[07:36] <kraut> moin
[14:27] <zul> @schedule now
[14:28] <zul> @schedule utc
[14:28] <ubotu> Schedule for Etc/UTC: Current meeting: Edubuntu meeting 19 Dec 19:00: QA Team meeting | 20 Dec 14:00: Desktop Team Development | 21 Dec 12:00: MOTU meeting | 02 Jan 12:00: Edubuntu meeting | 09 Jan 20:00: Edubuntu meeting
[14:28] <zul> @now
[14:28] <ubotu> Current time in Etc/UTC: December 19 2007, 14:28:35 - Current meeting: Edubuntu meeting
[14:28] <zul> sorry
[18:59]  * pedro_ waves
[18:59]  * heno waves
[18:59]  * liw waves
[18:59]  * nand waves
[18:59] <pedro_> hi all :-)
[18:59]  * somerville32 waves.
[19:00]  * ogasawara waves
[19:00]  * bdmurray tries to think of something other than waving to do
[19:00]  * somerville32 jumps on top of bdmurray 
[19:00]  * nand throws snowballs
[19:00] <heno> better start before a fight breaks out
[19:01] <heno> welcome all!
[19:01] <heno> #startmeeting
[19:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 19:01. The chair is heno.
[19:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[19:01] <heno> [TOPIC] Testing wiki cleanup day - suggestion from stgraber to follow up on Davmor2's new testing page
[19:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Testing wiki cleanup day - suggestion from stgraber to follow up on Davmor2's new testing page
[19:01] <heno> I don't think either of them are here
 nand: I won't be there :(
[19:02] <bdmurray> It sounded like a good idea to me
[19:02] <heno> yep, we just need to pick a day
[19:03] <heno> Thurs. Jan 3rd?
[19:04] <liw> ok by me
[19:04] <heno> (to not conflict with a bug day)
[19:04] <heno> ok, let's go with that
[19:05] <heno> [AGREED] QA Wiki cleanup day will be Jan 3rd 2008
[19:05] <MootBot> AGREED received:  QA Wiki cleanup day will be Jan 3rd 2008
[19:05] <heno> [TOPIC] qa-hardy-list discussion
[19:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  qa-hardy-list discussion
[19:05] <heno> the list has about 120 bugs ATM
[19:06] <heno> btw, agenda with links: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam
[19:06] <pedro_> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=qa-hardy-list
[19:07] <heno> The purpose of this list is a recommendation from the Canonical QA team to the distro team for what they should focus on
[19:07] <heno> I would ask that community members not add items to that list directly, but please do make suggestions
[19:08] <heno> It will to some degree determine the use of Canonical-paid time, so it makes sense to filter it in that way IMO
[19:09] <heno> At the same time, it's not hidden in any way
[19:09] <heno> So, with that out of the way, any comments on the contents?
[19:09] <ogasawara> I assume we should go through and triage any which still need Importance/Status set
[19:10] <heno> we should
[19:10] <liw> importance isn't enough to tell distro team what to work on first?
[19:10] <heno> there are just too many I think
[19:11] <heno> and importance mainly shows the severity of the bug
[19:11] <bdmurray> Are they all verified in Hardy?
[19:11] <ogasawara> bdmurray: I don't think so.  it would be good to verify if the issue is still present with Alpha2
[19:11] <heno> while a Low bug with 100 subscribers that's been around for 2 years might be good to fix now
[19:12] <heno> even if it's only a rendering glitch or something
[19:12] <heno> in fact devs should work on High priority bugs as well; this is a supliment to that lisy
[19:12] <ogasawara> heno: the one hurdle I see there is that some of those reports that span many releases often grow wildly out of control and deviate from the original report
[19:12] <heno> raising other issues on the radar
[19:13] <heno> ogasawara: what can we do about that? Distill the remaining issue in a new bug and dupe the old one to the new, cleaned up one?
[19:14] <heno> I have added some messy bugs to the list myself
[19:15] <bdmurray> Looking at the list the 120 number isn't right
[19:15] <ogasawara> heno: that might help and at least give us a fresh starting point
[19:15] <bdmurray> Some show up more than once
[19:15] <pedro_> yeah there's a few of them with more than one task.
