[08:03] <MacSlow> Greetings everybody!
[13:06] <zul> @schedule montreal
[13:06] <ubotu> Schedule for America/Montreal: 22 Nov 09:00: Desktop Team Development | 23 Nov 07:00: MOTU meeting | 29 Nov 09:00: Desktop Team Development
[14:48] <soren> @now
[14:48] <ubotu> Current time in Etc/UTC: November 20 2007, 14:48:05 - Next meeting: Desktop Team Development in 1 day
[14:48] <soren> Figures.
[14:55] <akincer> Meeting in 1 day?
[14:56] <soren> No, in 5 minutes.
[14:56] <soren> Server meeting.
[14:56] <akincer> Right, not sure I'll participate much, but I wanted to be here
[14:56] <akincer> Oh, Desktop Team Development. Should have read the words before the 1 day part
[14:57] <zul> morning
[14:57] <akincer> morning
[14:57] <soren> No, it's not.
[14:58] <akincer> It's all relative
[14:58] <zul> soren: yes it is...
[14:58] <mathiaz> Hi everyone !
[14:58] <soren> Um.. I'm quite sure I can tell when it's morning and when it isn't... And it really isn't right now.
[14:59] <soren> Hi, mathiaz!
[14:59] <ivoks> hi all
[14:59] <zul> soren: im sure you can, but let me assure you it is morning
[14:59] <jdstrand> hi ivoks
[14:59] <zul> hey mathiaz
[14:59] <akincer> It's 5 oclock somewhere
[14:59] <soren> Yes. In the afternoon.
[15:00]  * soren shakes his head
[15:00] <akincer> and it is also 5AM somewhere
[15:00] <ivoks> guys, every second somewhere is midnight, so...
[15:01] <zul> its all black and white to me
[15:01] <mathiaz> alright let's get the ubuntu server team meeting started
[15:01] <mathiaz> #startmeeting
[15:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 15:00. The chair is mathiaz.
[15:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:02] <pschulz01> mathiaz: +1
[15:03] <mathiaz> So I'd like to appoligize for the last meeting not being run.
[15:03] <mathiaz> some of the team members were not available to attend it.
[15:03] <mathiaz> it's been a long month since the last one.
[15:04] <mathiaz> I think it was before UDS.
[15:04] <ivoks> then we have lots of things to talk about
[15:04]  * dholbach hugs the server folks :)
[15:04] <mathiaz> I hope so
[15:05]  * soren hugs dholbach
[15:05]  * ivoks turns to the dark side and hugs dholbach too :)
[15:05] <dantalizing> get a channel
[15:05] <mathiaz> the agenda for today is here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[15:05] <soren> dantalizing: :)
[15:05] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting.
[15:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting.
[15:06] <mathiaz> last meeting notes can be found here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/Server/20071023
[15:06] <dholbach> more hugs for those of you who do reviews marked as 'canonical-server' on http://people.ubuntu.com/~dholbach/sponsoring/
[15:06]  * dholbach is quiet now
[15:06] <mathiaz> zul: did you start a wiki page about your plan for xen ?
[15:06] <zul> mathiaz: yes i havent updated it since Ive started it
[15:07] <soren> zul: What's the name of it?
[15:07] <zul> its a launchpad spec
[15:07] <zul> gimme a sec..
[15:07] <zul> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/XenInHardy
[15:08]  * pschulz01 greets sommer
[15:08] <mathiaz> zul: did you register a spec in LP ?
[15:08] <zul> thats the gist of it
[15:08] <zul> mathiaz: yep
[15:08] <sommer> hey, all
[15:08] <ivoks> zul: those xen releases patches for newer version of kernels?
[15:08] <ivoks> s/those/does
[15:08] <mathiaz> zul: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/xen-hardy gives me an error
[15:09] <zul> argh...ill fix it after the meeting
[15:09] <zul> ivoks: correct.
[15:09] <mathiaz> zul: ok - great !
[15:09] <dendrobates> mathiaz: have we started?
[15:09] <mathiaz> dendrobates: yes
[15:09] <soren> dendrobates: Yes :)
[15:09] <dendrobates> topic?
[15:10] <mathiaz> dendrobates: review last meeting points.
[15:10] <mathiaz> dendrobates: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/Server/20071023
[15:11] <mathiaz> I haven't sent an email about tagging bugs for documentation to the ubuntu-doc team.
[15:11] <soren> I had an action point, too.
[15:12] <soren> I sent the e-mail to debian-devel about the default MTA stuff.
[15:12] <mathiaz> soren: ah says. So did you send your email ?
[15:12] <mathiaz> soren: what was the response ?
[15:12] <soren> Despite my efforts to emphasize the process and work included, no-one responded to that bit, and everyone started talking about if exim or postfix should be the default one.
[15:13] <soren> ...so the discussion has gotten nowhere at all :(
[15:13] <mathiaz> soren: has the thread finished ?
[15:14] <soren> Wel... it's dead.
[15:14] <soren> I can't find it in the ml archive right now. :/
[15:15] <mathiaz> soren: may be you could send another email explaining that the default choice of the mta is a hot topic and that what you propose is a technical improvement to give choice the end user
[15:15] <mathiaz> soren: give choice to the end user or developer
[15:16] <soren> I thought about that, but I can already imagine the response. :)
[15:16] <soren> I'll try.
[15:17] <mathiaz> ACTION: soren will try to come up with a new email for debian-devel about the default MTA change.
[15:17] <soren> "but we can't do this before we've all agreed which mta should be our default".. and then the same discussion will start again.
[15:17] <soren> But I'm not bitter.
[15:17] <mathiaz> [ACTION] soren will try to come up with a new email for debian-devel about the default MTA change.
[15:17] <MootBot> ACTION received:  soren will try to come up with a new email for debian-devel about the default MTA change.
[15:17] <soren> Moving right along..
[15:18] <ivoks> soren: may the force be with you...
[15:18] <dendrobates> I thought we agreed on postfix in a previous meeting.
[15:18] <soren> dendrobates: *we* did. Debian didn't.
[15:19] <soren> dendrobates: ...and we'd really like to have Debian agree on the same technical way to do this, so that we don't go in different directions.
[15:19] <dendrobates> perhaps slangasek can help point us to the correct people to get on board before we make another post to the ml.
[15:19] <mathiaz> any other toughts about the last meeting ?
[15:19] <soren> dendrobates: Yeah, I could try talking to him.
[15:20] <soren> mathiaz: no
[15:20] <dendrobates> no
[15:21] <mathiaz> ok. Let's move on then.
[15:21] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] JeOS support/documentation for gutsy, plans for hardy
[15:21] <MootBot> New Topic:  JeOS support/documentation for gutsy, plans for hardy
[15:21] <dendrobates> nealmcb added te next topic.
[15:21] <dendrobates> He does not seem to be with us.
