[15:59]  * slangasek waves
[15:59] <ttx> o/
[15:59]  * ogasawara waves
[16:00]  * marjo waves
[16:01] <ameetp> o/
[16:01]  * kenvandine waves
[16:04] <ScottK> o/
[16:04] <robbiew> o/
[16:05] <slangasek> urk; sorry, having some kind of gateway instability here folks
[16:05] <slangasek> hopefully it'll settle to the point I can actually run the meeting...
[16:05] <slangasek> #startmeeting
[16:05] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:05. The chair is slangasek.
[16:05] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:05] <slangasek> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseTeam/Meeting/2010-04-02
[16:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseTeam/Meeting/2010-04-02
[16:06] <slangasek> [TOPIC] actions from previous meetings
[16:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  actions from previous meetings
[16:06] <slangasek>   * slangasek to shake the branding tree and see what falls out (Kubuntu: done; Edubuntu: ?)
[16:06] <slangasek>   * marjo to confirm whether there are committments to certify any hardware for 10.04 that's not yet provisioned (DONE - we're ok)
[16:06] <slangasek>   * slangasek, asac to discuss omap plans for 10.04
[16:06] <slangasek>   * doko to grep the archive for codecs.open in python code, to find other packages broken by http://bugs.python.org/issue691291
[16:06] <slangasek>   * ScottK, slangasek to review python sync/merge candidates
[16:06] <ScottK> (not done)
[16:06] <slangasek> stgraber: how is the new Edubuntu branding coming along?
[16:06] <slangasek> indeed :/
[16:07] <slangasek> asac mentioned on #ubuntu-release that he was off 'til Wednesday for vacation, but has promised me a mail regarding omap (I don't seem to have received it yet)
[16:07] <slangasek> doko__: did you have a chance to look at the codecs.open issue?
[16:09] <slangasek> (presumably not around, then :)
[16:09] <slangasek> [TOPIC] QA Team
[16:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  QA Team
[16:09] <slangasek> marjo: are we on track?
[16:09] <marjo> * Hardware testing
[16:09] <marjo> http://people.canonical.com/~fader/hw-testing/current.html
[16:09] <marjo> Netbooks:
[16:09] <marjo>    passed:   12 (86%)   failed:    0 ( 0%) untested:  2 (14%)
[16:09] <marjo> Laptops:
[16:09] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~fader/hw-testing/current.html
[16:09] <marjo>    passed:   37 (97%)   failed:    0 ( 0%)   untested:  1 ( 3%)
[16:09] <marjo> Servers:
[16:09] <marjo>    passed:   64 (93%)   failed:    0 ( 0%)   untested:  5 ( 7%)
[16:09] <marjo> Desktops:
[16:09] <marjo>    passed:   12 (100%)  failed:    0 (  0%)  untested:  0 (  0%)
[16:09] <marjo> * Bug:530380: checkbox writes to .cache/checkbox/submission before submission completes
[16:09] <marjo> The fix has been approved and pushed to the archive yesterday, April 1.
[16:10] <stgraber> slangasek: still waiting on Canonical to provide the new logo ...
[16:10] <marjo> slangasek: yes, all QA work items are on track for beta-2
[16:10]  * rickspencer3 asks designers about new logo
[16:10] <ScottK> stgraber: I'd imagine you need "E" and "d" too.
[16:11] <slangasek> fwiw, the checkbox fix is still in the beta freeze queue; I still need to review it today
[16:11] <stgraber> ScottK: yeah, though in our case Canonical will actually provide the logo as well as the updated font
[16:11] <slangasek> stgraber: have they been in communication with you lately?
[16:11] <cr3> slangasek: thanks!
[16:11] <slangasek> marjo: is the beta release as a whole on-track quality wise?  any warning signs?
[16:11] <stgraber> slangasek: nope, Iain said he'd ping me as soon as he get it and the "E" and "d" are signed off but haven't heard from Canonical design team since at least a week and I have no clear ETA.
[16:12] <slangasek> rickspencer3: ok, thanks
[16:12] <marjo> slangasek: per the daily report, we still need to work on fixing 10 bugs/day from today on
[16:13] <slangasek> which does seem to be the rate we're sustaining
[16:13] <slangasek> though I wonder, is that bug count "all bugs targeted to lucid"?
