[15:57] <liw> yo yo, hula ring, and other greetings
[15:58] <mvo> hello
[15:59] <robbiew> waaaaazzzz uuuuuup! :P
[15:59] <TheMuso> Hey folks.
[16:00] <evand> hi
[16:01] <robbiew> #startmeeting
[16:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:01. The chair is robbiew.
[16:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:01] <slangasek> hi
[16:02]  * robbiew waits for others
[16:02] <robbiew> mvo: cjwatson: liw: Keybuk: ready to go?
[16:02] <Keybuk> ready
[16:02] <mvo> yes
[16:02] <liw> robbiew, sure
[16:02] <robbiew> james_w: are you awake...in Brisbane, right?
[16:03] <Keybuk> just turn off those 5 red lights and I'm off
[16:03] <robbiew> heh
[16:03]  * liw censors bad joke
[16:03] <TheMuso> It would actually be an hour earlier for james_w than it is for me.
[16:03] <TheMuso> So 2 AM.
[16:04] <robbiew> ouch
[16:04] <robbiew> ok...let's get started
[16:04] <robbiew> http://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/Meetings/2009/0311#Agenda
[16:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/Meetings/2009/0311#Agenda
[16:04] <robbiew> so Alpha 6 is tomorrow...whoohoo :D
[16:04] <cjwatson> sorry I'm late; my stepson left his cello in school which slowed the normal flow of events
[16:05] <robbiew> heh
[16:05] <robbiew> now worries, just started
[16:05] <robbiew> [TOPIC] Jaunty Alpha 6
[16:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Jaunty Alpha 6
[16:05] <robbiew> so are those 4 bugs supposed to be fixed by tomorrow?...or pushed to Beta
[16:06] <slangasek> the gnome-keyring one was targeted courtesy of the mobile team, and is assigned to one of their guys; I'll follow up on that
[16:06] <robbiew> ok
[16:06] <slangasek> since it's only been reported on ARM, we wouldn't need any rebuilds to get it "fixed" for alpha-6
[16:07] <cjwatson> I meant to put bug 337306 off until beta, since my first attempt to fix it failed and I haven't had a chance to revisit; done now
[16:07] <slangasek> ok, thansk
[16:07] <robbiew> well...none of the bugs seem to bad to me...moving on
[16:08] <robbiew> well...100% CPU is a little nasty :P
[16:08] <robbiew> skipping Feature Status update...I think we're fine there
[16:09] <robbiew> 91 bugs targeted for Jaunty
[16:09] <robbiew> no critical...that's nice
[16:10] <robbiew> hi doko :)
[16:10] <doko> sorry, a bit late (and I have to leave in a few minutes :-/
[16:10] <robbiew> anyway...wanted to highlight the bug fixes report
[16:10] <robbiew> doko: no worries
[16:11] <robbiew> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/bug-fixing/jaunty-fixes-report.html
[16:11] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/bug-fixing/jaunty-fixes-report.html
[16:11] <robbiew> has everyone..or anyone...seen this?
[16:11] <slangasek> yes
[16:11] <Keybuk> no
[16:12] <robbiew> it's interesting...even has a "scoreboard" at the bottom
[16:12] <Keybuk> seb is not winning!
