[03:21] <HulkHogan> !ops
[13:53] <zul> morn'
[13:53] <nijaba> aftern'
[13:53] <ivoks> hello
[13:54] <jiboumans> 'lo
[13:57] <ttx> o/
[13:59] <jiboumans> afternoon folks
[13:59] <jiboumans> time to get this thing rolling
[14:00] <soren> o/
[14:00] <jiboumans> #startmeeting
[14:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 08:00. The chair is jiboumans.
[14:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[14:00] <jiboumans> today's scribe is smoser
[14:00] <ttx> mathiaz, smoser: around ?
[14:00] <sommer> o//
[14:00] <mathiaz>  /o\
[14:00] <smoser> hi
[14:00] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] last weeks action points
[14:00] <MootBot> New Topic:  last weeks action points
[14:00] <jiboumans> i'll take the ones that belong to a blueprint when we discuss those
[14:01] <jiboumans> ACTION: SorenHansen to solicit packages that lend them selves well to nightly builds
[14:01] <jiboumans> soren: ^
[14:01] <soren> jiboumans: Hm... I don't remember /how/ I did it, but I did get some feedback.
[14:01] <soren> :)
[14:01] <jiboumans> soren++
[14:01] <jiboumans> please shae :)
[14:01] <jiboumans> *share
[14:02] <soren> The only extra ones I got were:
[14:02] <soren> python2.6 and atlas.
[14:02] <soren> I'll get those added to the nighly builds shortly.
[14:02] <soren> Like now
[14:03] <jiboumans> you agree there's mileage in those?
[14:03] <soren> If they run a test suite during build, I don't see any harm in detecting if they start failing.
[14:04] <jiboumans> fair enough
[14:04] <soren> I still haven't gotten round to the reporting part of things.
[14:04] <soren> I get an e-mail when stuff fails to build, but that's about as far as it gets.
[14:04] <jiboumans> that's the interesting bit though :)
[14:04] <soren> Quite :)
[14:04] <jiboumans> you still have a bit of time to wrap that up though
[14:04] <jiboumans> please let us know how you progress ;)
[14:04] <jiboumans> moving on
[14:04] <soren> mathiaz suggested using a team ppa and interested parties can join the team and thus get the build failure e-mails as well.
[14:04] <soren> I'll set that up.
[14:05] <jiboumans> soren: good step. i'd also love to see an overview/bugs coming out of that (maybe a nice to have though)
[14:05] <soren> jiboumans: Noted.
[14:05] <jiboumans> ACTION: ScottMoser to investigate publishing new AMIs
[14:05] <jiboumans> smoser: ^
[14:06] <smoser> no movement on that.  eric tested the us-west-1 nightly some and his results were favorable.
[14:06] <jiboumans> ok, push that action to next meeting then
[14:06] <jiboumans> alpha2's more important at this point
[14:06] <smoser> but i've not done anything myself. long term, this falls into RefreshPolicy and QA and such are involved.
[14:07] <jiboumans> agreed
[14:07] <jiboumans> we'll pick it up after this milestone
[14:07] <jiboumans> the remainign action points are related to blueprints
[14:07] <jiboumans> we'll get to those in the alpha3 section
[14:07] <jiboumans> ttx: your turn for the alpha2 deliverables
[14:07] <ttx> right
[14:07] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Alpha2 milestone (ttx)
[14:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Alpha2 milestone (ttx)
[14:08] <ttx> So Alpha2 milestone will be released tomorrow
[14:08] <ttx> There are a few work items still targeted to that milestone
[14:08] <ttx> I want to make sure they are still on track, or we shoudl defer them
[14:09] <ttx> mathiaz:
[14:09] <ttx> hm
[14:09] <ttx> jib: retrospective/Establish access to central hardware when available
[14:10] <ttx> smoser: boothooks / cleanup and package new development
[14:10] <jiboumans> ttx: got word from IS today. hardware is in but not setup yet. ETA early next week, so it won't be done for alpha2 milestone
[14:10] <ttx> zul: Write MIR and update package for main requirement for ctdb
[14:10] <ttx> jiboumans: ok, will defer
[14:10] <zul> ttx: triaged waiting to hear back from lool
[14:10] <jiboumans> ttx: making the blueprint change now
[14:10] <ttx> zul: still hoping to complete by tomorrow :) ?
[14:11] <zul> if i can find lool today
[14:11] <smoser> loking
[14:11] <ttx> mathiaz; you have two from aws-client-libs
[14:11] <smoser> looking even
[14:11] <mathiaz> ttx: well - they've been added today
[14:11] <mathiaz> ttx: wasn't that supposed to be for alpha3?
[14:11] <ttx> right, the spec isn't for alpha2 anyway
[14:11] <smoser> i moved my "package stuff" to 'DONE' (as its in now).
[14:12] <jiboumans> ttx: ACTION Mathiaz to send out AWS Client lib RFC (that's what that relates to)
[14:12] <ttx> jiboumans: ok for me to move to alpha3, even if we want it very soon ?
[14:12] <jiboumans> ttx: move which one?
[14:12] <mathiaz> jiboumans: nijaba sent an email about it
[14:12] <ttx> the aws ones
[14:12] <nijaba> mathiaz: only for the part I was aksed to chekc: php
[14:12] <mathiaz> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/server-lucid-aws-client-libraries
[14:13] <jiboumans> i'd like the rfc email to go out ASAP
[14:13] <jiboumans> mathiaz, ttx: ^
[14:13] <mathiaz> jiboumans: ok
[14:13] <ttx> ok, keeping them in, then
[14:13] <ttx> mathiaz: sounds doable ?
[14:13] <mathiaz> ttx: yes
[14:13] <jiboumans> the decision can go to next meeting
[14:13] <ttx> moving on to alpha2 bugs
[14:13] <ttx> the most important one was in fact already fixed
[14:13] <ttx> (the ec2-init one)
[14:14] <ttx> just didn't autoclose on upload
[14:14]  * jjohansen fades in (sorry I am late)
[14:14] <ttx> that leaves the MIRs...
[14:14] <ttx> And the samba one (bug 462169)
[14:15] <ttx> zul: the pastedeploy MIR bug should be targeted for alpha3 now
[14:15] <zul> i have to update the MIR ones
[14:15] <zul> ttx: okies
[14:15] <jiboumans> ttx: the samba one has added: "This bug was fixed in the package samba - 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.3"
[14:15] <ttx> taht's the karmic SRU, we want it fixed in lucid as well
[14:15]  * ttx doublechecks
[14:16] <jiboumans> ttx: you're correct. lucid is set to 'in progress'
[14:16] <zul> i can do that as well
[14:16] <ttx> samba bug -> <slangasek> ttx: oh, I have that listed under foundations ;)  Yes, I'll have that fixed beginning of next week
[14:16] <ttx> that is.. yesterday
[14:16] <ttx> slangasek: defer to alpha3 ?
[14:17] <zul> the proper fix is to have an upstart job imho
[14:17] <ttx> last topic is ISO testing
[14:17] <ttx> we ahve candidates in, please test them
[14:17]  * soren is doing a bunch of that.
[14:18] <ttx> i'll be doing the UEC ones
[14:18] <soren> If anyone tries an LVM install on real hardware, please let me know the results.
[14:18] <jiboumans> [NOTE] ISO testing candidates are in. please test them!