[15:22] <soren> Maybe we can move to the next topic and return to this one if he shows up?
[15:22] <dendrobates> I would like to table this discussion until he can join us.
[15:22] <soren> snap
[15:22] <mathiaz> ok. Let's defer this discussion then.
[15:22] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] sudo bug discussion - dendrobates
[15:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  sudo bug discussion - dendrobates
[15:23] <dendrobates> There have been sporadic reports of the user added at install time not being in the admin group.
[15:23] <dendrobates> this causes sudo not to work for that user.
[15:23] <ivoks> dendrobates: any examples?
[15:23] <soren> dendrobates: Actually, one of the reports mentioned that it was the %admin ALL=(ALL) ALL   line that was missing from sudoers..
[15:24] <pschulz01> dendrobates: URL?
[15:24] <soren> http://www.enterprisenetworkingplanet.com/netos/article.php/3712031
[15:24] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://www.enterprisenetworkingplanet.com/netos/article.php/3712031
[15:24] <mathiaz> dendrobates: is there a bug in LP ?
[15:24] <jdstrand> didn't I hear someone say it happened only when installing the mail-server task?
[15:24] <dendrobates> The reports have all been a little different, and I cannot reproduce it.
[15:24] <jdstrand> (I cannot remember where I heard/read that)
[15:25] <mathiaz> I've also heard about some thread in the forums
[15:25] <dendrobates> jdstrand: yes, that was one report, but it was not reproducable.
[15:25] <ivoks> m... this article... i've read it
[15:25] <ivoks> we really shouldn't base assumptions on it
[15:25] <dendrobates> I don't put too much stock in that particulat report.
[15:26] <dendrobates> but it has popped up too pften to be a coincidence IMO
[15:26] <soren> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=590290
[15:26] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=590290
[15:27] <dendrobates> I would like everyone to try at least once this week to reproduce this.  I have done 20+ installs with no luck.
[15:27] <jdstrand> dendrobates: I am curious if all of this has been in Vms?
[15:27] <jdstrand> VMs
[15:27] <mathiaz> dendrobates: may be we could try to centralize all the links that describe such a problem ?
[15:28] <dendrobates> mathiaz: good idea.
[15:28] <ivoks> jdstrand: or maybe even with wubi or someting like that...
[15:28] <sommer> is there a bug we can leave comments on?
[15:28] <dendrobates> jdstrand: I have tried to reproduce it in VM and real HW.
[15:28] <mathiaz> dendrobates: is there a bug in LP about this ?
[15:28] <akincer> I did a server install yesterday and did not run into this issue. Had a separate issue, but it isn't part of this discusion
[15:28] <dendrobates> mathiaz: not yet.
[15:28] <mathiaz> ok. So I'll file a bug about this and assign to the server team then.
[15:29] <mathiaz> [ACTION] mathiaz will file a bug for the sudo bug to track all the links mentioning it.
[15:29] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mathiaz will file a bug for the sudo bug to track all the links mentioning it.
[15:29] <dendrobates> we can keep track of the various reports on the lp bug report.
[15:31] <dendrobates> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/user-setup/+bug/40684  perhaps they are using expert mode.
[15:31] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 40684 in user-setup "expert install user not a sudoer if root password given" [Medium,Confirmed]
[15:31] <ivoks> ah... expert mode
[15:31] <soren> Yeah, I just stumbled upon that.
[15:31] <soren> That is clearly intentional, though.
[15:32] <soren> The code very clearly checks if a root password has been set, and if so, no sudo-capable user is added.
[15:32] <dendrobates> quite old though.  Should be looked at though. I did not try an expert install.
[15:32] <soren> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sudo/+bug/162638
[15:32] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 162638 in sudo "sudo - first user not in sudoers file" [Undecided,New]
[15:32] <zul> dendrobates: ill be trying a server install after the meeting so I can try to reproduce it
[15:32] <dendrobates> in the reported cases, no root password was set, allegedly
[15:33] <ivoks> i'll try expert install today
[15:33] <mathiaz> soren: it seems that this is a bug where we should track the links.
[15:33] <jdstrand> dendrobates: I haven't looked at that passwrod checking code.  maybe it is as simple as a 'blank' password (eg, a space or tab or something)
[15:34] <dendrobates> jdstrand: it shouldn't be possible to inadvertantly do that from the installer
[15:34] <jdstrand> dendrobates: we should ask for /etc/shadow entry for root
[15:34] <jdstrand> or at least whether it has a password in it
[15:35] <dendrobates> anyway, I just wanted everyone to be aware.
[15:35] <jdstrand> (as opposed to '*' or '!'
[15:35] <mathiaz> I've just subscribed ubuntu-server to bug 162638
[15:35] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 162638 in sudo "sudo - first user not in sudoers file" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/162638
[15:35] <dendrobates> mathiaz: thanks.
[15:36] <mathiaz> I think it should be used to track all the information we found about this issue.
[15:36] <dendrobates> agreed
[15:36] <mathiaz> dendrobates: anything else about this issue ?
[15:37] <dendrobates> no
[15:37] <mathiaz> let's move on to the next topic then
[15:37] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Hardy community projects - dendrobates
[15:37] <MootBot> New Topic:  Hardy community projects - dendrobates
[15:38] <dendrobates> we would like a volunteer to pick up a project for hardy.
[15:38] <dendrobates> We would like to add a ruby on rails stack.
[15:39] <dendrobates> This would consist of adding the necessary packages to main ,and creating a tasksel task
[15:39] <ivoks> anyone knows anything about ruby?
[15:40] <dendrobates> this is perfect for someone going for core-dev.
[15:40] <zul> not me
[15:40] <coffeedude> nope.
[15:40] <dendrobates> or someone that wants to learn ruby.
[15:40] <sommer> I've done some script type programming with Ruby... cool language
[15:40] <dendrobates> or someone that knows ruby
[15:41] <nealmcb> ahh - daylight savings - damn
[15:41] <dendrobates> When everyone volunteers at once, I can't hear you.
[15:41] <ivoks> well
[15:41] <ivoks> i could do everything needed on apache side
[15:41] <sommer> I'm not haven't really done much packaging, but can probably help
[15:42] <ivoks> but i really don't know anything about gems and other ruby stuff
[15:42] <mathiaz> there was another ruby spec registered in LP.
[15:42] <sommer> s/I haven't/
[15:42] <dantalizing> I would be willing to help but would need some direction
[15:42] <mathiaz> I can contact the person that registered the spec to see if he is interested in doing it.
[15:43] <dantalizing> a lot of direction
[15:43] <akincer> Pardon me, but it seems the question worth asking is "Does anyone here who knows anything about Ruby on Rails want to volunteer to head up a RoR project for Gutsy?"
[15:43] <mathiaz> akincer: s/gutsy/hardy/
[15:43] <akincer> doh
[15:43] <akincer> No coffee today, what do you expect?
