From Fedora Project Wiki

2006 August 24 FESCo

Meeting Summaries are posted on the wiki at:


  • warren
  • thl
  • rdieter
  • bpepple
  • tibbs
  • scop
  • abadger1999
  • dgilmore (late)
  • jwb (thuderstorms)


Mass Rebuild

  • Start this Monday August 27, 2006.


  • Docs for modifying comps are on the wiki:

  • Comps SIG:

Ctrl-C Problem

  • Infrastructure thinks new VCS is the way to go so removing from the schedule.
  • abadger1999 will explore an async method as he works on the new VCS mailing scripts.

Packaging Committee

  • Discussed Provides/Obsoletes and rpmlint warnings. No changes voted on this week.

Sponsorship Nominations

  • cweyl was nominated and accepted.
  • Patrice Dumas to be discussed for next time.


  • No new kmods this week.
  • Suggestion was made to have a separate, official Fedora Repository for kmods (not livna).
  • The question of whether kmods are allowed in at all still has to go before the Fedra Project Board.
  • zaptel is still on the table but held up until these decisions are made.

FESCo Elections

  • Elections'Draft was approved with the following changes:
  • Candidates must be a member of cvsextras.
  • If this is a problem, focusing on alternate criteria for gaining cvsextras might be a better solution than using cladone as the requirement.
  • abadger1999 will move the draft to policy .

CVS Branch Approvals

  • gcin turned down for FC4 and FC3 due to lack of information.
  • crm114 approved as:

1. It is the reason tre is in FC4 and tre will receive more attention if crm114 is in as well. 2. The maintainer will continue to test and fix bugs in crm114 on FC4.

Ignacio's Packages and AWOL Maintainers in General

  • Security issues can always be fixed through the Security Policy.
  • Ignacio posted to his blog in May but hasn't been active on the mailing lists since February.
  • FESCo approved other maintainers taking on Ignacio's packages.
  • Co-maintainership with Ignacio brought up as a possibility if he comes back.
  • Moving ignacio's email to the CC field in owners.list instead of removing him entirely would be a step towards this.
  • lmacken has been updating the TurboGears stack and is willing to take on those packages.


