2020)
+ 12:07:10 pm <@gyakovlev> 2. Set OTW read-only (deadline 27 Dec 2021), depends on ^
+ 12:07:10 pm <@gyakovlev> 3. Make OTW non-accessible (deadline 1 Jan 2021)
+ 12:07:10 pm <@gyakovlev> 4. Upgrade the software ( sotft deadline - 13 Feb 2021, subject to infra time availability)
+ 12:07:10 pm <@gyakovlev> how does that ^ sound?
+ 12:07:18 pm <@mattst88> Whissi: I might remind you that NeddySeagoon only appears to have changed his opinion quite recently
+ 12:07:53 pm <@dilfridge> the way we are watering this down I have an alternative suggestion
+ 12:08:04 pm <@dilfridge> 1. give forum mods one month to clean up their act
+ 12:08:16 pm <@Whissi> mattst88: You are right. But I am focusing on the fact that it happened at all.
+ 12:08:18 pm <@dilfridge> 2. if no significant changes, close otw immediately
+ 12:08:28 pm <+NeddySeagoon> mattst88: Not true. Ask the guy it was discusseh with 2 years ago.
+ 12:08:43 pm <@Whissi> mattst88: I don't understand why you want to 'rush' with this now. Just two more weeks... do really have zero faith left?
+ 12:08:55 pm <@ulm> dilfridge: but that's one month, versus 2 weeks in the motion?
+ 12:09:07 pm <@dilfridge> NeddySeagoon: maybe you shouldn't let your team lead speak for the team then? or vote him out?
+ 12:09:09 pm <@mattst88> NeddySeagoon: yeah, you just never bothered to acknowledge the problem in writing in any of the threads in the last month; instead arguing that pointing out the problem was done in bad faith, wrong procedure, etc
+ 12:09:12 pm <@ulm> how is that supposed to be harder/faster?
+ 12:09:30 pm <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: That extends to do what the team wants or will there be council micro management?
+ 12:09:42 pm <@mattst88> Whissi: yes, I have zero faith in the forum moderators' lead, and very little for the rest of the mods given their inability to speak up
+ 12:10:19 pm <@dilfridge> NeddySeagoon: so far noone has bothered forum mods for years. so there's no reason to complain about micromanagement.
+ 12:10:47 pm <@dilfridge> and yes, what you're saying would come up much more convincing if you had stood up on the mailing list.
+ 12:10:55 pm <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: I'm not complianing. I'm looking forward.
+ 12:11:08 pm <@mattst88> so, I think nothing is going to pass today without WilliamH or slyfox and ehtier has spoken in the last 11 minutes. are you two still here?
+ 12:11:20 pm <@slyfox> i'm here :)
+ 12:11:21 pm <@WilliamH> Yes just listening
+ 12:11:56 pm <+NeddySeagoon> If you go with the 'fix your stuff' approach, I write up a project plan that progress can be measured against.
+ 12:11:57 pm <@slyfox> My stance is that i'm no forums user and i'm in no position to dictate what project's team does on this i know nothing about.
+ 12:12:13 pm <@mattst88> slyfox: have you read the discussion threads?
+ 12:12:18 pm <@slyfox> yep
+ 12:12:23 pm <@dilfridge> That is somewhat silly since the discussion contains a lot of data points.
+ 12:12:30 pm <@mattst88> and you have no opinion, having read the threads?
+ 12:12:46 pm -*- dilfridge re-read a large part of it over the last 90min before the meeting.
+ 12:12:54 pm <+mgorny> unsurprising given 90% of the threads is dictionary copy-paste
+ 12:12:56 pm <@ulm> how about this? "Shut down OTW (i.e. make unaccessible and wipe the database if possible) with a deadline of 2020-12-31. There is the option of re-creating a new blank off-topic forum from scratch, with stricter rules."
+ 12:13:17 pm <+NeddySeagoon> ulm: WFM
+ 12:13:34 pm <@dilfridge> ok
+ 12:13:47 pm <@mattst88> oh, are we okay with wiping the database now?
+ 12:14:04 pm <@ulm> it doesn't tie it to the software upgrade, which is sort of independent IIUC
+ 12:14:14 pm <@dilfridge> I dont care about that part so much, I just want to avoid that a hidden url then points to...