[16:12] <robbiew> though I don't really care about who fixes the most...as there's no way to measure difficulty
[16:12] <cjwatson> I'm looking through the jaunty bugs and giving some more of them priorities
[16:12] <robbiew> or complexity of the resolution
[16:12] <robbiew> ok
[16:13] <robbiew> cjwatson: ^
[16:13] <robbiew> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/bug-fixing/ubuntu-foundations-jaunty-fixes-report.html
[16:13] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/bug-fixing/ubuntu-foundations-jaunty-fixes-report.html
[16:13] <robbiew> gives a view of the team
[16:13] <doko> have to look at the ca-certificates-java bugs, but I think most of these are already fixed
[16:14] <robbiew> though poor liw is not represented...more incentive for upload rights
[16:14] <robbiew> ;)
[16:14]  * liw hangs head in shame
[16:14] <robbiew> liw: all that means is someone is stealing your thunder :P
[16:15] <robbiew> [TOPIC] Team Buglist
[16:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Team Buglist
[16:15] <robbiew> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/ubuntu-foundations-assigned-bug-tasks.html
[16:15] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/ubuntu-foundations-assigned-bug-tasks.html
[16:16] <robbiew> so the QA team has taken the time to document a workflow, for handling these bugs
[16:16] <robbiew> http://wiki.canonical.com/UbuntuPlatform/QA/BugFixing/TeamAssigned
[16:16] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://wiki.canonical.com/UbuntuPlatform/QA/BugFixing/TeamAssigned
[16:17] <robbiew> I'd like to stress the use of the "ct-rev" tag
[16:17] <Keybuk> I'm a little worried about the possibility that the assignment field is going to become a firehose
[16:17] <robbiew> "If the team decides that it cannot realistically take responsibility for a given bug it should be assigned to Nobody (or a suitable community team) and the 'ct-rev' tag should be added"
[16:17]  * ScottK grumbles about 'assignment to a suitable community team' again.
[16:17] <robbiew> heh
[16:17] <cjwatson> I have a sort of general concern about the workflow
[16:17]  * robbiew is all for "Nobody"
[16:18] <cjwatson> I think once a bug is Triaged then it ought to belong to developers to organise, not QA
[16:18] <Keybuk> for me, the problem is that there are a lot of bugs which I'm the best person to deal with
[16:18] <Keybuk> and most of them are on packages which I'm also the best person to deal with
[16:18] <cjwatson> unless it is a customer priority or other major case requiring escalation
[16:18] <Keybuk> and I tend to watch those packages
[16:18] <Keybuk> so I already know about the bugs
[16:18] <liw> Keybuk, we need to clone you, you're a SPOF
[16:18] <Keybuk> and I use the assignment field to actually note which bugs I'm actively working on
[16:19] <Keybuk> if all those bugs get assigned to me, I can't do that anymore
[16:19] <Keybuk> it means as a developer, there is little left in Launchpad to help *me* manage my workflow
[16:19] <Keybuk> all of the Launchpad bells, whistles and nobs have been taken over by QA
[16:19] <Keybuk> and sidelined us
[16:19] <cjwatson> I share this concern
[16:19]  * doko is leaving now (worked from Daniel's place today, broken DSL). not sure if I will be online tonight
[16:19] <Keybuk> if everything is assigned to me
[16:20] <robbiew> cjwatson: Keybuk: would it be easier to assign to the Foundations Team
[16:20] <Keybuk> and everything is in the Triaged state
[16:20] <Keybuk> and the Importance is mandated already
[16:20] <Keybuk> how do I manage my own todo list in LP?
[16:20] <slangasek> Keybuk: you don't use 'in progress' to denote bugs you're working on?
[16:20] <cjwatson> robbiew: I'd rather it be left unassigned, and that the Triaged state should be the responsibility of developers
[16:20] <mvo> post-it notes
[16:20] <Keybuk> slangasek: I use In Progress to mean I have at least a partial fix
[16:20] <Keybuk> but that doesn't help with sorting
[16:21] <robbiew> cjwatson: which developers? those watching the package?