[14:18] <ttx> and I hope to have time to do the UEC cloud images as well
[14:18] <ttx> make sure the rest is covered
[14:18] <ttx> afaict no respin is planned now
[14:18] <ttx> unless something bad happens
[14:19] <jiboumans> [ACTION] ttx coordinate ISO testing efforts
[14:19] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ttx coordinate ISO testing efforts
[14:19] <jiboumans> ttx: well volunteered, thanks
[14:19] <ttx> yaya
[14:19] <ttx> yay
[14:19] <ttx> jiboumans: alpha2 done, you're on for alpha3
[14:19] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Alpha3 subcycle planning (jib)
[14:19] <MootBot> New Topic:  Alpha3 subcycle planning (jib)
[14:20] <jiboumans> We're trying to get our alpha3 roadmap in order by the end of the week
[14:20] <jiboumans> as you know, we've only planned until alpha2 so far, and we're now filling in the remaining work for alpha3
[14:21] <jiboumans> for that we're collecting feedback as we go. We've made a preliminary pass from the server team, which is reflected in launchpad: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/~jib/+specs?role=approver
[14:21] <jiboumans> preliminary workitems can be seen here: http://macaroni.ubuntu.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-server-lucid-alpha-3.html
[14:21] <jiboumans> any feedback or opinions you have are welcome on the mailinglist :)
[14:22] <jiboumans> i'd like to quickly focus on the community driven blueprints:
[14:22] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] server-lucid-cluster-stack
[14:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  server-lucid-cluster-stack
[14:22] <jiboumans> ivoks: ^
[14:22] <jiboumans> ACTION ivoks to update server-lucid-cluster-stack with lucid (and alpha3) goals
[14:22] <ivoks> well, we have a good progress there
[14:22] <ivoks> beta quality packages are there
[14:22] <ivoks> blueprint was updated
[14:22] <jiboumans> ivoks++
[14:22] <ivoks> and we are in the testhing phase
[14:23] <ivoks> testing
[14:23] <jiboumans> saw your mails on the list; looks like very good stuff
[14:23]  * ttx hugs his favorite croatian
[14:23] <ivoks> :)
[14:23] <jiboumans> ... i read that as crustacean...
[14:23] <ivoks> so, this should be ready for alpha3
[14:24] <nijaba> \o/
[14:24] <jiboumans> ivoks: we're particularly interested in your experience of redhat cluster suite vs pacemaker & co
[14:24] <jiboumans> ivoks: when do you think you could tell us a bit more about that?
[14:24] <ivoks> jiboumans: atm pacemaker looks very very nice
[14:24] <ivoks> well, we had a discussion about it at uds
[14:24] <ivoks> pacemaker is only one part of future, yet unnamed, cluster stack
[14:25] <ivoks> there's also cluster-glue, cluster-agents, etc...
[14:25] <ivoks> basicaly, everybody is working on common cluster stack (all distros and some vendors)
[14:25] <ivoks> will that kill rhcs... i doubt it, but it should be better at some point
[14:26] <ivoks> problem with rhcs in ubuntu now is that very few people use it nad even less know how it works
[14:26] <ivoks> pacemaker is much easier to setup
[14:26] <jiboumans> ivoks: i think you're aware of the promotion/demotion discusion around redhat cluster, so I'm sure mathiaz and zul are very interested in the input you can provide there
[14:26] <ttx> ivoks: could you explain what the different components do ?
[14:27] <ivoks> i could copy paste :)
[14:27] <ivoks> http://www.linux-ha.org/wiki/Cluster_Glue
[14:27] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://www.linux-ha.org/wiki/Cluster_Glue
[14:27] <ttx> "Glue is everything that is not the cluster messaging layer (Heartbeat), nor the cluster resource manager (Pacemaker), nor a Resource Agent. "
[14:27] <ttx> makes sense
[14:27] <ivoks> Cluster Glue is a set of libraries, tools and utilities suitable for the Heartbeat/Pacemaker cluster stack. In essence, Glue is everything that is not the cluster messaging layer (Heartbeat), nor the cluster resource manager (Pacemaker), nor a Resource Agent.
[14:28] <ivoks> so, idea is that future rhcs and future (let's call it) pacemaker cluster
[14:28] <ivoks> share common libraries and agents
[14:28] <ttx> ivoks: that's future development, not part of your current spec iiuc
[14:28] <ivoks> our spec is 'follow what's going on'
[14:29] <ttx> that's not a spec, that's an interest
[14:29] <ttx> :P
[14:29] <ivoks> and if you ask me now what we should push for next 5 years in lucid, that would be pacemaker
[14:29] <mathiaz> ivoks: will the pacemaker-based stack be feature equivalent to rhcs in the lucid timeframe?
[14:30] <ivoks> hard to say cause they don't share the same philosophy
[14:30] <ivoks> for example, rhcs belives in quorum disks, while pacemaker doesn't
[14:30] <ivoks> there's also GFS2, which isn't yet supported in pacemaker
[14:30] <soren> ivoks: What does it support instead?
[14:30] <soren> ocfs?
[14:30] <ivoks> but ocfs2 is
[14:30] <soren> Ok.
[14:31] <ivoks> i wouldn't mind demoting rhcs to universe, even though we don't get pacemaker in main
[14:31] <jiboumans> ivoks: thanks for the summary. please share your ongoing experiences with us :)
[14:32] <ivoks> sure
[14:32] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] server-lucid-contextualization
[14:32] <MootBot> New Topic:  server-lucid-contextualization
[14:32] <jiboumans> stgraber: just to confirm you're in good shape for the alpha3 related parts
[14:33] <jiboumans> stgraber appears idle. hopefully this will show up in his scrollback :)
[14:33] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] server-lucid-asterisk-integration
[14:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  server-lucid-asterisk-integration
[14:33] <jiboumans> ACTION: jmdault to update server-lucid-asterisk-integration blueprint with alpha3 & post-alpha3 workitems and change syntax to match Pitti's workitems WorkItemsHowto
[14:34] <jiboumans> Daviey, dyfet if you're around; just a quick check you're in good shape for alpha3
[14:34] <stgraber> sorry, wasn't looking at IRC
[14:34] <stgraber> jiboumans: I requested a sync for LXC this week, the new package is in Debian (for the userspace tool)
[14:35] <jiboumans> stgraber: we've targeted this spec today for alpha3 as the work items affect feature freeze
[14:35] <stgraber> jiboumans: I also contacted LXC upstream about a few small issues in current LXC and I now have a few good contacts with upstream
[14:35] <dyfet> there is new dahdi packages ready
[14:35] <jmdault> o/
[14:36] <stgraber> jiboumans: yep, I expect to have the MIR written and approved by then (for the userspace tool)
[14:36] <jiboumans> stgraber++ excellent, thanks for the update
[14:36] <jiboumans> ok, asterisk once again :)
[14:36] <jiboumans> ACTION: jmdault to update server-lucid-asterisk-integration blueprint with alpha3 & post-alpha3 workitems and change syntax to match Pitti's workitems WorkItemsHowto
[14:36] <jiboumans> Daviey, dyfet if you're around; just a quick check you're in good shape for alp
[14:36] <stgraber> jiboumans: I'm also waiting for libcap support in libvirt, I think it's either soren or jdstrand who have that bullet point assigned to them
[14:37] <dyfet> I will defer to jmdault
[14:37] <soren> Me, probably.
[14:37] <jiboumans> stgraber: they do, it's targeted for alpha3 for soren
[14:37] <jdstrand> my bullet is for the merge
[14:37] <jdstrand> Debian is still fiddling with 0.7.5
[14:37] <jmdault> dyfet: thx
[14:37] <jdstrand> (plus I haven't had time to do it yet)
[14:38] <jmdault> dyfet: we'll need lots of testing
[14:39] <jiboumans> jmdault: it looks like all work items should be targeted for alpha3, except perhaps: Further testing pre-release: TODO
[14:39] <jiboumans> jmdault: i'd appreciate it if you could update the blueprint to match the WorkItemsHowto as per the action point. would that be ok?
[14:40] <jmdault> jiboumans: yes, I'm doing that today
[14:40] <jiboumans> jmdault: excellent. could you also confirm you're confident for the alpha3 deliverables?
[14:41] <jmdault> jiboumans: yes, very confident, all the dahdi build problems have been resolved
[14:41] <jiboumans> jmdault++ dyfet++ daviey++
[14:41] <jmdault> jiboumans: so  I'm 99% confident
[14:41] <jiboumans> excellent. thanks all for your update
[14:41] <jiboumans> next topic:
[14:42] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Alpha3 blueprints that request community feedback
[14:42] <MootBot> New Topic:  Alpha3 blueprints that request community feedback
[14:42] <jiboumans> ttx?