(10:00:08) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress
(10:00:11) thl: hi all
(10:00:14) thl: who's around?
(10:00:15) ***rdieter here
(10:00:18) ***bpepple is here.
(10:00:19) _wart_ left the room.
(10:00:40) kyrian: thl> can you drop me your email address so I can send you that reminder if needed?
(10:00:43) tibbs: I'm here.
(10:01:01) ***scop is here
(10:01:03) thl: kyrian, fedora [AT]
(10:01:27) thl: k, so let's start slowly
(10:01:39) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress --  M{ae}ss-Rebuild
(10:01:43) thl: scop ?
(10:01:57) scop: just a sec
(10:01:57) thl: warren, f13, ca we start on monday?
(10:02:03) thl: s/ca/can/
(10:02:28) scop: yep, that's the only thing open
(10:02:31) f13: I see no reason not to.
(10:03:07) thl: f13, k, thx
(10:03:18) scop: f13, are you aware of anything that would prevent starting it right now?
(10:03:37) ***warren checks on dbus
(10:03:47) thl: scop, when will you annouce the procedure?
(10:03:56) scop: when I know when it'll happen :)
(10:04:05) scop: which prolly means today
(10:04:07) thl: scop, k :)
(10:05:09) f13: scop: nothing gcc/glibc related, but I reserve the right to find something later.
(10:05:10) thl: f13, warren, please yell if everything shows up that could lead to problems
(10:05:19) thl: let's move on for now then
(10:05:19) warren: thl, nod
(10:05:21) f13: will do
(10:05:38) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress --  Use comps.xml properly
(10:05:41) scop: okay, I'll announce it and will use 28th
(10:05:47) thl: scop, thx
(10:06:05) thl: c4chris|w and dgilmore not around afaics
(10:06:11) Rathann: are there any docs on how to add things to comps?
(10:06:14) thl: skipping for now if no one objects
(10:06:29) tibbs: Yes, at least a bit of docs would be good here.
(10:06:36) Rathann: I got one of those reminders from Chris and I'm unsure what to do about it
(10:06:51) thl:
(10:07:08) thl: Rathann, that enough? If not -> please mail the comps sig
(10:07:20) Rathann: yeah, that should do it, thanks
(10:07:21) scop: ->
(10:07:46) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress --  Activate legacy in buildroots
(10:07:50) thl: no dgilmore, skipping
(10:07:59) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- CTRL-C problem
(10:08:08) thl: shall we remove that from the schedule?
(10:08:16) tibbs: I think so.
(10:08:23) bpepple: yeah.
(10:08:28) rdieter: yeah, it's pretty much out of our hands.
(10:08:31) warren: Note that we're willing to try things if people give code suggestions.
(10:08:45) ***thl will remove it later
(10:08:45) warren: but otherwise yes remove from schedule
(10:08:52) abadger1999: Is anyone here intimate with the CVS ondisk format?
(10:08:56) xris [n=xris]  entered the room.
(10:09:32) ***scop ducks
(10:09:55) warren: abadger1999, if you're thinking the async solution route, that might allow greater flexibility in notification... like CC'ing owners and sponsors
(10:10:11) warren: (which would depend on package database, but anyhow)
(10:10:17) abadger1999: warren: Yep.
(10:10:54) tibbs: abadger1999: I think the format contains the current revision, plus ed scripts which take the file back in time, all wraped up in a minimal bit of structure.
(10:11:09) scop: abadger1999, see CVSROOT/history and eg.
(10:11:17) drfickle: abadger1999: i know it uses RCS format. whether there is documentation on that or not I dunno
(10:11:41) scop: and perhaps cvsps in extras
(10:11:44) thl: abadger1999, would it be wise to work on that stuff now before the next VCS is chosen?
(10:12:26) abadger1999: thl: Depends.  An async solution might fit in with the next VCS so it might not be entirely wasted effort.
(10:12:39) dgilmore: sorry was messing with xerox machine ill be in and out
(10:12:51) abadger1999: But it depends on how hard it is to get the relevant information out of CVS when things change.
(10:13:05) thl: abadger1999, feel free to look into it ;-)
(10:13:31) thl: but let's move on for now
