[13:56:58] [connected at Thu Jan 30 13:56:58 2020]
[13:57:09] [I have joined #xf-bod]
[13:58:19] <samuelig> hi!
[13:58:52] <Lyude> Hi everyone! So we've got a couple of items on our agenda today. VESA status, XDC2019 sponsor invoicing, XDC2020 sponsors, sponsored travel receipts for XDC2019, X.org/freedesktop.org domain status, requesting ledger data from SPI, elections, LGBT-free zones in Poland, and cloud hosting for freedesktop.org
[13:59:26] * bryce waves
[13:59:37] <tlwoerner> gsoc
[13:59:40] <tlwoerner> evoc
[14:00:03] <keithp> howdy folks
[14:00:04] <Lyude> (re: tlwoerner: added) On the topic of VESA status: turns out we never got a reply before because somehow the email that I sent to the VESA board with the list of interested members never got receive by them. I poked them again a few days ago and resent the list, but I'm probably going to poke them again today to make sure they actually got it
[14:00:26] <danvet> hi all
[14:01:23] <Lyude> so on requesting ledger data from SPI: "While I agree this is a useful service SPI should provide to projects, I shall investigate why you got that answer and get back to you over next week."
[14:02:13] <mdnavare> mdnavare joining
[14:02:28] <Lyude> re: fdo.org poking, got too caught up in work this week and last and ended up forgetting to poke them, I'll make sure to do that today
[14:02:29] <Lyude> hey!
[14:03:01] <Lyude> danvet: do you want to start with the fdo.org cloud hosting thing you brought up last meeting that we didn't get time to go over?
[14:03:19] <hwentlan> hi
[14:03:42] <danvet> well we're burning down money for fd.o hosting, would be good if someone takes care of getting sponsoring for that (again, we've had that in the past)
[14:04:04] <danvet> I can help with the nagging and ideas, but I'm already busy with xdc sponsors
[14:04:32] <Lyude> that's fair. hwentlan, would you maybe be up to do this ^ ?
[14:05:08] <hwentlan> i could give a try but i'd need to know where to start
[14:05:11] <hwentlan> why did this previously?
[14:05:16] <danvet> it's not an immediate disaster, but long term we'll go bankrupt even with the xdc surplus
[14:05:36] <danvet> hwentlan, daniels nagged google until they said yes
[14:05:46] <keithp> that is the usual plan
[14:05:54] <danvet> I think we can do the same again, and maybe nag other companies for sponsoring admin time
[14:06:21] <danvet> or sponsoring CI runners, which is also happening a lot already
[14:06:26] <hwentlan> i can touch base with daniels and get the google contacts and maybe bug other companies that have an interest in fd.o
[14:06:28] <daniels> yes we can for Google sponsorship and cc seanpaul as he helped connect us to the right people
[14:06:50] <daniels> admin time is mostly a matter of finding someone who can commit and also be trusted by the community with access
[14:06:56] <daniels> which is a difficult intersection
[14:07:13] <danvet> jbarnes is now also there and might be able to help
[14:07:25] <danvet> there = google
[14:07:41] <hwentlan> hosting is currently provided by google, right?
[14:07:53] <anholt_> here now
[14:07:58] <danvet> hwentlan, I can help you with contacts and strategies for shameless begging, just don't want to do it myself for redundancy reasons
[14:08:01] <daniels> I can't do much about it until next week or the week after, given that this morning I discovered I need to rip out and replace my entire bathroom due to water leakage, then went into the office and discovered that we need to rip out and replace the whole ceiling due to water leakage
[14:08:03] <hwentlan> they technically charge us but gave us a credit if i remember right?
[14:08:11] <danvet> hwentlan, atm gitlab.fd.o is paid from the x.org budget
[14:08:17] <danvet> we've blown the google credits
[14:08:23] <danvet> since Dec last year
[14:08:34] <daniels> hwentlan: correct, they credited us $30k for a year but we used that credit in approx 10 months
[14:08:46] <danvet> yeah we burn about 3k/month
[14:08:48] <daniels> so call it 40 next year to be safe
[14:08:50] <hwentlan> i see
[14:09:01] <daniels> (USD)
[14:09:18] <anholt_> and that's basically all just fd.o gitlab hosting, not CI.
[14:09:28] <hwentlan> i wonder if over time we can look at the data and get better projections
[14:09:29] <danvet> yeah CI is all sponsored on top
[14:10:07] <anholt_> daniels: do you have a good sense of if our cluster has the right amount of resources right now?