[14:42] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] server-lucid-papercuts (ttx)
[14:42] <MootBot> New Topic:  server-lucid-papercuts (ttx)
[14:42] <ttx> yes, so I sent an email about that project to the ubuntu-server ml
[14:42] <jiboumans> also: ACTION: ThierryCarrez to send background mail on papercuts project for next weeks discussion
[14:42] <ttx> "The idea is to spend time during this less-featureful development cycle
[14:42] <ttx> to fix server usability issues that make Ubuntu Server less
[14:42] <ttx> sysadmin-friendly."
[14:43] <ttx> This is a global effort, so I'd like to discuss part of the design during the alpha3 period
[14:43] <ttx> get community's advice on it
[14:43] <ttx> Today I want to discuss the nomination mechanism
[14:43] <ttx> Two options were mentioned in the mail
[14:43] <ttx> LP project approach:
[14:43] <ttx> * Nominate by marking Also affects project
[14:43] <ttx> * Accept by marking bug Confirmed for the project
[14:43] <ttx> * Reject by marking bug Invalid for the project
[14:43] <ttx> * Find bugs by looking at project bugs
[14:43] <ttx> * Fix-release in both Ubuntu and project
[14:43] <ttx> LP tag approach:
[14:43] <ttx> * Nominate by tagging server-papercut-proposed
[14:43] <ttx> * Accept by tagging server-papercut
[14:43] <ttx> * Reject by marking server-papercut-refused
[14:44] <ttx> * Find bugs by searching for tags
[14:44] <ttx> * Fix-release in Ubuntu
[14:44] <ttx> which one should we pursue ?
[14:44] <ttx> I tend to prefer the tag approach, but we had someone in the ML preferring the project approach
[14:44] <ttx> tag is more integrated
[14:44] <jiboumans> ttx, do we have an answer to this: "I do not see anywhere (like I said, I may be missing out on a feature) the
[14:44] <zul> project aproach
[14:44] <jiboumans> ability to "subscribe" to tags."
[14:45] <ttx> jiboumans: nothing already built in LP that I know of
[14:45] <ttx> i.e. if you don't add some home-made glue
[14:45] <ttx> I agree that increases the barrier of entry
[14:45] <ttx> so Lp project, everyone agrees ?
[14:45] <jiboumans> ttx: my vote is on transparency. if all things are not equal i vote project
[14:45] <zul> i think the project aproach increases visibility
[14:46] <ttx> the price to pay is /some/ redundancy
[14:46] <ttx> I'm surprised mathiaz doesn't vote for tag :)
[14:46] <mathiaz> ttx: works for me
[14:46] <ttx> ok, then project it is
[14:46] <ttx> jiboumans: action me on creating that one
[14:47] <jiboumans> [ACTION] ttx to create project approach for papercuts
[14:47] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ttx to create project approach for papercuts
[14:47] <erichammond> "subscribe to tag" would also be very helpful for the ec2-images tag.  When that got switched from a project to a tag, I sort of lost visibility.
[14:47] <jiboumans> ttx: what's the next step for papercuts?
[14:47] <ttx> discuss acceptance criteria, project publicity plan
[14:47] <ttx> that's for next week
[14:47] <ttx> I'll post a followup on the ML
[14:47] <ttx> action me on that as well
[14:48] <jiboumans> [ACTION] ttx for papercuts: discuss acceptance criteria, project publicity plan
[14:48] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ttx for papercuts: discuss acceptance criteria, project publicity plan
[14:48] <jiboumans> well volunteered
[14:48] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] server-lucid-apport-hooks (ttx)
[14:48] <MootBot> New Topic:  server-lucid-apport-hooks (ttx)
[14:48] <ttx> This is also a shared effort, we want to add apport hooks to as many packages as we can
[14:48] <ttx> and follow up on the meeting on progress regularly
[14:48] <ttx> zul will lead that effort
[14:49] <zul> yay!
[14:49] <ttx> anyone is interested in participating in this ?
[14:49] <jiboumans> [ACTION] Mathiaz to publish papercuts & apport efforts in our blog/community channels
[14:49] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Mathiaz to publish papercuts & apport efforts in our blog/community channels
[14:50] <ttx> zul: you should come up with a open-ended list of candidates based on the number of bugs
[14:50] <ttx> and we'll have a point at next week meeting about it
[14:50] <ttx> see if there are any takers
[14:50] <zul> ttx: we did that in the spec
[14:50] <ttx> jiboumans: anything else on that subject ?
[14:50] <ttx> zul: I think there should be more candidates
[14:50] <jiboumans> ttx: don't think so. right now it's about awareness and exposure
[14:50] <zul> ttx: ok
[14:51] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (ttx)
[14:51] <MootBot> New Topic:  Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (ttx)
[14:51] <ttx> hah
[14:51] <ttx> checking the list
[14:51] <ttx> woo groovy new look
[14:51] <ttx> nothing assigned to team, still too much in kirkland and zulcss list
[14:52] <ttx> anything blocking someone to report ?
[14:52] <ttx> this list isn't useful until it's trimmed down
[14:52] <zul> im actually going to find some time this week to do some of it
[14:53] <jiboumans> ttx: let's pick this up internally and do a triage round once alpha2 is out the door
[14:53] <ttx> jiboumans: action zul/kirkland in trimming their list ?
[14:53] <ttx> ok
[14:53] <ttx> next
[14:53] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (soren)
[14:53] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (soren)
[14:53] <soren> o/
[14:54] <soren> So, this is alpha week.
[14:54] <ttx> alpha2, even
[14:54] <soren> We need all the help we can get to get through the ever growing list of ISO test cases.
[14:54] <soren> ttx: The best sort of alpha!
[14:54] <jiboumans> [ACTION] mathias to publish request for iso testing in our regular blog/community channels
[14:54] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mathias to publish request for iso testing in our regular blog/community channels
[14:54] <soren> Some of them are already covered, but please take a few hours out of your schedule to do some of the ones that noone apparantly wants to do :)
[14:54] <mathiaz> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/ <- list of ISO test cases
[14:55] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/ <- list of ISO test cases
[14:55] <soren> I've noticed that many of the test cases are slightly outdated.
[14:55] <soren> The list of steps are not complete, so we need to get them to actually correspond to the steps you need to take during an install.
[14:55] <ttx> soren: i've updated some UEC ones recently
[14:55] <ttx> soren: to reflect current state/names
[14:55] <soren> If people could do that while they go through the installs, that would be very helpful.
[14:56] <jiboumans> ttx: part of the coordinate ISO tests for you?
[14:56] <soren> As I mentioned earlier, if someone does an LVM install, please ping me on IRC with the results.
[14:56] <ttx> part of the "running tests"
[14:56] <soren> I'm having some troubles with those, you see.
[14:56] <jiboumans> ttx: sure; just making sure we have decent coverage
[14:57] <jiboumans> soren: any other updates from the QA team?
[14:57] <soren> I'm currently running automated tests of the default install, the bind9 test case, the lamp test case, and the mail test case. On i386 and amd64.
[14:57] <mathiaz> soren: how have you automated the tests?
[14:57] <soren> I'll be doing that every day from now until release so that we know very quickly if there are regressions.
[14:57] <mathiaz> soren: via checkbox?
[14:58] <soren> mathiaz: Nope, it's currently using autotest.
[14:58] <mathiaz> soren: how does the reporting works?
[14:58] <soren> mathiaz: It spits out a report in the end. I just need to put it somewhere.
[14:58] <soren> mathiaz: Today is the first time I'm running it where everything seems to be working, so I haven't attacked the reporting part yet, really.
[14:58] <mathiaz> soren: ok - who's responsible for checking the report and filing bugs if things break?