(10:13:33) abadger1999: I'll look into it as part of other VCS work I'm doing in infrastructure and we can take it off the list here.
(10:13:44) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- Packaging Committee Repor
(10:13:46) thl: abadger1999, thx
(10:13:51) thl: report?
(10:13:59) warren: thl, we would have CVS for some sub-projects even after nextgen VCS
(10:14:06) f13: I don't think we decided on anything on teh packaging meeting.
(10:14:15) tibbs: No, not really enough people around.
(10:14:20) f13: not enough people
(10:14:25) thl: okay, skipping
(10:14:29) scop: there was some discussion about Provides/Obsoletes and rpmlint things, that's about it
(10:14:39) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress --  Sponsorship nominations
(10:14:39) abadger1999: Discussed how rpmlint interacted with package reviews.
(10:14:44) warren: Is this separate from the kmod "decision" last week?
(10:14:55) rdieter: yes
(10:15:21) thl: cweyl was nominated and slightly discussed on the list
(10:15:31) thl: He got two +1 there
(10:15:36) thl: that was all comunication
(10:15:46) thl: any -1 here?
(10:15:53) thl: otherwise I'll consider him approved
(10:15:58) warren: I think it is a little unclear, but my interpretation of the "decision" of last week is to go ahead with kmod's in FC6 and RHEL5.  Only the yum plugin needs to be improved, but that isn't a blocker.
(10:16:06) warren: +1 on cweyl
(10:16:06) mber [n=bertaglm]  entered the room.
(10:16:11) abadger1999: +1 here
(10:16:12) bpepple: +1 to cweyl.
(10:16:16) thl: +1 here, too
(10:16:17) tibbs: I +1'ed  on cweyl on-list.
(10:16:20) rdieter: cweyl++
(10:16:24) thl: okay, approved
(10:16:29) scop: warren, that's my impression too
(10:16:30) thl: any new nominations?
(10:16:47) tibbs: Did anyone want to consider our current top non-sponsor reviewer?
(10:16:56) mber left the room.
(10:16:59) thl: cweyl, congratiulations
(10:17:00) bpepple: tibbs: who's that?
(10:17:12) tibbs: Patrice Dumas.
(10:17:23) tibbs: (had to scroll through PackageStatus).
(10:17:25) dgregor left the room (quit: Connection timed out).
(10:17:26) mber [n=bertaglm]  entered the room.
(10:17:31) mber left the room.
(10:17:33) dgregor [n=dennis]  entered the room.
(10:17:39) thl: tibbs, can you nominate him on the list
(10:17:44) tibbs: Sure.
(10:17:50) thl: just as jwb did for cweyl
(10:17:52) thl: thx
(10:17:56) tibbs: Assuming he doesn't object.
(10:18:22) thl: any other nominations?
(10:18:57) thl: seems not
(10:19:07) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- approve kmod's
(10:19:24) thl: well, I didn't get any requests for kmod approvals
(10:19:24) mdomsch [n=mdomsch]  entered the room.
(10:19:41) thl: but maybe we should talk about the whole kmod stuff now at this point?
(10:19:49) thl: is there anything to talk about here?
(10:19:51) scop: oh, btw, is there a chance that FAB will still block kmods altogether from FC6/RHEL5?
(10:19:57) thl: or do we continue on FAB?
(10:20:10) dgilmore: thl: FAB
(10:20:33) rdieter: scop: doubt it (if I have anything to say about it).
(10:20:34) dgilmore: lets not waste time here if it gets bloked up there
(10:21:01) warren: I highly doubt FPB will disallow kmods
(10:21:05) dgilmore: though i personanly think we need a kmod only repo shipped but disabbled by default
(10:21:07) nirik99: should zaptel-kmod get the thumbs down for not wanting to merge upstream? or wait and see what policy FAB wants for kmods?
(10:21:16) scop: rdieter, do you know when it would be possible to hear an official decision?
(10:21:29) warren: Likely the only problem we will have is davej and dwmw2 will demand that you reproduce kernel bugs without tainting modules loaded.
(10:21:58) tibbs: That's only fair of them.
(10:21:58) rdieter: scop: I can ask at the next FedoraBoard meeting.
(10:22:12) scop: rdieter, thanks
(10:22:14) dgilmore: warren: they will do that dwmw2 was adamant the other day that all kmods should live in livna
(10:22:31) scop: well, "tainting" might not be entirely fair AFAIU
(10:22:34) thl: nirik99, I'd really like to hear opinions from zaptel-upstream before it gets a "thumbs down"
(10:22:37) abadger1999: nirik99: I think it should get a thumbs down under current guidelines.
(10:22:55) scop: I disagree
(10:23:07) bpepple: abadger1999: I agree.
(10:23:09) abadger1999: But I'd like something to evolve that gets it into an official fedora repo... like dgilmore's suggested repository.
(10:23:12) nirik99: yeah, wish they would chime back in on the bug more with their thinking... we might have heard all we will from them tho.
(10:24:02) abadger1999: warren, dgilmore: livna would be okay if we can point people to livna to get their kernel modules.
(10:24:23) abadger1999: Otherwise we'll have free and opensource software that we can't legally tell people how to get.
(10:24:30) ***thl doesn't like the livna solution to much
(10:24:46) tibbs: So we need another repository?
(10:25:03) abadger1999: s/if/if and only if/
(10:25:07) dgilmore: tibbs: i think so
(10:25:12) warren: I understand why dwmw2 and davej feel this way, but I think they are overreacting.  The restrictions on kmod packages are already strict enough and this is a good balance for Fedora.
(10:25:23) warren: Let FPB decide.
(10:25:32) ***cweyl joins the meeting late -- and is a proud new sponsor!  thanks all :)
(10:25:50) rdieter: cweyl: that's what you get for showing up late. :)
(10:25:59) thl: yeah, anything else regarding kmods?
(10:26:05) cweyl: rdieter: I figured :)
(10:26:25) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- MISC from the schedule
(10:26:37) thl: "move the packaging committee report to email list" still there
(10:26:52) thl: but I assume that can and has to wait
(10:27:18) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress --  Future FESCo elections
(10:27:21) thl: abadger1999 ?
(10:27:29) abadger1999: Shall we vote?
(10:27:39) bpepple: sure.
(10:27:47) abadger1999: First on whether to let candidates be cladone or cvsextras.
(10:28:15) thl: cvsextras +1
(10:28:23) abadger1999: cvsextras +1
(10:28:30) rdieter: difference is whether they're sponsored or not?
(10:28:38) tibbs: I lean towards cvsextras, but do we really want to exclude, say, someone who only does documentation?
(10:28:51) bpepple: cvsextras +1
(10:28:58) thl: tibbs, we can revert that later if we want
(10:29:04) abadger1999: Pretty much -- but it also means someone can be involved in another area of Fedora and not be a cadidate for FESCo
(10:29:06) thl: rdieter, yes, basically
(10:29:18) rdieter: cvsextras +1
(10:29:30) abadger1999: tibbs: documentation as in Fedora Docs Project?
(10:29:45) tibbs: abadger1999: I don't know; it was just an example.
(10:30:06) tibbs: The point was that someone might do a lot but might not maintain any packages.
(10:30:21) warren: cvsextras only +1
(10:30:26) rdieter: then why would they care about Extras/FESCo?
(10:30:43) thl: tibbs, rdieter made a good point imho
(10:30:45) tibbs: They might do loads of package reviews.
(10:30:51) tibbs: I did.
(10:30:57) abadger1999: tibbs: It could exclude people who make bugfixes and such but don't maintain packages.
(10:30:59) rdieter: touche'
(10:31:14) thl: well,
(10:31:16) tibbs: In any case, if the issue comes up, they can always get sponsored.
(10:31:18) warren: Maybe we should focus on improving ways of people gaining cvsextras?
(10:31:21) thl:  how about something like this:
(10:31:39) abadger1999: tibbs: If someone is doing tons of good quality reviews, shouldn't they get sponsored?
(10:31:46) warren: abadger1999, they would
(10:31:49) abadger1999: so they can FE-ACCEPT packages?
(10:32:02) thl: "candidates have to show interest in Extras; that's normally done via maintaining packages, doing reviews and stuff like that"
(10:32:04) bpepple: abadger1999: correct.
(10:32:08) Foolish left the room (quit: "Ex-Chat").
(10:32:26) tibbs: Sorry to derail the conversation with a hypothetical.
(10:32:40) thl: s/interest/active particpation/
(10:32:57) tibbs: cvsextras +1
(10:33:20) thl: okay, so cvsextras seem settled afaics ...