+ 12:14:30 pm <@WilliamH> I don't really care either way about the db
+ 12:14:41 pm <@mattst88> WilliamH: you were against it before
+ 12:15:05 pm <@ulm> a backup of the db can (ind IMHO should) be made of course
+ 12:15:11 pm <@dilfridge> yes
+ 12:15:12 pm <@ulm> *and
+ 12:15:15 pm <@Whissi> OK, let's skip that. We can vote for ulm latest motion when everyone agrees.
+ 12:15:20 pm <@WilliamH> mattst88: because I didn't know it was difficult at the time... see what antarus said about it.
+ 12:15:26 pm <@mattst88> well, do we have an opinion from antarus?
+ 12:15:26 pm <@gyakovlev> ok
+ 12:15:28 pm <+NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: The will me no access to the fourm, except the forums team.
+ 12:15:30 pm <@mattst88> maybe he'll refuse to do it
+ 12:15:39 pm <@dilfridge> ok shall we vote on ulm's motion?
+ 12:15:54 pm <@Whissi> yes, vote time.
+ 12:15:57 pm -*- WilliamH is ok with ulm 's motion
+ 12:15:57 pm <@mattst88> I think we should figure out the wiping aspect, since it seemed to be a deal breaker before
+ 12:16:04 pm <@ulm> the chair should call for the vote :)
+ 12:16:18 pm <@gyakovlev> ###
+ 12:16:18 pm <@gyakovlev> Motion:
+ 12:16:18 pm <@gyakovlev> "Shut down OTW (i.e. make unaccessible and wipe the database if possible later) with a deadline of 2020-12-31. There is the option of re-creating a new blank off-topic forum from scratch, with stricter rules."
+ 12:16:18 pm <@gyakovlev> yes/no votes
+ 12:16:18 pm <@gyakovlev> ###
+ 12:16:28 pm -*- dilfridge yes
+ 12:16:38 pm -*- Whissi yes
+ 12:16:39 pm -*- gyakovlev yes
+ 12:16:41 pm -*- mattst88 yes
+ 12:16:44 pm -*- ulm yes
+ 12:16:45 pm -*- WilliamH yes
+ 12:16:48 pm -*- slyfox abstains
+ 12:17:10 pm <+NeddySeagoon> I better deliver now.
+ 12:17:19 pm <@Whissi> =)
+ 12:17:20 pm <+antarus> lol
+ 12:17:22 pm <@ulm> NeddySeagoon: yes, please :)
+ 12:17:29 pm <@slyfox> \o/
+ 12:17:32 pm <+antarus> sorry I stepped out
+ 12:17:35 pm <@gyakovlev> motion passed with 6 yes votes and 1 abstention.
+ 12:17:41 pm <+antarus> inaccessible is possible
+ 12:17:48 pm <+mgorny> NeddySeagoon: will you be forums' liaison now?
+ 12:17:48 pm <@gyakovlev> finally. moving on.
+ 12:17:51 pm <+antarus> deleting the database is also possible, but its not reversible
+ 12:18:01 pm <+antarus> so I would prefer not to do it until the end
+ 12:18:08 pm -*- NeddySeagoon gets back to groceries.
+ 12:18:14 pm <@dilfridge> make a backup and move it into glacier?
+ 12:18:19 pm <+Marecki> About the DB, do keep in mind that once it no longer backs an operational forum there might be limits on how long we can legally keep it.
+ 12:18:22 pm <+NeddySeagoon> antarus: At cutover time ...
+ 12:18:29 pm <+antarus> its not a separate database...
+ 12:18:34 pm <+antarus> its just some rows in a bunch of tables
+ 12:18:48 pm <@Whissi> Guys, these are details we will get sorted. Don't create a problem out of nothing.
+ 12:19:05 pm <+mgorny> antarus: are you sure phpbb doesn't have a 'delete' feature that just wipes the whole forum, recursively?
+ 12:19:11 pm <+antarus> I'm sure it does
+ 12:19:17 pm <+antarus> I'm not going to click it
+ 12:19:29 pm <+Marecki> I meant data in the database. But in the end it really doesn't matter that much, just keep it in mind.