[15:44]  * coffeedude thought that was an implicit question anyways....
[15:44] <mathiaz> well - the first thing is to figure out what is the current state of ror in ubuntu.
[15:44] <sommer> is there a link to the spec?
[15:44] <nealmcb> [sorry to get my clocks messed up and miss so much of the meeting.  can someone shoot me a transcript somehow of the meeting so far?]
[15:45] <mathiaz> sommer: https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/rubyonrails
[15:45] <jdstrand> nealmcb: the JeOS stuff was postponed til you got here
[15:45] <nealmcb> :-)
[15:45] <sommer> mathiaz: thx
[15:46] <mathiaz> the actual wiki page is https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RubyOnRailsStack
[15:46] <lionel> mathiaz: all is free, nothing has been chossen like mongrel versus fast-cgi or something like that. This topic was discused at UDS?
[15:46] <mathiaz> lionel: a little bit - but there wasn't enough knowledge around the table.
[15:47] <dendrobates> this is actually a different spec.  But we can use it.  I assigned jdstrand to create the spec, but since this exists, we can use it.
[15:47] <dendrobates> Does anyone know who David Portwood is?
[15:47] <lionel> due to some nightmare in the past for me to install the RoR stack, I'm fine with helping on this topic :)
[15:47] <jdstrand> yea
[15:47] <mathiaz> lionel: well you could help with drafting the spec then.
[15:48] <mathiaz> lionel: which is just about figure out what's wrong with the current way of installing ror.
[15:48] <lionel> I'll try to contact David first.
[15:49] <soren> someone's at the door.. brb.
[15:49] <lionel> mathiaz: more or less : nothing is packaged and all is fech with ruby packaging system :-(
[15:49] <mathiaz> lionel: david == dzportwood ?
[15:49] <lionel> but I agreee that's something that's necessary
[15:50] <dendrobates> We need the spec completed by thursday, which is not alot of time.
[15:50] <lionel> mathiaz: yes. to know if he want to help us to implement :)
[15:50] <lionel> dendrobates: well, there is nothing at tv tonight ;)
[15:50] <mathiaz> lionel: ok. So could you try to contact him ?
[15:50] <dendrobates> lionel: Ha, thanks.
[15:51] <lionel> yes, when the meeting is finished I send him a mail and I will digg in the spec
[15:51] <mathiaz> lionel: and since we may be short on time, could also add your thoughts to a discussion section on the wiki page ?
[15:51] <lionel> I have not a lot of experience with specs, I may require a bit help from you
[15:51] <lionel> mathiaz: sure, no problem
[15:52] <mathiaz> lionel: don't worry. I can be the approver of the spec.
[15:52] <mathiaz> [ACTION] lionel will contact david to write the ruby-on-rails spec.
[15:52] <MootBot> ACTION received:  lionel will contact david to write the ruby-on-rails spec.
[15:52] <dendrobates> ok, that is an action item, lionel will work on the spec, and sommer, ivoks, and dantalizing will all help with the implementation.
[15:53]  * soren is back
[15:53] <dendrobates> we should go back to JEOS now that nealmcb is here.
[15:53] <mathiaz> dendrobates: let's get the spec drafted and approved first.
[15:54] <mathiaz> ok. Let's get back to JEOS then.
[15:54] <dendrobates> true, but I want to capture who volunteered, so we don't have to ask again.
[15:54] <nealmcb> dendrobates: thanks
[15:54] <mathiaz>  [TOPIC] JeOS support/documentation for gutsy, plans for hardy
[15:54] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] JeOS support/documentation for gutsy, plans for hardy
[15:54] <MootBot> New Topic:  JeOS support/documentation for gutsy, plans for hardy
[15:54] <nealmcb> did folks read my email on the topic?
[15:55] <nealmcb> any comments on that?  should I go thru it?  someone else want to lead this item?
[15:55] <soren> It would be wonderful if you could lead it.
[15:55] <mathiaz> nealmcb: I've read your email.
[15:55] <nealmcb> I think documentation is a big part - lots of folks confused about what is out there
[15:56] <nealmcb> ...for gutsy.  pretty easy to fix with a wiki page at help.ubuntu.com - right?
[15:56] <soren> Heck, *I*'m confused sometimes!
[15:57] <mathiaz> nealmcb: yes. Your proposal to create https://help.ubuntu.com/community/JeOS makes sense.
[15:57] <dendrobates> nealmcb: the question becomes what do we say about Jeos
[15:57] <nealmcb> a big question in my mind is whether we should somehow get the ubuntu-jeos-builder out there for gutsy somehow
[15:57] <soren> nealmcb: I plan on renaming that, by the way.
[15:57] <nealmcb> since it is so much nicer than the iso
[15:58] <soren> ...to remove a big part of the confusion in my head.
[15:58] <soren> To ubuntu-vm-builder or something.
[15:58] <nealmcb> dendrobates: what are the options?
[15:58] <nealmcb> ..for what we say...
[15:58] <soren> ...and when I'm done looking at virt-install I'll figure out if I'll roll them into one, or upload both of them. It'll only be a few days.
[15:59] <dendrobates> technically, I'm not sure we have much of a story at this point.
[15:59] <nealmcb> soren: right
[15:59] <nealmcb> I was also looking at rbuilder rpath.com last night - some very cool stuff there...
[16:00] <mathiaz> fwiw it can be used to quickly create virtual machines with specific packages installed.
[16:00] <nealmcb> dendrobates: my sense is that the momentum is now, and if we don't at least get the community involved in helping make jeos work well on ubuntu, they'll go elsewhere
[16:00] <mathiaz> ex: I want an ldap server using hardy.
[16:01] <dendrobates> nealmcb: ok.  agreed
[16:01] <nealmcb> so a mailing list makes lots of sense, and more transparency from the folks working on it
[16:01] <nealmcb> there is a perception that canonical somehow is trying to make this a proprietary thing, which makes no sense to me
[16:01] <mathiaz> nealmcb: more transparency means having a roadmap
[16:01]  * soren has just reproduced the no-user-in-sudoers bug.
[16:02] <soren> er... no.
[16:02] <soren> never mind :)
[16:02]  * pschulz01 smiles at soren.
[16:02]  * nijaba guesses that he forgot to update his meeting time after DST change
[16:02] <nealmcb> nijaba: you and me too....
[16:02] <akincer> OT, but DST needs to die
[16:02] <nealmcb> nijaba: the topic is jeos now
[16:03] <mathiaz> nealmcb: do you think a team is needed ?
[16:03] <zul> well how far along is jeos?
[16:03] <nealmcb> mathiaz: you mean launchpad team?
[16:03] <nealmcb> probably
[16:03] <mathiaz> nealmcb: well - not necessarly an LP team.
[16:03] <nealmcb> but also mailing list for users and developers.  I hate talking about this on the forums....