[16:21] <cjwatson> there is a sort of general assumption here that all bugs must be on track to be fixed in some kind of reasonably near-term timescale
[16:21] <cjwatson> which is entirely fair for important bugs
[16:21] <cjwatson> but I'm concerned that it leaves us with a hell of a lot of paperwork to do for bugs that just aren't that important
[16:21] <cjwatson> but that shouldn't be expired
[16:21] <robbiew> cjwatson: understand
[16:22] <cjwatson> actually, I think I can articulate this more clearly
[16:22] <cjwatson> there is a state not encapsulated in that document, which is "Canonical should spend time fixing this, but not in the near future"
[16:22] <robbiew> cjwatson: good point
[16:23] <cjwatson> if we implement that by assigning bugs anywhere (be it the foundations team or an individual developer), then (a) that clutters our lists (b) it discourages contributors from working on it
[16:23] <cjwatson> but, according to that document, ct-rev + assignment to Nobody means that we aren't interested
[16:23] <cjwatson> which isn't right
[16:24] <robbiew> well...I think it means we (Canonical) won't fix due to resources...but would still like it resolved
[16:24] <Keybuk> right
[16:24] <cjwatson> well, look at lots of the qa-jaunty-foundations bugs
[16:24] <Keybuk> and what Colin's saying is that there's another state
[16:24] <robbiew> got it
[16:24] <robbiew> bugs we want to fix, but not right now
[16:24] <Keybuk> that we (Canonical) won't fix it _right_now_ due to resources...but would still like it resolved...and may have the resources later
[16:24] <cjwatson> plenty of them are really old, and for the last half-dozen releases they've been in a "Canonical would like to fix this, but not yet" state
[16:25] <cjwatson> I don't think we can change this by fiat, obviously, but should raise the concern with QA
[16:25] <cjwatson> also, the page indicates that Triaged bugs may be re-triaged ("Mark as invalid, wontfix, incomplete, as a dupe, etc. i.e. triage it better")
[16:25] <cjwatson> I would like to strongly object to this
[16:26] <cjwatson> once it is Triaged, I find that further involvement by bug triage teams tends to be a net loss for me
[16:26] <cjwatson> (cf. my recent blog post)
[16:26] <cjwatson> a *developer* might choose to re-triage it if the triage was wrong, but I think this should be left to developers looking at the bug
[16:26] <robbiew> agreed
[16:27] <cjwatson> that said, I don't object at all to the QA team having a process that helps them assess Triaged bugs and flag ones that need urgent developer attention
[16:28] <robbiew> cjwatson: Keybuk: I think you raise valid points...and encourage you to feed it back to QA ;)
[16:28] <robbiew> fwiw, it's nice for me to be able to have something to help me gauge workload
[16:28] <Keybuk> robbiew: what is the process by which we do that?
[16:29] <robbiew> they are collecting "Feature" requests at the bottom of the page
[16:29] <cjwatson> robbiew: I'm guessing, but I suspect you're more interested in near-term workload than "things Colin wants to work on next year" ;-)
[16:29] <robbiew> cjwatson: heh, yes
[16:29] <robbiew> just for when those fire drill assignments pop up
[16:29] <cjwatson> and at the same time, I want to have a way to record things that I want to look at later, without getting in *your* way
[16:30] <robbiew> it's nice to know who I should and probably shouldn't ask
[16:30] <robbiew> understand
[16:30]  * robbiew likes mvo's post-it solution (j/k)
[16:30]  * mvo is actually using it that for some (short-term) items
[16:30] <Keybuk> robbiew: there isn't enough room on my desk for posties
[16:30] <Keybuk> too many netbooks
[16:31] <mvo> it has the nice property that you can then throw the postit away when its done, a good feeling :)
[16:31] <robbiew> Keybuk has a netbook cloud, tentatively called a "puff"
[16:31] <robbiew> lol
[16:31] <mvo> lol
[16:31] <robbiew> [TOPIC] Sponsoring Queue
[16:31] <MootBot> New Topic:  Sponsoring Queue
[16:31] <robbiew> http://people.ubuntu.com/~dholbach/sponsoring/
[16:31] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.ubuntu.com/~dholbach/sponsoring/
[16:33] <robbiew> it's there...we all know about it...some do more than others...enough said
[16:33] <robbiew> [TOPIC] Karmic UDS
[16:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  Karmic UDS
[16:33]  * liw uses GTD for keeping track of bugs, outside LP
[16:34] <robbiew> I've created a page for session suggestions
[16:34] <robbiew> http://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/UDS/May2009
[16:34] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/UDS/May2009
[16:34] <Keybuk> when a developer can no longer use the bug tracking system to keep track of bugs ... an EPIC FAIL has occurred
[16:34] <robbiew> Keybuk: +1
[16:35]  * slangasek needs to find a way to keep track of session ideas over the course of a release cycle; I had several ideas for Karmic UDS and can't find them in my brain now
[16:35] <liw> robbiew, should we add topics to that page, or discuss them with you first?