+ 12:19:40 pm <@gyakovlev> ok next item
+ 12:19:40 pm <@gyakovlev> 3) Open bugs with Council participation
+ 12:19:40 pm <@gyakovlev>
+ 12:19:44 pm <+antarus> because later people wills ay "oh we wanted something" and instead of just going to get the thread I have to do a partial DB restore and get a version of phpbb-2 working and bla bla bla
+ 12:19:50 pm <@gyakovlev> 754009 we just discussed
+ 12:19:52 pm <+antarus> and its just busywork
+ 12:20:00 pm <@dilfridge> there's a proposal frm FreedomBear for open floor
+ 12:20:08 pm <@gyakovlev> we'll open it up
+ 12:20:22 pm <@gyakovlev> 736760 Application to Software Freedom Conservancy
+ 12:20:43 pm <@gyakovlev> now news here afaik. just watching. mgorny can you confirm that?
+ 12:21:34 pm <@gyakovlev> 677824 OTW related as well, skipping.
+ 12:21:50 pm <+antarus> I thought for SFC the basic response was 'no'
+ 12:21:58 pm <+antarus> but I can update the bug
+ 12:22:05 pm <@slyfox> sounds good
+ 12:22:34 pm <@gyakovlev> bug 751010 Missing summaries ( I have one, sorry for delay, machine is under desk, need to recover log )
+ 12:22:35 pm <+willikins> gyakovlev: "Missing log and summaries for 20191110, 20191208, and 20200412 council meetings"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; ulm:council
+ 12:23:10 pm <@Whissi> Just make sure you get it done before forum is finally upgrade =)
+ 12:23:22 pm <@gyakovlev> bug #688876
+ 12:23:22 pm <@gyakovlev> no response from comrel yet after ping
+ 12:23:23 pm <+willikins> gyakovlev: "Comrel webpage does not document expectations of privacy"; Community Relations, Developer Relations; CONF; rich0:comrel
+ 12:23:34 pm <@gyakovlev> will ping again
+ 12:23:42 pm <@slyfox> thank you!
+ 12:23:57 pm <@gyakovlev> bug 729062
+ 12:23:59 pm <+willikins> gyakovlev: "Services and Software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in the Gentoo namespace"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; IN_P; jstein:council
+ 12:24:10 pm <@gyakovlev> is discussion still going on?
+ 12:24:19 pm <@Whissi> Not ready for getting called yet. I still have to send motion. Need to discuss with jstein first.
+ 12:24:28 pm <@gyakovlev> ok watching
+ 12:24:40 pm <@slyfox> worth posting a status update?
+ 12:24:53 pm <@Whissi> I can update bug later, yes.
+ 12:25:04 pm <@slyfox> thank you!
+ 12:25:22 pm <@gyakovlev> and bug 574752
+ 12:25:24 pm <+willikins> gyakovlev: "Rename portage-YYYYMMDD.tar* snapshots with gentoo-YYYYMMDD.tar*"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Other; IN_P; mgorny:infra-bugs
+ 12:25:32 pm <@Whissi> I have an update on this:
+ 12:25:45 pm <@Whissi> The snapshot thing itself is done.
+ 12:25:57 pm <@Whissi> It's only the delta update thing missing
+ 12:26:05 pm <@Whissi> And there is no upgrade path
+ 12:26:18 pm <@Whissi> Current idea is to remove delta upgrades
+ 12:26:32 pm <@Whissi> people who wants delta updates because of bandwidth should use git
+ 12:26:34 pm <@ulm> Whissi: what does "The snapshot thing itself is done" mean exactly?
+ 12:26:54 pm <@ulm> I thought that was done since many months?
+ 12:27:01 pm <@Whissi> `emerge-webrsync` supports both gentoo-*.tar* and old portage-*.tar* snapshot
+ 12:27:18 pm <@Whissi> This is working and stable for ~almost 2 months
+ 12:27:46 pm <@Whissi> It is only the delta update which is missing but like said, nobody is working on this.
+ 12:28:07 pm <+antarus> is updated, fyi
+ 12:28:07 pm <+mgorny> gyakovlev: no news on either of 3 orgs
+ 12:28:56 pm <@Whissi> Maybe we should create a motion to end support for delta updates.. bring this to mailing list and finally vote on this.
+ 12:29:18 pm <@gyakovlev> Whissi: this was suggested by Robin in a bug I think, can you take this action?