[16:04] <mathiaz> nealmcb: if you want to have users joining the project, a team in the wiki makes more sense.
[16:04] <nealmcb> who wants to work on it?
[16:04] <dendrobates> zul: it exists, but there is no interesting technology, except the scritp that builds it.
[16:04] <soren> dendrobates: Well.. no.
[16:04] <soren> dendrobates: The script that builds the JeOS iso not exceptionally non-interesting.
[16:05] <soren> er.. s/not/is/
[16:05] <pookey> hm, I'm an hour late :)
[16:05] <nealmcb> soren: I disagree!
[16:05] <dendrobates> soren: at least it is technology.
[16:05] <soren> The ubuntu-jeos-builder (which is sort of unrelated to JeOS, actually) is rather interesting, though.
[16:05] <nijaba> soren:  exceptionally non-uninteresting.
[16:05] <nealmcb> ahh - right
[16:05] <dendrobates> isn't that what I said?
[16:05] <nealmcb> though i'd like to see how the jeos iso is built.....
[16:05] <mathiaz> I think that the script to build iso is interesting.
[16:06]  * nealmcb nods
[16:06] <mathiaz> It can be used as a base to build virtual appliances.
[16:06] <nealmcb> but why an iso?  why not a vm?
[16:06]  * nijaba nods as nealmcb
[16:06] <akincer> And I, for one, would like a plethora of documentation on how to use that
[16:06] <soren> mathiaz: It's no different from any other cd building script, really.
[16:06] <mathiaz> to me it's just another output.
[16:07] <mathiaz> some user want to create an iso, others want to create a vm.
[16:07] <nealmcb> are any doc folks here?
[16:07] <nijaba> Iwas asked to write an article on how to build an appliance based on JeOS
[16:07] <nijaba> So I guess that will be a start for a doc
[16:07]  * sommer waves at nealmcb
[16:07] <nealmcb> :-)
[16:07] <soren> mathiaz: If the vm builder should be part of this, we need a new name for it. A generic vm builder script does not match "Just enough OS" in any sane way, IMO.
[16:08] <soren> mathiaz: I see the relation of the two things, though.
[16:08] <pschulz01> nijaba: I would be happy to review the article.
[16:08] <dendrobates> We could automate appliance building ala vmware vadk.
[16:08] <zul> I agree a vm would be more useful than an iso
[16:08] <nealmcb> soren: though jeos is a catchy name now.  but I see your point
[16:08] <mathiaz> nijaba: would you mind writing a wiki page for your articile ?
[16:08] <nijaba> mathiaz: not at all
[16:09] <nijaba> soren: I will need some help from you to get started.
[16:09] <mathiaz> so what about starting a document on help.u.c ?
[16:09] <zul> for example most ISP would use a base VM rather than an ISO to install images for clients
[16:09] <akincer> Not everyone would find a vm more useful than an iso. Despite that being the trend, I can think of many uses of an iso as an appliance install
[16:09] <nijaba> mathiaz: perfect
[16:09] <soren> nijaba: Sure.
[16:10] <mathiaz> nijaba: do you already have a skeleton in mind ?
[16:10] <zul> or have a switch that either builds an iso or a vm
[16:10] <nealmcb> having easy tips on how to dpkg-reconfigure after the vm comes up (or before?) would help
[16:10] <nealmcb> akincer: what use case are you thinking of ?
[16:10] <nijaba> mathiaz: for a_z step by step install install of a given web app (which I have not picked)
[16:10] <mathiaz> it seems that we also need a way to capture all the other ideas of improvements
[16:11] <soren> bugs.lp.net/ubuntu-jeos/+new ?
[16:11] <dendrobates> we are technically out of time.
[16:11] <akincer> nealmcb: Old machines that would do fine as a simple appliance like a DNS server
[16:12] <mathiaz> dendrobates: is there another meeting scheduled now ?
[16:12] <nealmcb> akincer: I though jeos explicitely meant vm in people's minds, and putting lots of hw support for old hardware in there would be a different focus
[16:12] <nijaba> akincer: the problem is that the JeOS kernel is stripped of most drivers that you will need
[16:12] <nealmcb> does anyone have to leave now?
[16:12] <dendrobates> I don't think so, I was just stating the obvious.
[16:12] <akincer> wouldn't the point of having a builder be to add in things like drivers? Maybe I don't understand enough about JeOS
[16:13] <mathiaz> soren: is there a spec for jeos in hardy ?
[16:13] <soren> mathiaz: Well... Depends on what you mean by "jeos".
[16:13] <soren> See?
[16:13] <soren> mathiaz: If it's for Ubuntu as a guest os, then yes.
[16:13] <mathiaz> I'm trying to figure out where we can keep track of the proposed improvements
[16:13] <soren> Bugs on launchpad?
[16:14] <mathiaz> soren: ok.
[16:14] <nealmcb> but a roadmap in a wiki spec would be more helpful for many folks
[16:14] <soren> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/jeos-hardy is about Ubuntu as a guest os
[16:14] <mathiaz> I'll also add a section about it in the ServerTeam Roadmap.
[16:14] <nijaba>  mathiaz: I think that JeOS is and should stay as Ubuntu as a guest os, but need to increase the number of virtualization environments supported
[16:14] <soren> There's currently no spec about the vm builder thing.
[16:14] <akincer> If I'm simply uninformed, ignore my assertion
[16:15] <mathiaz> akincer: if you're uninformed, we need to fix it.
[16:15] <soren> akincer: You rarely care much about extra drivers in a vm, do you?
[16:15] <nijaba> akincer: your point is good, but that would be an appliance builder vs a virtual appliance builder
[16:15] <nijaba> we certainly could use both
[16:16] <zul> soren: actually if i had a weird usb key drive then yes I would
[16:16] <akincer> soren: Right, but I was specifically talking about building an appliance for say an unused machine to be a DNS machine
[16:16] <soren> zul: How weird?
[16:16] <mathiaz> akincer: that's out of the scope of JeOS.
[16:16] <zul> soren: usb thumbscanner or something like that
[16:16] <soren> akincer: Ah, I thought you still meant in a virtual machine, but on old hardware.
[16:17] <zul> soren: or a wireless driver that the kernel doesnt support but there are drivers out there that does support it
[16:17] <akincer> Is there a link to the scope of JeOS?
[16:17] <mathiaz> akincer: not that know of. That's what we need to fix
[16:17] <akincer> wait, think I see it
[16:17] <soren> zul: Wireless driver? In a VM?
[16:17] <zul> soren: as an exmample
[16:17] <soren> zul: I fail to see the use of that.
[16:18] <zul> soren: people have done weirder things
[16:18] <mathiaz> so to get back on track, what can we do ?
[16:18] <nealmcb> document what we offer in gutsy
[16:18] <mathiaz> nijaba will write a short tutorial about using jeos to build a virtual appliances.
