[11:02] <freeflying> meeting today?
[11:04] <freeflying> persia: ^^
[11:04] <sivaji> persia: pm ?
[11:08] <sivaji> freeflying: can you pass on a message to persia ?
[11:09] <lifeless> freeflying: yes, there is
[11:09] <lifeless> amachu pinged us
[11:09] <lifeless> not sure when
[11:10] <sivaji> Tell him amachu's vehicle is broken down, he may not attend today metting.
[11:11] <freeflying> sivaji: seems persia is afk atm
[11:13] <sivaji> you could tell him when he is here.
[11:13] <freeflying> ok, so we start?
[11:24] <persia> Sorry I'm late.
[11:29] <lifeless> so we're here
[11:29] <lifeless> 22:10 < sivaji> Tell him amachu's vehicle is broken down, he may not attend today metting.
[11:30] <persia> Saw that.
[11:31] <persia> Are we quorate?  Were we waiting for me?  Who's charing?
[11:43] <persia> Right, so since I'm late, and nobody else is chair, and neither of the aspirants are present, I'm adjourning the meeting.
[11:43] <lifeless> aye
[11:43] <persia> I'll be unable to attend the next one, unfortunately.
[11:43]  * persia updates the date on the wiki page for the early June meeting
[13:59] <NCommander> #startmeeting
[13:59] <MootBot> Meeting started at 07:59. The chair is NCommander.
[13:59] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[14:00] <NCommander> ogra: GrueMaster: persia, dyfet, ping
[14:00] <dyfet> pong
[14:00] <ogra> poop
[14:01]  * GrueMaster wheezes, coughs, and sputters in.
[14:01] <ogra> NCommander, you missed davidm :)
[14:01] <davidm> G'day all
[14:01] <NCommander> [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2010/20100525
[14:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2010/20100525
[14:01] <NCommander> ogra: d'oh
[14:01] <ogra> grr, where is my spec gone
[14:02] <NCommander> [topic] Action Item Review
[14:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Action Item Review
[14:02]  * ogra tries to find https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-arm/+spec/arm-m-image-builds-without-root
[14:02] <NCommander> [topic] ogra to SRU bug #568736
[14:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  ogra to SRU bug #568736
[14:02] <ogra> done
[14:02] <ogra> uploaded to proposed, seeds for lucid and maverick were changed
[14:03] <NCommander> [topic] NCommander to invite ndec to meeting
[14:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  NCommander to invite ndec to meeting
[14:03] <ogra> did you ?
[14:03] <persia> He's not here
[14:03] <NCommander> I poked him on IRC once or twice, but kept missing them
[14:03] <persia> And he wasn7t on the ping list
[14:03] <ogra> there is that awesome thing called email
[14:03] <ogra> heard about it ? :P
[14:04] <NCommander> I'll c/o this
[14:04] <NCommander> Also a c/o on NCommander to poke Keybuk on libnih
[14:04] <NCommander> [topic] Mobile team to have spec completed by next week
[14:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Mobile team to have spec completed by next week
[14:04]  * NCommander has his done
[14:04]  * ogra has one out of three done
[14:05] <ogra> davidm, https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/preinstalled-sd-card-images-for-omap is ready to go
[14:05] <ogra> i fail to find https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-arm/+spec/arm-m-image-builds-without-root and havent done https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-arm/+spec/arm-m-lightweight-panel-for-efl yet
[14:06] <ogra> somehow the ubuntu-arm team is shuffling everything around atm
[14:06] <NCommander> [topic] Standing Items
[14:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Standing Items
[14:07] <ogra> nothing on the workitem tracker yet
[14:07] <NCommander> indeed
[14:07] <ogra> NCommander make sure to have davidm make your specs valid for it
[14:08] <NCommander> [topic] Kernel Status (cooloney, mpoirier)
[14:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Kernel Status (cooloney, mpoirier)
[14:08] <NCommander> [action] NCommander to make sure his specs are valid for tracker
[14:08] <MootBot> ACTION received:  NCommander to make sure his specs are valid for tracker
[14:08] <ogra> did you invite mpoirier ?