+ 12:29:32 pm <@Whissi> OK.
+ 12:29:37 pm <@ulm> bug 574752 comment #20
+ 12:29:37 pm <+willikins> ulm: "Rename portage-YYYYMMDD.tar* snapshots with gentoo-YYYYMMDD.tar*"; Gentoo Infrastructure, Other; IN_P; mgorny:infra-bugs
+ 12:29:39 pm <@dilfridge> wfm
+ 12:29:40 pm <@gyakovlev> I've been using git for years so far, works great
+ 12:29:48 pm <@gyakovlev> for sync I mean.
+ 12:30:00 pm <+antarus> er
+ 12:30:08 pm <+antarus> we don't have a good scaling story for git
+ 12:30:09 pm <@slyfox> i used to use delta updates when i had internet at work only :)
+ 12:30:09 pm <+antarus> FYI
+ 12:30:31 pm <@gyakovlev> antarus: github mirror is ok, they have =)
+ 12:30:33 pm <@ulm> the other option would be to revert to an undated top-level dir
+ 12:30:53 pm <@Whissi> If delta upgrades are considered critical it should be possible to create them just for the new naming like we do today. It's just the missing upgrade path... i.e. getting people using old portage tarball to use new newtarball because deltas aren't interchangeable.
+ 12:31:27 pm <@WilliamH> I've never understood why we have a dated top-level dir anyway.
+ 12:31:32 pm <@WilliamH> ulm: ^^
+ 12:31:46 pm <@mattst88> The date in the directory name seems negatively helpful to me
+ 12:31:58 pm <@mattst88> I always untar and then realize I have to rename the directory
+ 12:32:19 pm <@Whissi> It has some values if you keep multiple tarballs
+ 12:32:30 pm <+antarus> gyakovlev: social contractttttt ;)
+ 12:32:30 pm <@WilliamH> If the date in the directory name was gone, the delta updates would work.
+ 12:33:06 pm <@mattst88> yes, but you could just do the thing I do and rename it then. The question is why is the date in it if it's aggravating for most people and makes this process more difficult
+ 12:33:14 pm <@WilliamH> Whissi: just name the tarballs that way -- you don't need the date in the directory
+ 12:33:25 pm <@gyakovlev> ok let's move on, it's taking too long already. please take some initiative and push for action. I have no technical opinion there as I used deltas last time with modem many years ago.
+ 12:33:43 pm <@mattst88> yes, I would want this to finally be resolved next meeting
+ 12:33:52 pm <@mattst88> tired of discussing it
+ 12:34:08 pm <@gyakovlev> 4. Open floor
+ 12:34:11 pm <@WilliamH> Let's find out why the date needs to be in the path and nuke it if there's not a good reason for it.
+ 12:34:28 pm <@gyakovlev> did the mode change? I don't see mode changes =)
+ 12:34:28 pm <@dilfridge> ok so
+ 12:34:29 pm <@WilliamH> This has been broken for months for people who use deltas.
+ 12:34:47 pm <@Whissi> It's not broken of you use the correct tarball.
+ 12:34:51 pm <@dilfridge> [22:27:09] <FreedomBear> I have to run... Would you proxy this for me?
+ 12:34:51 pm <@dilfridge> [22:27:24] <FreedomBear> It is a "general idea" please feel free to massage it...
+ 12:34:51 pm <@dilfridge> [22:27:29] <FreedomBear> I would like the council to consider a second decision for the forums. Something along a warning for the current forum mods team to enforce the CoC. If not, their permissions will be removed. As clearly shown earlier... one mod does not agree with several others reports of sexist and racist comments. As OTW is shut, there is potential for this to spill over to other areas. Failure to enforce will result in
+ 12:34:51 pm <@dilfridge> the removal of permissions. It may
+ 12:34:51 pm <@dilfridge> [22:27:29] <FreedomBear> also be considered that forum mods directly reports to the council as QA does. Just a few options...please adjust as needed.
+ 12:35:26 pm <@dilfridge> pasting this here as requested, and asking for comments / discussion
+ 12:36:33 pm <@dilfridge> from my side I dont see anything we can do here, this would first be comrel business
+ 12:36:35 pm <@Whissi> I don't think that an explicit action is required at the moment. Let's wait and see how NeddySeagoon plan will work.