[16:18] <nealmcb> backport some vm builder to gutsy
[16:19] <nealmcb> build a community around it
[16:19] <nealmcb> and go for the gold in hardy
[16:20] <mathiaz> anyone interested in writing a simple wiki page that presents and explain what is JeOS ?
[16:20] <nealmcb> getting rid of unneeded app-level stuff seems like an important goal to me, and a hard one
[16:20] <mathiaz> or would this part of nijaba's tutorial ?
[16:20] <nijaba> mathiaz: will be part of it
[16:20] <nealmcb> the jeos page should list various related pages, and include our working definition
[16:20] <nijaba> in fact, I have already started this part internally
[16:21] <mathiaz> it looks like the bigest problem now is documentation. let's focus on this first.
[16:21] <nealmcb> I've put various hints on using the jeos builder on that forums page
[16:21] <nijaba> preparing the eb page for u.c/server/jeos
[16:21] <nealmcb> and put the ubuntu-jeos-builder in my ppa
[16:21] <nealmcb> but don't want to go to far without a plan....
[16:22] <mathiaz> nealmcb: can you copy your hints on h.u.c/community/JeOS ?
[16:22] <nealmcb> absolutely - though I think they would be in a sub-page
[16:22] <soren> Ok, let me just get this straigt:
[16:22] <nealmcb> and picking the vm builder script of choice is a top priority so I look forward to soren's thoughts on virt-install etc
[16:22] <nealmcb> does virt-install require x11?
[16:23] <zul> no
[16:23] <soren> I'm the only one who's annoyed that JeOS refers to two completely separate things? Ie. both Ubuntu as a guest os and the vm builder thingie?
[16:23] <mralphabet> and third a physical machine os
[16:23] <nijaba> so let's have JeOS and JeOS-Builder
[16:23] <mathiaz> soren: nope. There is some confusion.
[16:24] <nealmcb> a jeos builder can also build simple vms right?
[16:24] <nealmcb> but a vm builder might not be very savvy about tight jeos images
[16:24] <soren> mathiaz: Then can we please, please, please not put anything about the vm builder script onto h.u.c/whatever/JeOS/whatever ?
[16:24] <mathiaz> soren: JeOS is ubuntu as a virtual guest.
[16:24] <nealmcb> so what is wrong with using the hip jeos term?
[16:24] <mathiaz> soren: vm builder script is part of the virtualization spec.
[16:24] <akincer> If they are two entirely different things, I don't think having similar names is conducive to clarity
[16:24] <soren> mathiaz: Not the virtualisation spec I wrote :)
[16:25] <soren> mathiaz: I can be, but it isn't.
[16:25] <nealmcb> I'm just talking about the name of the tool.  ubuntu-jeos-builder now (a bit long)
[16:25] <nealmcb> jeos-builder would be better perhaps
[16:25] <soren> vm-builder!
[16:25]  * nijaba beeps -> trademark
[16:25] <nealmcb> vm's are so 1990's...
[16:25] <nealmcb> :-)
[16:25] <mathiaz> soren: ok. It seems that vm----builder would build on JeOS
[16:25] <soren> I just hate that every conversation I have about JeOS has to start with: "So, when you say JeOS, do you mean the entirely separate installabal ISO, or do you mean the wicked cool vm builder script, I wrote?"
[16:25] <zul> i would have said virt-factory
[16:26] <nealmcb> I'm not firm on that opinion, but I think jeos has mindshare now.  it jeos trademarked?
[16:26] <soren> nealmcb: Good question.
[16:26] <dendrobates> nealmcb: I don't know.
[16:26]  * zul must go to work
[16:27] <nealmcb> nijaba: you brought up trademarks - in relation to what?
[16:27] <nijaba> to vm-xxxx
[16:27] <nealmcb> is vm-xxxx trademarked?
[16:27] <nijaba> nope, but vm- is very close to vmware
[16:27] <nealmcb> ah
[16:28] <nijaba> so I would suggest getting away from it if we want to do stuff outside of vmware
[16:28] <nealmcb> regardless of what we call it - will we package "jeos-builder" for gutsy somehow?
[16:28] <soren> I doubt it.
[16:28] <nealmcb> (other than my ppa :-)
[16:28] <mathiaz> ok. so it seems that this is still confusing. and we still have some things to talk about.
[16:28] <soren> Not through any official channels anyway.
[16:28] <mathiaz> let's get this to the mailing list.
[16:29]  * pschulz01 says: goodnight all. will ne reading the logs
[16:29] <mathiaz> I'll reply to your email nealmcb
[16:29] <nealmcb> but it is so cool - that is where we get traction!
[16:29]  * nijaba +1 to mathiaz proposal
[16:29] <nealmcb> 90 seconds to a new vm!
[16:29] <mathiaz> with a summary of the previous conversation.
[16:29] <nealmcb> great
[16:29] <mathiaz> [ACTION] mathiaz will reply to nealmcb mail about jeos.
[16:29] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mathiaz will reply to nealmcb mail about jeos.
[16:30] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Review each section of the ServerTeam/Roadmap.
[16:30] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review each section of the ServerTeam/Roadmap.
[16:30] <akincer> Gotta go. Goodbye and good luck.
[16:30] <mathiaz> The Roadmap: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Roadmap
[16:31] <mathiaz> nealmcb: how is the factoids going ?
[16:31]  * soren wonders if mathiaz lives in a hexagonal flat
[16:31] <nealmcb> I have't put any time into them - jeos is too much fun and work is pressing.  but I'll get back to them
[16:32] <ivoks> mathiaz: what about postfix+dovecot?
[16:32] <soren> :)
[16:32] <ivoks> mathiaz: i've tested it and i can't say anything else than 'works as advertised'
[16:32] <nealmcb> and I'll work on a jeos factoid :-)
[16:32]  * mathiaz checks that his flat hasn't changed drastically during this meeting
[16:33] <ivoks> a long one :)
[16:33] <lamont> ivoks: dovecot should "just work" with the current postfix
[16:33]  * nijaba states that mathiaz has actually moved out of the hexagon
[16:33] <soren> mathiaz: I'm just curious where the ".* corner" terminology comes from.
[16:33] <ivoks> lamont: we were talking about SASL over dovcot in postfix
[16:33] <mathiaz> soren: that comes from jono
[16:33] <soren> mathiaz: oic
[16:34]  * nealmcb finally gets the hexagon joke :-)
[16:34] <lamont> ivoks: right
[16:34] <ivoks> lamont: so, we would like to provide that out of the box
[16:34] <lamont> and it should "just work".  If not, iz bug and should be filed
[16:34] <ivoks> lamont: it does just work :)
[16:34] <mathiaz> ivoks: what is the goal of this ?