[14:09]  * NCommander didn'thave an action to
[14:09] <ogra> sigh
[14:09] <ogra> can you send out the two necessary invites today ?
[14:09] <ogra> ndec and mpoirier
[14:09] <ogra> by mail
[14:10] <NCommander> will do
[14:10] <ogra> thanks
[14:10] <ogra> so kernel status on omap4 is so-lala
[14:10] <NCommander> cooloney isn'taround :-/
[14:10] <ogra> it works but i see bus errors if i do heavy compile jobs
[14:10] <persia> Interesting traffic on the ubuntu-kernel mailing list.  Looks like we'll have *two* OMAP trees.
[14:11] <ogra> cooloney is trying to upload the kernel to the canonical-arm-dev PPA atm
[14:11] <ogra> persia, we do
[14:11] <ogra> one for omap3 and one for 4
[14:11] <ogra> NCommander, please test that kernel too asap
[14:11] <persia> Are they both topic branches, or can we build the omap3 one from the linux source package?
[14:11] <ogra> so we have more data points
[14:11] <ogra> persia, no idea, ask kernel team
[14:11] <ogra> i think omap3 is supposed to be from mainline
[14:12] <ogra> with some cherrypicks from linux-omap
[14:12] <ogra> omap4 is completely TI rebased against our tree
[14:12] <persia> I thought omap4 was our tree rebased against TI's kernel
[14:12] <ogra> other way round :)
[14:13] <ogra> omap4 is TI rebasing their patchset against the maverick kernel
[14:13]  * persia is confused by different contents from different sources, and hopes that someone will make it all clear in the future
[14:13] <ogra> easy :)
[14:13] <ogra> 10.07 -> TI 2.6.32 with ubuntu configs
[14:14] <ogra> 10.10 omap3 and 4 both against 2.6.35 ... omap3 built from mainline, omap4 TI rebased against out tree
[14:14] <ogra> clearer ?
[14:14] <NCommander> ogra: mind if I move on?
[14:15] <persia> Not in any way, because it failed to have any reference to the actual source packages, but that7s OK: the folks who can give me the answer I want aren7t here.
[14:15] <ogra> well, can you commit to do some omap4 kernel testing ?
[14:15] <ogra> it would really help if more then one person does it
[14:15]  * GrueMaster would but ENOHW.
[14:16] <ogra> persia, source is at omapzoom.org for the 10.07 and at kernel.ubuntu.com in git for 10.10
[14:16] <NCommander> ogra: sure, I'lltestmore kernels as well
[14:16] <ogra> (or at least its supposed to end up there)
[14:16] <ogra> NCommander, thanks
[14:16] <ogra> move !! :)
[14:16] <ogra> GrueMaster, well, you can test omap3 ... i think amitk had something for us
[14:17] <NCommander> [topic] QA Status (GrueMaster)
[14:17] <MootBot> New Topic:  QA Status (GrueMaster)
[14:17] <ogra> ask in #ubuntu-kernel or -arm
[14:17] <GrueMaster> cool
[14:17] <ogra> GrueMaster, how is the SRU front looking ?
[14:17] <GrueMaster> qa status:  Currently working on internal infrastructure improvements and starting to test app builds this week.
[14:17] <GrueMaster> SRU front?
[14:18] <ogra> yeah
[14:18] <ogra> there are still a bunch of SRUs for lucid, no ?
[14:18] <ogra> especially for kernel stuff iirc
[14:19] <GrueMaster> I don't know.  All kernel issues from 10.04 were for platforms that are apparently not supported by us as of now.  Haven't heard from any kernel devs about any test kernels since prior to release.
[14:19] <ogra> you pointed at them last meeting
[14:19] <ogra> GrueMaster, these platforms are supported for 18 months
[14:20] <GrueMaster> ok.
[14:20] <ogra> and you pointed out the SRUs yourself last meeting
[14:20] <ogra> i.e. the eth0 issues on babbage
[14:20] <GrueMaster> I'll have to dig up the list again and see if anyone has moved on them.
[14:20] <ogra> ok
[14:20] <GrueMaster> I know I haven't seen anything from the kernel team.