(10:33:35) scop: cladone +1, just for reference
(10:34:22) scop: uh, s/reference/the record/
(10:34:55) scop: (I think the voters will recognize who deserves to be in no matter what group the candidates are in)
(10:35:09) ***bpepple agrees.
(10:35:39) thl: and if we have only 5 extras contributors and 11 outsiders up for vote?
(10:36:27) scop: "outsiders"?
(10:36:27) abadger1999: Okay.  Vote to approve with cvsextras required for candidacy.
(10:36:56) thl: scop, "non extras contributors"
(10:37:17) scop:  why would extras contributors vote for someone like that?
(10:38:21) thl: scop, in case only a small number of extras contributors was nominated for the election
(10:38:58) thl: time ticks...
(10:39:11) thl: do we want to wait another week and discuss this further on the list?
(10:39:15) tibbs: +1 for ElectionDraft.
(10:39:31) abadger1999: +1 for ElectionDraft
(10:39:45) rdieter: +1 ElectionDraft
(10:39:59) warren: +1
(10:40:06) bpepple: +1
(10:40:35) thl: seems people want to get this done
(10:40:36) thl: so +1
(10:40:54) scop: well, my humble opinion is still that cvsextras is a bit too restrictive, otherwise the draft gets my +1
(10:41:14) abadger1999: "Dateline #fedora-extras: Threat of Continued Discussion Brings out the Votes" :-)
(10:41:17) thl: scop, we can revisit it later if we have to / want to
(10:41:29) tibbs: abadger1999: s/while oa member/while a member/ under Candidates, BTW.
(10:41:39) warren: I think the solution is to instead focus on alternative criteria for cvsextras
(10:41:44) thl: k, abadger1999 that was all afaics?
(10:42:00) warren: And given the Core + Extras merge, I envision that cvsextras will evolve in purpose, being only the first "rank" up the ladder.
(10:42:18) abadger1999: Yep.  Eelection should be done now.
(10:42:20) thl: warren, we have to adjust several things when Core and Extras merge...
(10:42:21) scop: thl, sure, but please, not everyone has to agree on everything, and there seems to be a clear consensus towards requiring cvsextras, so I have no problem with that
(10:42:31) abadger1999: tibbs: I'll take care of the typo
(10:42:56) thl: scop, sure, but I prefer to find solution that fit all people
(10:42:56) tibbs: abadger1999: I'd edit it, but I didn't want to change it while people were voting.
(10:43:04) thl: k
(10:43:19) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- what do we want to discuss?
(10:43:28) thl: if there anything else people want to talk about?
(10:43:33) thl:  Package Database?
(10:43:39) thl:  Comaintainership
(10:43:45) thl:  Feature support in Extras?
(10:43:53) thl: anything else?
(10:43:55) Rathann: what about CVS branch approvals?
(10:44:01) warren: oh
(10:44:02) warren: yes
(10:44:06) rdieter: Comaintainership: what can we do to move this along?
(10:44:10) ***Rathann has one package to put into FC-4
(10:44:10) warren: Infrastructure needs FC3 branches
(10:44:21) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- CVS branch approvals
(10:44:31) thl: warren, which ones? Why?
(10:44:41) warren: FC-5 FC-4 FC-3 gcin 201337
(10:44:43) warren: mmcgrath, requested
(10:44:45) ***mmcgrath is sitting.
(10:44:46) warren: let me check into details...
(10:44:49) warren: mmcgrath, what is it?
(10:45:14) mmcgrath: warren: I didn't request that specific branch, I just noticed that he did and didn't want to create the branch without approval.
(10:45:14) ***thl would be glad if think like this could be dealed with before the meeting
(10:45:34) thl: that wold make it possible that people look into the details
(10:45:36) warren: oh right
(10:45:45) thl: and we can say just "yes" or "no" in the meeting
(10:45:51) warren: Rathann, that was you?  please explain why we should branch this?
(10:45:57) Rathann: crm114 needs FC-4 branch
(10:46:35) Rathann: well, other than "putting tre was the sole purpose of getting crm114 in", I have no other arguments
(10:46:39) warren: oh, gcin was someone else, I need to talk to them directly
(10:46:40) Rathann: it's useful software
(10:46:57) scop: Rathann, do you still use it on FC-4 yourself?