[16:35] <ivoks> mathiaz: we talked about that at UDS
[16:35] <ivoks> mathiaz: replacing saslauthd with dovecot
[16:35] <mathiaz> ivoks: yes - it's been a while since then.
[16:35] <mathiaz> ivoks: right.
[16:36] <mathiaz> ivoks: so what needs to be done ?
[16:36] <sommer> just to note the docs have been updated to use Dovecot SASL.
[16:36] <ivoks> mathiaz: we need to add 1 or 2 lines in main.cf
[16:36] <sommer> for Hardy anyway
[16:36] <nijaba> mathiaz: also update the mail task ?
[16:36] <mathiaz> ivoks: you said you've tested it - is there anything that can be done improve it ?
[16:36] <mathiaz> sommer: great ! thanks.
[16:36] <sommer> np
[16:36] <ivoks> mathiaz: yes, we could provide it out of the box?
[16:37] <mathiaz> ivoks: where should this be done ? in the dovecot postinst script ?
[16:37] <ivoks> that's the problem i wanted to disccuss
[16:37] <mathiaz> ivoks: OTOH I'm not sure we can mangle the postfix configuration file
[16:37] <ivoks> we can't do it in postinst, since that will break debian policy :/
[16:38] <soren> No.
[16:38] <lamont> mathiaz: I'd be happy to mangle the config file
[16:38] <ivoks> we talked about tasksel postinst, and it's the same thing...
[16:38] <soren> postfix provides postconf to alter its config, so all should be good.
[16:38] <lamont> ivoks: in dovecot postinst?
[16:38] <soren> SEction 11.7, IIRC.
[16:38] <mathiaz> lamont: what would you suggest ?
[16:38] <lamont> yeah - that just means that we need an interface
[16:38] <ivoks> soren: that's ok, yes...
[16:38] <soren> Ah, 10.7.
[16:38] <soren> 10.7.4 in particular.
[16:38] <soren> lamont: Interface?
[16:39] <ivoks> lamont: dovecot postinst could check if postconf exsist and then use it to set up sasl
[16:39] <soren> Hm... It would be nice if it asked first. :)
[16:39] <ivoks> yeah...
[16:39] <soren> A simple yes/no, though.
[16:39] <lamont> and 10.7.4 says postconf -e will make things right
[16:39] <mathiaz> soren: OTOH this is one more question
[16:40] <lamont> note that modifying config files does require that you ask first
[16:40] <ivoks> that's why i was thinking about new package
[16:40] <ivoks> ubuntu-mail-server
[16:40] <ivoks> wich would depend and replace postifx and dovecot
[16:40] <lamont> ivoks: ew
[16:40] <soren> mathiaz: ...that's not much of an issue, as it turns out.
[16:40] <lamont> it shouldn't need to replace
[16:41] <mathiaz> ivoks: tasksel seems like a good candidate for that
[16:41] <sommer> I have another meeting... thanks all
[16:41] <ivoks> replace means 'that's my config too, and i can edit it'
[16:41] <lamont> mathiaz: it's not a question in base install
[16:41] <soren> mathiaz: We discussed this earlier (mysql root password stuff).
[16:41] <lamont> ivoks: if it uses postconf, then it's not editing its config, and it's policy compliant
[16:41] <mathiaz> ok. It seems that it needs to be discussed a little bit more.
[16:41] <ivoks> sorry, i forgot that we need to change dovecot's config also
[16:41] <mathiaz> ivoks: could you file a bug for that ?
[16:42] <mathiaz> ivoks: against dovecot.
[16:42] <ivoks> ok
[16:42] <lamont> also, please note that neither main.cf nor master.cf is a conffile, nor should they ever be.
[16:42] <mathiaz> ivoks: Are you willing to do the packaging work also ?
[16:42] <ivoks> mathiaz: yes
[16:42]  * soren hugs ivoks 
[16:42]  * nijaba hugs him too
[16:43] <mathiaz> ivoks: attach your debdiff and we'll keep discussing the technical bits in the bug.
[16:43] <ivoks> ok
[16:43] <lamont> ivoks: and don't replace dovecot or postfix, please.
[16:43] <mathiaz> [ACTION] ivoks will file a bug to work on dovecot and postfix integration.
[16:43] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ivoks will file a bug to work on dovecot and postfix integration.
[16:43] <ivoks> lamont: ok, i'll change dovecot's config and postconf postfix
[16:44] <lamont> ivoks: if there's a way to export an interface from dovecot, that'd be the win tere.
[16:44] <lamont> there.
[16:44] <ivoks> i know...
[16:45] <mathiaz> ivoks: on a related note, I've looked at fast-cgi
[16:46] <mathiaz> ivoks: the plan was to move fast-cgid to main
[16:46] <ivoks> um... fcgid
[16:46] <ivoks> not fast-cgi
[16:46] <mathiaz> ivoks: I've described this in the webapplication spec.
[16:46] <mathiaz> ivoks: yes.
[16:46] <ivoks> ok
[16:47] <soren> Yeah, -mod-fastcgi iz evil.
[16:47] <mathiaz> ivoks: I had one issue: Why choose mod_fcgid over mod_fastcgi ?
[16:47] <ivoks> i'm also eager to do packaging work for that
[16:47] <ivoks> it's evil :)
[16:47] <soren> mathiaz: mod_fastcgi is non-free.
[16:47] <mathiaz> soren: yes - I've already mentionned that.
[16:48] <mathiaz> is there another reason ?
[16:48] <soren> mathiaz: ...but used to be the only way to get apache to do fastcgi, which in turn is the reason why the switch away from mod_php[45] hasn't happened a loooong time ago.
[16:48] <soren> mathiaz: That's not enough? :)
[16:48] <mathiaz> what about performance ?
[16:48] <nijaba> and security ?
[16:49] <ivoks> i will look into all that
[16:49] <mathiaz> ivoks: the next step for this is to write a MIR, which needs that sort of information.
[16:49] <ivoks> and write about it
[16:49] <mathiaz> ivoks: ok. great !
[16:49] <ivoks> i know
[16:50] <mathiaz> [ACTION]: ivoks will write a MIR to include mod-fcgid in main.
[16:50] <MootBot> ACTION received: : ivoks will write a MIR to include mod-fcgid in main.
[16:51] <nealmcb> by the way for those that came late like me:  http://kryten.incognitus.net/mootbot/meetings/ubuntu-meeting.20071120_1500.html
[16:51] <nealmcb> and http://kryten.incognitus.net/mootbot/meetings/ubuntu-meeting.log.20071120_1500.html
[16:51] <mathiaz> Is there any comments on the ServerTeam Roadmap ?
[16:52] <nealmcb> I love how mootbot keeps meeting notes in real-time :-)
[16:52] <ivoks> roadmap to heaven :)
[16:54] <mathiaz> ok. We've almost run out of time.
[16:54] <ivoks> i'll also take a look at some modules for apache
[16:55] <mathiaz> do we need another meeting in one week ?
