[09:57]  * persia peers about
[09:57] <e-jat> wb persia
[09:57]  * MaWaLe tracks persia
[09:58] <hito_jp> hi all.
[09:58] <linuxmalaysia> hi all
[09:58] <GunbladeIV> hi hito_jp
[09:58] <umarzuki> hi
[09:59] <TheMuso> Hey folks.c
[09:59] <zaafouri> hi
[09:59] <MaWaLe> hey TheMuso
[09:59] <MaWaLe> hi folks
[10:00] <zulmalc_> hi all
[10:01] <persia> amachu said he'd be late.  Do we have elky and lifeless ?
[10:06] <PmDematagoda> hello, did I miss the meeting?
[10:06] <elky> hi
[10:06] <persia> PmDematagoda, Nope.  We're just getting organised.
[10:07] <persia> elky, Hey.
[10:07] <PmDematagoda> persia: ah, thanks :)
[10:07] <persia> So were waiting for one of lifeless or amachu, and we'll be all set.
[10:09] <khanh_coltech> hi all :)
[10:10] <PmDematagoda> hey khanh_coltech
[10:10] <khanh_coltech> sorry i'm late :)
[10:10] <PmDematagoda> khanh_coltech: the meeting hasnt started yet
[10:10] <hito_jp> hi khanh_coltech. dont worry, we are waiting for quorum.
[10:15] <persia> Hmm.  I think we're waiting for amachu then, who ought arrive around half-past.  lifeless doesn't appear to be here.  So if you're glued to the screen, you may wish to take a short break.
[10:18] <elky> mmm chocolate caaaake
[10:18] <elky> persia, that should make them hunt for food ;)
[10:18] <e-jat> elky: how bout ice cream :)
[10:18] <linuxmalaysia> yeah. Im feeling hungry now.
[10:19] <elky> e-jat, none of that in my freezer. i has the cake though. and it's cakey and chocolatey
[10:19] <umarzuki> i already ate ;-)
[10:19]  * e-jat still at the office ... freezer empty ..
[10:31] <elky> sorry, got disconnected. did i miss anything?
[10:31] <khanh_coltech> elky: nothing :)
[10:31] <persia> RIght.  amachu was planning to be only 30 minutes late.  I'm tempted to wait around just in case, as I'd like to have had at least one successful meeting this month.
[10:31] <persia> elky, TheMuso: Are you still good to wait?
[10:31] <TheMuso> persia: yes
[10:32] <TheMuso> I'm fine till approx 12:15UTC
[10:33] <elky> persia, i am. i cant guarantee i wont lag out again though
[10:33] <ApOgEE-> hi persia
[10:33] <elky> stupid australian intarwebs
[10:33] <ApOgEE-> hi e-jat
[10:33] <ApOgEE-> hi TheMuso
[10:33] <elky> i need to go about 45 mins earlier than that
[10:33] <ApOgEE-> hi elky
[10:43] <ApOgEE-> hi nbliang
[10:43] <nbliang> hi ApOgEE-
[10:45] <e-jat> belutz also not here :(
[10:47] <linuxmalaysia> saya hairan ada 137 in the room
[10:47] <linuxmalaysia> tapi tak ramai yang bercakap
[10:47] <linuxmalaysia> :)
[10:47] <linuxmalaysia> opp sori wrong window
[10:48] <e-jat> hmm ...
[10:54] <persia> Hrm.  There's other meetings happening later, and I think we didn't achieve quorum again :(
[10:55] <elky> yeah. we need that team expansion already
[10:55] <e-jat> hmm .. i cant contact belutz .. since he bz with something nowday ..
[10:56] <linuxmalaysia> Maybe ubuntu member from Malaysia can help on that
[10:56] <umarzuki> minimum applying member needed?
[11:00] <khanh_coltech> we will still wait?
[11:00] <ApOgEE-> hi BuffaloSoldier
[11:00] <BuffaloSoldier> hi ApOgEE-
[11:00] <ApOgEE-> BuffaloSoldier, how r u doing?
[11:00] <elky> we need suggestions for nominations of people who are members, who represent the region and are connected enough to know who people are and what is involved with most aspects of contribution
[11:01] <nbliang> elky, any guide on applying for it?
[11:02] <elky> if people know who you are and what you do, then they nominate you.
[11:03] <nbliang> noted
[11:03] <nbliang> can we nominate them here?
[11:04] <elky> you may want to check with them first. it's manners to do so.
[11:04] <ApOgEE-> the nominator is ubuntu member is it?
[11:04] <persia> nbliang, Also, please nominate by mail to ubuntu-membership-board-asia-oceania@lists.ubuntu.com
[11:04] <persia> ApOgEE-, Yes.
[11:04] <ApOgEE-> hi GunbladeIV
[11:05] <elky> it would be preferable. otherwise random joe 1 could nominate random joe 2
[11:05] <nbliang> elky: , persia : noted
[11:06] <GunbladeIV> ApOgEE-, hi ApOgEE- ..
[11:06] <TheMuso> c
[11:06] <GunbladeIV> elky, persia : so we will have a meeting due to not enough quorum isnt it?
[11:07] <elky> now, since the meeting seems like it will not happen, please take random chatter elsewhere so as not to pollute meeting logs.
[11:07] <GunbladeIV> s/will/will not/g
[11:07] <elky> GunbladeIV, yes, we lack quorum today
[11:08] <GunbladeIV> elky, okay.  Hope to be here again next time.(as a candidate)
[11:08] <umarzuki> when the next will be then?
[11:08] <elky> two weeks from now.
[11:11] <GunbladeIV> elky, noted.
[11:12] <TheMuso> In that case, unless there is anything else from either persia or elky, I shall return to my personal work. :)
[11:12] <ApOgEE-> uhh
[11:13] <persia> TheMuso, Good night.
[11:14] <umarzuki> thanks anyway
[12:11] <lifeless> persia: elky bah, tz confusion *again*
[12:11] <lifeless> sorry.
[12:31] <vorian> @now
[12:31] <vorian> grr
[12:32] <persia> vorian, http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar
[12:33] <vorian> thanks persia
[13:00] <jkbys> こんばんわ
[13:01] <jkbys> oops
[13:01] <jkbys> wrong chat box, sorry
[15:01] <mdz> #startmeeting
[15:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:01. The chair is mdz.