[14:20] <ogra> if not we need to kick some butts :)
[14:21] <ogra> right, can you take an action to clearify who is working on what wrt SRUs in the kernel team ?
[14:21] <NCommander> can I move on, or are we waiting for an SRU list?
[14:21] <ogra> i guess its all smb but i doubt he'll write the patches himself
[14:21] <ogra> NCommander, an action :)
[14:21] <ogra> then move onm
[14:21] <ogra> i'm happy to be in the action together with GrueMaster
[14:22] <NCommander> [action] GrueMaster+ogra to compose list of notiable SRUs for lucid
[14:22] <MootBot> ACTION received:  GrueMaster+ogra to compose list of notiable SRUs for lucid
[14:22] <ogra> nah
[14:22] <NCommander> no?
 right, can you take an action to clearify who is working on what wrt SRUs in the kernel team ?
[14:22] <NCommander> oh
[14:22] <ogra> (that was initially to GrueMaster )
[14:22] <GrueMaster> sure.
[14:22] <ogra> but you can action him to assemble a list too :)
[14:23] <ogra> since i only operate from the top of my head which isnt very reliable ;)
[14:23] <NCommander> [action] GrueMaster to assemble list on what SRU is going on with kernel team
[14:23] <MootBot> ACTION received:  GrueMaster to assemble list on what SRU is going on with kernel team
[14:23] <NCommander> [topic] ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, dyfet)
[14:23] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, dyfet)
[14:24] <NCommander> toolchain is no longer broken, but Qt is busted. Will review this failure this week and attempt to resolve, as this is breakinga lot fo rdepends
[14:24] <ogra> yeah kde looks bad
[14:24] <ogra> as usual
[14:24] <ogra> and still libnih
[14:24] <NCommander> indeed
[14:24] <ogra> that will get us bad days wrt images
[14:24] <persia> As usual?
[14:24] <ogra> persia, yeah
[14:25] <NCommander> ogra: its only broken cause Qt FTBFSed
[14:25] <ogra> we didnt have a cycle yet where kde/qt wasnt at least broken once
[14:25] <NCommander> and that looks like a timeout
[14:25] <ogra> right
[14:25] <NCommander> ogra: yeah well, GNOME breaks itself as often, no?
[14:25] <ogra> i saw the discussion with lamont in ubuntu-release
[14:25] <NCommander> its broken right now!
[14:25] <persia> Let's not have a toolkit war.
[14:25] <ogra> nah
[14:25] <ogra> anyway
[14:25] <persia> We need both for the flavours built.
[14:26] <ogra> lamont asked that the package gets a pinger mechanism
[14:26] <persia> So they need be fixed.  Moving on...
[14:26] <ogra> for QT
[14:26] <NCommander> [topic] ARM Image Status (ogra, NCommander)
[14:26] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Image Status (ogra, NCommander)
[14:26] <ogra> instead of working around the timeout
[14:26] <NCommander> nothing new to add on my side
[14:26] <ogra> so someone has to add such a mechanism
[14:27]  * ogra points to #ubuntu-release around 22:00 UTC last night
[14:27] <NCommander> ogra: can you sum up for those who weren't there?
 ScottK: this early in the cycle, could we just fix the package please?
 It's not clear what 'fix' would mean in it's current state since the dbg really takes that long to build.
 We are promised qt4-x11 getting more modular, but it hasn't happened yet.
 something that makes sure we spit something out to stdout every 120 min or so, after verifying that the build is, in fact, progressing
 take a look at the compilers :-(
 Sigh.
 ScottK: as in this is what I get for bending over and violating rules just to avoid rebuilding oo.o everywhere
[14:27] <ogra> sorry ScottK ...
[14:28] <ogra> so the request is to not add more timeout override handlers on the buildds but to fix the packages
[14:28] <ogra> we need some generic mechanism we can put on a wikipage for that i think
[14:28]  * NCommander disagrees ...
[14:28] <ogra> for people being hit by these timeouts
[14:29] <ogra> NCommander, can you take that on with lamont ?