[16:55] <ivoks> which aren't in ubuntu, but are life savers...
[16:55] <nealmcb> mathiaz: sounds useful to me
[16:55] <nijaba> +1
[16:55] <ivoks> VOTE
[16:56] <mathiaz> we can schedule one next week at 16:00 UTC
[16:56] <nealmcb> is there a conflict with 15:00?
[16:56] <mathiaz> 15:00 is a bit too early for the west coast people.
[16:56] <soren> Slackers.
[16:56]  * nealmcb nods
[16:56] <nijaba> specially for mathiaz
[16:56] <mathiaz> we used to run the meeting at 15:00 UTC but with DST it has changed
[16:57] <mathiaz> the kernel team irc meeting is at 17:00 UTC
[16:57] <nealmcb> is 1600 bad in the summertime?  or should we (gasp) schedule it in some DST-using timezone for calendar sanity?
[16:57]  * nealmcb needs a calendar that can schedule in UTC....
[16:57] <mathiaz> ok. So next meeting will be next week at 16:00 UTC
[16:58] <mathiaz> same place.
[16:58] <soren> I'd just like to direct everyone's attention at http://people.ubuntu.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html .. There's a few server packages on there that need testing before they can make their way to -updates.
[16:58] <nealmcb> and you can test some with vms I bet :-)
[16:58] <soren> If people could test them and report on the relevant bugs if it works for them, that would be a great help.
[16:58] <soren> nealmcb: Oh, yeah.
[16:59] <dendrobates> I have to go to another meeting, I'll check the logs for further developments.
[16:59] <mathiaz> and don't forget the merges.
[16:59] <mathiaz> dendrobates: well we've finished.
[16:59] <mathiaz> thanks all for your participation
[16:59] <nijaba> thanks !
[16:59] <nealmcb> thanks!
[16:59] <mathiaz> #endmeeting
[16:59] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 16:58.
[17:00] <ivoks> a long one
[17:00] <ivoks> 2 hours
[17:00] <nealmcb> we did the dst "jump back" during the meeting so it was really only one hour of clock time
[17:00] <nealmcb> :-)
[17:01] <ivoks> duration is not the same as time :)
[17:01] <nealmcb> yeah - the leap-second folks keep saying that
[17:01] <ivoks> and you were on hour late :p
[17:01] <pookey> hi mathiaz , thanks for accepting my application to the server team :)
[17:01] <ivoks> one
[17:02] <mathiaz> pookey: you're welcome :)
[17:02] <nijaba> Take care everybody.  See you next week
[17:02] <nealmcb> ivoks: yup - only 100 minutes for me....
[19:55] <mdz__> mjg59,Keybuk: ping
[19:55] <mjg59> Hi
[19:55] <mdz_> good evening
[19:55] <mjg59> We still seem to be missing tech board meetings from the calendar
[20:00] <mdz_> mjg59: which calendar?
[20:00] <mdz_> they're on mine
[20:00] <mdz_> the fridge is a black box to me
[20:01] <mjg59> Well, missing from the topic (for instance)
[20:01] <mdz_> I think that's driven by the fridge
[20:01] <mdz_> Keybuk: are you available for the meeting?
[20:01] <mdz_> sabdfl is on holiday
[20:02] <mdz_> I'll ring Scott
[20:03] <mdz_> no answer
[20:04] <mdz_> #startmeeting
[20:04] <MootBot> Meeting started at 20:03. The chair is mdz_.
[20:04] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[20:04] <mdz_> [TOPIC] Martin Pitt's proposal for tightening the MOTU SRU process
[20:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Martin Pitt's proposal for tightening the MOTU SRU process
[20:04] <mdz_> mjg59: have you had a look at this?
[20:06] <pitti_> hi
[20:06] <mdz_> it seems eminently sensible to me
[20:07] <mdz_> (1) is a no-brainer
[20:07] <Keybuk> to me also
[20:07] <Keybuk> (hi, btw)
[20:07] <mdz_> we should start with the same policy as for main, and any divergence from that can be done later with appropriate justification
[20:07] <mjg59> Yes, it seems broadly sensible to me
[20:08] <mdz_> I think 2b is likely more effective than 2a
[20:08] <mdz_> any MOTU should be able to read an SRU request and confirm that it meets the documented policy
[20:08] <mdz_> particularly since the requestor must explain how it does
[20:08] <pitti> sorry, what's the topic?
 New Topic:  Martin Pitt's proposal for tightening the MOTU SRU process
[20:09] <mdz_> I'm referring to the numbered points in your email, which it seems was only sent to technical-board so far
[20:09] <pitti> ah, thanks
[20:10] <pitti> sistpoty told me that this will also be discussed on the next MOTU meeting, but that will be some days
[20:10] <mdz_> regarding point 3, rejecting uploads which don't have a bug reference is perfectly acceptable in my opinion
[20:11] <mdz_> even if the policy were broadened, there needs to be a bug report filed to correspond to the SRU and explain in more detail what it's about
[20:11] <mdz_> and referring to that in the changelog is just basic good practice
[20:11] <mdz_> that's a very low bar
[20:11] <mdz_> pitti: would you like to explain your preference for 2a over 2b?
[20:11] <mdz_> pitti: and may I paste your points in the channel for context?
[20:12]  * pitti caught up on ubuntu-devel@ now, seems there is basically a consensus
[20:13] <pitti> mdz_: feel free to paste anything from my mail
[20:13] <mdz_> (1) Reintroduce a policy what kinds of bugs should be fixed in stable
[20:13] <pitti> mdz_: slight preference because this would mean that we have a team which gets experienced with the nature and handling of SRUs
[20:13] <mdz_>     releases. Ideally this should be identical to the one for main
[20:13] <mdz_>     [3].
[20:13] <mdz_> (2a) Reinstate the MOTU-SRU team and require an ack from a team member
[20:13] <mdz_>     before the upload is done.
[20:13] <mdz_>  or
[20:13] <mdz_> (2b) Require acks of at least two other MOTUs before a universe SRU bug
[20:13] <mdz_>      is considered approved and ready to upload.
[20:13] <mdz_> (3) The archive admins will reject any upload which does not fulfill
[20:13] <mdz_>     above criteria. They will reject uploads without any notice if the
[20:13] <mdz_>     changelog does not have a bug reference. (It takes much time to
[20:13] <mdz_>     find the corresponding bug report otherwise, or just to find that
[20:13] <mdz_>     there is none at all.)
[20:14] <mdz_> pitti: how would you define the role of the team?  to make a judgement about whether an SRU proposal meets the criteria?