[14:59] <soren> mathiaz: That would be me, since it's currently running on a machine in my office :)
[14:59] <mathiaz> soren: I'd suggest to check with c3 - and try to get the test included in the tests he runs
[15:00] <mathiaz> soren: that way it's all part of the QA regression tests that he does
[15:00] <soren> mathiaz: That's the goal.
[15:00] <soren> mathiaz: I've just not gotten that far yet.
[15:00] <mathiaz> soren: glad to hear that !
[15:00] <jiboumans> soren: any other updates from the QA team?
[15:01] <soren> jiboumans: Not much. We've got a round of interview for the server QA position this week, so that spot might be filled soon. We're hoping :)
[15:01] <soren> Apart from that, I don't have anytihng.
[15:01] <jiboumans> soren++ thanks for the update. any questions for QA?
[15:01] <ttx> nope
[15:02] <jiboumans> ok, great. next topic
[15:02] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[15:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[15:02] <jiboumans> Bug 494565 is the first on the list :)
[15:02] <jjohansen> jiboumans: right, its top of my list for next week
[15:03] <jiboumans> jjohansen: great. as you know we have a blueprint depending on it
[15:03] <jiboumans> jjohansen: any updates from the kernel team for this week?
[15:03] <jjohansen> yeah I would like to get it nailed down next week
[15:04] <jjohansen> not that I can think of, we froze the kernel on friday and most changes were in thursday
[15:04] <jiboumans> jjohansen: as a heads up, we've targeted this spec for alpha3: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/server-lucid-other-cloud-providers
[15:04] <mathiaz> jjohansen: I ran into a pci hotplug error
[15:05] <jiboumans> relevant for you are any kernel issues that may be coming up to run on rackspace's environment
[15:05] <jjohansen> mathiaz: thanks
[15:05] <mathiaz> jjohansen: when doing some ebs testing on UEC
[15:05] <mathiaz> jjohansen: have you seen the bug?
[15:05] <jjohansen> no
[15:05] <mathiaz> jjohansen: bug 506698
[15:05] <jjohansen> jiboumans: I am not aware of anything
[15:06] <jiboumans> jjohansen: we expect to discover them during alpha3 if they exist. hopefully non will surface ofcourse
[15:06] <mathiaz> jjohansen: when libvirt/kvm removes the device, the guest see this warning/error message
[15:06] <jjohansen> mathiaz: okay I'll have a look
[15:07] <mathiaz> jjohansen: thanks
[15:07] <jiboumans> any other questions for the kernel team?
[15:07] <jiboumans> ok, great
[15:07] <jiboumans> seems i missed a bit of discussion earlier though, my appologies. so:
[15:07] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] server-lucid-aws-client-libraries
[15:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  server-lucid-aws-client-libraries
[15:07] <jiboumans> we had some outstanding action points
[15:08] <jiboumans> ACTION jib to complete Perl list for AWS client libs
[15:08] <jiboumans> i've added the perl modlues to the wiki
[15:08] <jiboumans> in most cases we only have one choice, and at least 2 of them are only provided by amazon, meaning we have to investigate their license
[15:08] <jiboumans> mathiaz: let me know if you need more info on this
[15:08] <jiboumans> ACTION nijaba to complete PHP list for AWS client libs
[15:09] <nijaba> see http://nicolas.barcet.com/drupal/fr/php-ec2-libraries I would recommend packaging tarzan
[15:09] <jiboumans> mathiaz: ^
[15:09] <mathiaz> nijaba: could you add it to the wiki page?
[15:10] <nijaba> mathiaz: sure
[15:10] <mathiaz> nijaba: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AWSClientLibraries
[15:10] <jiboumans> nijaba: did you check for libraries for all the services? or is tarzan doing it all?
[15:10] <nijaba> jiboumans: there is not that many in total in PHP.
[15:11] <jiboumans> nijaba: i saw some by amazon, beyond just ec2 though
[15:11] <nijaba> jiboumans: zend and Tarzan cover most services
[15:11] <erichammond> jiboumans: I'm pretty sure that Amazon released their SimpleDB package under the Apache 2 license.  They seemed somewhat supportive of adding it to CPAN, though it was difficult to find anybody in charge who could answer authoritatively.  It's been about a year since I pursued the issue with them.
[15:11] <jiboumans> erichammond: if you have a contact, i can facilitate from the perl side
[15:12] <zul> nijaba: is it easy to package? ;)
[15:12] <nijaba> zul: I have not gone that far
[15:13] <jiboumans> ACTION Mathiaz to send out AWS Client lib RFC
[15:13] <mathiaz> jiboumans: you've already re-actioned me this one
[15:14] <jiboumans> i don't recall, but i'll trust you
[15:14] <jiboumans> as it stands, we have input for perl/python/php
[15:14] <jiboumans> barring easily packagable or community efforts for the other languages, i suggest we target only those 3 for alpha3
[15:14] <ttx> jiboumans: ack
[15:15] <jiboumans> ok, moving on
[15:15] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Weekly SRU review: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review (mathiaz)
[15:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly SRU review: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review (mathiaz)
[15:15] <mathiaz> jdstrand: is the security team working on bug 379329?
[15:15] <mathiaz> that's the only bug being nominated for this week
[15:16] <mathiaz> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[15:16] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[15:16] <mathiaz> ^^ anything SRU worth in last week's fixed bugs?
[15:17] <ttx> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vsftpd/+bug/462749
[15:17] <zul> i was just about to say that
[15:17] <ttx> was wondering about bug 502071
[15:18] <mathiaz> bug 462749 accepted for karmic
[15:18] <ttx> SA srus were done already
[15:18] <ttx> that's all for me
[15:18] <mathiaz> ttx: SA is all good - thanks to ScottK work
[15:19] <mathiaz> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/acceptedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[15:19] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/acceptedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[15:19] <mathiaz> ^^ make sure that things are moving on this front as well
[15:19] <mathiaz> That's all for the SRU review
[15:19] <jiboumans> thanks mathiaz
[15:19] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Using bzr for package maintenance (zul)
[15:19] <MootBot> New Topic:  Using bzr for package maintenance (zul)
[15:20] <zul> so i just want to get people to use bzr branches for server packages more often and want to know what people think, especially mathiaz
[15:20] <mathiaz> zul: it's a good thing!
[15:21] <ttx> bzr-branches++
[15:21] <zul> i been using bzr branches more and I think it would be a good idea to get more poeple to use it more, maybe write some documentation on how we should use it
[15:21] <ivoks> yes, docs please
[15:21] <ivoks> :D
[15:21] <mathiaz> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/Documentation
[15:21] <mathiaz> ^^ this is what james_w has been writing up
[15:21] <ttx> zul: are you missing something in particular ?
[15:21] <mathiaz> to cover working with package branches
[15:22] <ttx> not enough people doing it ?
[15:22] <zul> ttx: not enough people doing it and we might need some policy
[15:22] <ttx> policy for waht ? Everything should be submitted in branches ?
[15:22] <mathiaz> one proposal was to push for using pkg branches in the SRU process
[15:22] <mathiaz> combined with the LP review process
[15:23] <zul> yeah I been doing that when I have time for SRU
[15:23] <smoser> i've a question..
[15:23] <smoser> so when i push a branch as a fix for a bug, it gets magically attached.
[15:23] <smoser> but then once that bug is fixed, i often want to trash that branch
[15:24] <smoser> is there any negative effect of that ? ie, the branch i attach for the fix often includes just the single fix i want, to avoid confusion for anyone.
[15:24] <mathiaz> smoser: you can edit the status of the bzr branch in LP
[15:24] <mathiaz> smoser: and mark it merged
[15:24] <mathiaz> smoser: that way it won't show up in the default LP listings for branches
[15:24] <smoser> then it would cease to show up on my list .
[15:24] <ttx> mathiaz: it would still appear on the bug ?
[15:24] <smoser> ah. thats reasonable.
[15:24] <mathiaz> smoser: but LP still knows about it
[15:24] <mathiaz> ttx: I think so
[15:25] <ttx> ok
[15:25] <zul> thats it from me
[15:25] <jiboumans> any actions coming from this?