[16:35] <robbiew> liw: just add them
[16:35]  * liw hits slangasek with the GTD book
[16:35] <robbiew> liw: I'm subscribed
[16:35] <liw> robbiew, ack
[16:36] <slangasek> liw: I'm alluding to a desire to have them tracked somewhere other than on my local system though :)
[16:36] <robbiew> slangasek: yeah...I kept a folder where I would put emails that had potential ideas
[16:36] <cjwatson> robbiew: I assume that it's unnecessary to add things for which we're having requirements calls?
[16:36] <robbiew> cjwatson: correct :D
[16:36] <liw> slangasek, I stick to my answer ;-) but I'll postpone GTD fanboyism until after the meeting
[16:36] <robbiew> I suppose we could for public consumption
[16:37] <robbiew> cjwatson: ^
[16:37] <cjwatson> probably good to start pushing 'em out
[16:38]  * robbiew will update 
[16:38] <robbiew> the last thing on my list is travel
[16:38] <robbiew> a note should be going out today or tomorrow from our lovely admin team
[16:39] <robbiew> the goal is to have all travel booked by end of March
[16:39] <robbiew> so just a heads up
[16:39] <cjwatson> for somehands/allhands/uds?
[16:39] <robbiew> yes...all three
[16:39] <Keybuk> does anybody know anybody who's going to this mysterious "somehands" ?
[16:39]  * robbiew is...and cjwatson
[16:40] <slangasek> next thing you know they'll be adding jazzhands
[16:41] <Keybuk> followed by looknohands
[16:41] <robbiew> heh
[16:41] <cjwatson> I assume I'm needed at somehands because I'm organising one of the allhands tracks
[16:41] <RainCT> lol
[16:41] <Keybuk> cjwatson: no, it's because you get to live after the revolution
[16:41] <robbiew> heh
[16:42] <Keybuk> unless somehands is some heaven's gate-like event, in which case that statement would be entirely wrong
[16:42] <robbiew> somehands is just those management type topics that most others would be bored with...nothing special
[16:43] <robbiew> was a way to make sure we don't have a bunch of management meetings during Allhands
[16:43] <robbiew> [TOPIC] Good News/AOB
[16:43] <MootBot> New Topic:  Good News/AOB
[16:44]  * robbiew noticed Keybuk got 25sec *with* compiz
[16:44] <robbiew> whoohoo!
[16:44] <Keybuk> robbiew: you're spying on me! :p
[16:44] <mvo> I made some progress on the aufs based upgrade branch, I will post something to ubuntu-devel about it
[16:44] <cjwatson> I would say that I think we've finally fixed the installer races, except that IIRC that was my good news last week too
[16:44] <robbiew> heh
[16:44] <liw> I note that we must be getting close to a release. My laptop, which runs the current release, has started behaving erratically. It always does this at the end of an Ubuntu release.
[16:44]  * mvo did a successful upgrade of intrepid->jaunty on a aufs overlayed system, so everything was back to intrepid after the neext reboot
[16:45] <cjwatson> ooh
[16:45] <evand> hot
[16:45] <slangasek> informal feedback this week is that Keybuk has sped up the boot to the point where it's faster to reboot a machine than to resume from hibernation
[16:45] <slangasek> oops :)
[16:45] <liw> slangasek, but I've had that for years :P
[16:45] <Keybuk> I've sped it up sufficiently that you stare at a blank screen and mouse cursor longer than you see usplash ;)
[16:46] <Keybuk> mvo: \o/
[16:46] <mvo> Keybuk: out of curisoity, how much win was the protobuf stuff on the mini9?