[20:14] <pitti> right, pretty much what ubuntu-sru does for main ATM: approve/deny/discuss patches, mangle bug tasks, supervise and enforce policy
[20:14] <mdz_> if so, I that's not so specialized that I think we need a team to house that experience, but if it would make the process work more smoothly, I have no particular objection to it
[20:15] <mdz_> ok, there's a bit more to it then
[20:15] <mdz_> if they're expected to make judgements about the implementation and discuss patches
[20:15] <pitti> TBH I'd leave that decision between 2a) and 2b) to the MOTUs themselves
[20:15] <pitti> if they don't want such a team and think that manpower is an issue, let's try peer review first
[20:15] <pitti> that spreads the patch review and discussion about the necessity, which is a good thing
[20:16] <mdz_> I'm happy to delegate it to the MOTU council
[20:16] <mdz_> and let them decide
[20:16] <mdz_> mjg59,Keybuk: any other comments or questions for pitti?
[20:16] <pitti> (between 2a and 2b, right?)
[20:16] <Keybuk> nope, none from me
[20:16] <mjg59> I think I'm happy with that conclusion
[20:19] <mdz_> pitti: yes
[20:19] <mdz_> [VOTE] confirm approval for pitti's plan, delegating the decision between 2a and 2b to the MOTU Council
[20:19] <MootBot> Please vote on:  confirm approval for pitti's plan, delegating the decision between 2a and 2b to the MOTU Council.
[20:19] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[20:19] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[20:20] <mdz_> +1
[20:20] <MootBot> +1 received from mdz_. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[20:20] <Keybuk> +1
[20:20] <MootBot> +1 received from Keybuk. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[20:20] <mjg59> +1
[20:20] <MootBot> +1 received from mjg59. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[20:20] <mdz_> #endvote
[20:20] <mdz_> MootBot: poke
[20:20] <mdz_> #endvote
[20:20] <pitti> thanks
[20:20] <mdz_> anyway
[20:21] <mdz_> pitti: will you communicate the decision to the council on our behalf?
[20:21] <pitti> mdz_: maybe you need to address it?
[20:21] <pitti> mdz_: yes, I'm happy to do that
[20:21] <mdz_> MootBot: #endvote
[20:21] <mdz_> pitti: ok, thanks
[20:21] <mdz_> [ACTION] pitti to liaise with MOTU Council to implement the plan
[20:21] <MootBot> ACTION received:  pitti to liaise with MOTU Council to implement the plan
[20:22] <mdz_> [TOPIC] Perl regular expressions in grep
[20:22] <MootBot> Vote is in progress. Finishing now.
[20:22] <MootBot> Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3
[20:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  Perl regular expressions in grep
[20:22] <mdz_> this was raised by Joe Terranova <joeterranova@ubuntu.com> via email
[20:22] <Keybuk> err, do you have the e-mail?
[20:22] <mdz_> the issue is that he wants grep linked with libpcre to provide perl-compatible regex support
[20:22] <mdz_> discussion is here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/15051
[20:22] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 15051 in grep "grep -P is not supported" [Medium,Confirmed]
[20:23] <mdz_> Keybuk: I've also forwarded the email to you
[20:23] <Keybuk> oh, yes, I saw that one
[20:23] <Keybuk> didn't libpcre just have a *major* security hole?
[20:24] <mjg59> grep is required - pcre is important
[20:24] <mjg59> (from a point of view of just worrying about priorities)
[20:24] <mdz_> I don't see the problem with pcregrep, to be honest
[20:24] <mdz_> it's not as if this is a standard grep feature
[20:25] <mdz_> Keybuk: I don't know, but it's already in main and used by gobs of stuff
[20:25] <Keybuk> isn't that basically just "perl -n" ?
[20:25] <mdz_> including network services
[20:26] <mdz_> Keybuk: no, not quite
[20:26] <mdz_> it provides grep-like command line options
[20:26] <mjg59> There was an issue with perl's regular expression library, but we didn't ship updates to libpcre
[20:26] <mdz_> it ships with pcre3
[20:28] <Keybuk> What's wrong with linking grep against pcre?
[20:29] <mdz_> the only point raised in the bug is that it's in /usr/lib
[20:29] <mdz_> and therefore would need to be moved to /lib
[20:29] <mjg59> Which is hardly an issue
[20:29] <mdz_> I have no particular objection to that, but it means maintaining that delta from Debian and doesn't buy us much
[20:30] <Keybuk> it's in /lib in Fedora
[20:30] <mdz_> the Debian bug is http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=350468
[20:30] <ubotu> Debian bug 350468 in libpcre3 "libpcre3: install libpcre.so* in /lib" [Wishlist,Open]
[20:30] <Keybuk> why won't Debian put it in /lib ?
[20:30]  * ogra1 tries to find out what a gob is to determine hw much stuff in main uses it
[20:31] <mdz_> sounds like the Debian grep maintainers are on board with it
[20:31] <mdz_> but not the pcre3 maintainer(s)
[20:32] <mjg59> We'd need to maintain a small delta and we'd use up an extra 150K in /
[20:32] <mjg59> I don't think this is a compelling argument against doing it
[20:32] <mdz_> the other question is, who would do the work and look after it?
[20:32] <mdz_> there aren't any comments from core-devs in support
[20:33] <mdz_> I have no argument against the technical correctness of doing this, only practical questions
[20:33] <mjg59> I'm happy with us making the technical decision, and then leaving the practical ones up to someone who cares
[20:33] <mdz_> if someone in core-dev wants to do it, I'm not bothered
[20:33] <Keybuk> do we need to care?  if he's asked the TB for a decision, and we have consensus, then actually persuading someone to do it is his problem? :)
[20:34] <mdz_> I suppose not, but it's the obvious next question
[20:35] <mjg59> I don't think worrying about who's going to do something this trivial is our problem
[20:35] <mdz_> [VOTE] approve moving libpcre (~150k) from /usr/lib to /lib to accomodate grep -P
[20:35] <MootBot> Please vote on:  approve moving libpcre (~150k) from /usr/lib to /lib to accomodate grep -P.
[20:35] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[20:35] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[20:35] <mdz_> +1
[20:35] <MootBot> +1 received from mdz_. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[20:35] <Keybuk> +1
[20:35] <MootBot> +1 received from Keybuk. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[20:35] <mjg59> +1
[20:35] <MootBot> +1 received from mjg59. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[20:35] <mdz_> #endvote
[20:35] <mdz_> MootBot: silly bot
[20:35] <mdz_> [TOPIC] AOB
[20:35] <MootBot> Vote is in progress. Finishing now.
[20:35] <MootBot> Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3
[20:35] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[20:36] <mdz_> any other business?
[20:36] <mdz_> [ACTION] mdz to communicate libpcre decision to the relevant Launchpad bug
[20:36] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mdz to communicate libpcre decision to the relevant Launchpad bug
[20:37] <mdz_> adjourned, thanks all
[20:37] <mdz_> #endmeeting
[20:37] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 20:36.
[20:37] <Keybuk> np :)
[20:37] <ogra1> :)