(10:47:24) Rathann: hm, no
(10:47:37) warren: I'm okay with branches for crm114 only if cvsextras participants actually use it.
(10:47:43) Rathann: but I can test it on fc4 if need be
(10:48:15) bpepple: warren: it was candyz that requested it.
(10:48:41) bpepple: gcin that is.
(10:48:45) warren: Rathann, what kind of assurance can you personally make about future maintenance of the older branches and your personal time commitment?
(10:49:02) smohan left the room (quit: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
(10:49:56) Rathann: I can only say that I'll keep an fc4 environment to test new releases
(10:50:14) scop: if I understand correctly, tre, which is now in in FC4, would probably receive less maintainer love if crm114 is not there too
(10:50:35) Rathann: you could say that
(10:50:41) pygi [n=pygi]  entered the room.
(10:50:48) warren: If that's the case, then +1 on FC4.
(10:50:56) thl: yeah, +1
(10:50:59) scop: +1
(10:51:00) Rathann: I'd like to either get both in, or none
(10:51:00) rdieter: +1
(10:51:01) dgilmore: +1
(10:51:09) warren: +0 on FC3, if nobody is using it there
(10:51:23) abadger1999: +1
(10:51:32) tibbs: I'm happy as long as there's a maintainer who cares, so +1.
(10:51:36) rdieter: +1 (both)
(10:51:53) Rathann: nah, FC3 is not an issue
(10:52:00) bpepple: +1
(10:52:02) dgilmore: Rathann: will you be using crm114 on aurora?
(10:52:09) Rathann: hm
(10:52:12) Rathann: why not
(10:52:18) Rathann: I can at least test it
(10:52:33) warren: ok ok, fine +1
(10:52:49) dgilmore: cause if you are then FC3  would be ok with me.  at the least i can pull the fc4 package into aurora extras
(10:53:04) ***thl is getting confused a bit
(10:53:10) thl: okay, just to make sure
(10:53:10) Rathann: but I haven't requested FC3 branch...
(10:53:24) thl: crm114 was agreed on for FC-4
(10:53:29) thl: I think that should be all
(10:53:33) bpepple: thl: +1
(10:53:35) Rathann: thanks
(10:53:38) thl: so what about gcin?
(10:53:40) dgilmore: thl: aurora 2.0  is based on FC3  and Rathann is a sparc user
(10:53:48) dgilmore: thl:   ok
(10:54:00) smohan [n=smohan]  entered the room.
(10:54:19) warren: thl, I'm leaning towards -1 on the older distros, but I'll talk to the submitter.
(10:54:21) thl: the infrastrucure group needs gcin for FC-4 or FC-4 afaics?
(10:54:32) warren: gcin is a Chinese input method, nothing to do with infrastructure
(10:54:34) dgilmore: why is gcin requesting a fc4  branch?
(10:54:45) warren: unless we suddenly have a dozen chinese infrastructure volunteers
(10:54:45) bpepple: -1 to gcin.
(10:55:04) dgilmore: -1
(10:55:06) warren: -1
(10:55:22) warren: I'll inform the owner...
(10:55:31) tibbs: He might not have known.  I've been active with that review and there's a bit of a lack of understanding of the process.
(10:55:33) thl: warren, thx
(10:55:39) pygi left the room ("Leaving").
(10:55:44) thl: tibbs, details?
(10:55:50) thl: or better:
(10:55:55) thl: let's stop here
(10:56:03) scop: :)
(10:56:04) thl: and revisit gcin next week
(10:56:12) bpepple: tibbs: that was the impression I got from some of his comments, also.
(10:56:14) thl: and discuss the details on the list until then
(10:56:16) jwb: thl, sorry here now.  we had a severe thunderstorm warning
(10:56:26) jwb: was required to be away from computer
(10:56:43) rdieter: jwb: sounds fun.
(10:56:49) jwb: sounds pointless
(10:57:09) warren: thl, move on.  I'll leave open to submitter an appeal if they feel strongly, but I doubt it.
(10:57:16) thl: warren, k
(10:57:37) bpepple: Has anyone been able to get a hold of Ignacio?  And if not should we expedite the  AWOL/maintainership of his packages?
(10:57:46) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- Ignacio
(10:58:21) thl: warren, could you reach him?
(10:58:40) thl: (or anybody else?)
(10:58:45) warren: I haven't had a chance to look directly in the database for contact info.  Our account system for some reason hides personal info even from admins.