[16:13] <marjo> the ISO testing bugs still has new bugs open
[16:13] <marjo> http://people.canonical.com/~marjomercado/isotestingbugs.html
[16:13] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~marjomercado/isotestingbugs.html
[16:14] <marjo> slangasek: yes, that report includes those for lucid only
[16:14] <slangasek> but it includes low/medium priority bugs too?
[16:14] <marjo> slangasek: yes
[16:14]  * slangasek nods
[16:15] <marjo> slangasek: do you think a daily report is useful?
[16:15] <slangasek> the one you're sending currently?
[16:15] <marjo> if so, that's what i plan to do
[16:15] <marjo> yes
[16:15] <marjo> otherwise, twice a week may be sufficient?
[16:15] <slangasek> yes; though I think it would be good to distinguish between high/critical-importance bugs and wishlist/low/medium bugs
[16:16] <ttx> or maybe weigh them
[16:16] <marjo> slangasek: ok, will make more distinctions, to help the teams focus
[16:16] <slangasek> great, thanks
[16:16] <slangasek> anything else on QA?
[16:16] <marjo> slangasek: no, thx
[16:17] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Server Team
[16:17] <MootBot> New Topic:  Server Team
[16:17] <slangasek> marjo: thanks
[16:17] <slangasek> ttx: hi
[16:17] <ttx> o/
[16:17] <ttx> Updated server team status @ https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:18] <ttx> Server Beta2/Milestoned Bugs:
[16:18] <ttx> bug 292971
[16:18] <slangasek> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:18] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:18] <ttx> This one is hardly beta2-critical, given that we shipped with it for 4 releases now, but still one we would like to fix for beta2
[16:19] <ttx> The other two are targeted to final:
[16:19] <slangasek> is that feasible?
[16:19] <slangasek> or should it be unmilestoned?
[16:19] <ttx> Yes, that's what we want to do, fix this one before beta2.
[16:19] <ttx> bug 551544 and bug 546874
[16:20] <ttx> that last one you know about.
[16:20] <slangasek> yes
[16:20] <slangasek> fixing the maintainer script part is easy, but I still have to figure out what's wrong with the actual PAM stack
[16:20] <ttx> You also listed another one as ours: bug 532733
[16:20] <slangasek> I'll try to get that done by beta2 still, anyway
[16:20] <ttx> it's not clear if qemu-kvm is the right source for the bug, kirkland is working with asac/ogra on this one
[16:21]  * slangasek nods
[16:21] <kirkland> ttx: i don't have a lot of confidence that I'm going to solve that one for release (can't tell if the bug is in kvm yet)
[16:22] <slangasek> it's fairly important to the folks working on arm to get that fixed, but I don't see anything about it that's a beta blocker in particular - feel free to unmilestone
[16:22] <ttx> kirkland: right. You involved upstream on this IIRC
[16:23] <ttx> kirkland: hopefully we'll get an idea of where the problem more precisely lies
[16:23] <ttx> We identified 5 "targets of opportunity" (targeted to lucid but unmilestoned), see report for details
[16:23] <ttx> On the specs side...
[16:23] <kirkland> ttx: not yet, as I'd like to show that I can reproduce this bug doing normal disk I/O (outside of apt/dpkg) first
[16:23] <ttx> kirkland: ok
[16:23] <ttx> Two High/Critical incomplete specs:
[16:23] <kirkland> ttx: as upstream will likely not use apt/dpkg to also reproduce/fix the bug
[16:23] <slangasek> kirkland: could it be related to the recent fsync() additions to dpkg code?
[16:24] <ttx> server-lucid-uec-testing (63%): Still working on multi-network test automation (not affected by freeze). Other remaining items are about B2 candidate testing
[16:24] <ttx> server-lucid-daily-vcs (92%) : On track, not affected by freeze
[16:24] <ttx> Bugs affecting server, in other teams:
[16:24] <kirkland> slangasek: hrm, possibly
[16:25] <ttx> bug 548954 was apparently fixed today, we'll look forward the dailies to tset that
[16:25] <ttx> that was our only beta2-critical remaining bug
[16:26] <slangasek> do you want me to spin an extra daily?
[16:26] <ttx> slangasek: won't have time to exercise it before the weekend, but someone else might
[16:26] <ttx> bug 531494 was somehow work-arounded by re-enabling ramdisks in cloud images, so less critical
[16:27] <slangasek> plymouth also currently fails entirely without a ramdisk; I'm working on the fix, but - it's good that this isn't blocking you
[16:27] <ttx> I think it will need close cooperation between the Scott's to come to the root cause
[16:27] <ttx> That's all from me, questions ?
[16:27] <slangasek> none here; anyone else?
[16:28] <ttx> i'm trying to scout buglists to make sure I didn't overlook any critical server issue
[16:28] <ttx> if you know of one, please ping me and/or target appropriately
[16:29] <slangasek> oh; you didn't mention server-lucid-eucalyptus-merging-and-packaging, which has one outstanding WI for B2 and I'm pretty sure is 'critical'
[16:29] <ttx> was completed today
[16:29] <ttx> well, a few minutes ago
[16:29] <slangasek> hah
[16:29] <slangasek> ok
[16:29] <ttx> last item was libvirt 0.7.7 compat tests
[16:29] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Mobile Team
[16:29] <MootBot> New Topic:  Mobile Team
[16:29] <slangasek> ttx: thanks
[16:29] <ttx> and kirkland did them yesterday with jdstrand
[16:30] <slangasek> oh, mobile; asac sends his on-holiday regrets, and wasn't able to line up a substitute
[16:30] <kirkland> ttx: we're sticking with 0.7.5 for lucid (unless a miracle happens)
[16:30] <ttx> yes, that was my understanding
[16:31] <slangasek> the outstanding specs on mobile are either confirmation / documentation, or meta-WIs
[16:31] <slangasek> so nothing to worry about there
[16:31] <slangasek> those darn thumb2 porting bugs are still open, though
[16:31] <slangasek> NCommander: is anyone on your team responsible for these remaining thumb2 porting bugs? they've been floating for several milestones now
[16:33] <slangasek> anyone else have concerns re: Mobile?
[16:33] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Kernel Team
[16:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  Kernel Team
[16:33] <slangasek> ogasawara: hi
[16:33] <ogasawara> Overall Kernel Team status is summarised at the first URL below, including the items called out in the agenda.  The burndown chart for Beta-2 is at the third URL, and our burndown chart is at the fourth:
[16:33] <ogasawara> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[16:33] <ogasawara> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid#Milestone%20ubuntu-10.04-beta-2
[16:33] <ogasawara> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-kernel-team-ubuntu-10.04-beta-2.html
[16:33] <ogasawara> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-kernel-team.svg
[16:33] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[16:33] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid#Milestone%20ubuntu-10.04-beta-2
[16:33] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-kernel-team-ubuntu-10.04-beta-2.html
[16:33] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-kernel-team.svg
[16:33] <ogasawara> On the items pulled out on the agenda, our blueprint status is as follows:
[16:33] <ogasawara>   * AppArmor has had a number of fixes applied for beta-2 with the upstream work continuing strongly though it is not a release blocker.
[16:33] <ogasawara>   * On the configuration review the primary task remaining is the configuration report which is expected to go out before the milestone.
[16:34] <ogasawara> Of the bugs pulled out on the agenda, several should be fixed by the uploaded kernels and await testing, the rest have been retargeted.  We've posted a summary for each on our release status page, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid .
[16:34] <ogasawara> We have postponed the ureadahead optimisation work as the userspace side is not going to make it.  The kernels for the freeze are now all built and in the archive, currently we do not expect to be updating them before beta-2.
[16:34] <ogasawara> As noted in the agenda, a lot of bugs do seem to get milestoned just before the freeze or indeed after it without regard to the time it takes to prepare, test, upload and build the kernel.  Those which have not made it we will retarget next week.
 aside from questions.
[16:36] <slangasek> I pinged smb and apw early this morning about bug #528155, which is a packaging-only change; I suppose they're both off today, so that's missed the milestone?
[16:36] <slangasek> well; apw was around enough to assign it to himself, I guess, but no new upload today regardless :)
[16:36] <ogasawara> slangasek: unfortunately yes, that's slipped.  and yes, apw and smb are on holiday.
[16:37] <slangasek> [ACTION] slangasek to document bug #528155 for beta2 errata
[16:37] <MootBot> ACTION received:  slangasek to document bug #528155 for beta2 errata
[16:38] <slangasek> there's a linux-mvl-dove bug still targeted to beta-2 - are we expecting another upload of that kernel before beta, or was that source package overlooked in the triaginG?
[16:38] <ogasawara> slangasek: I don't expect any uploads before beta.  I'll take a look as I didn't think we overloooked the arm packages.
[16:39] <slangasek> ok, thanks
[16:40] <ogasawara> slangasek: ah, but 548565.  I think the fix was uploaded already.  I'll double check the git tree to make sure and fix up the bug status.
[16:40] <ogasawara> s/but/bug/
[16:40] <slangasek> ogasawara: great, thanks
[16:40] <slangasek> any other kernel concerns for beta2?
[16:41] <ogasawara> none from our side
[16:41] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Desktop Team
[16:41] <MootBot> New Topic:  Desktop Team
[16:41] <slangasek> ogasawara: thanks
[16:41] <kenvandine> hello
[16:42] <slangasek> rickspencer3: did pitti punt to you today for desktop?
[16:42] <slangasek> ah, kenvandine
[16:42] <slangasek> hello
[16:42] <kenvandine> :)
[16:42] <rickspencer3> he punted to kenvandine ;)
[16:42]  * rickspencer3 lurks
[16:42] <kenvandine> lots of RC bugs fixed
[16:42] <kenvandine> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:42] <kenvandine> for current status
[16:43] <slangasek> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:43] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/ReleaseStatus
[16:43] <kenvandine> whoops, thx
[16:43] <slangasek> not your fault, the bot is criminally insecure ;)
[16:43] <ScottK> The Kubuntu section of that's out of date, I'll report on Kubuntu once kenvandine is done
[16:43] <kenvandine> ScottK, thx
[16:43] <kenvandine> there is a desktopcouch bug listed as fix available there
[16:44] <kenvandine> we think it is fixed, but awaiting confirmation
[16:44] <slangasek> bug #540177> that's actually bounced back open since pitti updated the report, there was one missing bit I didn't notice until I went to finish the plymouth integration
[16:44] <kenvandine> there is a bunch of related bugs that we think are all fixed with this
[16:45]  * ScottK is waiting for nixternal to appear to get him to fix that.
[16:45] <slangasek> kenvandine: 530541> I don't see any call for feedback in the master bug?
[16:47] <kenvandine> slangasek, we will today
[16:47] <slangasek> there was one other bug I put on desktop's plate, bug #357673 - it's marked as 'fix released' in the kernel, but there's a desktop component that also needs to be fixed... I just am not sure yet which component it is
[16:47] <kenvandine> one very concerning issue we have is apps using the keyring
[16:48] <slangasek> we have a kernel in lucid that exports the mixer needed for notification; but we need something on the desktop to monitor than mixer and generate the OSD
[16:48] <rickspencer3> slangasek, what package would that be on?
[16:48] <slangasek> that's what I don't know
[16:48] <rickspencer3> I'll assign it to my team
[16:48] <rickspencer3> ok, I'll make one up ;)
[16:49] <kenvandine> yeah, i am trying to figure that out
[16:49]  * rickspencer3 handles bug #357673
[16:49] <slangasek> [ACTION] rickspencer3 to figure out what package needs changed for bug #357673
[16:49] <MootBot> ACTION received:  rickspencer3 to figure out what package needs changed for bug #357673
[16:49] <kenvandine> thx rickspencer3
[16:49] <slangasek> kenvandine: what's the concern with keyrings?
[16:49] <rickspencer3> "figure out" may be a bit strong ;)
[16:50] <kenvandine> some applications that use the keyring, can peg the CPU
[16:50] <kenvandine> currently affecting ubuntuone-client, desktopcouch, gwibber and gvfs
[16:50] <kenvandine> that we know of
[16:50] <kenvandine> there is a fix now in libgnome-keyring0 that fixes gvfs and maybe desktopcouch
[16:50] <kenvandine> there is a work around in ubuntuone-client that is waiting approval in the upload queue
[16:51] <kenvandine> and we think we have just now gotten a work around in gwibber
[16:51] <slangasek> ok, I'll be sure to look at that today
[16:51] <kenvandine> thx
[16:51] <slangasek> is there a bug number for these issues?
[16:51] <kenvandine> bug 554005
[16:51] <slangasek> ok
[16:52] <kenvandine> that is all i have
[16:52] <slangasek> ScottK: Kubuntu?
[16:52] <ScottK> As planned, uploaded KDE 4.4.2 on Tuesday, due to heavy buildd load, going through binary New, and a few packaging issues it took a long time to get built, but is complete on all non-ports archs
[16:52] <ScottK> It looks like we are getting close on smooth transition for Plymouth.  It will require another kdebase-workspace upload - would still like to get this for beta 2
[16:52] <ScottK> Artwork issues are resolved, but exactly how some of the new branding gets used will likely need some post beta2 tweaking
[16:52] <ScottK> We got a number of patches from upstream that really moved Kubuntu Netbook Remix usability forward.
[16:52] <ScottK> It is likely there are still some installer issues that need to be worked out, not sure if they'll be for beta 2 or not
[16:53] <ScottK> Both the likely victims for installer work aren't online right now, so I can't check their plans.
[16:53] <ScottK> That's it.  Questions?
[16:53] <slangasek> smooth transition for plymouth> *very* close; I've made the upstart job tweaks locally on a test box, and it's very nice :)
[16:54] <ScottK> slangasek: Great.  You wouldn't want to just upload that would you?
[16:54] <slangasek> I can, if you want to queue accept it
[16:54] <ScottK> Certainly.
[16:55] <slangasek> anything else to discuss on desktop?
[16:55] <rickspencer3> slangasek, sort of
[16:55] <rickspencer3> a question for you
[16:55] <rickspencer3> quickly
[16:55] <slangasek> shoot
[16:56] <rickspencer3> there were some dx/design and ols uploads yesterday that seemed to rather break certain freezes
[16:56] <rickspencer3> are those going through?
[16:56] <rickspencer3> I'm especially interested in the new theme upload
[16:57] <slangasek> I asked kwwii to notify the ubuntu-doc team about these freeze exceptions, since this upends any work they've done to date on screenshots for the documentation
[16:57] <rickspencer3> so blocking on kwwii ... ok, thanks slangasek
[16:57] <rickspencer3> that's all I needed to know
[16:58] <slangasek> I haven't checked if he's done so; if not, I'll contact them today and get them through the queue, it seems there's little choice but to push them through despite the lateness given that the button order is kind of a fundamental thing to have the way we want it
[17:00] <rickspencer3> slangasek, for Lucid yes, but perhaps we can figure out how to be a bit more disciplined in 10.10
[17:00] <rickspencer3> :)

[17:00] <slangasek> ;)
[17:00]  * rickspencer3 hangs head
[17:00] <kenvandine> :)
[17:01] <slangasek> rickspencer3: just tell Mark his deadline is a month earlier than the real deadline? ;)
[17:01] <slangasek> anyway
[17:01] <slangasek> nothing else for desktop, right?
[17:01] <slangasek> [TOPIC] DX Team
[17:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  DX Team
[17:01] <slangasek> rickspencer3, ScottK: thanks
[17:02] <slangasek> anyone around for DX?
[17:02] <slangasek> call-out items are both documentation WIs
[17:02] <slangasek> so nothing to fret over there
[17:02] <kenvandine> humm... no dbarth
[17:03] <slangasek> they've earned their day off, all their work is in on time ;)
[17:03] <kenvandine> slangasek, if you have anything specific i i can try to answer :)
[17:03] <slangasek> nothing from me
[17:03] <slangasek> anyone else have questions/concerns on DX?
[17:03] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Foundations Team
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Foundations Team
[17:03] <slangasek> no cjwatson today, but he's sent me his notes
[17:04] <slangasek> foundations-lucid-non-applications-in-software-center> One last piece of testing in progress; everything else is done or postponed
[17:04] <slangasek> foundations-lucid-support-timeframe-information> Awaiting LP merge to sort out server support lifetimes (which has been discussed with the LP folks, should be in progress).
[17:04] <slangasek> foundations-lucid-laptop-mode-tools-integration> As mentioned last week, the remaining piece here is preparing for M, not for Lucid, so we don't need to continue tracking it although it's in progress.
[17:05] <slangasek> foundations-lucid-supportable-binaries> in progress, should be getting the removals done today
[17:05] <slangasek> * Bug:368060: Map of Kashmir when selecting the timezone is incorrect
[17:05] <slangasek> kwwii is processing latest adjustments following bug comments, as well as recent timezone changes.  I've deferred this from beta-2 to final, as the scope of the changes shouldn't be intrusive.
[17:06] <slangasek> bug #529366, bug #527972: I haven't talked with Evan about these two and am not sure about current status.  They may need to be deferred to final.
[17:06] <slangasek> bug #539827: We believe this is fixed following recent robustness work, but are awaiting confirmation from reporters.
[17:06] <slangasek> bug #552542: Recent milestoning, and I'm not sure what's happening here.  May need to be pushed to final.  Looks like apt is just a placeholder package for some server-side script here.
[17:07] <slangasek> bug #548954: Fixed, aside from the release-notes task which we can do next week.
[17:07] <slangasek> that's it
[17:07] <slangasek> any questions?
[17:08] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Security Team
[17:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Security Team
[17:08] <slangasek> jdstrand: hello
[17:08] <jdstrand> o/
[17:08] <jdstrand> as always: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[17:09] <slangasek> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[17:09] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/ReleaseStatus/Lucid
[17:09] <jdstrand> in terms of bugs, there bug #528274 still
[17:09] <jdstrand> the uone guys are still getting the packaging together, but the profile will be disabled by default
[17:09] <slangasek> ok
[17:10] <jdstrand> another item worth discussing is security-lucid-libvirt-apparmor-devel
[17:10] <jdstrand> this is related to bug #553737
[17:11] <slangasek> from earlier, it sounds like the server team decision is to defer 0.7.7?
[17:11] <jdstrand> the bp is related to it in that it can't be completed without the merge
[17:11] <jdstrand> slangasek: it is still open-- will discuss in a moment
[17:11] <jdstrand> however, I think I can get 1, maybe to items from the bp into 0.7.5
[17:12] <slangasek> ok
[17:12] <jdstrand> that said, the merge is being discussing in the bug and on ubuntu-server mailing list
[17:12] <slangasek> btw - you know you can link bugs from blueprints and they'll be tracked as work items, instead of embedding bug numbers in the whiteboard?
[17:13] <jdstrand> kirkland and I spent yesterday testing euca with 0.7.7 and found that upstream's changing of scsi hot add, while correct, breaks EBS
[17:13] <slangasek> heh
[17:13] <jdstrand> (the guest is suppose to rescan the bus to notice the disk-- past libvirt did a pci hot add of a controller, one per disk-- wrong but it magically appeared in the guest)
[17:14] <jdstrand> upstream qemu has reiterated time and again that virtio should be used over scsi
[17:15] <jdstrand> so, between all the bug fixes, maintainability, data integrity/stability improvements of virtio vs scsi and performance, testing of euca with virtio hot add instead of scsi is being reviewd
[17:15] <jdstrand> I defer completely to the server team on whether to merge 0.7.7
[17:15] <zul> gah?
[17:16] <jdstrand> they are testing early next week. I have the merge prepared and can uplad quickly if needed, otherwise will defer than work to 'm'
[17:16] <jdstrand> zul: not you-- kirkland and smoser ;)
[17:16] <jdstrand> if I merge my bp is conveniently completed as well
[17:17] <jdstrand> if not, I'll need to try to backport as best I can to 0.7.5 (internal interfaces changes significantly for the better for the apparmor driver to handle the bp items in 0.7.7)
[17:18] <jdstrand> I am moving the discussion of the merge parts into the bug, so it is easier for everyone to see
[17:18] <slangasek> ok - sounds like we'll want to revisit that after beta2
[17:18] <slangasek> I guess it should be resolved one way or the other by next week?