[15:25] <ivoks> pain
[15:25] <ttx> zul: ok -- at this point it's difficult to ask patch submitters to replace their debdiff by a branch proposal
[15:25] <ivoks> :D
[15:26] <ttx> so I don't think there is much to set in stone in a policy
[15:26] <jiboumans> ivoks: the good kind, surely
[15:26] <zul> ttx: true i just want to encourage people more to use bzr branches
[15:27] <ttx> ok, I think that's done, then
[15:27] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[15:27] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[15:27] <jiboumans> please, not all at once ;)
[15:27] <ivoks> o/
[15:28] <ivoks> we haven't mentioned mail-stack blueprint
[15:28] <ivoks> ScottK is assigned, but i'll be working on it
[15:28] <jiboumans> ivoks: ok, we cleared the spec a few meetings ago, so we didn't have it on teh agenda
[15:28] <ivoks> so if someone has the power of chaning assignee, please do
[15:28] <jiboumans> happy to
[15:29] <ivoks> thanks
[15:29] <jiboumans> ivoks: well volunteered, done
[15:29] <jiboumans> ivoks: anything about the spec itself?
[15:29] <ivoks> all except debconf integration should be doable for alpha3
[15:30] <jiboumans> ttx, ivoks: debconf sounds like something that would have to be done for featurefreeze, no?
[15:30] <mathiaz> jiboumans: yes - I'd say so
[15:30] <ttx> jiboumans: yes
[15:31] <jiboumans> alright, so what do we do with this item?
[15:31] <ivoks> we could convert it into: make packages ask questions
[15:31] <mathiaz> jiboumans: try to stick it into alpha3
[15:31] <ttx> ivoks: that would still be a feature
[15:31] <mathiaz> jiboumans: if not - plan to ask for a FeatureFreeze Exception if it's important
[15:32] <ivoks> ttx: yes, but easily done
[15:33] <ttx> well, those questions are pretty essential
[15:33] <ivoks> i don't think so
[15:33] <ttx> "Debconf will be used to gather additional information to get to a fully functional system. "
[15:33] <ivoks> those are 'what kind of mail server do you want us to set up for you?'
[15:34] <ivoks> for example, do you want postgrey, rbl, etc
[15:34] <ivoks> we could assume that if someone installs postgrey-postfix that she wants it
[15:35] <jiboumans> ivoks, ttx: to summarize, if the debconf questions are essential for setting up the system, they need to be done for alpha3
[15:35] <jiboumans> if they're not, let's reflect that in the work items
[15:35] <ivoks> ok
[15:35] <ttx> jiboumans: ack
[15:35] <jiboumans> if it's a bit of each, split the items; we can't guarantee an exception and it'd be a shame to miss the window
[15:35] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Next meeting is next Wednesday from 14:00 UTC to 15:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting
[15:35] <MootBot> New Topic:  Next meeting is next Wednesday from 14:00 UTC to 15:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting
[15:35] <jiboumans> hopefully with a less crowded agenda
[15:36] <ttx> hm
[15:36] <jiboumans> thanks all for your time, now let's get alpha2 out the door :)
[15:36] <jiboumans> #endmeeting
[15:36] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 09:36.
[15:58] <lool> Heya
[15:59] <doko> barry, cjwatson, ev, ga, james_w, lool, mvo, Keybuk, slangasek, robbiew: ping meeting in 2min
[15:59] <ev> hi
[16:00] <tremolux> hey folks
[16:00] <mvo> hji
[16:01]  * slangasek waves
[16:01] <doko> #startmeeting
[16:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:01. The chair is doko.
[16:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:01] <slangasek> ttx: yeah, defer, unfortunately
[16:02] <ttx> slangasek: no pb
[16:02] <ttx> will do
[16:02] <doko> anybody missing?
[16:02] <slangasek> not me!
[16:02]  * lool i o O ( Anybody missing please raise hand )
[16:02] <doko> [TOPIC] lightning rounds ...
[16:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  lightning rounds ...
[16:03] <doko> slangasek: please start
[16:03] <slangasek> alpha2 && !sleep
[16:04] <slangasek> (that's a sentence, right?)
[16:04] <lool> WFM
[16:04] <doko> the template does require 2-4, but anyway
[16:05] <doko> lool: continue?
[16:05] <lool> Was on training a couple of days; did a random set of Ubuntu and OEM stuff around pbuilder and ARM for instance, and need to focus on higher priority projects in the next week.
[16:05] <lool> (done)
[16:06] <doko> mvo: ?
[16:07] <mvo> software-center: bugfixing & working on the reviews branch
[16:07] <mvo> support-timeframe: blocked on review lp:~mvo/launchpad/support-timeframe-information from someone from LP
[16:07] <mvo> misc updates for alpha-2 (app-install, command-not-found, apt-ddtp, ...)
[16:08] <doko> mvo: I suppose you handle the blocker yourself?
[16:08] <mvo> doko: yes
[16:08] <mvo> I will keep asking and if nothing happens start making noise
[16:08] <mvo> but for now I need patience
[16:08] <doko> ev: next?
[16:09] <ev> Nearly there on translated keyboard names, just need to get console-setup building.  Giving further review to the ubiquity design specification.  Looking into why we're calling os-prober 10 times in an install from ubiquity.
[16:09] <ev> Going to start on jockey support in ubiquity just as soon as I merge my keyboard guessing branch and translated keyboard names stuff.  Looking for areas where UTF-8 passwords break.  Found out that ubiquity is currently broken for zh_CN due to bug 495012.
[16:09] <ev> blocked: Waiting to hear back from IS on the geoip database.
[16:09] <ev> done
[16:09] <cjwatson> [sorry I'm so late - the school run took much longer than usual]
[16:09] <ev> erm, that should be bug 506996
[16:10] <doko> ok, I'll go next
[16:11] <doko> ARM - tracking/forwarding toolchain bug reports, OOo build workaround for arm
[16:11] <doko> GCC-4.5 test rebuild (based on a Debian rebuild by lucas), up to now filed 20 GCC reports, and 160 reports for packages (need to find an automatic way to import and tag these reports into lp)
[16:11] <doko> IcedTea6-1.7 release testing
[16:11] <doko> done
[16:12] <doko> cjwatson: ?
[16:12] <cjwatson> done: progress on foundations-lucid-reliable-device-id-in-grub, preparing to send to Debian for feedback; unfortunately most time this week spent on Chrome OS build system work
[16:12] <cjwatson> blocked: nothing, except bug in Earth's rotational period allows only 24 hours per day
[16:12] <cjwatson> todo: finish this iteration on foundations-lucid-reliable-device-id-in-grub; move on to designing the UI layouts for LVM/RAID in ubiquity
[16:13] <cjwatson> oh and maybe also look at repeated debconf-communicate startups in ubiquity
[16:14] <cjwatson> [done]
[16:14] <doko> james_w, barry, Garry, Keybuk?
[16:15] <doko> [TOPIC] outstanding actions from last week?
[16:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  outstanding actions from last week?
[16:15] <doko> I can't see any in the report from last week
[16:15] <cjwatson> Keybuk's on holiday, per calendar
[16:15] <cjwatson> james_w is at an LP sprint
[16:16] <doko> thanks
[16:16] <tremolux> I'm here, want my lightning round?  :)
[16:16] <cjwatson> ("Build From Branch Sprint")
[16:16] <doko> tremolux: sure, just missed the nickname :/
[16:16] <tremolux> no prob  :)
[16:16] <tremolux> Finished code (in software-center) to maintain app selection for all cases when
[16:16] <tremolux> a list view is refreshed; branch uploaded for mvo review.
[16:16] <tremolux> Continue working on bugs.
[16:16] <tremolux> Got Lean trained.
[16:16] <tremolux> that's all
[16:16] <tremolux> thanks
[16:17] <doko> [TOPIC] Any business from activity reports
[16:17] <MootBot> New Topic:  Any business from activity reports
[16:17] <doko> I didn't see any so far (topics)
[16:17] <ev> we're over the line in the burndown chart
[16:18] <slangasek> ev: is there a burndown chart that's been updated in the past 3 days?