[14:29] <NCommander> I hate the idea of patching a package so it builds just because its slow
[14:29] <NCommander> will do
[14:29] <ogra> he's the one to have to do that work all the time
[14:29] <ogra> thanks
[14:29] <NCommander> [action] NCommander to discuss build timeout with lamont
[14:29] <MootBot> ACTION received:  NCommander to discuss build timeout with lamont
[14:29] <NCommander> ogra: anything else?
[14:29] <ogra> nope
[14:29] <NCommander> (damn this meeting is goingby fast)
[14:29] <ogra> so wrt image status
[14:29] <ogra> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/preinstalled-sd-card-images-for-omap is ready
[14:29] <NCommander> \o/
[14:29] <ogra> NCommander, persia and me have workitems there
[14:30] <ogra> please everyone have a look and agree/disagree :)
[14:30] <NCommander> cool
[14:30] <NCommander> ogra: is that it?
[14:30] <ogra> GrueMaster, we probably need a specific testing plan since the image operates totally different from what we know
[14:30] <ogra> NCommander, yeah, any additions ?
[14:31] <persia> Why not combine the two livecd-rootfs tasks, or at least assign the same person?
[14:31] <persia> Avoids handoff complexities.
[14:31] <GrueMaster> From a boot up standpoint it shouldn't be too different from live images.
[14:31] <NCommander> Just that I'm slowing rolling along with d-cd changes
[14:31] <ogra> persia, well, i'd rather leave the jasper stuff in one hand
[14:32] <ogra> GrueMaster, well, there is a lot that can go wrong with these images
[14:32] <persia> ogra: Also, I thought we were splitting the d-i vs. jasper stuff into two tasks, for scheduling reasons.
[14:32] <GrueMaster> Other than the initial setup that shouold run at first boot.
[14:32] <ogra> basically its not different from what casper does, but the results are more harmful if something fails
[14:32] <ogra> persia, d-i vs jasper ?
[14:32] <persia> I'm still not entirely happy with the VFAT solution, but will withold detailed complaint until I can come up with something better.
[14:33] <ogra> there is no other solution
[14:33] <persia> ogra: my/your task.
[14:33] <ogra> its a HW limitation
[14:33] <persia> You're addressing the wrong complaint :)  Wait until I have some alternate to propose, or ignore me :)
[14:33] <ogra> persia, ah, i dont know if the WI tracker will still pick it up, feel free to split it
[14:33]  * persia tries
[14:33] <ogra> i was inclined to add both of us in front
[14:34] <GrueMaster> ogra: Why not add a testplan line to the blueprint and assign it to me.
[14:34] <ogra> persia, point is that the u-boot versions we currently have can only read fat
[14:34] <ogra> GrueMaster, would you work out a testplan based on the spec ?
[14:34] <persia> GrueMaster: I'm done editing: your turn :)
[14:34] <NCommander> ogra: persia: please take it offline, then come back?
[14:34] <ogra> like "check that the blah worked by looking at blupp"
[14:34] <GrueMaster> I can.  NCommander:  AR time.
[14:34] <persia> NCommander: Please.
[14:35] <NCommander> persia: please what?
[14:35] <ogra> random expression of politeness ? :)
[14:35] <NCommander> works me
[14:35] <ogra> works you eh ? :)
[14:35] <NCommander> er
[14:36]  * ogra grins
[14:36] <NCommander> works for me
[14:36]  * NCommander needs more sleep
[14:36] <NCommander> which brings me to
[14:36] <NCommander> [topic] Meeting Time
[14:36] <MootBot> New Topic:  Meeting Time
[14:36] <NCommander> So
[14:36] <ogra> anyway nothing else from me for images
[14:36] <ogra> i think davidm started a discussion by mail about that one
[14:36] <NCommander> there's no real better time unless either ogra or persia is willing to be shafted with an ungoldly meeting hour.