[14:10:15] <danvet> my back of the envelope math is that fd.o is probably costing 250k/y if we account for all the sponsored stuff (+/- a pile of cash)
[14:10:17] <daniels> yes, CI is mostly Packet sponsoring directly which we can increase when we fix admin tech debt, plus GStreamer project paying for runners on Hetzner
[14:10:31] <daniels> anholt_: right amount of resources but needs elasticity
[14:11:19] <daniels> if we can bring up a couple more runners on a schedule from IIRC 2pm - 8pm GMT we're good
[14:11:36] <anholt_> daniels: just meaning the gitlab servers, not ci
[14:11:51] <daniels> can provide more details and help but not now, best thing for me is if someone files an issue or sends an email to remind me to follow up
[14:11:55] <keithp> so if we don't get any sponsorship, could we disable ci and not go broke?
[14:12:06] <anholt_> keithp: nope, this cost is just gitlab, not ci.
[14:12:09] <daniels> anholt_: ah right. yes core servers are good.
[14:12:11] <keithp> ouch
[14:12:25] <anholt_> keithp: the $30k/year that we're trying to sort out right now
[14:12:28] <danvet> keithp, hence my slightly worried impression at lca :-)
[14:12:32] <hwentlan> daniels, will do. i'll try to get a better picture first and then send you an email
[14:12:37] <Lyude> Did anyone ever setup the autoscaling stuff?
[14:12:56] <anholt_> Lyude: I experimented with it, turned out gitlab-runner hopelessly broken for kubernetes
[14:13:09] <Lyude> mh :\
[14:13:12] <anholt_> lots of open bugs, not actually dealing with their architectural problem.
[14:13:25] <anholt_> there's a third-party runner I haven't figured out how to deploy yet.
[14:13:58] <Lyude> ah, anyway - going to move onto the next aenda item: GSoC/EVoC. tlwoerner ?
[14:14:02] <Lyude> *agenda
[14:14:05] <tlwoerner> okay
[14:14:08] <anholt_> (if we did that and had just preemption, the CI costs in that 250k/year napkin math would go down by 70%)
[14:14:24] <tlwoerner> GSoC: do we want to do it? i'm happy to admin if everyone's okay with it
[14:14:34] <Lyude> I think we should do it
[14:14:42] <mdnavare> tlwoerner: i wanted to confirm my availability for gsoc as well
[14:15:09] <tlwoerner> do we need a vote?
[14:15:22] <Lyude> Prohably a good idea, we've got mostly everyone here anyway
[14:15:27] <Lyude> +1 from me
[14:15:32] <hwentlan> +1
[14:15:36] <samuelig> +1
[14:15:37] * danvet always +1 on gsoc if someone runs the show
[14:15:44] <keithp> +1
[14:15:54] <mdnavare> yes absolutely +1
[14:15:55] <bryce> +1
[14:15:55] <Lyude> alright, passed
[14:16:01] <tlwoerner> excellent, thanks
[14:16:13] <tlwoerner> my firs step is to complete the org application, due feb 5
[14:16:17] <tlwoerner> thanks
[14:16:30] <tlwoerner> evoc: has anyone had a chance to see the email i sent last week (friday?)
[14:17:05] <tlwoerner> basically the student who failed out last year (1/3) wants to finish the project as an evoc this yea
[14:17:08] <tlwoerner> r
[14:17:28] <mdnavare> oh yes I briefly saw Sabastian right?
[14:17:33] <Lyude> was that the student that lost their backpack last year?
[14:17:44] <tlwoerner> evoc is something we (x.org) pays out, so we'llneed the board to approve the potential expense
[14:17:50] <tlwoerner> mdnavare: Lyude: yes
[14:18:03] <danvet> tlwoerner, can't we run them as part of gsoc again?
[14:18:03] <Lyude> tlwoerner: I felt really bad for them :C, so definitely +1 for me
[14:18:11] <danvet> the timing will probably line up
[14:18:47] <tlwoerner> danvet: i'll look into it as a gsoc, maybe there's a rule that says you can't if you've failed out before? i'll check
[14:19:17] <tlwoerner> but i know students can do up to 2 gsocs, so that should be okay
[14:19:31] <danvet> but yeah if gsoc doesn't work I'm ok with evoc too
[14:19:54] <samuelig> agree with danvet, +1
[14:20:05] <mdnavare> tlwoerner: So if gsoc allows them to redo the proect there we go with that else evoc?
[14:20:17] <Lyude> Alright, passed
[14:20:19] <tlwoerner> mdnavare: perfect, i'll take that approach
[14:20:22] <hwentlan> +1 from me as well
[14:20:23] <tlwoerner> thanks everyone!
[14:20:41] <Lyude> danvet: any updates on elections?