[16:18] <cjwatson> does anyone have things they explicitly want to redistribute to others?
[16:18] <ev> oh, I hadn't noticed it stopped updating
[16:18] <slangasek> (though yes, we're probably over anyway)
[16:18] <lool> it broke when parsing some blueprint when i ran it locally two days ago
[16:19] <lool> I told pitti  but didn't debug the underlying issue
[16:19] <cjwatson> I haven't been getting mail about parse errors - I normally would
[16:19] <cjwatson> maybe that's stopped happening with the new version
[16:19] <lool> In my case:
[16:19] <lool> 18:07 <lool> IOError: [Errno 36] File name too long: '/home/lool/.launchpadlib/api.edge.launchpad.net/cache/api.edge.launchpad.net,beta,ubuntu,+source,nvidia-graphics-drivers-173,+bug,474917,related_tasks-application,json,a7caeeaceb2eecb9f25ae7c30a177c68'
[16:19] <doko> anybody who wants to take care about that?
[16:19] <lool> It might or might not be the same issue pitti is hitting
[16:20] <doko> will note as open isue
[16:21] <slangasek> nobody has any workitems they want redistributed, otherwise?
[16:21] <lool> I guess I can start by pinging pitti again to confirm it's the issue
[16:22] <doko> ok
[16:22] <doko> slangasek: release meeting this week?
[16:22] <cjwatson> burndown chart: http://macaroni.ubuntu.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-foundations.html, except the line has been reset :-(
[16:23] <slangasek> doko: yes
[16:23] <slangasek> cjwatson: hah - well, we're above that line too
[16:23] <cjwatson> which I suppose was necessary because it now includes quite a few more items, but it's still a bit of a shame
[16:24] <doko> [TOPIC] Reminder for release meeting
[16:24] <MootBot> New Topic:  Reminder for release meeting
[16:24] <doko> slangasek: anything about release meeting/alpha-2?
[16:24] <lool> ev, slangasek: Oh you folks were looking at the piware.de one?
[16:25] <ev> lool: I was, yes.
[16:25] <slangasek> there are also a large number of WIs there that are team assigned; perhaps people should review the ones related to their specs and make sure we find real people to assign them to
[16:25] <slangasek> doko: please help with ISO testing
[16:25] <cjwatson> I sent mvo a mail about most of those team-assigned WIs a while back, not sure I acted on the reply though ...
[16:26] <lool> slangasek, ev: Talking to pitti: piware.de full cycle chart will be removed; piware.de is only used for A2 team charts and everything will be macaroni in the future (per his email)
[16:26] <slangasek> also, please have a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+bugs?field.milestone=21444 and make sure any bugs you have there are on track for resolution (probably not for alpha-2, but we don't want to wait for the week of a3 either)
[16:26] <ev> lool: okay, thanks
[16:26] <mvo> some of the softtware-center ones are still unassigned, I replied to that mail, but I think its just too many work items that got assigned to us
[16:29] <doko> for the pending MIR's an archive-admin is needed, doesn't need to be pitti
[16:29] <slangasek> doko: what pending MIRs?
[16:29] <slangasek> the ones on the milestone bug list?
[16:30] <doko> python-openid, pastescript, nagios-nrpe
[16:30] <doko> yes
[16:30] <lool> MIR are approved
[16:30] <slangasek> incorrect, those need someone to actually seed the packages
[16:30] <lool> In Progress is approved
[16:30] <lool> Just need seed changes + upload + promotion
[16:30] <slangasek> archive admin isn't supposed to change the overrides until the package has been seeded
[16:31] <slangasek> (otherwise they just show up on the component-mismatches list as candidates for demotion again)
[16:31] <doko> ok, I'll take care of these three
[16:32] <slangasek> do you know where they're meant to be seeded?
[16:32] <slangasek> (I would've expected server team to handle this before now)
[16:33] <doko> well, yes, addressing the submitters to seed those
[16:33]  * slangasek nods
[16:34] <doko> [TOPIC] good news?
[16:34] <MootBot> New Topic:  good news?
[16:35] <slangasek> OOo hasn't FTBFS on armel yet? :)
[16:35]  * mvo made launchpadlib and the software-center gtk ui work together nicely 
[16:35] <doko> but the compiler bug isn't reproducible with upstream builds :/
[16:36] <slangasek> heh
[16:36] <doko> [TOPIC] chair for next meeting?
[16:36] <MootBot> New Topic:  chair for next meeting?
[16:37]  * lool o/
[16:38] <doko> [TOPIC] any other business?
[16:38] <MootBot> New Topic:  any other business?
[16:40] <doko> so it looks we are finished?
[16:40] <lool> doko: Thanks for chairing
[16:40] <doko> #endmeeting
[16:40] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:40.
[16:40] <slangasek> thanks!
[16:42] <mvo> thanks
[16:44] <ev> thanks
[16:58]  * marjo waves
[16:59] <davmor2> hello
[16:59] <bdmurray> hi
[16:59]  * fader_ waves.
[17:00] <sbeattie> hey
[17:00]  * pedro_ waves
[17:00]  * ara waves
[17:00] <marjo> #startmeeting QA Team
[17:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:00. The chair is marjo.
[17:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:00] <marjo> Agenda:
[17:01] <marjo> # SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie)
[17:01] <marjo> # Bugday highlights -- pedro
[17:01] <marjo> #
[17:01] <marjo> Future of Ubuntu QA Launchpad team (https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-qa) -- ara
[17:01] <marjo> # Calls for testing: mailing list or "Contact This Team" -- ara
[17:01] <marjo> [TOPIC] SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie)
[17:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie)
[17:02] <sbeattie> SRU activity was light this week, probably due to everyone working on alpha 2 stuff.
[17:02]  * soren wanders in
[17:02] <sbeattie> SRU Activity report for the past week (since 2009-12-09):
[17:02] <sbeattie> * karmic: 9 new packages in -proposed (cairo, gcc-4.4, gnome-screensaver, grub2, libxml2, linux, linux-backports-modules-2.6.31, opensc, xserver-xorg-video-intel) and 9 packages pushed to -updates (asterisk, eglibc, gnome-screensaver, landscape-client, linux, muse, postgis, samba, vlc)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * jaunty: 1 package pushed to -updates (landscape-client)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * intrepid: 2 packages pushed to -updates (landscape-client, smart)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * hardy: no SRU activity
[17:02] <sbeattie> * dapper: no SRU activity
[17:02] <sbeattie> Thanks to Konrad Paumann, till kahle, Benedikt Wegmann, Eberhard Beilharz, Terrasque, Andrew Bennetts, Dmitri Petros, matze, Jaap, Manuel, saniac, Dominik, Mike Gratton, Petri Lehtinen, Guillaume Bottex, Rune Svendsen, Luciano Faletti, Jean-Baptiste Lallem, Alex Sidorenko, Ryan Finnie, and Fabrice Coutadeur for testing packages in -proposed this week.
[17:02] <soren> Sorry I'm late, I had a humungous spider I needed to... um.... "handle". :)
[17:03] <marjo> soren: thanks for sharing...
[17:03] <sbeattie> that's all I have for SRUs.
[17:03] <marjo> sbeattie: i'm curious re: xserver* proposed updates
[17:04] <marjo> any negative reports, so far?
[17:05] <sbeattie> marjo: I'm not seeing anything with the respective bug reports...
[17:05] <marjo> sbeattie: ok, thx; i will reinstall them on my system and report accordingly
[17:06] <sbeattie> marjo: that'd be appreciated, thanks!