[15:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:02] <mdz> Technical Board meeting, 2009-03-24
[15:02] <mdz> cjwatson,Keybuk,sabdfl: ping
[15:02] <mdz> dholbach: ping
[15:02] <mdz> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda
[15:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda
[15:02] <sabdfl> hello all
[15:02] <Keybuk> mdz: I'm here
[15:02] <cjwatson> here
[15:03] <mdz> I think we need dholbach for several of these items
[15:03] <mdz> vorian: are you here?
[15:03] <vorian> mdz: yes sir
[15:03] <mdz> cjwatson: can you cover archive reorg?
[15:04] <mdz> [TOPIC] Archive reorg (and corresponding governance changes)
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Archive reorg (and corresponding governance changes)
[15:04] <cjwatson> I had a phone call with Jono and Daniel to go over it
[15:04] <cjwatson> Daniel has been working on a timeline as a result of this
[15:05] <cjwatson> roughly, it puts us doing a transition of developer permissions in June
[15:05] <cjwatson> there are a number of decisions flagged for TB action along the way
[15:06] <mdz> anything we should start thinking about now?
[15:06] <cjwatson> we need to start preparing text about what's going to happen, to help developers
[15:06] <cjwatson> we need to decide on changes to the developer application process
[15:07] <cjwatson> and MOTU Council charter review I believe
[15:07] <cjwatson> we need to decide on a rough process for administering package sets
[15:07] <cjwatson> later on, we'll need to look at unifying processes for handling new packages
[15:08] <cjwatson> I'll get Daniel to send some more detail to technical-board@ to kick-start a discussion
[15:08] <mdz> cjwatson: thanks
[15:08] <mdz> cjwatson: is there anything we can/should cover in this meeting or shall we move on?
[15:08] <cjwatson> I think we can move on
[15:09] <mdz> [TOPIC] Upload permission for Romain Francoise for 'emacs-snapshot
[15:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Upload permission for Romain Francoise for 'emacs-snapshot
[15:09] <mdz> dholbach?
[15:09] <sabdfl> we won't have package sets for june, so we'll need to fake it on the permissions client
[15:09] <dholbach> mdz: around
[15:09] <sabdfl> ach, too slow :-)
[15:09] <dholbach> mdz: I mailed Romain and offered to help with the application, but got no reply yet
[15:09] <mdz> dholbach: how long ago?
[15:10] <dholbach> some time last week
[15:10] <dholbach> but Emmet mailed him a wek or two before that already
[15:10] <cjwatson> sabdfl: this is new information, and more pessimistic than I've been hearing from Julian and Muharem
[15:10] <dholbach> I'll try to locate him together with siretart
[15:11] <mdz> dholbach: shall we take this off of the TB list for now?  we can consider it MOTU Council territory until we hear otherwise
[15:11] <dholbach> mdz: yep, that's fin
[15:11] <dholbach> e
[15:11] <mdz> thanks
[15:11] <mdz> [TOPIC] codecs in ffmpeg
[15:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  codecs in ffmpeg
[15:11] <mdz> dholbach again
[15:11] <dholbach> mdz: no news I'm afraid - Amanda is still working on a general policy
[15:11] <dholbach> Jono and I have been in touch with her, it's still WIP
[15:12] <dholbach> no due date yet, will ask
[15:12] <mdz> dholbach: what can we do to help move it forward?
[15:12] <mdz> perhaps sabdfl would prefer to handle this more informally, I don't know
[15:12] <sabdfl> cjwatson: ok, i was being pessimistic, if you have better info, i'm happy to go with that
[15:13] <dholbach> mdz: I don't know - I haven't seen any of that work yet - I can try asking for a more detailed roadmap of the document if you like
[15:13] <mdz> sabdfl: we've asked for legal guidance on how we should handle this, but it has been stalled for a long time.  should we be doing something different?
[15:14] <sabdfl> mdz: i don't have good advice for you
[15:14] <cjwatson> sabdfl: Julian has been steering clear of giving me a firm date as yet, but he's been talking about the guts of the implementation happening during April - of course I'm OK with faking it client-side for the time being if that slips
[15:14] <cjwatson> (anyway, yes, we've moved on)
[15:14] <dholbach> mdz: it might help to split up the discussion
[15:14] <dholbach> mdz: siretart asked me two things: 1) is it good enough to disable the code that has to do with patents or does it need to be purged completely and
[15:15] <dholbach> 2) which codecs / which patents
[15:15] <sabdfl> mdz: i'm inclined to split patent claims into the "alleged" and "judge-tested" categories
[15:15] <sabdfl> we don't have the resources to separate claims except on the basis of court ink
[15:15] <sabdfl> i think.
[15:15] <cjwatson> also "expired" in some of these cases (which is not entirely facetious because some have expired in some jurisdictions but not others)
[15:16] <mdz> sabdfl: one of the questions is, if we have reason to be concerned about a particular patent, how do we respond?  is it OK to skip compiling the relevant code, or do we need to patch it out of the source?
[15:16] <cjwatson> I sent a mail a while back about the expiry situation of one of the ffmpeg patents
[15:16] <sabdfl> compile it out
[15:16] <mdz> cjwatson: indeed, jono has that email
[15:16] <cjwatson> of course, there is a well-known effect where a submarine holder pops up just before its expiry date, so "about to expire" is not de facto safe
[15:17] <mdz> dholbach: sabdfl has answered 1) above
[15:18] <dholbach> mdz: ok, I'll relay that to  siretart
[15:18] <mdz> sabdfl: what do you think we should do in each of those circumstances (alleged, judge-tested, expired)?
[15:21] <sabdfl> about to expire - jfdi
[15:21] <sabdfl> expired - ship it
[15:22] <sabdfl> judge-tested - escalate and consider
[15:22] <sabdfl> in each case, there would be an assessment of jurisdiction
[15:22] <sabdfl> if there is a judge-tested patent in andorra, would we not ship it? i think we would
[15:22] <sabdfl> this makes it very hard for me to say anything other than "we should review the cases"
[15:23] <sabdfl> so, who's "we"?