(10:58:58) ***mmcgrath notes that I am still sponsored by Ignacio and he may have had others.
(10:59:08) bpepple: As far as I can tell, no once's been able to contact him.
(10:59:15) tibbs: There's a security issue wrapped up in this as well, so we need to do something.
(10:59:16) warren: mmcgrath, would it be simple to make the account system show me personal info?
(10:59:17) dgilmore: thl: if no one could get hold of him i say mark all his packages as orphaned  and ask memebers in the comminity to pick them up if they have intrest
(10:59:18) mmcgrath: The CentOS people haven't seen him since February.
(10:59:50) thl: dgilmore, I'd like to leave the option open that he get's his packages back if he shows up later
(10:59:55) thl: dgilmore, otherwise I agree
(11:00:13) bpepple: thl: +1.
(11:00:16) abadger1999: I think security issues can be fixed without invoking AWOL policy necessarily.  Am I misremembering?
(11:00:18) tibbs: co-maintainership will always leave that avenue open.
(11:00:35) warren: thl, we just make it known that if he wants to come back he's welcome to.  But meanwhile we must do our best to make sure thing are maintained.
(11:00:43) bpepple: abadger1999: I think the security team should be able to step in.
(11:00:45) tibbs: abadger1999: Yes, but I've held off a day until this meeting to see if anyone could contact him.
(11:00:45) thl: warren, +1
(11:01:09) abadger1999: warren: +1
(11:01:11) warren: all traces of him have disappeared from the internet?
(11:01:39) ***nirik99 hopes he's ok...
(11:01:51) thl: warren, I seems so :-/
(11:02:00) warren:
(11:02:03) warren: personal blog entry form 5/21/06
(11:02:04) abadger1999: warren: is still up (but hasn't had an entry in a while)
(11:02:15) warren: May is sooner than February
(11:02:20) lmacken: i've been fixing up a bunch of his packages for the past couple of months :(
(11:02:46) scop: if Ignacio reappears, FWIW I think it's the new maintainer's call whether he wants to hand the packages back, co-maintain, or neither
(11:02:48) lmacken: i'll be happy to take over the turbogears stack from him
(11:02:54) warren: scop, +1
(11:03:02) warren: lmacken, go ahead and edit owners.list
(11:03:11) lmacken: k
(11:03:22) thl: scop, +1
(11:03:24) lmacken: if we're going to play the 'who touched it last' game, i'll probably end up owning a bunch of his packages
(11:03:31) thl: who annouces this rough plan to the list?
(11:03:38) abadger1999: with com-maintainership in mind, should we put ignacio's email into the CC field of owners.list?
(11:03:43) tibbs: moodle is the one with the security issue, BTW.
(11:03:45) thl: abadger1999, good idea
(11:04:28) warren: abadger1999, +1
(11:04:31) thl: seem I have to annouce it :-/
(11:04:49) thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress
(11:04:56) thl: anything else we should discuss?
(11:04:57) scop: regarding security issues, I'm going to go ahead and fix #200832, #200834 and #200845
(11:05:06) jwb: just to backtrack a second...
(11:05:07) thl: scop, thx
(11:05:16) jwb: i'm +1 for cvsextras in election
(11:05:18) warren:
(11:05:24) jwb: and +1 for draft
(11:05:26) warren: Ignacio's mail on various lists stopped in April
(11:06:03) ***jwb was playing catchup
(11:06:21) thl: I think that was all for today
(11:06:31) thl: rdieter, let's talk aboutco-maintainershiop next week
(11:06:39) rdieter: ok
(11:06:46) ***thl will close the meeting in 60
(11:07:11) ***thl will close the meeting in 30
(11:07:26) thl: btw, when will SOpwith be around again?
(11:07:33) ***thl will close the meeting in 10
(11:07:39) dgilmore: thl: he took a few months off
(11:07:43) thl: -- MARK -- Meeting end
(11:07:54) abadger1999: thl:
(11:07:57) dgilmore: he sends email every so ften though
(11:08:06) warren: thl, you know that he's no longer at Red Hat?  He's currently on a long vacation and he returns in a while. He remains on the FPB though.
(11:08:29) thl has changed the topic to: This is the Fedora Extras channel, home of the FESCo meetings and general Extras discussion. | | Next FESCo Meeting: 2006-08-31 1700 UTC