[17:06] <marjo> test kernel from manjo has been stable for a few days
[17:06] <marjo> so, maybe x is ok
[17:06] <marjo> [TOPIC] Bugday highlights -- pedro
[17:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Bugday highlights -- pedro
[17:06] <pedro_> The first bug day of this year will be celebrated Tomorrow
[17:07] <pedro_> the target is.. Gnome Power Manager : https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20100114
[17:07] <pedro_> so we welcome everybody who want to help that day, there's plenty of reports :-)
[17:07] <pedro_> special thanks to Kamusin for helping with the organization again
[17:09] <marjo> thx pedro!
[17:09] <pedro_> that's all from here , more news next week
[17:09] <marjo> [TOPIC] Future of Ubuntu QA Launchpad team (https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-qa) -- ara
[17:10] <MootBot> New Topic:  Future of Ubuntu QA Launchpad team (https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-qa) -- ara
[17:10] <ara> This team started as a very restricted team, but it was never used for anything useful
[17:11] <ara> So, my question would be, should it be kept as restricted as it is now?
[17:11] <ara> and, what requirements shall we ask to enter?
[17:11] <soren> Is there another team that's been used for people loosely involved in QA?
[17:12] <ara> soren, we have Ubuntu Testing team, Ubuntu Bugsquad, Ubuntu Bugcontrol
[17:12] <soren> Ok.
[17:13] <soren> Do we have any idea what we want to use the team for?
[17:13] <marjo> ara: my thought is to use ubuntu-qa as the umbrella team, therefore not restricted
[17:14] <ara> the team was created by Laserjock, who is no longer in the QA team. He had his reason to make it that restricted (the entry level was high), but I cannot remember why he did it
[17:14] <marjo> and place membership requirements on Testing Team, along the lines of Bug team
[17:16] <sbeattie> are there any bzr branches owned by ubuntu-qa?
[17:16] <bdmurray> ubuntu-qa-tools?
[17:17] <ara> no, ubuntu-qa-tools is own by bugcontrol members
[17:17] <bdmurray> nope, that's bug control so would be fine
[17:17] <ara> there are some branches, but the last time they were updated was 50 weeks ago
[17:18] <sbeattie> (err, in one case, that's because I must not be pushing to the right place)
[17:18] <soren> heh.. :)
[17:19] <sbeattie> but I can make sru-verification the owner of that branch.
[17:19] <marjo> sbeattie: please do
[17:20] <marjo> ara: do you have a specific proposal, or are only looking for suggestions?
[17:20] <ara> suggestions
[17:20] <marjo> ah, ok
[17:21] <ara> I never understood the goal of this team, and the person that created it, left ubuntu qa soon after that
[17:21] <marjo> well never mind that
[17:21] <marjo> let's just repurpose it to our current needs
[17:22] <plars> could it just be that this team should own the tools used by the others? similar to the umbrella team model you described?
[17:22] <marjo> plars: that would make sense to me
[17:23] <marjo> otherwise, delete the team altogether
[17:23] <soren> In that case we would certainly want to make it a restricted team, right?
[17:23] <marjo> oh no! we're back to restricted!
[17:23] <davmor2> would it not be better to get a clearer picture of how you want to structure the various teams
[17:24] <ara> restricted is fine, what I don't understand is the high entry level
[17:24] <ara> and nobody is managing that
[17:24] <ara> the queue of people wanting to enter keeps growing, but nobody is acting on it
[17:25] <bdmurray> maybe redirect them to iso testing or bug squad teams?
[17:25] <marjo> ara: at this point, i would rather encourage more people to join "QA", so I "high entry requirements" don't work for me
[17:26] <bdmurray> joining the team doesn't do anything other than say I'm interested in qa
[17:26] <marjo> bdmurray: so keep the team, but use it to direct people to bug squad or test team, right?
[17:27] <bdmurray> keep the team for future software tools / bzr branches and redirect people interested in joining to one of the subteams
[17:27] <marjo> bdmurray: i agree with your thinking: people who are interested in qa just want to join that team
[17:27] <marjo> bdmurray: yes!
[17:28] <marjo> the more the merrier, then we focus on their area of interest
[17:28] <davmor2> currently you have bug-squad entry level, bug-control higher level where would the qa team come into that side of the qa team?
[17:28] <bdmurray> then change the team from moderated to restricted
[17:29] <marjo> davmor2: i'm thinking qa team = entry level
[17:29] <marjo> fits the idea of umbrella and more the merrier
[17:30] <marjo> then funnel them into their area of interest
[17:30] <marjo> this would address soren's question of "loosely involved in QA" also
[17:31] <soren> marjo: In that case, I don't generally think the team should own tools.
[17:31] <marjo> soren: definite ack
[17:31] <marjo> +1, i mean
[17:32] <davmor2> marjo: okay so that is making more sense now we know more where you are coming from with this.  Would this then own all the general qa-tools etc that are use by both teams?
[17:32] <marjo> ara, have you got enough suggestions?
[17:32] <ara> hehe, yes, but the decision has to come from the team, not me :)
[17:33] <marjo> davmor2: no, soren's suggesting that "qa team" should NOT own any tools
[17:34] <soren> I don't think it's a very good idea to let tools be owned by very open teams.
[17:34] <soren> We don't want random, mischievous people coming around and "fixing" those tools. :)
[17:34] <marjo> ara: i suggest the team think through these suggestions and try to reach a consensus decision next week
[17:35] <marjo> soren: agree
[17:35] <bdmurray> could we get a list of the suggestions?
[17:35] <ara> marjo, OK, I will send an email to the list explaining the situation
[17:35] <ara> bdmurray, ^
[17:35] <marjo> ara: thx
[17:35] <bdmurray> ;-)
[17:35] <marjo> [TOPIC] Calls for testing: mailing list or "Contact This Team" -- ara
[17:36] <MootBot> New Topic:  Calls for testing: mailing list or "Contact This Team" -- ara
[17:37] <ara> the question here is that when we do a call for testing we use the ubuntu-qa mailing list
[17:37] <ara> should we use the "Contact This Team" (Ubuntu Testing) as well to reach people not in the mailing list
[17:37] <ara> ?
[17:37] <ara> or would it be too intrusive?
[17:38] <fader_> ara: Any idea how many people that would cover?
[17:38] <soren> Depends..
[17:38] <soren> Which team?
[17:38] <soren> :)
[17:38] <davmor2> ara: hey they signed up hit both
[17:38] <soren> Oh "Ubuntu Testing". Sorry, I missed that.
[17:38] <marjo> ara: yes, also use "Contact This Team"
[17:38] <marjo> ara: more the merrier, again
[17:38] <ara> :)
[17:38] <fader_> It might be worth doing a "Contact This Team" once or twice every cycle encouraging people to sign up for the mailing list, but I'd be wary of contacting people who haven't signed up every time we need testers
[17:39] <bdmurray> fader_: that makes sense to me
[17:39] <marjo> fader_ : but then we may lose out on some potentials
[17:40] <bdmurray> Isn't there some announcement when you join a Launchpad team?
[17:40] <fader_> marjo: I think contacting the team occasionally is a compromise between blasting everyone we can and respecting the wishes of people who haven't necessarily volunteered to receive mail
[17:40] <marjo> fader_ : i see
[17:41] <fader_> Though one could make the argument that if you're not willing to test and don't want to hear about testing, maybe you shouldn't be a member of the team
[17:41] <marjo> you think that might turn them off, right?
[17:41] <davmor2> fader_: they signed up to ubuntu testing I think it's fair to ask them to test stuff
[17:41] <marjo> fader_ : yeah, that's my thot
[17:41] <pedro_> well why you joined the team in the first place if you don't want to receive anything from it?
[17:41] <pedro_> just to collect icons?
[17:41] <marjo> pedro_ : yeah!
[17:41] <fader_> davmor2, marjo: I'm fine with that as long as it's pretty clear to people how to leave the group if they don't want to help or hear from us
[17:41] <pedro_> i don't see why contact this team is a bad thing...
[17:41] <pedro_> haha
[17:42] <marjo> fader_ : kinda like "please take me off your call list"
[17:42] <davmor2> fader_: no make the badge collectors suffer ;)
[17:42] <soren> I feel the same way. These are not unsuspecting strangers. These are people who explicitly joined a team that deals with testing.