[15:23] <sabdfl> best answer i have there is canonical legal
[15:23] <dholbach> sabdfl: how do you think this process is going to work? "if concerned bring up with TB, they then get in touch with Canonical legal"?
[15:23] <sabdfl> that's a reasonable start, imo
[15:24] <cjwatson> realistically I suspect most of the interesting cases are going to be US and EU, with the odd case where it's expired in some jurisdictions but not others
[15:24] <cjwatson> sorry, US and/or EU
[15:24] <sabdfl> sorry that i can't provide stronger guidance
[15:24] <sabdfl> actually, maybe i can
[15:24] <mdz> sabdfl: I think the most common case is "alleged", so we most need the guidance there
[15:24] <sabdfl> but i need to caucus with Amanda on that
[15:26] <sabdfl> in general, i think any patent holder making such an allegation should raise it with the TB
[15:26] <sabdfl> i think third-party allegations aren't going to be sufficiently tangible for us to be able to invest time in parsing and considering them
[15:27] <sabdfl> i.e. if someone comes along and says "there is a patent that i think covers this code", i don't think we can usefully invest a lot of time in that
[15:27] <cjwatson> we need to split that into two cases: (1) code already in Ubuntu (2) code not already in Ubuntu
[15:27] <sabdfl> if someone comes along and says "i have a patent that i believe covers this code", then that's more manageable
[15:28] <mdz> that leads to a process like "the TB maintains a record of any patent allegations.  if a developer has a question or concern regarding a certain patent, they should contact the technical board, who will advise as to whether they are aware of an issue.  anyone who becomes aware of an allegation should forward it to the TB"
[15:28] <cjwatson> for (1) I agree; for (2) this guidance sounds like "ship it until we have good reason to believe we may not" but I would like clarity there as there are cases where complying with a cease-and-desist will be difficult
[15:29] <sabdfl> cjwatson: any cease-and-desist would be very difficult for us. copyright. trademark. patent. url-prefix.
[15:29] <sabdfl> we don't control the mirror network
[15:30] <cjwatson> indeed, so some level of avoidance is rational, but not necessarily panic-level avoidance
[15:30] <sabdfl> are you worried about specific cases more than others?
[15:30] <cjwatson> no, just a general point that I would like to avoid getting into a situation where we have to pull an Ubuntu release
[15:30] <sabdfl> msft's suit against tom-tom - does that mean we should remove FAT support from Hardy?
[15:30] <sabdfl> i think not, myself
[15:31] <cjwatson> presumably the amount of risk we're willing to take depends somewhat on the usefulness of the technology to us
[15:32] <cjwatson> FAT is extremely useful; an individual media codec, say, may be less so
[15:32] <sabdfl> well, a lawyer could turn that into "presumably our willingness to steal depends on the value of the jewels"
[15:32] <cjwatson> granted
[15:32] <sabdfl> and i don't think that would be a correct characterisation of our approach
[15:33] <sabdfl> i would say that our approach is more "we will engage with rights holders openly"
[15:33] <cjwatson> in the msft case I'm not sure the facts are clear yet, nor that msft has made any kind of general statement about the situation of fat
[15:33] <sabdfl> so far, we haven't had any rights-holders engage with us
[15:33] <sabdfl> they've said that this suit is NOT a prelude to a general series of suits
[15:33] <sabdfl> but, they've also acted in ways that suggest it might be
[15:34] <sabdfl> however, microsoft violates many patents, and is often found in court to be doing so
[15:34] <cjwatson> what I meant by (2) above was a process for archive administrators to follow when dealing with new packages that are alleged to have some level of patent risk associated with them
[15:34] <mdz> I suggest we wrap up this topic in the next 5 minutes to allow time for the rest of the agenda
[15:34] <sabdfl> so, i'm sure they would have raised any issues with us that they are concerned about, being familiar with the system
[15:34] <cjwatson> in that case, the rights holder is not going to have engaged with us yet, since we aren't shipping it yet
[15:34] <sabdfl> good point
[15:34] <sabdfl> ok, for shipping code, we'll engage with rights holders
[15:35] <sabdfl> for code that is proposed, allegations or concerns should be raised with the TB
[15:35] <sabdfl> and we'll decide what to do
[15:35] <sabdfl> perhaps in consultation with canonical-legal or SFLC or OIN
[15:35] <mdz> sabdfl: ok, that brings us full circle.  siretart has raised a concern with the TB and we need to decide what to do :-)
[15:35] <sabdfl> thanks mdz :-)
[15:35] <sabdfl> are there any new codecs proposed for inclusion in ffmpeg for jaunty?
[15:36]  * dholbach doesn't know
[15:36] <mdz> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/254201
[15:36] <cjwatson> siretart: ^- ?
[15:38] <mdz> it looks like, in the absence of guidance from the TB, several codecs have been disabled
[15:38] <sabdfl> can they be split into a separate package, easily enough?
[15:39] <mdz> they have been, see the bug
[15:39] <mdz> it's now split between main and multiverse
[15:39] <sabdfl> can we detect when a codec is needed, that is available in another package, and prompt the user?
[15:39] <cjwatson> we do
[15:41] <mdz> I don't know how it's currently implemented in this case
[15:41] <cjwatson> or at any rate totem does
[15:41] <sabdfl> does the prompt say "this functionality may be subject to a patent, your rights may vary based on your location"? then i think this is fine.
[15:41] <mdz> cjwatson: my hunch is that that doesn't cover this case
[15:41] <cjwatson> nevertheless, some of these codecs are rather old and the more we can ship in the default install the better users' experience will be
[15:41] <cjwatson> mdz: mine too, I see mention of things like Empathy
[15:41] <mdz> totem will install gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg, which is dependent upon libavcodec52 | libavcodec-unstripped-52
[15:41] <cjwatson> mm, of course
[15:41] <mdz> the latter is complete, the former not
[15:41] <cjwatson> and it has to be that way round for a variety of reasons
[15:42] <mdz> so this is a regression
[15:42] <sabdfl> i would be inclined to say, that if we have not heard from alleged rights holders for an extended period of time, and a patent is near expiration, then code can be shipped as part fo the default install
[15:42] <mdz> we have to close this topic for now so that we can move on
[15:42] <mdz> vorian is waiting
[15:42] <sabdfl> ok
[15:43] <mdz> cjwatson/sabdfl: can one of you take an action to write up what you just agreed?
[15:43] <sabdfl> i can do that and mail the TB
[15:44] <mdz> [ACTION] sabdfl to document consensus regarding policy and process for patent concerns
[15:44] <MootBot> ACTION received:  sabdfl to document consensus regarding policy and process for patent concerns
[15:44] <mdz> thanks
[15:44] <mdz> [TOPIC] Steve Stalcup (vorian) for ubuntu-core-dev
[15:44] <MootBot> New Topic:  Steve Stalcup (vorian) for ubuntu-core-dev
[15:44] <mdz> [LINK] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/private/technical-board/2009-February/003011.html
[15:44] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/private/technical-board/2009-February/003011.html
[15:44] <mdz> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StephenStalcup/CoreDeveloperApplication
[15:44] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StephenStalcup/CoreDeveloperApplication
[15:45] <cjwatson> we're a little late here, having dropped the ball when motu-council first notified us
[15:45] <cjwatson> Steve reminded me about this after the last meeting so I put it on the agenda
[15:45] <mdz> sorry, better link for the first one
[15:45] <mdz> [TOPIC] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2009-February/002033.html
[15:45] <MootBot> New Topic:  https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/2009-February/002033.html
[15:45] <vorian> thanks cjwatson :)
[15:46] <mdz> vorian mentioned Riddell as a present sponsor
[15:46] <mdz> Riddell: are you here?
[15:46] <Riddell> hi
[15:46] <Riddell> I entirely advocate vorian, he's a very capable packager and extreamly useful member of the kubuntu ninjas (KDE packaging team)
[15:46] <Keybuk> brb
[15:47] <Riddell> he took over much of the ninjas process when apachelogger had to leave so has filled in an important gap
[15:47] <Riddell> but it would be useful to have more of us who can upload to main so it's not reliant on me for that
[15:47] <Riddell> and vorian is a top candidate there
[15:48] <cjwatson> vorian: you described a period of frustration while you were learning about packaging. As a core developer you would be looked to for advice by up-and-coming packagers. How would you advise them to approach getting started?
[15:48] <Keybuk> back
[15:49] <vorian> cjwatson: I would first try and understand where their frustrations lay.  It could be one of may areas.  Then help them learn the next small steps
[15:50] <mdz> vorian: what is the current freeze status of jaunty, and what are some examples of what you should and should not upload at the present time?  how about next week?
[15:50] <cjwatson> vorian: (what were your areas of frustration?)
[15:52] <vorian> mdz: well, we are in beta freeze at the moment. any main package upload is really not a good idea. universe bug fixes are ok as long as they have a ffe and are accepted by an archive admin
[15:52] <sabdfl> vorian: "not a good idea" meaning no packages should be uploaded?
[15:53] <mdz> vorian: (feel free to finish answering cjwatson before moving on to my question)
[15:53] <vorian> cjwatson: i had trouble with the jargin, once I was able to pick up the lingo - it was easy going
[15:53] <cjwatson> mm, I agree that the Ubuntu development community is often rather too jargon-heavy
[15:53] <sabdfl> vorian: which main packages would you like to work on between now and the end of next week, and how would you coordinate that?
[15:53] <vorian> not a good idea as in none
[15:54] <vorian> sabdfl: KDE 4.2.2 is being released next Tuesday, so for the rest of this week and into next, I'll be working on the core stack
[15:55] <sabdfl> will those packages land in main pre-release? when, and what would be done differently given the timing?
[15:55] <JontheEchidna> KDE 4.2.2 is actually being released exactly a week from tomorrow, coincidentally
[15:55] <cjwatson> vorian: pretend I know nothing about libdb - can you explain to me what the difficulty is in moving applications to new libdb versions?
[15:55] <vorian> cjwatson: ok
[15:55] <cjwatson> vorian: (like mdz said above, feel free to finish answering sabdfl before moving on to my question)
[15:56] <mdz> (my question still needs more answering)
[15:56] <vorian> sabdfl: we will be needint lots of pre-uploading quality checking given the freeze
[15:56]  * nixternal notes to cjwatson everyong pretends they know nothing about libdb :)
[15:56] <vorian> needing*
[15:57] <vorian> mdz: sorry,
[15:57] <mdz> vorian: no worries, we threw a lot of questions at you at once
[15:57] <mdz> we should be more organized
[15:57] <mdz> or perhaps, we're doing a good job at simulating the real-world chaos of ubuntu development ;-)
[15:57] <vorian> mdz: after beta is released, all packages will need freeze exceptions - and archive admin approval - after a thoruough job of qa and testing is done
[15:58] <vorian> :)
[15:58] <vorian> mdz: true :)
[15:59] <cjwatson> nixternal: wouldn't be much of a test if I didn't know the answer ;-)
[15:59] <vorian> cjwatson: as for libdb, pretend each version is called something else (ie, 4.2 == apple, 4.3 == orange, 4.4 == pear, etc..)
[16:00] <mdz> vorian: you said that during beta freeze, uploads to main were not a good idea.  however, you can see on jaunty-changes that uploads are still happening
[16:00] <vorian> there are a set of packages that depend on "apple" and we are trying to get rid of "apple" so we see if they will build and function with "pear"
[16:00] <cjwatson> hey, that's not a bad analogy. What do applications have to do when transitioning from one to another?
[16:00] <mdz> vorian: mvo uploaded update-manager just today.  did he make an error?
[16:00] <cjwatson> e.g. source changes, dependency changes, making sure database contents are preserved accurately, etc.
[16:01] <vorian> mdz: I understand that during the beta freeze, there is testing done and bugs related to the release are still uploaded.
[16:01] <vorian> as for ISO's and upgrades
[16:01] <mdz> vorian: bugs related to the beta release?  or to the 9.04 release?
[16:02]  * vorian is not 100% sure
[16:03] <mdz> vorian: where would you go to find either of those lists of bugs?
[16:04] <mdz> (you can finish answering cjwatson first)
[16:04] <vorian> i would go to qa.ubuntu.com
[16:04] <mdz> we're over time but I would like to finish here rather than carry over to the next meeting
[16:04] <mdz> Keybuk: any questions for vorian?
[16:05] <cjwatson> I don't see any relevant links on qa.ubuntu.com ...
[16:05] <Keybuk> mdz: none from me, you both covered the basics
[16:05] <cjwatson> aside from the one to Launchpad
[16:05] <mdz> no, I don't think that the release bug list is available there (though maybe it should be)
[16:05] <mdz> cjwatson: heh, you mean href=http://launchpad.net/ ? :-)
[16:05] <mdz> that is not a very useful link
[16:06] <cjwatson> quite
[16:06] <vorian> i don't know that link, however i find the list of bugs next to each iso test useful at times
[16:06] <cjwatson> ah, yes, that is a useful resource
[16:07] <cjwatson> (I'm still waiting for an answer to my libdb transitioning question, fwiw)
[16:07] <vorian> ah, sorry
[16:08] <vorian> Applications must not have any regressions when moving from one depends or build-depends
[16:09] <vorian> so, firstly it must build correctly, all files being built and installed correctly in the binaries
[16:09] <vorian> then it must install correctly on ones system
[16:09] <cjwatson> sorry, I don't want to spend too much time on this, but I should clarify that I'm specifically asking about what changes need to be made, not how those changes should be tested
[16:09] <vorian> and must behave *just* as it always has (given it isn't riddled with bugs)
[16:12] <mdz> we're well over time
[16:12] <cjwatson> I don't feel that my question has been answered
[16:12] <vorian> with libdb, it was a matter of changing the version in control
[16:12] <cjwatson> ah, typing lag
[16:12] <mdz> vorian: I think cjwatson is looking for a more specific answer
[16:13] <mdz> (note: sabdfl had to leave to make another meeting)
[16:13] <mdz> and I will need to do the same shortly
[16:13] <cjwatson> there are some applications that need more than simply being recompiled against the new version of libdb, for instance
[16:13] <vorian> cjwatson: about the specific changes to the package?  I changed the applicable versions in the debian/changelog.  No source changes were needed with many.  If there were, I tried to get it done upstream, as opposed to patching them
[16:14] <vorian> cjwatson: is that more what you are looking for?
[16:15] <cjwatson> well, not really, I was looking for the sorts of changes that would actually need to be made to the code, and how you would recognise when this needs to be done
[16:15] <mdz> sorry, folks, but we need to wrap this up
[16:15] <cjwatson> but I realise that we're over time
[16:16] <mdz> cjwatson,Keybuk: how would you like to proceed?
[16:16] <cjwatson> shall we go to a vote?
[16:17] <mdz> vorian: I'm not very confident that we can approve your application based on the Q&A so far
[16:18] <vorian> ok
[16:18] <cjwatson> my vote was going to be 0: I've not really been very satisfied with the answers to the questions I asked; on the other hand my belief is that vorian is conscientious and will ask when he's out of his depth, and it's clear that he knows what he's doing with Kubuntu and will be a valuable contributor there
[16:18] <vorian> I'm done then
[16:18] <nixternal> WHAT?
[16:18]  * nixternal head desks
[16:19] <mdz> nixternal: will you talk to him once he calms down?
[16:19] <cjwatson> blink, and I was going to suggest things that could be improved
[16:19] <nixternal> mdz: sure thing
[16:20] <nixternal> I will give him a call later this afternoon
[16:20] <mdz> nixternal: please let him know that we would like to help him complete the process in time
[16:20] <cjwatson> (FWIW, the answer to the question I was pressing on is on [[https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Roadmap#Get rid of old libdb versions]], so I don't feel it was unfair)
[16:21] <mdz> (sorry, was having a side conversation with nixternal)
[16:21] <nixternal> hehe, ya just saw that and responded :)
[16:22] <mdz> we need to wrap up, we'll carry over the remaining agenda item to next week
[16:22] <mdz> #endmeeting
[16:22] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:22.
[16:22] <nixternal> thanks guys and I am sorry that he just left like that, I will chat with him a little later
[16:22] <cjwatson> that was disappointing; I hope he calms down
[16:22] <nixternal> ya, I have never seen him emotional/upset like that in 2+ years
[16:22] <nixternal> and in person
[16:23] <mdz> these things happen, we'll work it out
[16:23] <cjwatson> I got the impression he froze up a bit under pressure of questions
[16:23] <cjwatson> so perhaps we should consider a different format
[16:23] <nixternal> hehe, I referred to it as a "Feeding Frenzy"
[16:23] <cjwatson> since pressure of questions is not really the best model for Ubuntu development
[16:23] <cjwatson> (at least not with a time limit measured in minutes)
[16:23] <nixternal> right
[16:24] <davmor2> cjwatson: maybe a mentor for a month
[16:24] <mdz> I've long felt that the format for this is not really ideal
[16:25] <mdz> the alternative, I think, is something much more structured and heavyweight like NM
[16:25] <nixternal> I always liked teh NM way
[16:59] <pgraner> About time to start the weekly kernel IRC meeting...
[16:59]  * manjo waves
[16:59]  * cking is here
[17:00]  * ikepanhc waves
[17:00]  * lieb is here
[17:00]  * maco is watching
[17:00]  * smb_tp hastly arrives
[17:00]  * sconklin -
[17:00] <pgraner> #startmeeting
[17:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 12:00. The chair is pgraner.
[17:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:00] <pgraner> [TOPIC] Open Action Items
[17:00] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Action Items
[17:02] <pgraner> awe to report back to kernel-team on LPIA testing status
[17:02] <pgraner> awe: Any update?
[17:02]  * apw is here
[17:02] <awe> pgraner: i've built the latest lpia kernel and tested on the hp mini
[17:02] <awe> pgraner: looks good.  i'm about to send an email to the team to try and get more coverage across other netbooks
[17:02] <pgraner> awe: great... thanks, pls email kernel-team and give us the thumbs up when complete
[17:03] <pgraner> [ACTION] awe to inform kernel-team when LPIA kernel testing is complete
[17:03] <MootBot> ACTION received:  awe to inform kernel-team when LPIA kernel testing is complete
[17:03] <awe> pgraner: ok, will send an update to the mailing list in time for next week's mtg
[17:03] <pgraner> * apw to inform ogasawara when revised CFT can go out
[17:03] <pgraner> apw: you good to go?
[17:03] <ogasawara> pgraner: apw and I agreed there was no added benefit for another CFT since the script isn't integrated into checkbox, only packaged with it.  we end up manually running the same script anyways.
[17:03] <apw> we have done some testing with the installed version and it seems to be identicle (as it should be)
[17:04] <pgraner> ogasawara, apw: sounds reasonable
[17:04] <pgraner> * smb to send manjo bug on Dell server hw issue on Hardy
[17:04] <smb_tp> done
[17:04] <manjo> yes
[17:05] <pgraner> * ogasawara to issue CFT around ext4 data loss patches
[17:05] <manjo> waiting on hardware to become available
[17:05] <ogasawara> pgraner: that one missed my todo list last week.  although comments from the bug indicate the patches fix the issue.
[17:06] <pgraner> ogasawara: I'd highlight it when Beta goes live, this way we can get some extra eyes on it
[17:06] <ogasawara> pgraner: sounds good.  I'll make sure it gets noted
[17:06] <pgraner> There are a few outstanding actions on the list but they will get resolved at the Kernel Sprint next week. So I will drop them from the IRC meeting agenda
[17:07] <pgraner> There is only one that needs to be brought up here:
[17:07] <pgraner> sconklin create wiki page showing lpia source structure and repos for various releases
[17:07] <pgraner> sconklin: ETA on that?
[17:07] <sconklin> pgraner: after Lex sprint
[17:08] <pgraner> sconklin: ok, do you want me to keep it on the agenda?
[17:08] <sconklin> pgraner: no need to, I think
[17:08] <pgraner> sconklin: ack
[17:08] <pgraner> Moving on then...
[17:08] <pgraner> [TOPIC] Security & bugfix kernels
[17:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Security & bugfix kernels
[17:08] <smb_tp> This week not much. I am still mostly stuck with CVE and Hardy proposed is stuck in the accept queue with some hope to be released tomorrow.
[17:09] <pgraner> smb_tp: ok.. when do you expect the Intrepid updates to slow down
[17:09] <sconklin> smb_tp: I still don't know what wil/should get pulled into the hardy branch from that
[17:10] <apw> sounds like something to discuss at sprint
[17:10] <smb_tp> pgraner, Ours? We are actually down to just fixing the regression bugs
[17:10] <smb_tp> So it is slowed down
[17:10] <smb_tp> sconklin, From what?
[17:10] <sconklin> hardy security updates
[17:10] <pgraner> smb_tp: 2.6.27-14.30, was very hefty
[17:11] <smb_tp> I would would have to have a look, but I think that was the last one which included stable releases from upstream
[17:12] <smb_tp> No actually that were not that many new ones
[17:12] <pgraner> smb_tp: ok, we need to revisit the stable updates frequency at the sprint
[17:13] <smb_tp> pgraner, 6 including a revert
[17:13] <apw> smb_tp, yes it was the one wich included 27.18 stable update amongst others
[17:13] <smb_tp> pgraner, What you probably see is the changlog currently including all updates since the last release to updates
[17:13] <pgraner> smb_tp: Ok, then I'm reading the change log wrong it looks to be about 25+ changes
[17:14] <pgraner> smb_tp: Thats broke then
[17:14] <smb_tp> pgraner, Not broke but as done for stable updates
[17:14] <pgraner> smb_tp: we should be able to see exactly what went in to the upload clearly
[17:15] <smb_tp> We are aksed to include the full history up to the last point the kernel was released to updates
[17:15] <cjwatson> pgraner: what are you using to look at the changelog?
[17:15] <pgraner> smb_tp: thats fine however we should be able to see whats in each rev
[17:15] <smb_tp> You should see that. But maybe its simple to miss the start of the previous uploads
[17:15] <pgraner> smb_tp: ok we'll take it offline
[17:15] <pgraner> [TOPIC] Jaunty Status
[17:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Jaunty Status
[17:15] <smb_tp> pgraner, ack
[17:15] <pgraner> rtg: how do we look?
[17:16] <rtg> pgraner: the only serious issue that I'm aware of is a degraded raid boot problem.
[17:16] <rtg> apw, anything else that you can think of?
[17:17]  * apw scans the list
[17:17] <rtg> it looks the ARM AA issue was solved
[17:17] <apw> nothing i can think of right now
[17:17] <pgraner> rtg: how is kerneloops & crashdump looking?
[17:17] <rtg> I'm looking at kexec-tools on 32 bit.
[17:17] <apw> there is some new stuff coming in about the CRDA stuff, but only affecting people who used the old options
[17:17] <rtg> 64 bit still appears to work.
[17:17] <apw> so not very serious
[17:18] <pgraner> apw: ack
[17:18] <rtg> so, no show stoppers.
[17:18] <apw> the degraded raid problem has just resurfaced having looked fixed
[17:18] <pgraner> rtg: how is kerneloops? working as advertised?
[17:19]  * apw notes it is not installed on his machine, which is at the latest jaunty
[17:19] <rtg> pgraner: dunno, I though someone in the foundation team took that on?
[17:19] <manjo> pgraner, I did some testing last fri
[17:19] <pgraner> rtg: for Karmic, we still have it for this release
[17:19] <pgraner> manjo: working?
[17:19] <manjo> and I sent you a mail with the test results last fri
[17:20] <manjo> yes working as advertised
[17:20] <pgraner> manjo: ok, I'm still on Thurs. mail
[17:20] <manjo> except for the fact that with broken
[17:20] <apw> manjo, did you have to opt in to get it, ie install it manually?
[17:20] <manjo> synaptic mouse you will get
[17:20] <manjo> false positives
[17:20] <apw> manjo, that is fixed in the next kernel upload which removes the warning
[17:20] <manjo> apw, yes
[17:20] <pgraner> manjo: ok, I'm assuming there is a bug filed on that?
[17:20] <manjo> pgraner, ^^
[17:20] <pgraner> manjo: ack
[17:20] <apw> so we should be good for beta
[17:21] <apw> manjo, did your testing incldue whether it uploaded to the real kerneloops web site?
[17:21] <manjo> no I used the script from lieb to use local
[17:22] <manjo> but I think the 1st couple of attempts I made were with kerneloops.org
[17:22] <apw> might be nice to get a test to the real site done (but we can discuss offline)
[17:22] <manjo> k
[17:22] <pgraner> manjo: we should ping Arjan and ask him how we can test the actual submission
[17:22] <manjo> pgraner, ack
[17:23] <pgraner> [ACTION] manjo to ping Arjan on kerneloops submission testing
[17:23] <MootBot> ACTION received:  manjo to ping Arjan on kerneloops submission testing
[17:23] <pgraner> apw: How are we doing on Suspend/Resume, both bug triage and bug repair?
[17:23] <apw> We have put together a basic Trigage and Debugging guide for suspend/resume
[17:23] <apw> and hibernate/resume, so we can simply point apport bug reports at
[17:23] <apw> a simple wiki page.  This should allow quicker triaging at our end:
[17:23] <apw>   https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingKernelSuspendHibernateResume
[17:23] <apw> i have pushed the button on a number of the bugs, and i believe manjo has been helping out too
[17:23] <apw> will take a few days to get through the backlog.  then we can review the progress
[17:24] <manjo> yes I am looking at a list of 75 odd bugs apw pointed me to
[17:24] <ogasawara> apw:  I'll help sorting through those
[17:24] <apw> ogasawara, that would be cool.  i have a one liner i paste in to start them on the path
[17:25] <manjo> apw, most of the bugs are opened as kerneloops but I can see no oops msg in the logs
[17:25] <apw> "Could you please follow the triage and debugging guide (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingKernelSuspendHibernateResume) and report back here."
[17:25] <apw> manjo, yes they have that tag, but they are a separate class
[17:25] <manjo> k
[17:25] <apw> we do need to do some more work on the tags to help us tell them appart
[17:26] <apw> pgraner, could you action me to talk to pitti on the direction there
[17:26] <pgraner> [ACTION] apw to talk to pitti about tags in apport
[17:26] <MootBot> ACTION received:  apw to talk to pitti about tags in apport
[17:26] <apw> ack
[17:27] <pgraner> Ok, moving on
[17:27] <pgraner> [TOPIC] ARM
[17:27] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM
[17:27] <pgraner> amitk, bradF: hows things?
[17:28] <bradF> pgraner: looks like the AA issue just turned out to be a config dependency issue
[17:28] <bradF> pgraner: will submit a patch shortly
[17:28] <cooloney> pgraner, right, i can confirm that
[17:29] <pgraner> bradF: are we turning it on post beta or just running with out it for the release?
[17:29] <amitk> with that patch, the babbage kernel should be good *with* AA support
[17:29] <rtg> pgraner: post beta
[17:29] <pgraner> cool
[17:29] <pgraner> Any other ARMism we should know about?
[17:30] <amitk> also two flavours have been ripped out, so we now ship with 4 flavours
[17:30] <amitk> this should be in the beta kernel
[17:30] <pgraner> 4? I thought it should be 3?
[17:30] <rtg> amitk: we're native on Babbage now, right?
[17:30] <amitk> iop32x, versatile, ixp4xx and imx51
[17:30] <amitk> rtg: yes we are
[17:31] <pgraner> amitk: whats the iop32x? Do we have hw?
[17:31] <amitk> yes, thecus
[17:31] <amitk> there are a few in the company
[17:31] <cooloney> pgraner, lool has the iop32x hardware
[17:31] <amitk> and it is fixed and works
[17:31] <pgraner> amitk: when I asked the mobile team yesterday they did not raise it as being dropped
[17:32] <pgraner> amitk: ok, I don't want to get into a support issue for hw thats not on the roadmap
[17:33] <amitk> pgraner: not sure about your chat with mobile team
[17:33] <amitk> but iop32x was not on the chopping block yesterday
[17:33] <pgraner> amitk: when dropping the other flavors I listed 3 flavors to them (davidm) and there was no objection
[17:34] <rtg> iop32x being one of them?
[17:34] <bradF> pgraner: which 3 did you talk about?
[17:34] <cooloney> pgraner, amitk i guess iop32x is for next release karmic
[17:34] <pgraner> rtg: yes I asked you about it yesterday, and you said you were going to talk to amitk
[17:34] <cooloney> lool said to me they thought iop32x might be dropped for karmic
[17:34] <amitk> pgraner: seems to be a miscommunication. I don't seem to have recommended iop32x on the chopping block since I knew we had some HW and it worked
[17:34] <cooloney> not jaunty
[17:35] <pgraner> It is what it is for beta. We'll take it up in person next week.
[17:35] <amitk> akc
[17:35] <cooloney> amitk, right
[17:35] <amitk> not much else here
[17:36] <pgraner> [TOPIC] LPIA
[17:36] <MootBot> New Topic:  LPIA
[17:36] <pgraner> sconklin: what say you?
[17:36] <sconklin> I resynced from the netbook trees again, everything else is scheduled for the sprint
[17:36] <pgraner> sconklin: ack
[17:37] <pgraner> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs
[17:37] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs
[17:37] <pgraner> ogasawara: ^^^^^^^^^^ you're up.
[17:37] <ogasawara> pgraner: 4 bugs to note . . .
[17:37] <ogasawara> bug 337929 - reporter notes this affects jaunty as well as intrepid-proposed
[17:37] <ogasawara> bug 346691 - points to possible git commit causing the issue
[17:37] <ogasawara> bug 299708
[17:37] <ogasawara> bug 344812
[17:37] <ogasawara> the first two appear to be regressions
[17:37] <rtg> destroy system seems kind of harsh.
[17:38]  * amitk likes the title of bug 346691 :-)
[17:38] <apw> ogasawara, i have the first one, looks like its an interaction between CRDA settings in the kernel and l-b-m
[17:38] <rtg> apw: it shouldn't cause an oops, though
[17:38] <apw> right, clearly a bug
[17:39] <apw> on the i915 thing, there is a lot of instability all over the map
[17:39] <apw> in i915 users right now, looking like its appeared since 2.6.28-8
[17:39] <rtg> apw: stable updates has a bunch of i915 stuff
[17:39] <apw> thats all in 2.6.28-11 though right?
[17:40] <rtg> no, its on deck
[17:40] <rtg> waiting until after Beta is released
[17:40] <apw> ahh so in our tree but not released?
[17:40] <rtg> correct
[17:40] <ogasawara> I'll post a comment to that bug then to retest after Beta
[17:41] <apw> ok, excellent, as one of those affected, i'll go make a kernel from our tip for "us" to test
[17:41] <manjo> apw, I saw some i915 erros in the netbooks
[17:41] <rtg> ogasawara: the dell mini bug is kind of bogus.
[17:41] <apw> so i'll get you a copy of the kernel too
[17:42] <ogasawara> rtg: is it getting the security updates?
[17:42] <rtg> its an OEM team update issue. don't they supply the kernel?
[17:42] <pgraner> rtg: depends on if they are running stock ubuntu or not
[17:43] <apw> i believe it may become our problem once we take over the netbook trees
[17:43] <pgraner> apw: wrong it will be sconklin's prob :-D
[17:43] <rtg> in the meantime I vote we stick awe with it.
[17:43]  * apw was being nice to sconklin 
[17:43] <awe> ;/
[17:43] <cking> heh
[17:44] <pgraner> ogasawara: anything else?
[17:44] <sconklin> apw: why should you be?
[17:44] <ogasawara> pgraner: nope, that's it
[17:44] <sconklin> :)
[17:44] <pgraner> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[17:44] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[17:44] <pgraner> Floor is open
[17:45] <apw> rtg althogugh there were drm updated in 28.9, actually they were all already applied and there is zero drm delta from what i have installed to the top of our jaunty tree
[17:45] <rtg> karmic is updated to 2.6.29, but doesn't compile yet.
[17:45] <rtg> apw: yeah, I did cherry-pick some stuff
[17:46] <apw> i presume karmic will stablise for a bit now .29 has hit the shelves
[17:46] <pgraner> rtg: we will need to back usbstorage out of the monolithic kernel and make it a module
[17:46] <rtg> pgraner: you'll have to convince me why thats a good idea.
[17:46] <pgraner> rtg: its causing issues with some 3g cards and the only way to give it module params
[17:47] <pgraner> rtg: is to give it on the grub command line
[17:47] <apw> can you not supply those params on the kernel command line via grub?
[17:47] <rtg> maybe we should fix the 3G drivers
[17:47] <pgraner> apw: yea but it breaks the hal set up as it tries to pass params as part of the loading
[17:47] <pgraner> rtg: there is no 3g driver usbserial is it
[17:47] <apw> ick
[17:48] <pgraner> rtg: in the cases that are broke
[17:48] <keffie_jayx> tu-hn
[17:48] <pgraner> rtg: the option driver drives 80% of the cards the others are with usbserial
[17:48] <rtg> I _really_ like having USB built in, it solves so many other issues.
[17:48] <pgraner> rtg: not USB, just usbserial
[17:48] <cooloney> pgraner, making usbstorage as a module is ok for imx51 babbage board?
[17:49] <rtg> um, you wanted usbserial for console debug, you're willing to lose that?
[17:49] <apw> hrm, that was the one which was essential built in for early usb serial console
[17:49] <cooloney> sometimes, we needs to boot up with rootfs on usb disk
[17:49] <amitk> cooloney: no problem for imx51, we will have initramfs
[17:49] <pgraner> rtg: we're gonna have to or regress users, and work them around with a crappy grub commandline
[17:49] <cooloney> amitk, ok, i see
[17:50] <rtg> pgraner: but you'er only talking about usbserial, right?
[17:50] <pgraner> rtg: we can build custom debug kernels with usbserial
[17:50] <pgraner> rtg: yes
[17:50] <rtg> pgraner: ok, I'm fine with that.
[17:50] <cking> ..we don't use usbserial that much do we?
[17:50] <pgraner> rtg: I'll send you the bug number
[17:50] <cking> ..for debug that is
[17:50] <amitk> cking: it is a debug method of last resort
[17:50] <rtg> when pgraner said usbstorage I though there  was some crack involved.
[17:51] <cooloney> cking, i use usbserial to talk my babbage borad
[17:51]  * cking has used to for kernel debug too
[17:51] <pgraner> rtg: sorry that was a typo
[17:51] <rtg> cooloney: you can also build your own kernels
[17:51] <rtg> pgraner: have you files a bug?
[17:51] <rtg> filed*
[17:51] <cooloney> rtg, do you mean kernel for babbage?
[17:51] <pgraner> rtg: yep
[17:51] <rtg> pgraner: stick me on it?
[17:52] <cooloney> i can build it with cross compiler
[17:52] <pgraner> rtg: I'll dig it up and send it to you
[17:52] <rtg> pgraner: just assign it too me.
[17:52] <pgraner> rtg: ack
[17:52] <pgraner> [ACTION] pgraner to assign usbserial bug to rtg
[17:52] <MootBot> ACTION received:  pgraner to assign usbserial bug to rtg
[17:52] <pgraner> Anything else in open discussion
[17:53] <rtg> cooloney: I meant that ,in general, you can build your own kernels with special debug features such as usbserial
[17:53] <cooloney> rtg, yeah, i can do that
[17:53] <apw> nothing here
[17:53] <rtg> done?
[17:53] <lieb> or here
[17:53] <sconklin> nil
[17:53] <cking> silence
[17:53] <pgraner> [TOPIC] Next Meeting
[17:54] <MootBot> New Topic:  Next Meeting
[17:54] <cooloney> rtg no
[17:54] <cooloney> i dont touch usbserial things in kernel
[17:54] <pgraner> Since we are all at the sprint I propose that we cancel the meeting for next week and resume on 7 Apr.
[17:54] <apw> ack
[17:54] <manjo> ask
[17:54] <smb_tp> ack
[17:54] <cooloney> just usb usbserial in my pc not babbage board
[17:54] <rtg> especially since most of us will be traveling on Tues
[17:54] <cooloney> ack
[17:54] <ikepanhc> ack
[17:54] <cking> indeed
[17:54] <bradF> ack
[17:55] <pgraner> Ok next meeting on 7 Apr.
[17:55] <pgraner> Thanks everyone...
[17:55] <pgraner> #endmeeting
[17:55] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:55.
[17:55] <manjo> pgraner, thanks
[18:07] <apw> pgraner, you sent me a link to the irc log for last weeks meeting where was that
[18:10] <pgraner> apw: once sec