[19:15] <bdmurray> in regards to messy bugs I think it'd be better to clear up the description
[19:16] <bdmurray> I think that is what it was designed for
[19:16] <heno> that list view is very annoying
[19:16] <heno> I don't have strong feelings about that
[19:17] <heno> what bdmurray says is the traditional way of doing it though
[19:17] <heno> Perhaps we should use some markup to show that a description has been enhanced in that way
[19:18] <stgraber> hello
[19:18] <stgraber> I can sort of follow the meeting
[19:18] <heno> *** SUMMARY *** for example
[19:18] <bdmurray> Is "This description was updated" not enough?
[19:18] <stgraber> (I managed to find an internet connection) :)
[19:18] <bdmurray> heno: that makes sense similar to "TEST CASE" and "WORKAROUND"
[19:18] <heno> stgraber: we decided on Jan 3rd for wiki day
[19:19] <somerville32> heno, sorry to interrupt, but I want to introduce you to sroberts. He is new to the community but he is interested in assisting pull up the slack with Xubuntu QA now that Jim is more busy IRL. :)
[19:19] <heno> bdmurray: agreed. Just to catch they eye
[19:19] <stgraber> heno: ok
[19:19] <heno> hello sroberts :)
[19:19] <sroberts> hello :)
[19:19] <somerville32> :)
[19:19] <jeromeg> hey sroberts
[19:20] <bdmurray> sroberts: I'd be happy to talk to you after the meeting in regards to bugs if you'd like
[19:20] <sroberts> bdmurray: sure
[19:20] <heno> we might get some CDs to test late tonight
[19:20] <heno> (if not tomorrow)
[19:21] <heno> about the list -- I've gone through Gutsy and Hardy nominations and printing bugs
[19:21] <jeromeg> sroberts: happy to have some help to triage xubuntu bugs
[19:21] <heno> I'm now looking at high dupe count bugs
[19:22] <heno> High subscriber and team reported are still up for grabs
[19:22] <bdmurray> I'll take one of them
[19:22] <heno> liw: did you identify some bugs from testing we should add?
[19:23] <liw> heno, still working on the list -- but nothing so far, actually, all problems are minor (symlinks or files left behind after upgrades, mostly)
[19:23] <heno> bdmurray: which one? :)
[19:24] <heno> liw: ok, perhaps you could look at bugs tagged as iso-testing as well then?
[19:24] <jeromeg> bdmurray: i triage most bugs for xubuntu so I can explain everything to sroberts
[19:24] <bdmurray> heno: subscribers
[19:24] <heno> Things that seem grave and widespread
[19:24] <bdmurray> jeromeg: okay, cool.  well if you need anything let me know.
[19:24] <jeromeg> bdmurray: or at least what i know
[19:24] <jeromeg> bdmurray: time :)
[19:25] <bdmurray> okay, well not that
[19:25] <jeromeg> :)
[19:25] <liw> heno, er, are we talking about the same thing? I'm going through the piuparts log files for failures and looking for problems there (but I can look at bugs in launchpad too, of course)
[19:25] <bdmurray> However, there are some time saving tools like bughelper that might be useful to you
[19:26] <heno> liw: right, my suggestion was looking for high impact things in https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=iso-testing
[19:26] <liw> heno, right, I'll do that
[19:26] <heno> and the adding the qa-hardy-list tag
[19:27] <heno> liw: thanks. You've probably filed several of those in fact
[19:27] <heno> I'll look at the from-teams list
[19:28] <heno> great, let's try to get those in some time tomorrow and I'll send the list of to the distro team
[19:28] <heno> [TOPIC] Alpha 2 image testing
[19:28] <MootBot> New Topic:  Alpha 2 image testing
[19:29] <heno> So we don't quite know when this will start, likely tomorrow morning
[19:29] <bdmurray> heno: is that UTC?
[19:29] <heno> Again, Alpha 2 mainly needs a sanity check on most images
[19:29] <heno> bdmurray: yeah, sorry :)
[19:29] <stgraber> so, is it still planned for tomorrow or will more likely be released on friday ?
[19:30] <heno> before bedtime tonight OR time would be my guess
[19:30] <heno> (as Steve the RM is in OR)
[19:31] <heno> My guess is testing tomorrow, release on Friday
[19:32] <heno> I don't think we can arrange much testing on Friday itself
[19:32] <stgraber> indeed
[19:32] <heno> lots of people will be away
[19:32] <heno> or working <not from home>
[19:32] <pedro_> when is the 2.6.24 hug day?
[19:32] <pedro_> is tomorrow also?