[16:47] <Keybuk> mvo: about 3s, so a third of compiz's start time
[16:47] <mvo> cool!
[16:47] <Keybuk> evand: random question, and I'm sure you get this one a lot
[16:47] <Keybuk> evand: but I assume you have plans to fix the city locations in the u6y timezone map?
[16:47] <evand> Keybuk: yes, made some progress on that recently, but more is needed.
[16:48] <evand> London is currently sitting in the English channel.
[16:48] <Keybuk> oh, for me London is on an off-shore Oil Rig in the North Sea
[16:48] <robbiew> lol
[16:49] <robbiew> #endmeeting
[16:49] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:49.
[16:49] <Keybuk> it did briefly occur that there's a wonderful Lost-related easter egg waiting to happen with that map...
[16:49]  * robbiew gives you back 10min...enjoy! :P
[16:49] <TheMuso> heh
[16:49] <TheMuso> and thanks
[16:49] <cjwatson> it's a map projection kind of issue. evand is busy committing stuff to ubiquity full of obscure floating-point arithmetic
[16:49] <liw> thanks
[16:49] <evand> :)
[16:49] <Keybuk> cjwatson: indeed, it looked like the new map was Mercator to me?
[16:49] <Keybuk> which is a bitch to project onto :p
[16:50] <evand> Miller
[16:50] <cjwatson> Miller, I'm told
[16:50] <slangasek> thanks all :)
[16:50] <liw> evand, I will be curious to see if Helsinki has moved away from the radioactive coast of the Arctic ocean
[16:50] <evand> lol
[16:50] <cjwatson> evand: it actually reminded me slightly of the obfuscated perl raytracer I wrote some years back ;-)
[16:51] <evand> haha
[16:51] <Keybuk> The Miller cylindrical projection is a modified Mercator projection, proposed by Osborn Maitland Miller (1897-1979) in 1942. The parallels of latitude are scaled by a factor of 0.8, projected according to Mercator, and then the result is divided by 0.8 to retain scale along the equator.
[16:51] <Keybuk> eep
[16:51] <evand> yarp
[16:52] <mvo> sounds like fun :P
[16:53] <Keybuk> I assume you're accounting for the variance between the WGS 84 reference ellipsoid used by the GPS systems and the ...
[16:53] <evand> oh, of course!
[16:54]  * Keybuk had to learn all this stuff
[16:54] <Keybuk> my brain dribbled out of my ears
[16:54] <evand> hahaha
[16:54] <Keybuk> but it turns out that knowing that the GPS system altitude is based on a fictional reference geoid and not on the ground comes in quite useful when flying ;)
[16:55] <Keybuk> (and map projections, knowing that if you fly in a straight line what shape line you draw over the map and stuff
[16:55] <Keybuk>  and then knowing that flying in a straight line is never efficient, and instead you want to fly in a great circle, which may be a very funny shape on your map :p)
[16:56] <evand> very cool.  How much longer until you can fly the lot of us to UDS?
[16:57] <Keybuk> it's more a question of money than time at this point :-/
[17:00]  * ScottK has (in ancient history) had to do great circle plotting of a trans-Atlantic voyage on paper charts before.
[17:01] <bdmurray> hello
[17:01] <pedro_> hello everybody
[17:01]  * ogasawara_ waves
[17:01]  * cgregan waves
[17:01] <davmor2> hello
[17:01] <jcozens> Hi
[17:01] <sbeattie> hey
[17:03] <bdmurray> #startmeeting
[17:03] <MootBot> Meeting started at 12:03. The chair is bdmurray.
