[12:05] <jamesh> lifeless: I guess ddaa is on holiday.  Was there any decision on who would chair?
[12:06] <jamesh> SteveA, mpool, lifeless, spiv, jamesh: is everyone here?
[12:06] <spiv> I'm here.
[12:08] <jamesh> no SteveA or mpool?
[12:09] <lifeless> I'll nag
[12:10] <jamesh> should we start without them?
[12:10] <lifeless> ok, mpool nagged succesfully
[12:10] <lifeless> I haven't nagged stevea
[12:13] <jamesh> well, we're almost a third of the way through the timeslot, so we should probably start.
[12:13] <jamesh>  * roll call
[12:13] <jamesh>  * production status
[12:13] <jamesh>  * Smart server
[12:13] <jamesh>  * SFTP advertising
[12:13] <jamesh>  * vcs-import knits
[12:13] <jamesh>  * tarball-spider
[12:13] <jamesh>  * Python import
[12:13] <jamesh>  * critical bugs
[12:13] <jamesh>  * pending sysadmin tasks
[12:13] <jamesh>  * any other business
[12:13] <SteveA> hi
[12:13] <mpool> hi
[12:14] <jamesh> first up is production status.  Does anyone have anything to report?
[12:15] <SteveA> will the supermirror be down for writing when launchpad is down tomorrow?
[12:15] <SteveA> if so, do the right people know about it?
[12:15] <spiv> Yes.
[12:16] <jamesh> we've still got bug #53825 (input validation problems in the branch puller), but I don't think there is any new issues.
[12:16] <SteveA> will it fail elegantly, or inelegantly?
[12:16] <spiv> It will refuse authentication.
[12:16] <SteveA> as a future thing, can we make it refuse with a message
[12:16] <SteveA> like "launchpad is down for maintenance" ?
[12:16] <spiv> SFTP doesn't give us a nice way to say "sorry, we're down for maintenance" that I know of.
[12:16] <SteveA> then at some point, we should do authserver cacheing with it
[12:16] <SteveA> or some such
[12:16] <spiv> Well, http://bazaar.launchpad.net/ will still be serving read-only branches ok.
[12:17] <SteveA> maybe that's fixed when we go to two databases
[12:17] <SteveA> mpool: what do you think about announcing it to the bzr list?
[12:17] <spiv> (unless the cronscript generating the branch name mapping goes silly when the db is down?)
[12:17] <SteveA> announcing the launchpad downtime, that is
[12:17] <lifeless> I think 2 dbs is the right fix for it
[12:17] <mpool> i think spiv  should send a message to the list
[12:17] <mpool> or someone
[12:17] <mpool> it would be nice if it could continue in r/o mode
[12:18] <jamesh> spiv: looks like the rewritemap script opens the output file for writing after connecting to the DB, so assuming that fails it should be fine.
[12:19] <spiv> I suggested to stub at the launchpad meeting that we should point the authserver at a r/o copy of the database -- that would still allow writes to existing branches, at least, but I don't know if he's had time to do that, it may be too much to ask at short notice.
[12:19] <jamesh> next on the agenda is the smart server status
[12:19] <mpool> we kept working on it
[12:20] <jamesh> spiv: a read only connection to staging might be an option for that (or maybe for future downtime like this)
[12:20] <jamesh> so nothing new to report for smart server?
[12:20] <lifeless> some parts merged
[12:20] <lifeless> more in progress
[12:20] <lifeless> all conformance test passing, which means we're now in conversion mode rather than model overhaul
[12:21] <jamesh> cool.
[12:21] <jamesh> next up is SFTP advertising
[12:21] <jamesh> I published the team branches article last week: http://blogs.gnome.org/view/jamesh/2006/08/17/1
[12:22] <jamesh> there is a note in the agenda about spiv blogging about similarities between SVN and bzr usage with checkouts
[12:22] <SteveA> it was well received outside of canonical, jamesh 
[12:22] <SteveA> mgedmin read it and commented on irc about bzr looking better and better all the time
[12:23] <jamesh> SteveA: cool.  We should check if it has a visible effect in the cricket statistics
[12:23] <jamesh> since it is tracking the number of team owned branches
[12:23] <SteveA> if the sftp server gets improved to not need --make-parents (or whatever the option is) from bzr
[12:23] <lifeless> we may have got another user today, olive was the linchpin for him
[12:23] <SteveA> then you could update the blog with that
[12:23] <SteveA> what does "olive was the linchpin" mean?
[12:24] <SteveA> sounds like secret agent codes
[12:24] <lifeless> as his users include only-comfortable -with-guis folk
[12:24] <lifeless> olive is our gui
[12:24] <lifeless> written as part of SoC
[12:24] <SteveA> i see
[12:24] <lifeless> KDE and GTK, known to work on windows
[12:24] <SteveA> it's a bit of an opaque codename
[12:24] <jamesh> spiv: do you think getting rid of the --make-parents requirement would be easy for someone else to do, or would it require more twisted knowledge?
[12:25] <spiv> jamesh: I think your analysis is probably correct -- it's probably not too hard.
[12:25] <jamesh> (I mean --create-prefix rather than --make-parents)
[12:25] <spiv> The twisted knowledge necessary should be cargo-cultable
[12:26] <jamesh> spiv: okay.  I'll have a go at it tomorrow then.
[12:26] <jamesh> if I get in over my head I'll ping you.
[12:27] <SteveA> lifeless: imo, don't call it "olive" in public.  if you have $$$$ to spend on marketing like apple, then you can call your GUI "aqua" or other cute names.