[19:32] <heno> after alpha 2
[19:33] <pedro_> ok ok
[19:33] <heno> bdmurray: any details?
[19:33] <heno> ogasawara: ^ ?
[19:33] <bdmurray> There is a list at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20071219
[19:33] <bdmurray> the tasks are in progress
[19:34] <bdmurray> I queried based off 2.6.22 bugs with recent (past 4 weeks) comments
[19:34] <ogasawara> but we'd like to wait with the hug day until Alpha2 is officially out
[19:34] <pedro_> totally
[19:34] <heno> which will likely take us past the Holidays
[19:34] <bdmurray> hrm
[19:35] <heno> or perhaps Friday
[19:35] <ogasawara> I'm hoping for Friday
[19:35] <heno> ok, cool
[19:35] <heno> gives reporters a chance to respond over the break
[19:35] <heno> ok, fingers crossed
[19:35] <heno> next
[19:36] <heno> [TOPIC] Bug Day - no package analysis
[19:36] <MootBot> New Topic:  Bug Day - no package analysis
[19:36] <heno> bdmurray: care to elaborate?
[19:37] <bdmurray> I was wondering what packages the no package bug day bugs got assigned to
[19:37] <bdmurray> 40 went to linux-source-2.6.22
[19:37] <bdmurray> 34 stayed with ubuntu probably due to their not being enough information
[19:37] <bdmurray> then 9 to xorg, and 7 to kdebase
[19:38] <bdmurray> so the quantity dropped off pretty quickly
[19:38] <heno> bdmurray: do you have a link to the current graph for no-pkg?
[19:38] <bdmurray> http://people.ubuntu.com/~brian/testing_graphs/nopackage.html
[19:38] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.ubuntu.com/~brian/testing_graphs/nopackage.html
[19:39] <heno> I wonder if many of the no-pkg bugs are there because it was difficult to figure out where it should go?
[19:39] <heno> have the tricky ones been piling up?
[19:39] <bdmurray> Right, that I was really curious how useful writing about "Help -> Report a Bug" would be
[19:39] <heno> that might well be over-represented by obscure packages
[19:39] <bdmurray> and with 40 kernel bugs probably not much
[19:40] <bdmurray> but it still couldn't hurt
[19:41] <heno> looks like we should revisit this bug day topic in a few weeks
[19:41] <bdmurray> probably
[19:41] <heno> bdmurray: you mean that guide is not helpful for kernel bugs, but most other bugs?
[19:42] <bdmurray> I meant that with the kernel, xorg, compiz there is no "Help" menu to go to in the application
[19:43] <heno> oh, right
[19:44] <heno> we should make wishlist bugs to add that ;)
[19:44] <bdmurray> Additonally it seems like the no package bugs could be a blind spot for the kernel
[19:44] <heno> yet, 40 doesn't seem too bad
[19:44] <heno> out of 800 or whatever
[19:45] <bdmurray> It as 40 out of 238
[19:45] <heno> oh, that is a fair bit
[19:45] <liw> 17%
[19:45] <bdmurray> actually 43 for those doing percentages
[19:45] <heno> 16.8 ;p
[19:45] <heno> meh
[19:46] <heno> anyway, significant
[19:46] <liw> 18.06722689075630252100% then, approximately :P
[19:46] <heno> and how many for related things like lrm, initramfs, etc?
[19:47] <bdmurray> okay +4 with lrm
[19:47] <bdmurray> regardless still a fair bit
[19:47] <heno> do many of the no-pkg bugs have dupes already on them?
[19:48] <heno> and how many were duped during this triage?
[19:48] <bdmurray> only 2
[19:48] <bdmurray> http://people.ubuntu.com/~brian/reports/gt2dups/no-package.html
[19:48] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.ubuntu.com/~brian/reports/gt2dups/no-package.html
[19:49] <heno> ok, so there is likely quite a bit of dupe material in there
[19:50] <heno> bdmurray: do you want to write up some musings on this?
[19:50] <bdmurray> What do you mean?  A lot of the no-package ones are likely duplicates?
[19:50] <heno> bdmurray: right, of things that already have a package
[19:51] <heno> 2 bugs with dupes from a pool of 2000 is tiny
[19:52] <heno> so if someone knows enough about a bug to link a dupe, they probably also know it's package
[19:52] <heno> btw, I wonder how many were genuine no-pk bugs?
[19:52] <bdmurray> hrm, that report I linked to is old
[19:52] <heno> and should we tag them as such?
[19:52] <bdmurray> I'll look into that after the meeting
[19:53] <heno> ok, cool
[19:53] <heno> I'm sure we can squeeze some metrics from this :)
[19:54] <heno> [TOPIC] Next meeting
[19:54] <MootBot> New Topic:  Next meeting
[19:54] <heno> We should do one the first week of Jan IMO, but when?
[19:54] <liw> I'm fine with Wed 2 Jan for a meeting, but I gather people might be on vacation still?
[19:55] <ogasawara> Jan 2 works for me as well
[19:55] <pedro_> I'd like to have it the 4th
[19:55] <heno> we likely won't have much to talk about then
[19:55] <bdmurray> we would have anything new to report?
[19:55] <pedro_> so you have a couple of days to read your email
[19:55] <heno> :)
[19:55] <pedro_> and talk about some issue you'd find
[19:55] <liw> nothing to report -> wonderfully short a meeting :)
[19:55] <stgraber> I'll probably not be around on the 2nd
[19:55] <ogasawara> Jan 4th works too
[19:55] <stgraber> (looks like a LUG meeting date :))
[19:55] <liw> I'm also fine with Jan 4
[19:55] <pedro_> or the 1 of January
[19:55] <stgraber> +1 for 4th
[19:55] <pedro_> a:-)
[19:56] <heno> looks like the 4th
[19:56] <stgraber> pedro_: yeah, what about the 1st at like 1:00 UTC ? :)
[19:56] <heno> pedro_: I suspect a meeting the 1st would be rather empty :)
[19:56] <pedro_> stgraber: yeah! that's what i'm talking about!
[19:56] <pedro_> hey i can bring some champagne
[19:56] <nand> :)
[19:57] <heno> If so we should do it by voice
[19:57] <liw> jan 4, at 18:00 UTC?
[19:57] <heno> just a social meeting
[19:58] <heno> works for me
[19:58] <heno> any objections to 18.00 UTC?
[19:58] <ogasawara> nope
[19:58] <stgraber> fine for me
[19:58]  * bdmurray is doing tz math
[19:58] <bdmurray> that'l be fine
[19:59] <pedro_> fine for me  too
[19:59] <liw> bdmurray, should be 10:00 west coast time, right?
[19:59] <nand> good
[19:59] <bdmurray> liw: thanks, I got it worked out ;)
[19:59] <heno> [AGREED] Next meeting on Jan 4th at 18.00 UTC
[19:59] <MootBot> AGREED received:  Next meeting on Jan 4th at 18.00 UTC
[19:59]  * liw successfully destroyed any plans to go to a party on Friday night :)
[19:59] <pedro_> haha
[20:00] <heno> #endmeeting
[20:00] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 20:00.
[20:00] <heno> oh, on the dot!
[20:00] <heno> thanks everyone!
[20:00] <liw> we're getting good at this
[20:01] <pedro_> thanks you
[20:02] <stgraber> now, let's hope the new l-r-m will build
[20:02] <stgraber> Upload was like an hour ago
[20:04] <heno> ogasawara: what's the correct package name for lrm in LP now? linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24?
[20:05] <heno> there seem to be some *-2.6.24 bugs that cannot be closed or renamed
[20:05] <heno> LP bug it seems
[21:04] <ogasawara> heno: yah, linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24 should be right
[22:39]  * FisherGirl is looking for a smart person who can help her solve a problem...
[22:41] <somerville32> !support | FisherGirl
[22:41] <ubotu> FisherGirl: the official ubuntu support channel is #ubuntu. Also see http://ubuntu.com/support and http://ubuntuforums.org
[22:44] <FisherGirl> okay
[22:44] <FisherGirl> I just have a hard time finding my way
[22:44] <FisherGirl> I am not native English speaker
[22:44] <pochu> What's your language?
[22:45] <FisherGirl> swedish
[22:46] <pochu> !swedish | FisherGirl
[22:46] <ubotu> FisherGirl: Svensk Ubuntu- och Kubuntusupport hittar du pa #ubuntu-se resp. #kubuntu-se
[22:47] <pochu> You can try there :)
[22:47]  * FisherGirl can't afford it
[22:47] <FisherGirl> they sell ubuntu to swedish ppl
[22:48] <FisherGirl> not knowing they can download such stuff for free