[14:21:06] <danvet> Lyude, still waiting for mupuf to update the wiki with the new instructions fitting our new member page
[14:21:12] <Lyude> gotcha
[14:21:16] <danvet> he says he has them, just needs to push them to the wiki
[14:21:35] <danvet> as soon as we have that I'll send a timeline proposal to elections@ and we'll get rolling (I hope)
[14:21:50] <danvet> just want to make sure stuff is properly documented for next year
[14:21:57] <Lyude> mhm
[14:22:00] <danvet> that's all
[14:22:47] <Lyude> alright, next topic - the LGBT-free zones in poland. samuelig - I think it'd be a good idea for us to contact the activism groups that our venue pointed out to see what they think the situation is like
[14:23:02] <samuelig> ok, I can send them an email
[14:23:16] <danvet> hm on that did radek get back to us with full details he promised?
[14:23:24] <samuelig> not yet
[14:23:27] <danvet> haven't seen anything, but gmail has been eating mails recently
[14:23:42] <danvet> samuelig, maybe ping? it's busy here at intel with a few milestones and stuff
[14:23:55] <samuelig> danvet, ok, I'll ping him
[14:24:26] <tlwoerner> is there a backup plan?
[14:24:41] <mdnavare> danvet: yes after the friday milestone, radek will hopefully get some time
[14:24:56] <Lyude> note - was a little slow on reading responses with that because work crept up, but I'm going to pay more attention this week/next and try to keep up to date with what's happening so we can figure this out soon (I only say soon because of montreal offering to host us and wanting an answer soon)
[14:25:06] <Lyude> (and soon == before the next meeting)
[14:25:18] <samuelig> tlwoerner, I got the confirmation that galia won't be able to organize XDC this year. I contacted Intel FI to see if we can count on them if needed.
[14:25:23] <samuelig> igalia*
[14:25:27] <mdnavare> Lyude: I saw your public statement draft and it sounded good
[14:25:29] <Lyude> tlwoerner: yeah we are looking at alternate venues
[14:25:37] * tlwoerner will not miss montreal next time!
[14:26:27] <Lyude> mhm, I was going to send it out today but danvet pointed out it might not be great for us to make a statement until we're ready. I guess the other thing worth noting is that I'm pretty sure in the email we sent to that polish news person I had mentiined we'd have something out by this meeting (kinda why I was sending it out as a draft first)
[14:26:35] <Lyude> should we just tell them that we're working on it for the time being?
[14:26:57] <danvet> Lyude, I'd just ignore them, we can work this out on our own time
[14:27:05] <Lyude> danvet: sgtm
[14:27:26] <Lyude> so: I also found some other helpful info in the mean time that I missed the first time looking at the wikipedia page
[14:27:46] <bryce> agreed, don't publicize until ready
[14:27:52] <samuelig> +1
[14:27:56] <Lyude> there was the mention of the protests that they had in Gdansk against LGBT-free zones, but I also found: https://atlasnienawisci.pl
[14:28:05] <danvet> I also think it's better if we go formally public once we all sorted this out and made a decision
[14:28:19] <hwentlan> +1, don't think we're ready to engage media
[14:29:07] <Lyude> note that it's in polish and, does not seem to like selecting text in firefox so it's a bit difficult to use google translate with, but it's basically a map of the areas that have - had no proposals for LGBT-free zones, have had proposals but voted them down, have had proposals and approved them, or currently have lobbying activity for proposals ongoing
[14:29:20] <hwentlan> interesting. with lobbying activities in gdansk it's especially important to make a strong statement
[14:29:30] <Lyude> mhm, that's what I was thinking as well
[14:29:31] <danvet> yeah
[14:29:58] <danvet> but looks we're at least on the other side of where this seems popular
[14:30:06] <Lyude> danvet: also I don't think radek's responded since you responded to them on the 21st
[14:30:08] <Lyude> mhm
[14:30:36] <Lyude> I think it would be good to figure out what that lobbying entails and whether or not there's a risk that it could actually result in a proposal being passed by the time XDC comes around
[14:31:39] <Lyude> I think that might also be useful for judging if we should go with the alt venue or not
[14:32:00] <hwentlan> we could go to Hel instead (that peninsula off the coast of gdansk that rejected hate) :)
[14:32:01] <samuelig> Lyude, I will ask in my ping to radek, so he can include info about this. Also in my email to the activist organization.
[14:32:26] <keithp> sounds like we need to set a date for deciding where to hold the event, and then set some parameters for making the decision at that point
[14:32:29] <Lyude> samuelig: cool, thanks! should we also let mark filion know that we're still working on this and to see what the deadline with their venue is?
[14:32:38] <Lyude> keithp: yeah that sounds like a good idea to me
[14:32:52] <samuelig> I think we should keep Europe if possible.
[14:33:00] <keithp> safety of the attendees is our #1 priority
[14:33:25] <Lyude> samuelig: mhm, if it's possible I agree as well
[14:33:40] <mdnavare> I think switching to Intel Finland hosting instead Intel Poland sounds like a feasible option
[14:33:42] <keithp> I'd suggest that if there is a chance that the location will not be safe, then we have to move
[14:34:05] <Lyude> keithp: yeah, agreed
[14:34:09] <danvet> imo one thing to keep in mind is that for canada also not everyone could attend (because visa nonsense), so unfortunately it's not all magically good if we do montreal again :-/
[14:34:21] <Lyude> oh right, I forgot about that
[14:34:47] <danvet> but yeah if this doesn't look good in gdansk, I'm for moving (if we can)
[14:35:04] <samuelig> I think we should give organizers about 6 months time to prepare the conference, if we go to alt venue. A deadline like the end of Feb, beginning March should be reasonable.
[14:35:23] <mdnavare> danvet: Do you need help checking with Intel Finland about hosting?
[14:35:49] <samuelig> mdnavare, I contacted mupuf already, but if you can move it internally it would be great.
[14:36:38] <mdnavare> samuelig: Cool I will try to do so
[14:36:45] <tlwoerner> organizing a first-time event is a lot of work and needs a lot of time to get done, doing a repeat of a recent event (in theory) is much easier than saying "let's go to Finland instead"
[14:38:07] <samuelig> we are contacting past organizers, just prioritizing European ones as it is expected to be in Europe this year.
[14:38:11] <hwentlan> i agree with samuelig that we should make some sort of decision by end of feb or early march
[14:38:25] <mdnavare> and i thought Finland has hosted this in this past as well
[14:38:36] <samuelig> yep, 2016.
[14:39:05] <Lyude> also, and this is just me thinking about options here, would there be any issues with having XDC in the US this year? If all else fails I could look into the possibility of having RH and/or BU host it in boston
[14:39:23] <Lyude> kinda don't want to do that on such short notice but i'm willing to give it a shot if we have to
[14:40:00] <danvet> btw fired up debug console on ff, yellow just means "we have something, no critic" i.e. we'd need more details on what exactly is going on in gdansk
[14:40:06] <samuelig> Lyude, you can test the waters while we wait for organizer's detailed reply.
[14:40:20] <Lyude> samuelig: i'm fine with that, I'll see what I can go
[14:40:22] <Lyude> *do
[14:40:41] <Lyude> at the very least, I know of plenty of good food around here :)
[14:40:57] <Lyude> alright - next agenda item so we don't run over time
[14:41:29] <Lyude> anholt_: any update with ARM/Intel being stuck in an infinite time loop?
[14:41:45] <anholt_> nothing
[14:41:50] <anholt_> other than more pings from spi to arm
[14:42:17] <danvet> hm the only link that atlas has for gdansk is a nutjob doing a presentation somewhere ... I guess that's kinda unavoidable in a big city
[14:42:24] <Lyude> sigh :s, well thanks for keeping up with the pings
[14:42:38] <danvet> Lyude, maybe needs official secretary nag?
[14:42:46] <danvet> (not sure that helps)
[14:43:28] <Lyude> danvet: if I can help I don't mind, I'll see if a nag from me pushes things through
[14:43:51] <Lyude> next item - anholt_, any updates with the sponsored travel receipts?
[14:44:51] <anholt_> the one we had a question about said they could recalculate to just reimburse 3 days of travel, but didn't have screenshots of flight costs
[14:45:19] <anholt_> given that the flight costs that caused this whole thing were due to (from the looks of it) booking just days before the trip, that seems like the right answer.
[14:46:13] <Lyude> anholt_: yeah I'm fine with that
[14:46:29] <Lyude> Should we do a vote on this?
[14:46:37] <anholt_> shall we say days of conf plus one on either side?
[14:46:47] <Lyude> sgtm
[14:46:56] <mdnavare> yes sounds reasonable
[14:47:00] <hwentlan> +1
[14:48:10] <Lyude> alright - danvet, any updates with XDC2020 sponsors?
[14:48:30] <danvet> we have 2020 now, so lots of pings for me to do, but also busy with lca and vacations
[14:48:35] <danvet> I hope I get to this next week
[14:48:41] <danvet> aka nothing new
[14:49:12] <Lyude> alright
[14:49:18] <Lyude> that's it then, thanks everyone for coming!
[14:49:27] <bryce> thanks!
[14:49:29] <samuelig> thanks!
[14:49:38] <danvet> anholt_, do we have a reimbursed that went way over estimates?
[14:49:42] * danvet missing context a bit
[14:50:14] <anholt_> danvet: yeah, flights were expensive so they booked a week long trip to get cheaper flights, then tried to reimburse the extra days of food and lodging.
[14:50:33] <anholt_> but also our pre-approval was a bit messy so we don't have a lodging number to even reference.

[16:28:59] [disconnected at Thu Jan 30 16:28:59 2020]