+ 12:36:45 pm <@mattst88> I honestly don't want to litigate that. e.g., there are going to be arguments over *whether* there are CoC violations; *whether* the mods did or didn't moderate; etc
+ 12:36:56 pm <@ulm> it's easy to say that permissions will be removed, but then we'd need a plan how to proceed from that point
+ 12:37:05 pm <@mattst88> the answers are clear in my mind, but I'm tired
+ 12:37:25 pm <@gyakovlev> it's not a meeting discussion but I partially agree, some mod opinions are kinda questionable and human communication is not effective.
+ 12:37:57 pm <@dilfridge> a related question is if we still need glep-38; we also have other non-commit devs so this could probably be revoked
+ 12:38:29 pm <@ulm> it's informational anyway
+ 12:38:31 pm <@mattst88> I will have to read it in full; I'm not familiar with it
+ 12:39:26 pm <+antarus> I don't think we have...
+ 12:39:26 pm <@mattst88> My sense is that the forum moderators are only barely connected to the rest of the developer community
+ 12:39:32 pm <@mattst88> and that seems to be a large part of the problem
+ 12:39:46 pm <+antarus> are all the #gentoo-ops developers?
+ 12:39:56 pm <+antarus> I feel like I was an op for years before I joined officially
+ 12:40:12 pm <@mattst88> I think it's very strange that there are forum moderators that I've never seen on any gentoo-related communication media except the forum
+ 12:40:18 pm <@dilfridge> the overlap is larger there, maybe 50%
+ 12:40:53 pm <+antarus> mattst88: is that a problem with them or a problem with everyone else?
+ 12:40:55 pm <@WilliamH> mattst88: you're right, the forums are pretty disconnected from the rest of the community.
+ 12:40:59 pm <@mattst88> (I also think it's very strange that some of those moderators are participating in the alt-right conspiracy threads in OTW)
+ 12:41:08 pm <@Whissi> But all of this should be fine as long as we all agree on the same values.
+ 12:41:10 pm <+antarus> (e.g. why don't developers interact on the forums at all)
+ 12:41:23 pm <@mattst88> antarus: plenty of us do...
+ 12:41:32 pm <@WilliamH> antarus: in my case it is impossible.
+ 12:41:37 pm <+antarus> are you suggesting there are developers that *don't* hold alt-right views?
+ 12:41:46 pm <+antarus> or just odd that they are discussing it on a gentoo forum
+ 12:41:49 pm <+antarus> as opposed to some other venue
+ 12:42:04 pm <@dilfridge> while I dont post much I do check the forums for problems after e.g. glibc upgrades
+ 12:42:10 pm <@mattst88> antarus: is this a real question?
+ 12:42:15 pm <+antarus> uhh yes?
+ 12:42:32 pm <@mattst88> I honestly don't want to know most people's political views
+ 12:42:41 pm <@gyakovlev> ^ and religious
+ 12:42:54 pm <@gyakovlev> leave it to yourselves and facebook.
+ 12:42:56 pm <@mattst88> like I said, I think it's strange that mods are *participating* in some of the more objectionable threads
+ 12:42:59 pm <+antarus> ok ;)
+ 12:43:08 pm <@WilliamH> I guess the question is, does that belong on the Gentoo forums?
+ 12:43:12 pm <@WilliamH> antarus: ^^
+ 12:43:29 pm <@mattst88> gyakovlev: I think we can close the meeting now?
+ 12:43:31 pm <+antarus> I think it belongs somewhere ;)
+ 12:43:52 pm -*- dilfridge points to 8kun
+ 12:44:14 pm <@gyakovlev> yeah. Open floor topics are non-actionable now and proposed discussed items need wider community discussion
+ 12:44:17 pm <+antarus> no comment ;)
+ 12:44:26 pm -*- mattst88 out
+ 12:44:30 pm <@slyfox> o/
+ 12:44:41 pm -*- gyakovlev bangs the gong
+ 12:44:53 pm <@slyfox> That was a long one. Thanks all!
+ 12:44:54 pm <@gyakovlev> meeting closed, thanks everyone for patience and your time
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20201213.txt.asc b/meeting-logs/20201213.txt.asc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b0f351c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-logs/20201213.txt.asc
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@