= MacPorts PortMgr

There's a talk from 2016, see [wiki:Meetings/MacPortsMeeting2016/Programme#MacPortsPortMgr]. Compared to two years ago, `portmgr@` no longer deals with managing the infrastructure, since we now have the infrastructure team to do that and rely on GitHub.

== Should there be a voting process to confirm `portmgr@` and/or get new members elected?
* Is this really necessary? Since there is very little conflict within MacPorts anyway, elections might be more trouble then it's worth.
* Getting voting right is complicated.
* Should it be merged with the infrastructure team? No, administrative tasks on the systems should be kept separate from portmgr.
* A process to get new people onto portmgr is needed

== `portmgr@` response times
* `portmgr@` is sometimes slow to respond to inquiries
* Should there be a "portmgr@ timeout" (one or two weeks) for somebody to object and a default to accept a proposal if the timeout occurs?
  * This was a problem when discussing funding requests for travel to the meeting.

== Legal organizations & fund handling
* Handling money is an issue for us, since we cannot easily accept donations
* There are options, such as founding an association (which may require a certain number of people in a certain jurisdiction) or joining an existing organization such as Software Freedom Conservancy

=== sfconservancy

* TODO: Find out the terms of joining [https://sfconservancy.org/projects/apply/ sfconservancy]

To clarify:
* Can we leave the organization again?
* Would they own any trademarks?
* Would they own domain names?

= Video call with Ryan

== Documentation for infrastructure

* Should have some internal documentation on buildbot and braeburn
* Maybe a private GitHub repository (usually have to pay for that)
  * TODO: Ask GitHub support

== Deploying updates to buildbot

* www/guide/portindex/man
  * TODO: Let's deploy it during this meeting

* Move mprsyncup on buildbot
  * TODO: Add this as a job to buildbot