On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 18:19:13 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > Our annual groupmeeting aka "BoF" is getting closer: And it happened :) Videos are up at https://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2021/DebConf21/ And here are the notes taken during the meeting and slightly edited by various people afterwards. Thanks to everyone who participated in one way or another! ####### https://debconf21.debconf.org/talks/75-use-perl-annual-meeting-of-the-debian-perl-group/ use Perl; # Annual meeting of the Debian Perl Group Aug 25 (Wed): 17:00-17:45 UTC Pad for questions: https://pad.dc21.debconf.org/p/75-use-perl-annual-meeting-of-the-debian-perl-gr IRC: #debian-perl (and probably #dc21-talks-1 and #debconf) Intro: Organisation =================== Who takes notes? Who monitors (which) IRC channels/pads? -> notes: ntyni & nodens Intro: Welcome, who's here? =========================== Introduce yourself if you like! -> emollier, ntyni, elbrus, carnil, cstamas, utkarsh, wouter, nodens, knowledgejunkie, axhn, gregoa Intro: Agenda ============= Anything to add to/scratch from the agenda? Order of topics? -> no changes, all fine Team status =========== https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianPerlGroup/Statistics * Members/committers -> members number pretty constant, number of very active persons (> 100 commits) down from 11 to 6 * LHF sessions -> pretty normal compared to earlier years General discussion? -> a year of rather low activity due to Covid-19 + freeze Future of LHF? -> nodens: LHF meetings are still useful emollier: +1 wouter: maybe advertise more widely? elbrus + gregoa: might do a yearly advertisement or something like that Usual question: do we keep the date + time (17:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC alternatively)? -> No opposition ACTION: update LHF wiki page [done] Does using Jitsi make sense? -> It was tried, but not very successful. We can decide whether we make a jitsi call at the occasion on each LHF. ACTION: put it in the agenda for LHF [done] Sprints ======= There was no sprint (online or in-person) since the last BoF. Future of sprints? -> would be nice to plan something for next year, preferrably with light preparations so it's easier to cancel usual time of the year has been around April / May plan for that for now, revisit around December / January PS: * https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEvents/de/2021/DebianReunionHamburg * https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEvents/de/2021/MiniDebConfRegensburg Perl 5.34 ========= https://gobby.debian.org/export/Teams/Perl/Perl-5.34-QA Status? in experimental /* discussion between elbrus & ntyni about interaction with ci.debian.net */ Todo? -> maybe splitting a few smaller packages out of src:perl to help with usrmerge Timeline? [tagged bugs: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.34-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org ] CPAN tarballs vs. git ===================== https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/08/msg00133.html -> the canonical way of distribution on CPAN is still tarballs, git usage varies probably not a concern for pkg-perl but we'll want to have the tooling work for us "Leftovers" from BoFs at DebConf19/20 ===================================== <!nocheck> (policy?) -------------------- From BoF 2019: 1. Recommend this for now and complete the work in dh-make-perl [done] 2. Once we have enough adoption (e.g. in 1 year), mandate it. Not discussed in 2020 Decision: As people and tools use it, add it to group policy? -> People use it, tools use it, it is time to add a sentence or two in the policy. ACTION: elbrus will add the bits [done] R³ (policy?) ------------ Not covered in BoFs 2019/20 for time reasons. Decision: As people and tools use it, add it to group policy? Christoph pointed it should actually be a default, and we should add exceptions as needed. However this is a discussion for a broader audience. Proposal: We add a sentence to the group policy now, if someone is up for bringing up the matter to debian-devel, the pkg-perl group supports it. ACTION: elbrus volunteered since he already adds another sentence to the policy ;) [MR done] DEP-14 ------ Not covered in BoFs 2019/20 for time reasons. Some people/packages switched. Issues for tools. Discussion? Decision? Coordinated actions? Comment from gregoa: it does break tools… It's no big deal but it would be preferable and helpful to discuss the change before changing it on specific packages. ;) So please don't hesitate to bring up a discussion on the list on these matters. Post-BoF (unrecorded): We at least need to be as consistent as possible in the packages maintained in the team. Post-BoF: idea: "pkg-perl newsletter" / reminder of tools ================ Leftover topics: ================ [moved to BoF agenda for DebConf22 in gobby - maybe start with them :)] dgit ---- From BoF 2019: We (?) feel it's too early to discuss whether we should use this consistently across the team. Anything to discuss? salsa-ci -------- From Bof 2019: 1. It is OK if some of us enable it for some packages, for which they would like to take benefit from the Salsa CI pipeline, as long as they keep an eye on the results and take care of it. If this harms the work of other team members, please say so and we'll adjust/disable/whatever. https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/blob/master/README.md "recipes/debian.yml@salsa-ci-team/pipeline" Anything to discuss? Tooling for inactive group members ---------------------------------- Was planned for DebCamp 2020. Action item? ####### Cheers, gregor -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Supertramp: Asylum
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature