=== Richie is now known as WelshDragon [01:04] popey: ping === yofel_ is now known as yofel === jono_ is now known as jono === vorian_ is now known as vorian === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach [08:56] FFEMTcJ: pong [11:04] popey: can I PM? === fader|away is now known as fader_ [14:00] \o [14:00] o/ [14:00] Oh, right. [14:00] * ScottK can attend server team meetings again. [14:00] \o [14:01] o/ [14:01] woot. [14:01] * mathiaz waves [14:02] geez its early for a meeting === chuck_ is now known as zul [14:02] good morning [14:02] #startmeeting [14:02] Meeting started at 08:02. The chair is mdz. [14:02] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [14:02] kirkland, smoser, ping [14:04] Dustin said he would be here [14:04] I think smoser may be on holiday [14:05] * nijaba waves [14:05] let's get started [14:05] [topic] Review ACTION points from previous meeting (ttx) [14:05] New Topic: Review ACTION points from previous meeting (ttx) [14:05] * ttx scrambles the list [14:05] kirkland to add a recipe covering virsh to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/KVM/VirtManager: Done [14:05] I wasn't able to attend the previous meeting [14:06] hm [14:06] * ttx tries again [14:06] ACTION: nurmi to help investigate/validate/fix bugs 455625, 460085 and 461156 [14:06] Launchpad bug 455625 in eucalyptus "Eucalyptus Loses Public IP Address" [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/455625 [14:06] Launchpad bug 460085 in eucalyptus "memory leak; rampart_context not freed (memory leaked per connection)" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/460085 [14:06] Launchpad bug 461156 in euca2ools "User data is not parsed correctly by Eucalyptus in some cases" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/461156 [14:06] nurmi is not around [14:06] I didn't have time to check progress on those bugs yet [14:06] 455625 has been marked invalid upstream [14:07] 461156 is Fix Committed upstream [14:07] 460085 is Fix Committed in Ubuntu [14:07] 460085 still needs a fix on eucalyptus side [14:07] so it looks like they have all been dealt with upstream [14:07] hmm, ok [14:07] I didn't look at that one [14:08] I'll look into that last one before tomorrow [14:08] * stgraber waves [14:08] o/ [14:08] to be sure to communicate to Eucalyptus anything we might be missing. [14:08] [ACTION] ttx to review status of bugs 455625, 460085 and 461156 for any missing info [14:08] ttx: does that mean we're preparing another SRU for UEC in karmic? [14:09] Launchpad bug 455625 in eucalyptus "Eucalyptus Loses Public IP Address" [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/455625 [14:09] Launchpad bug 460085 in eucalyptus "memory leak; rampart_context not freed (memory leaked per connection)" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/460085 [14:09] Launchpad bug 461156 in euca2ools "User data is not parsed correctly by Eucalyptus in some cases" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/461156 [14:09] beh, can't action :) [14:09] [ACTION] ttx to review status of bugs 455625, 460085 and 461156 for any missing info [14:09] ACTION received: ttx to review status of bugs 455625, 460085 and 461156 for any missing info [14:09] mathiaz: yes. The memory leak and the userdata are still on the list [14:09] mathiaz, we can discuss that on tomorrow's conf call [14:09] any other actions from last time? [14:09] yes [14:09] ACTION: mathiaz to compile a list of easy merges for publication [14:10] mdz: I'm almost done on generating the list of easy merges for publication [14:10] I've finally figured out how to do that with bzr and package branches [14:10] [action] mathiaz to compile a list of easy merges for publication [14:10] ACTION received: mathiaz to compile a list of easy merges for publication [14:10] that's all. [14:10] ok [14:10] [topic] Check blueprint status and progress for the week (mdz) [14:10] New Topic: Check blueprint status and progress for the week (mdz) [14:10] ttx: i have covered Virsh and Virt-Manager in the documentation [14:10] the list I'm using for this is: [14:10] [link] https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+specs?searchtext=server-lucid- [14:10] LINK received: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+specs?searchtext=server-lucid- [14:10] kirkland: yes, that action was already completed last meeting [14:11] mdz: i'm here now [14:11] kirkland: bringing it up was a cut/apste error, sorry about that [14:11] this is not ideal, because it has some false positives (desktop and foundations blueprints) [14:11] but it has all of ours as well [14:12] if anyone knows a better way to get this out of LP, let me know [14:13] in my, er, spare time, I'm working on the blueprints API ;-) [14:13] also the assignee can be different from the drafter, so you should check https://blueprints.launchpad.net/~YOURNAMEHERE/+specs?role=drafter [14:13] all of the server-lucid-* blueprints on that list should be moved into Drafting status [14:13] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/~YOURNAMEHERE/+specs?role=drafter&searchtext=server-lucid- [14:13] ^^ this is even better :) [14:14] s/check/cross-check/ [14:14] ttx, there is some way to do that with a universal URL, /+me or something [14:14] right [14:15] mathiaz, yes [14:15] many of them are still New or Discussion, so please update yours [14:16] kirkland, I reviewed what you submitted and sent feedback [14:16] the others, I'm waiting for you to tell me they're ready for review [14:16] you can do that by setting them to Review status when you're ready [14:16] I've sent email explaining what I'm looking for in the completed blueprints [14:17] mdz: thank you [14:17] mdz: i'm fixing up now [14:17] all of them should be completed by the end of this week [14:17] smoser: o/ [14:18] mdz: i clearly "missed" on the user stories ... do you have a favorite blueprint that has intriguing user stories? [14:18] does anyone feel they have too much to finish in that time? [14:18] not I [14:18] Hmm.. [14:18] I think I'll manage. [14:18] mdz: I do, but we already discussed that. [14:19] kirkland, I don't have a blueprint to hand, but you can look at the stories on the requirements pages [14:19] I mentioned them in the email [14:19] ttx: mdz: I see that I'm the drafter of UEC-testing, mathiaz is the assignee ... I didn't realize I was responsible for drafting that one until just now [14:19] where there is an internal requirement behind the blueprint, I've already written the user stories for you [14:19] as a means of capturing the requirement [14:19] mdz: right, I thought i followed that closely enough; i'll try again [14:20] https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/server-lucid-uec-testing [14:20] there are also loads of articles to be found with google about how to write user stories [14:20] kirkland, right, I believe that's because mathiaz couldn't be in the session, but you were [14:21] kirkland: yes - I wasn't in the session dealing with UEC testing === robbiew_ is now known as robbiew [14:21] if you can't get it done, now is the time to mention it, because we could find someone else who was there [14:21] I know you're off the rest of the week [14:22] mdz: i was planning on fixing up the 2 I did write, writing up my year-end-review results, and enjoying the rest of my day off [14:22] who else was in the UEC testing session on Friday? [14:22] mdz: I was, I think soren was as well [14:22] this is on the critical path, so it still needs to be done this week [14:22] soren, can you take it? [14:23] mdz: ttx: I'll do it [14:23] soren, ayt? [14:24] kirkland, OK, you can negotiate with soren separately if you find you need to hand it off [14:24] any other questions or considerations regarding blueprints? [14:25] otherwise, I'll expect everything to be ready for review first thing Monday morning [14:25] [topic] Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (mdz) [14:25] mdz: should "community" blueprient be following the same process as well? [14:26] New Topic: Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (mdz) [14:26] Sorry, someone was at the door.. [14:26] * soren catches up [14:26] nijaba, all blueprints should follow the same process [14:26] mdz: I know ScottK and maybe ivoks had a few === imlad is now known as imlad|away [14:27] [link] Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (mdz) [14:27] LINK received: Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (mdz) [14:27] Um... Yeah, I think I was in the UEC testing session. Think. [14:27] nothing assigned to the team at the moment [14:28] there are a bunch of bugs there which are still targeted to Karmic [14:28] looks like they're all Eucalyptus related [14:29] so I assume those are SRU candidates, as opposed to 9.10-targeted bugs which slipped [14:29] probably they should be targeted for LL as well, but I don't think it's