[17:03] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:03] <bdmurray> The agenda for the meeting is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Meetings and first up we have pedro_
[17:04] <pedro_> Last Thursday we celebrated the flashplugin-nonfree hug day https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20090305
[17:04] <cr3> bdmurray: you'll be chairing during the testing sprint? :)
[17:05] <bdmurray> cr3: yes, heno asked me to do this
[17:05] <pedro_> we had a really good participation from the bugsquad again (they are rocking so hard)
[17:05] <cr3> bdmurray: thanks man!
[17:05] <pedro_> we had some heroes bigal50, Joel Goguen (jgoguen), Martin Mai (MrKanister) and Charlie Kravetz (charlie-tca)
[17:05] <pedro_> big kudos to them ;-)
[17:06] <pedro_> and specially to MrKanister for helping out to set up everything
[17:06] <cr3> pedro_: why is it called a hug day rather than a bug day?
[17:06]  * pedro_ hugs MrKanister
[17:06] <bdmurray> cr3: that's why ^
[17:06]  * MrKanister huggs pedro back
[17:06] <pedro_> cr3: triage a bug, win a hug ;-)
[17:07] <pedro_> tomorrow we're having a samba hug day, we have been coordinating this with the server team
[17:07] <cr3> pedro_: dude, I so need to participate in those more!
[17:07] <cr3> pedro_: what's the wiki page for the samba hug day?
[17:07] <pedro_> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20090312 <- people already started to work on it
[17:07] <pedro_> cr3: ^
[17:07] <pedro_> i know Joel is amazing
[17:08] <pedro_> we're going to have people from the server team available to answers question regarding bugs on the #ubuntu-bugs channel
[17:08] <bdmurray> pedro_: did bugs w/ patches get added to the template?  I stuck them in for Samba again
[17:08] <cr3> pedro_: I'll invite some people from montreal, they might be interested too
[17:08] <pedro_> bdmurray: it's not added, i'll do that
[17:09] <pedro_> cr3: awesome!
[17:09] <bdmurray> #action pedro to add patches table to bug day template
[17:09] <bdmurray> hrm
[17:09] <pedro_> so that's it, we'll be waiting for you to start squashing samba bugs tomorrow ;-)
[17:09]  * cr3 hugs pedro_ in advance
[17:10] <pedro_> talking about hug days heroes, hello charlie-tca
[17:10] <pedro_> :-)
[17:10] <charlie-tca> hello, sorry I am a little late
[17:10] <bdmurray> This week we had a couple of new bug control members and one returning one.
[17:11] <bdmurray> Julien Lavergne, gilir on freenode, was approved as a member and is interested in awn, conduit, ogmrip among other packages
[17:12] <bdmurray> István Nyitrai, sianis on freenode, was also approved as a member and is interested in l10n bugs, misspellings, typos and has been working on gdebi a fair bit
[17:12] <pedro_> yay for a conduit contributor :-)
[17:13] <bdmurray> Third TJ, IntuitiveNipple on freenode, was a former member of Bug Control who has returned!  He has an interest in kernel bugs and received lots of positive comments from the kernel team.
[17:14] <bdmurray> There is one last application, andres mujica's, still pending if any bug control members want to comment.
[17:14] <bdmurray> That covers all that's going on in bug control!
[17:16] <bdmurray> Is there somebody who can speak about the testing day?
[17:16] <davmor2> Yo
[17:17] <davmor2> Testing day was mostly me and charlie-tca this week we found a few issues that have kinda been resolved for apha6 due to it
[17:18] <davmor2> ara_: is running the one on Monday which iirc is based on notify-osd and others
[17:19] <ara_> yes, focus will be notify-osd and checkbox
[17:19] <cr3> ara_: yay!
[17:20] <bdmurray> Okay, that sounds great!