[17:19] <kirkland> jdstrand: slangasek: I'm recommending sticking with 0.7.5 for Lucid
[17:19] <jdstrand> slangasek: the merge yes, the (if needed) 0.7.5 backporting, I hope so
[17:19] <kirkland> jdstrand: slangasek: email to that effect (recommendation on 0.7.5) send to ubuntu-server@ right now ...
[17:19] <jdstrand> kirkland: I thought you and smoser said a few minutes ago that reviewing virtio is planned for monday and the decision would be made then?
[17:20] <jdstrand> (in #ubuntu-server)
[17:20] <kirkland> jdstrand: upon further consideration, i really don't want to introduce that diff from upstream Eucalyptus in our LTS
[17:21] <kirkland> jdstrand: we have agreement with Dan to move toward virtio in Maverick
[17:21] <jdstrand> fair enough, it was my recommendation as well.
[17:21] <kirkland> jdstrand: LTS+1 seems to be the place to do it
[17:21] <kirkland> jdstrand: thanks
[17:21] <jdstrand> kirkland: so is it now decided?
[17:21] <kirkland> jdstrand: that's my recommendation, and yours.  I think it is decided.
[17:22] <kirkland> jdstrand: so we should move on stablizing and backporting to 0.7.5
[17:22] <jdstrand> ok, I'll update all the bugs then and get to backporting
[17:22] <jdstrand> slangasek: so it sounds like the merge item is resolved. as to the bp work, we'll see how it goes. I'll have more info next week
[17:22] <slangasek> yay, sorted
[17:22] <slangasek> anything else?
[17:22] <jdstrand> no
[17:22] <slangasek> great - thanks
[17:23] <slangasek> [TOPIC] MOTU
[17:23] <MootBot> New Topic:  MOTU
[17:23] <ScottK> Hello.
[17:23] <slangasek> ScottK: hi again
[17:23] <ScottK> We got a large pile of Ruby updates done yesterday, so that's good.
[17:23] <ScottK> One concern I have is evolution-mapi.
[17:24] <ScottK> It currenlty build-depends on samba4, which is on the unsupportable binaries removal list.
[17:24] <slangasek> ah
[17:24] <ScottK> While it's Universe, I suspect that's one we would rather not release without
[17:24] <ScottK> I'm still sorting through options.
[17:25] <ScottK> The "update everything to the latest" would have caused a Heimdal transition, so I abandoned that.
[17:25] <slangasek> I know the samba4 build-dep is non-negotiable for that one; are you looking into getting samba4 to build again, then?
[17:25] <ScottK> Yes
[17:25] <ScottK> My current line of inquiry is samba4 from Unstable and downgrade ldb.
[17:26] <slangasek> you might check if jelmer can help with this
[17:26] <ScottK> If it works, it's reasonably self contained (ldb has few reverse-build-depends)
[17:26] <ScottK> I will if I get stuck.
[17:26] <slangasek> ok - good luck :)
[17:26] <ScottK> Losing samba4 and openchange would also really suck, so ....
[17:27] <ScottK> That's the only new concern I'm aware of.
[17:27] <slangasek> shall I go ahead with removing the samba4 binaries anyway, in the meantime, or do you want me to whitelist those?
[17:27] <ScottK> NBS is not looking too bad (I was working it when I ran across this)
[17:27] <ScottK> slangasek: I'd say whitelist them.  It'll save a New later.
[17:27]  * slangasek nods
[17:27] <ScottK> One way or another we need to get this one fixed.
[17:28] <slangasek> ack
[17:28] <ScottK> That's all I have
[17:28] <slangasek> anyone else have questions on MOTU?
[17:28] <slangasek> #endmeeting
[17:28] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:28.
[17:28] <slangasek> thanks, all!
[17:30] <marjo> slangasek: thx!