too important [14:29] What's the link to the process we're supposed to be using for spec tasks? [14:29] some of those aren't candidates for SRUs -- I'll clean up [14:30] hmm, they show up wrongly in the list... they are wontfix for karmic [14:30] ScottK, do you mean the work items? [14:30] ttx, ah, ok [14:30] mdz: Yes. [14:30] bug 438631 and bug 455816 [14:30] Launchpad bug 438631 in eucalyptus "eucalyptus-nc needs an upstart job" [Wishlist,Won't fix] https://launchpad.net/bugs/438631 [14:30] Launchpad bug 455816 in eucalyptus "When installing a UEC cluster, the prompt for the private interface is displayed after the "Installation complete" dialog" [Medium,Won't fix] https://launchpad.net/bugs/455816 [14:30] I heard something about using bugs for burndown charts, but haven't seen specifics on how this process is supposed to work. [14:31] ScottK, it's working the same way as in karmic for the moment, I don't think the bugs-as-work-items bit is completed yet [14:31] mdz: OK. Thanks. [14:31] i.e. the work items go in the status whiteboard [14:32] I had never heard of this until Rick Spencer demoed it at UDS. This was in widespread use in Karmic? [14:32] nothing else jumps out at me from the bug list [14:32] soren: the desktop team was using it [14:32] mdz: i'm also trying to verify the eucalyptus SRU [14:32] ttx: Ok. [14:32] and the mobile team has adopted it as well [14:33] soren: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WorkItemsHowto gives an overview of this process [14:33] mathiaz, ah, thanks, I was trying to find that link [14:33] I reinstalled my UEC yesterday; i have some strange behavior that I emailed nurmi about; i'm not ready to approve/decline the SRU package yet, though. [14:33] [topic] work item tracking [14:33] New Topic: work item tracking [14:33] mathiaz: ^ [14:33] [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WorkItemsHowto [14:33] LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WorkItemsHowto [14:33] mathiaz: Neat, thanks. [14:33] any other questions about work items? [14:34] mdz: some work items can't be defined in some of my blueprints [14:34] mdz: example: write MIR for the list of agreed packages [14:34] mdz: which depends on agreeing on the list of packages first [14:35] mathiaz, I suggest creating work items for each of the proposed changes [14:35] mdz: that means that the list of work items will probably evolve over time [14:35] mathiaz: and adding it later will make it look like feature creep [14:35] mathiaz: The list will evolve over time. [14:35] mdz: are we trying to get all work items defined now? [14:35] e.g. "discuss moving foobar to universe" would be one work item, and "move foobar to universe (if agreed)" would be a second work item [14:35] mathiaz, yes, as closely as we can estimate up front [14:35] Last cycle on desktop stuff where I used this the tasks started out a few high level ones and got broken into more detail over time. [14:36] if some of them can be skipped, it's easy to skip them later, but we don't want to forget any [14:36] mdz: hm - ok. Does this mean there can be 20+ more work items in one blueprint? [14:36] it is possible to add them later, but usually this indicates that work was overlooked [14:37] mathiaz, you can add as many as you like, up to whatever the limit is for the status whiteboard [14:37] it's definitely >20 [14:37] mdz: well - in this situation is that more investigation needs to be conducted in order to define more WI [14:37] mathiaz, if there are natural groupings, you could group them [14:37] mathiaz: I'd do 4 sets [14:38] e.g. discuss the package changes related to backup, then make the agreed changes for those packages [14:38] but it needs to be more than one work item, because even having the discussion will take more than 1-2 days [14:38] mathiaz: obvious, potentially harmful, etc [14:38] then have one WI to delimitate the sets [14:38] mdz: ok [14:38] and discuss / MIR for each set ? [14:38] we'll learn from this as we go, since this is our first time through this process [14:39] find out what works best, and adopt that for next time [14:39] mdz: ideally work items could be weigthed [14:39] ttx: well - not knowing how many packages will be considered makes it hard to define the number of set [14:39] the most important thing is that the list is at approximately the right level of granularity, so that we make steady progress through the list [14:39] it will never be perfect [14:39] mathiaz: it's still slightly more accurate than defining nothing. [14:39] * mathiaz agrees [14:40] that's how I did it for the java dependencies [14:40] ttx, if you can't think of any other way, you can split them up arbitrarily [14:40] last cycle [14:40] e.g. if something is probably 4 days work, you could do "implement foo #1", "implement foo #2", etc. [14:40] but we should only do that as a last resort [14:40] mdz: yes. [14:41] mathiaz, remember, it just needs to fit into a 1-2 day chunk of work [14:41] they don't all need to be exactly the same size [14:41] * mathiaz nods [14:41] I'll update the list of work items with your suggestions [14:41] the errors should average out [14:41] i.e. we're just as likely to overestimate as to underestimate, we hope :-) [14:42] ok, anything else on this topic? [14:43] [topic] Weekly SRU review (mathiaz) [14:43] New Topic: Weekly SRU review (mathiaz) [14:44] (whoops) [14:44] there is one bug nominated for hardy [14:44] bug 426813 [14:44] Launchpad bug 426813 in net-snmp "snmpd dies after requests with snmpwalk" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/426813 [14:44] kirkland, whoops? [14:45] mdz: i was discussing the Eucalyptus SRU earlier [14:45] kirkland, that's OK [14:45] zul: ttx: seems like a good candidate for an SRU? [14:45] mdz: I see that conversation belongs here [14:45] mathiaz: looking [14:45] mathiaz:yep [14:45] mathiaz: yes [14:46] mathiaz: im going to start tagging them so they are easily searchable in launchpad [14:46] bug accepted for hardy [14:46] zul: well you can use LP searches [14:46] zul: or do you wanna tag the sru-potential? [14:46] zul: in which case they should just be nominated [14:46] mathiaz: yes that what I was thinking [14:46] mathiaz, zul, how would that be different from a nomination? [14:47] http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.2009-11-16.html [14:47] LINK received: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.2009-11-16.html [14:47] ^^ this is last week fixed released bugs - anything worth in there? [14:47] mathiaz, that list looks a week old [14:47] mdz: yes - that was during UDS [14:47] mdz: we haven't processed it yet [14:47] mdz: when its fixed in lucid then we can just close it and add a tag like "sru-potential" and talk about it during the weekly meetings [14:48] mdz: as we hadn't a meeting last week [14:48] zul: nominating them for the proper the release would do the same thing [14:48] zul: as we're reviewing the list of nominated bugs during the meeting [14:48] mathiaz: okie dokie [14:49] ok - so anything SRU worth on http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.2009-11-16.html? [14:49] mathiaz, so we should have 2 weeks worth of bugs, no? [14:49] For Universe, nxvl is working on some courier stuff that will be SRU worthy once it's resolved and there is a havp fix in work that should also qualify. Both packages are currently very broken in Karmic. [14:49] mdz: yes - 2 weeks of bugs -> 2 lists [14:49] mathiaz, #479955 might be [14:49] mathiaz, ah, ok [14:49] bug 479955 [14:49] Launchpad bug 479955 in samba "winbind authentication fails after karmic upgrade" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/479955 [14:50] ScottK: are the bugs nominated/accepted for karmic? [14:50] actually its already been nominated [14:50] mathiaz: I think not yet, but they are both still unfixed in Lucid. [14:50] ScottK: ok - so lucid first :) [14:51] For havp the patch is still being reviewed and last I heard nxvl was beating he head against the wall over courier. [14:51] Yes [14:51] ok - let's move on to the second list: [14:51] http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.2009-11-23.html [14:51] LINK received: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.2009-11-23.html [14:51] anything SRU worth on this one^^? [14:52] the ucf dbconfig-common is pretty easy to fix and probably SRUable [14:52] bug 424653 [14:52] Launchpad bug 424653 in dbconfig-common "I cant desintall phpmyadmin completle the database" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/424653 [14:53] should be fixed for jaunty at least [14:54] zul: well - it doesn't seem too critical for jaunty now [14:54] ttx: ^? [14:54] anything SRU worth on the two lists above? [14:54] im not exactly sure how to reproduce it though [14:54] mathiaz: yes, I'd say that's not important enough [14:55] ok - let's move on then [14:55] http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/acceptedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html [14:55] LINK received: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/acceptedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html [14:55] what the progress on these bugs? [14:55] ^^ [14:56] I think I need to add how long the bug has been assigned to this table [14:56] to measure whether things get stalled (which is the goal of this list) [14:56] I don't know I can extract the date of assignement from LP though [14:56] either in -proposed or in -updates or waiting for users to test [14:57] zul: all of them? [14:57] ok, we're almost out of time, can we close the SRU topic? [14:57] which reminds me that I should add the status of the bug as well [14:57] mdz: yes [14:57] [topic] Meeting time [14:57] New Topic: Meeting time [14:57] A few people mentioned this meeting time was less than ideal for them [14:58] last I checked, Maria was working on finding a better time, and I asked her to work directly with you on it [14:58] what was the outcome? [14:58] (she's on holiday right now, so I can't ask her) [14:58] It's way better for me since I'm generally unavailable on Tuesdays. [14:58] mdz: I haven't heard of maria on this topic [14:59] kirkland, I believe you were one of the people with an objection [14:59] there was an email thread at the end of October [14:59] mdz: yes, this time is very bad for me [14:59] mdz: i've spoken with maria, filled out the survey again [14:59] mdz: the day of the week is fine; it's the hour that's a problem [15:00] mdz: one hour later would solve my conflict [15:01] kirkland, please work with maria to find a better time [15:01] [topic] AOB [15:01] New Topic: AOB [15:01] mdz: okay [15:01] Who was working on the SpamAssassin update? [15:01] This is, I think, a very important topic for Lucid and I'd like to make sure we track it. [15:02] ScottK: IIRC Daviey investigated it [15:02] ScottK: I don't know the the outcome of the session though [15:02] It sounded like we'll want to update, but we need to make sure of this. [15:03] mathiaz: Could we make sure this gets added to something as a work item so it doesn't get dropped. [15:03] ScottK: that should be documented in the blueprint [15:03] mathiaz: What blueprint? [15:03] ScottK: and the whiteboard of the blueprint (mail-server stack?) updated [15:03] I don't think we have one explicitly for this. [15:03] mail-server-stack was a Karmic blueprint. [15:04] The one I'm working on is about package integration. [15:04] ScottK: well - if there is work to be done in Lucid and you'd want it to be tracked, I'd suggest to file a blueprint [15:04] ScottK: and create the necessary work items in the whiteboard [15:04] agreed [15:04] mathiaz: I think it's important, but I really don't have time to deal with it. It's in Main. Please assign someone to deal with it then. [15:04] ScottK: could the spamassassin be added to the mail-related blueprint you're working on? [15:05] mathiaz: It could if someone is going to do the work. [15:05] ScottK: right - documenting what needs to be done will make it easier for someone to pick it up later [15:05] I don't mind having it in there for tracking, but I really don't have time to develop a relationship with another upstream (and that's what I think this will take) [15:05] ScottK: defining a work item doesn't mean *you* need to do it [15:06] That's fine then. [15:06] ok, we're over time, can we adjourn? [15:06] thanks, all [15:06] #endmeeting [15:06] Meeting finished at 09:06. === imlad|away is now known as imlad [16:01] * mvo looks around [16:02] * robbiew waves [16:02] #startmeeting [16:02] Meeting started at 10:02. The chair is robbiew. [16:02] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [16:03] * ScottK waves. [16:03] * robbiew had zero time for an agenda this week....sorry :/ [16:03] had this whole UDS thing last week [16:04] plus Canonical seems to think I need to review my employees every 6 months :P [16:05] Keybuk: slangasek: around? [16:07] robbiew: It'd be nice we could add libdb to the release coordination items with Debian and someone look into that. The fewer versions we bring into the LTS the better. [16:07] Keybuk was arguing about udev on #ubuntu-devel earlier :) I think slangasek is on leave [16:07] ah...right [16:07] he is [16:07] lol [16:07] we're in sync on db right now, but it wouldn't hurt to know about future planned transitions [16:07] robbiew: For some value of someone != me. [16:08] heh [16:08] robbiew: yup [16:09] [TOPIC] Lucid blueprints/specs [16:09] New Topic: Lucid blueprints/specs [16:10] we are reviewing Lucid commitments next week...so I need specs written this week [16:10] otherwise I'll have to defer them for Manic Monkey [16:10] * robbiew bets someone will think that's the real name and blog it [16:10] Manic Minotaur! [16:10] * lool thinks Monkey sucks -- we already had Gibbon [16:10] Mythic Minotaur [16:10] Marmoset [16:11] mermaid? [16:11] Mammoth Mammoth [16:11] damnit, we should have had Buffalo Buffalo for B [16:11] We should start all meetings with some brainstorm on $dist name; it's much more fun :-) [16:11] heh... [16:12] we are also using burn-down charts this cycle [16:12] http://wiki.ubuntu.com/WorkItemsHowto [16:12] LINK received: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/WorkItemsHowto [16:12] which mean more work upfront for planning work items, but will make it a LOT easier to track progress [16:12] and know when we are getting into trouble [16:13] I've only used it for one spec so far, but it didn't seem too onerous [16:13] yeah...pretty easy [16:13] I've done a few already [16:13] * Keybuk already had a Work Items section in his blueprints [16:13] so should be easy to copy over [16:14] * robbiew already copied some for you ;) [16:14] I'll also be prioritizing all the work items for Lucid [16:14] though mine aren't really 1-2 days things ;) [16:14] well....they could be broken down into 1-2 day things [16:15] which might be useful in realizing the actual work effort [16:15] I was more meaning "Mine" to be things I have to do ;) [16:16] but it's not an exact science...and the charts aren't the only thing I would use to gauge progress [16:17] I'd like to have as many blueprints milestoned if possible [16:17] is an equivalent of that slide that said which milestones were for which purpose up somewhere? [16:18] the iteration stuff is not that relevant for us [16:18] at least in my opinion [16:19] except for things the products have targeted [16:19] like the server installer stuff ;) [16:19] for Alpha 2 [16:19] do we have a full list of those? [16:19] not that many work days from here to Alpha 2 :-/ [16:19] Of lucid foundations specs? [16:19] yep...were posted to ubuntu-devel I think [16:19] I think workitems.py will look at https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/?searchtext=lucid-foundations [16:19] lool: no, of things that come from product roadmaps [16:20] I hope foundations-lucid rather than lucid-foundations [16:20] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sprints/uds-l?searchtext=foundations-lucid [16:20] for specs targeted to UDS Lucid [16:20] cjwatson: It doesn't matter [16:20] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+specs?searchtext=foundations-lucid [16:20] (foundations-lucid, lucid-foundations, lucid foundations...) [16:20] for specs targeted to the actual Lucid release [16:21] "foundations lucid" should work fine [16:21] in the searcg [16:21] search [16:21] right, I mean things that we are going to get sat on for not delivering by alpha 2 because they're in a product roadmap [16:21] * robbiew will forward the alpha 2 deliverable emails to the team [16:21] cjwatson: A bunch of bps on that page have milestone == alpha-2 [16:21] ok, thanks [16:21] if that's a sufficient indicator, great [16:22] (NB: workitems.py will skip over the mobile and dx specs on that list) [16:23] I should point out that some of the specs we had for UDS Lucid were from karmic, so a foundations-karmic search is also suggested [16:23] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sprints/uds-l?searchtext=foundations-karmic [16:24] looks like the list I'm looking for is just UEC installation right now? [16:24] fwiw, I'll be going through each UDS Lucid blueprint this week...to be sure we've deferred or targeted it [16:24] which is a surprisingly short list but ok [16:24] (looking at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+milestone/lucid-alpha-2) [16:25] there may be a few software-center related items as well [16:25] but need mvo and mpt to prioritize that stuff first ;) [16:25] * mvo has this on his list [16:25] robbiew: just reviewed my specs, the work items actually all look pretty reasonable [16:25] (size wise) [16:25] and we can add more if we want...or even target something to alpha 1 (though I discourage it) [16:25]