[12:27] <SteveA> but it's cliquey and offputting for a small project to obfuscate names, where more obvious (but boring) ones will work
[12:27] <jamesh> next up on the agenda is "vcs-import knits", but last week's minutes says that it was completed so I'll skip it
[12:28] <lifeless> SteveA: fair enough. I've had almost no involvement with it though, so I'll redirect your feedback to mpool
[12:28] <SteveA> thanks
[12:28] <mpool> in line with the other naming thread, we should just move to calling them 'bazaar gui'
[12:28] <mpool> they need to all technically merge together
[12:28] <SteveA> ah, about knits
[12:28] <SteveA> james troup (or another sysadmin) commented to me
[12:28] <SteveA> that there was a lot, a LOT, less space being used
[12:29] <SteveA> on the SM machine
[12:29] <jamesh> that's good to hear
[12:29] <SteveA> he was concerned that some evil data loss had occured
[12:29] <SteveA> so, in future, maybe warn the admins of such improvements ;-)
[12:29] <lifeless> heh, we did
[12:29] <lifeless> when we rolled it out
[12:29] <jamesh> next up is the script formerly known as dyson
[12:30] <jamesh> I landed my fixes for the last round of bugs today
[12:30] <SteveA> that's the... tarball non-spider?
[12:30] <jamesh> and renamed it to "product-release-finder"
[12:30] <jamesh> lifeless has asked stub to do another test run of it on staging, so we'll have more to report next week
[12:32] <jamesh> next is Python import.  Given ddaa isn't here, I'll skip it
[12:32] <jamesh> unless anyone else knows the status
[12:32] <lifeless> noidea
[12:32] <jamesh> okay.  On to critical bugs.
[12:32] <jamesh> bug 31308: Cannot set branch associated to a product series.
[12:33] <jamesh> Mark mailed some of us with some concerns about having two branch references in the product series, but decided that it sounded okay after I explained what we were planning
[12:33] <jamesh> lifeless: are you still responsible for specing this?
[12:34] <lifeless> nope
[12:34] <lifeless> last meeting ddaa said to not spec it
[12:34] <lifeless> or around that time
[12:34] <lifeless> anyhow, its now just down to implementation of the extra attribute
[12:34] <mpool> is david going to do that?
[12:35] <jamesh> last meeting's minutes says it has been assigned back to him
[12:35] <spiv> The bug is assigned to him.
[12:35] <jamesh> bug 37897: renaming project, product or series breaks vcs imports
[12:36] <jamesh> looks like this one is now in my review queue
[12:36] <jamesh> using the design discussed at the sprint
[12:36] <jamesh> bug 51130: cannot use +admin on a branch I own
[12:37] <jamesh> the branch mentioned in last minutes for this one is in BjornT's review queue
[12:37] <jamesh> so I guess things are looking pretty good.
[12:37] <jamesh> next up is pending sysadmin tasks
[12:38] <jamesh> is anyone blocked on sysadmin stuff?
[12:39] <mpool> next then?
[12:39] <jamesh> there are a few items listed under proposed items, but I think they are unchanged from last week.  Should I go through them?
[12:40] <jamesh> the first is lp: URLs for bzr.
[12:40] <lifeless> you're the matre'd
[12:40] <jamesh> there have been some comments added to the spec which probably need integrating.  I don't think there is much more to add.
[12:40] <mpool> jamesh, spiv: have you read the spec?
[12:41] <jamesh> mpool: yes.  I added some of the comments.
[12:41] <spiv> mpool: not yet, I'll do that.
[12:42] <jamesh> mpool: it looked pretty good.  The client side would be pretty easy to implement with better redirect handling in bzr :)
[12:43] <mpool> ok, so: ACTION: spiv, read the spec
[12:43] <mpool> ACTION: mbp read/integrate  the comments
[12:43] <jamesh> next up is "important bugs according to bzr community"
[12:44] <mpool> i spoke to david and mark
[12:44] <mpool> i'll update the spec list instead
[12:44] <mpool> so that item is closed
[12:44] <jamesh> okay.
[12:44] <jamesh> next is "Move vcs-import data out of ProductSeries"
[12:45] <jamesh> I don't think there is much to add here.  It probably needs a bit of specing
[12:45] <jamesh> next is "1.0 targets, what, who, when?"
[12:46] <jamesh> we've already covered the smart server work, so I assume that's on target
[12:47] <mpool> jamesh: do you have any 1.0 bazaar-related targets?
[12:47] <SteveA> does that spec about lp: urls take into account our canonical pillar names?
[12:47] <mpool> spiv: do you have any other ditto?
[12:47] <mpool> SteveA: yes
[12:47] <SteveA> great
[12:47] <mpool> https://launchpad.canonical.com/BranchIndirection
[12:47] <mpool> if you want to read it
[12:47] <SteveA> thanks
[12:48] <spiv> mpool: other ditto?
[12:48] <jamesh> mpool: I'm not working on any of the 1.0 target bazaar specs at the moment.
[12:48] <mpool> any lp 1.0 targets related to bazaar?
[12:48] <jamesh> that spec should be registered in LP ...
[12:49] <spiv> Oh, right.  Just the smart server.
[12:50] <jamesh> One last thing before we finish.  There was an action item from the last meeting that we haven't covered
[12:50] <jamesh> ACTION: spiv and ddaa to review PrivateBranches again
[12:50] <jamesh> spiv: is that still a todo?
[12:51] <spiv> Yes, but I've skimmed and it won't take long for me to do.
[12:51] <jamesh> okay.  I think that's it.
[12:51] <jamesh> Meeting ends.
[12:51] <lifeless> thanks for chairing
[12:51] <SteveA> thanks jamesh