[17:21] <bdmurray> Moving on - last week or the week before we talked about a bug weighting / gravity as a way to find 'important' bugs in a large collection of bugs.
[17:21] <bdmurray> I've taken a stab at this using a calculation like so http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/129811/
[17:22] <bdmurray> Different points are assigned to the tags that a bug report has where lots of points are given for regressions or apport reported bugs
[17:22] <bdmurray> Then points are also given for duplicates, subscribers and users affected which we'd talked about.
[17:23] <bdmurray> I'd also like to add in some points if the bug report is private as that is one that should be looked at soon and hopefully made public.
[17:23] <sbeattie> bdmurray: should regression-update and regression-proposed get a high weighting?
[17:23] <sbeattie> as they're supposed to be regressions that were introduced by a (proposed) update.
[17:24] <bdmurray> sbeattie: right, and probably higher than regression-release?
[17:24] <sbeattie> that's my intuition.
[17:24] <bdmurray> so something like 250 and 300 for proposed then updates
[17:25] <bdmurray> okay, noted
[17:25] <bdmurray> Its this kind of feedback I'm looking for
[17:25] <bdmurray> I've run some reports using this at http://people.ubuntu.com/~brian/tmp/gravity/
[17:26] <bdmurray> sorting by the gravity you can identify which bug reports probably should be looked at first
[17:26] <sbeattie> bdmurray: hrm, should workflow bugs get excluded?
[17:27] <sbeattie> e.g. Bug 340606	shows up on the no-package report.
[17:27] <bdmurray> pedro_: if you could look at rhythmbox / totem and let me know if the gravity number is useful or indicative of something useful that would be helpful
[17:28] <pedro_> bdmurray: alright
[17:28] <bdmurray> sbeattie: and maybe the needs-packaging ones too
[17:28] <sbeattie> mmm, yeah.
[17:29] <bdmurray> I'm really curious if people would find these reports useful or not
[17:29] <sbeattie> bdmurray: might be useful to put the little lock marker or some other indicator for private bugs.
[17:30] <bdmurray> So please test them out and let me know!
[17:31] <pedro_> ok will do it
[17:31] <bdmurray> In other news, compiz now has an apport hook!
[17:31] <sbeattie> bdmurray: thanks for working on that, I think they could be useful.
[17:31] <sbeattie> nice!
[17:32] <bdmurray> It gathers hardware info, xorg log file and xsession errors
[17:32] <bdmurray> The same things asked for at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingCompiz
[17:33] <bdmurray> Maybe we should add compiz to the hug day targets list for after the release
[17:34] <pedro_> that's a good idea, I'll add that to the Planning page
[17:34] <sbeattie> bdmurray: do you have a list of packages that it would be a priority to get apport hooks added to?
[17:35] <bdmurray> sbeattie: not really, if we were to make a list I think it should take into consideration bug volume and Debugging page existence
[17:37] <bdmurray> sbeattie: looking around I think we are doing pretty well now
[17:37] <bdmurray> gnome-power-manager might benefit from one though
[17:38] <bdmurray> oh and firefox
[17:39] <bdmurray> so those 2 seem like a priority
[17:39] <sbeattie> for anyone who's interested, gnome-power-manager appears to include a gnome-power-bugreport.sh script that might be useful for ideas for inclusion in an apport hook
[17:41] <cr3> speaking of power management, checkbox should also come with a hibernate/suspend test script in the next release which should land before beta
[17:41] <bdmurray> I that back about firefox - there is one
[17:42] <bdmurray> Firefox could use a package bug guideline
[17:43] <bdmurray> Okay, that's all that was on the agenda.  Is there any other business?
[17:44] <cr3> all good here
[17:44] <pedro_> noup
[17:45] <bdmurray> Okay, thanks everyone!
[17:45] <bdmurray> #endmeeting
[17:45] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:45.
[17:45] <bdmurray> win 40
[17:45] <pedro_> thanks you
[17:48] <davmor2> ta