[17:42] <pedro_> davmor2, +1 :-)
[17:42] <fader_> Hehe
[17:43] <charlie-tca> I think contact the team. If they signed up for credit for membership, they aren't testing and will normally then resign
[17:43] <fader_> Fair enough; I'm convinced. :)
[17:43] <charlie-tca> It's like they collect teams
[17:43] <marjo> fader_ this might be another way to weed out some folks by triggering them to act
[17:44] <soren> The occasional e-mail is a small price to pay to have the wicked cool ubuntu-qa icon anyway :)
[17:44] <marjo> soren: key word "occasional"
[17:45] <charlie-tca> At least each testing week for the alphas and betas
[17:45] <marjo> ara: what do you think? did we convince fader_ thoroughly?
[17:45] <ara> I think so :)
[17:45] <fader_> I'm convinced, and just ran off to join ubuntu-qa on lp!
[17:45] <fader_> (Not sure how I missed joining it before...)
[17:46] <marjo> folks: any new topics for today?
[17:46] <marjo> i assume everyone is testing alpha 2 :-)
[17:47] <marjo> even those with bad backs
[17:47] <davmor2> hell yeah
[17:47]  * fader_ laughs.
[17:47] <davmor2> marjo: not so much testing as breaking alpha 2
[17:47] <charlie-tca> +1
[17:48] <marjo> davmor2: how's old wubi?
[17:48]  * soren is still curious if anyone has manged an ubuntu server lvm install
[17:48] <davmor2> not on the cds
[17:49] <davmor2> marjo: ^ pointed it out to ev
[17:49] <marjo> davmor2: thx
[17:50] <marjo> if there's nothing else, i propose we adjourn the meeting
[17:50] <davmor2> marjo: I'm just checking to see if it has been resolved and if the respin has been booked to get them on the cd
[17:50] <charlie-tca> While everyone is around, any chance of getting my ubuntu-bugcontrol membership renewed?
[17:50] <marjo> davmor2: ok, thx
[17:50] <bdmurray> charlie-tca: sure - what is your lp id?
[17:50] <charlie-tca> charlie-tca
[17:50] <charlie-tca> Thanks
[17:51] <bdmurray> well then
[17:52] <davmor2> marjo: are you classing wubi as release critical?
[17:52] <davmor2> slangasek: ^
[17:53] <marjo> davmor2: in the past, no, but slangasek might
[17:54] <marjo> going once
[17:54] <marjo> going twice
[17:54] <marjo> meeting adjourned
[17:54] <fader_> \o/
[17:54] <marjo> thx everyone!
[17:55] <davmor2> thanks
[17:55] <pedro_> thanks
[17:55] <schwuk> Thanks marjo
[17:55] <ara> thanks!
[17:55] <fader_> Thanks all
[17:55] <marjo> go alpha 2!
[17:55] <marjo> #endmeeting
[17:55] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:55.
[19:04] <highvoltage> who's around for the edubuntu meeting?
[19:04] <mhall119|work> I am
[19:04] <mhall119|work> do I count?
[19:04] <highvoltage> of course you do
[19:05] <mhall119|work> not that I have any input
[19:05] <mhall119|work> but I'd like to see what the state of Edubuntu 10.04 is
[19:05] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: yes most of what I could say is on the mailing list so far
[19:06] <mhall119|work> congrats on the bug day
[19:06]  * alkisg waves
[19:06] <highvoltage> our image was broken today because the build system didn't allow universe packages like we thought it would
[19:06]  * mhall119|work needs some DVD-Rs to test with
[19:07] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: did you have a chance so far to look at all the new theming stuff for qimo yet? I looked at the xplash, etc theming, but aparently it's going to be dropped for lucid so I'd like to get more clarity on that myself
[19:07] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: or virtualbox :)
[19:07] <mhall119|work> highvoltage: someone gave me links to tutorials on theming GDM and XSplash
[19:07] <mhall119|work> but I haven't read them yet
[19:07] <mhall119|work> been working on loco.ubuntu.com, and now school has started back up
[19:08] <mhall119|work> highvoltage: I'd like to have some DVD's to show off at SCaLE
[19:08] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: ah yes, that will be cool
[19:08] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: have you decided whether you're going to skip karmic for qimo? I remember you mentioned last time you were thinking about waiting for Lucid for the next release
[19:09] <mhall119|work> highvoltage: I think that's the plan, yes
[19:10] <dgroos1> Hi!
[19:10] <highvoltage> hi dgroos1 :)
[19:10] <mhall119|work> I've been playing with the Lubuntu alphas to see if I can use LXDE instead of XFCE
[19:10] <dgroos1> :)
[19:10] <mhall119|work> I think I'm going to stay with Xubuntu for now though, it has better supporting programs
[19:11] <mhall119|work> just have to make the darn config manager work right for a Qimo session
[19:11] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: yes LXDE is quite small, I guess all you need is a way to get big pannels in there (you could probably just include an xfpanel in an lxde session and it shouldn't be too big)
[19:12] <mhall119|work> highvoltage: my concern is that with my charity, it's often the only computer in the house, so I want it usable for adults too
[19:12] <mhall119|work> the LXPanel would work just as well as the XFPanel
[19:12] <mhall119|work> but configuration apps and such are not so nice in LXDE
[19:13] <highvoltage> yep
[19:13] <mhall119|work> so I just have to beat XFConf into submission and I'll be golden
[19:13] <mhall119|work> well, except for theming
[19:13] <highvoltage> heh
[19:15] <highvoltage> I think we can end this meeting, we've reported the bug day on the list, we have to do some testing when our image is ready so that we can have an alpha2 tomorrow, but that's about it that's important at this stage
[19:15] <highvoltage> and few people showed :)
[19:16] <alkisg> Yeah we can continue in #edubuntu if something's needed
[19:17] <dhillon-v10> hi all
[19:17] <highvoltage> yep
[19:17] <highvoltage> hi dhillon-v10
[19:17] <dhillon-v10> highvoltage, hi what's up
[19:18] <dhillon-v10> mhall119|work, hi :)
[19:18] <highvoltage> dhillon-v10: I saw some of your activity from the bug reports- nice :)
[19:18] <dhillon-v10> highvoltage, thanks :) my exams are going on atm so my work speed is a little slow but it will increase when my exams are over
[19:18] <highvoltage> great
[19:19] <mhall119|work> dhillon-v10 is involved in _everything_, he's awesome
[19:19] <highvoltage> I'
[19:20] <dhillon-v10> mhall119|work, thanks :) I try
[19:20] <highvoltage> I've only known him for a short time but I agree
[19:20] <dhillon-v10> highvoltage, mhall119|work soon we are going to take over this world, oh btw check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ
[19:21] <highvoltage> yeah I've seen that before :)
[19:22] <mhall119|work> I don't have audio at work
[19:22] <mhall119|work> I assume nobody knows what a browser is?
[19:22] <dhillon-v10> mhall119|work, yup :)
[19:22] <highvoltage> mhall119|work: they mostly confuse it with a 'search engine'
[19:22] <mhall119|work> I'm not surprised
[19:26] <dhillon-v10> mhall119|work, why not, it was pretty shocking to know that people even in new york don't know what a browser is
[19:27] <mhall119|work> dhillon-v10: people are, by and large, unfamiliar with the proper names for things on computers
[19:27] <dhillon-v10> mhall119|work, true, ignorance
[19:27] <mhall119|work> it's not necessarily a bad thing, people by and large don't need to know their proper names
[19:28] <mhall119|work> I don't know the proper names for most of the components in my car
[19:28] <dhillon-v10> mhall119|work, same here :)
[19:28] <mhall119|work> and yet I drive reasonably well
[19:28] <mhall119|work> especially by Florida standards ;)
[19:28] <dhillon-v10> lol
[21:51] <slangasek> davmor2: wubi> RC for alpha-2? no, but we want to make sure any breakage is on the radar