[14:36] <NCommander> ogra: I didn't see an email
[14:36]  * ogra did
[14:37] <NCommander> ugh, must not be awake enough to remember it
[14:37] <NCommander> Anyway
[14:37] <ogra> subject: 	Team meeting times
[14:37] <NCommander> oh
[14:37] <NCommander> I remember that
[14:37] <NCommander> Ok
[14:37] <ogra> nobody spoke up
[14:37] <ogra> so i guess we'll stay at what we have
[14:37] <NCommander> Anyway, to sum up, there's no real better thime for this unfortunately, so meeting time is unmoved
[14:37] <ogra> its a week old
[14:37] <NCommander> [topic] AOB
[14:37] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[14:38] <GrueMaster> gee, thanks guys.
[14:38] <persia> Is there really no better time?
[14:38] <ogra> GrueMaster, ?
[14:38] <GrueMaster> 6am here.
[14:38] <NCommander> Just one thing folks; please remember to post your ARs for previous weeks and such.
[14:38] <persia> I'd be really happy to shift it by ~12 hours.
[14:38] <ogra> persia, dunno, nobody answered davids mail
[14:38]  * NCommander would be happy by ~12 hour shift, but I thought that put ogra at a poor time
[14:38] <ogra> GrueMaster, ^^^
[14:39] <ogra> lets keep it on that mail
[14:39] <ogra> and revisit next week
[14:39] <NCommander> [action] Entire team to respond to davidm's email
[14:39] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Entire team to respond to davidm's email
[14:39] <GrueMaster> fair enough.
[14:39]  * persia tends to be more flexible than most, so leaves the decision to others
[14:39] <NCommander> :-)
[14:39] <NCommander> anything else, or can I close out the meeting
[14:39] <NCommander> going once
[14:39] <NCommander> twice
[14:40] <NCommander> good night folks
[14:40] <NCommander> #endmeeting
[14:40] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 08:40.
[14:40] <NCommander> (its nice when we finish early)
[14:43] <Pendulum> NCommander: can I PM you about something quickly?
[15:58]  * persia frantically edits the wiki faster
[16:00] <cjwatson> here
[16:00]  * micahg waves
[16:00] <persia> soren: nixternal: geser: stgraber: cody-somerville: ?
[16:01]  * stgraber waves
[16:01] <nixternal> hola
[16:01] <nixternal> perfect timing ey? i must have accidentally shut off my server last night
[16:01] <persia> quorate!
[16:01] <persia> #startmeeting
[16:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:01. The chair is persia.
[16:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:01] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda
[16:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda
[16:02] <persia> [TOPIC] Action Item Review
[16:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Action Item Review
[16:02] <persia> cjwatson to add PPU stuff in LP for Sylvestre Ledru, Scott Moser, Rodney Dawes, and Chad Miller
[16:02] <cjwatson> done
[16:02] <Keybuk> gnargh!
[16:02] <persia> cjwatson to create ubuntu-kernel-uploaders team owned by the DMB that will provide upload permissions to Ubuntu kernel packages.
[16:02] <cjwatson> not done
[16:03] <persia> cody-somerville to write an e-mail to the list concerning the layout/format of the DMB meeting - membership first
[16:03]  * persia moves on, considering Administrative Matters later
[16:04] <persia> [TOPIC] MOTU Application for Artur Rona
[16:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  MOTU Application for Artur Rona
[16:04] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArturRona/MOTUApplication
[16:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArturRona/MOTUApplication
[16:05] <AnAnt> DMB ? now ?
[16:05] <highvoltage> AnAnt: yup
[16:05] <AnAnt> I thought there was still an hour
[16:05] <cjwatson> Keybuk: hmm?
[16:05] <cjwatson> I don't see ari-tczew here, nor on #ubuntu-devel
[16:05] <Keybuk> cjwatson: hilight attack
[16:05] <cjwatson> do we know if he's intending to be here today?
[16:05] <persia> Nor does NickServ have a current record.
[16:05] <cjwatson> Keybuk: uh, ok
[16:06] <micahg> he said because of flooding he might have an issue being here
[16:06] <nixternal> cjwatson: I would think so, since he was a bit unpatient last time..figured he would be here
[16:06] <AnAnt> is it 14:00 UTC now ?
[16:06] <nixternal> 15:00 UTC
[16:06] <Keybuk> cjwatson: have the volume *WAY UP* because someone didn't sit near the microphone (not you, this time) - and just got deafened by the BONG!
[16:06] <cjwatson> well, we promised to process him first, but why don't we deal with other applications and then deal with his as soon as (if) he arrives?
[16:06] <persia> So, let's defer ari-tczew for now, giving him priority if he appears, as agreed last time.
[16:06] <micahg> (03:04:42 PM) ari-tczew: geser: I could be late for tomorrow's meeting, because we have flood in country and can be public communication problems.
[16:07] <persia> [TOPIC] Administrative matters
[16:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Administrative matters
[16:07] <persia> [TOPIC] Meeting Structure
[16:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Meeting Structure
[16:07] <cody-somerville> I thought the meeting was suppose to be an hour ago.
[16:08] <micahg> the fridge said 14:00, the wiki said 15:00
[16:08] <AnAnt> oh yes, it should have been an hour ago, I mis-calculated
[16:08] <persia> So, we've talked about how the current structure doesn't always let us get to everyone, and some folks (especiall coredev apps) get shunted, perhaps for many weeks.
[16:08] <cjwatson> google calendar persistently gets it wrong, probably hence the fridge as well
[16:08]  * barry went by the wiki time
[16:08] <nixternal> yeah, the fridge doesn't understand how to tell time
[16:08] <AnAnt> well, I'm lucky to arrive on time (by accident !)
[16:08] <persia> The fridge is broken by DST.  Complain to your governments.  Abolish the practice.
[16:08] <nixternal> the fridge is an epic fail after time changes
[16:08] <cjwatson> I think we've been spending too long on administrative matters at the start of each meeting ;-)
[16:08] <AnAnt> ari-tczew is here
[16:09] <cjwatson> ah, excellent
[16:09]  * ari-tczew is present
[16:09]  * nixternal agrees with cjwatson 
[16:09] <cody-somerville> The fridge isn't broken by DST.
[16:09] <persia> Right, let7s go back to ari-tczew's app then.
[16:09] <persia> [TOPIC] MOTU Application for Artur Rona
[16:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  MOTU Application for Artur Rona
[16:09] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArturRona/MOTUApplication
[16:09] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArturRona/MOTUApplication
[16:09] <persia> ari-tczew: Hey.  How are you today?
[16:09] <ari-tczew> Hello, my name is Artur, I live in Tczew, Poland. I am studying logistics.
[16:09] <ari-tczew> persia: I'm fine and tired after work. and you?
[16:10] <ari-tczew> I contribute to Ubuntu (development) since March 2009. I work on merges and syncs, because I like to order, I work on reduce delta between Debian and Ubuntu packages. I work on requested SRUs and security uploads, because I think that these sectors are orphaned.
[16:12] <cjwatson> (I guess people are reading)
[16:13] <persia> ari-tczew: A number of the commentors on your application have indicated that they'd like to see you also do more work in other areas.  Have you and recent examples of bugfixes you discovered, or patches submitted to Debian to reduce the need to merge in the future?
[16:13] <cjwatson> so, it's good to see lots of security and merge contributions; these are areas a lot of people get bored of, and it's good to see somebody picking up lots of work there
[16:13] <cjwatson> I'm pleased to see comments from the security team
[16:14] <ari-tczew> yea, last patch to Debian was junitperf
[16:14] <ari-tczew> now junitperf is Ubuntu = Debian
[16:14] <persia> Oh, excellent!
[16:14] <ari-tczew> and if I see that package is fakesynced, then I'll look for new upstream release and submit bug to Debian
[16:15] <ari-tczew> like I did with lash package.
[16:15] <nixternal> ari-tczew: I see a couple of comments regarding patience which seems you haven't had in previous situations, what are you doing to fix this issue and do you think it has gotten better?
[16:16] <persia> Yeah, lash is a special sort of mess :)
[16:16] <ari-tczew> nixternal: do you mean issue as my patience?
[16:17] <cjwatson> I'm concerned by your response to Iain Lane's comment; it comes across as very hostile to me, even if Iain's comment wasn't entirely accurate, and in particular I don't like to see responses like "But how about you? How many packages have you done sponsored?" in response to criticism; is this a language barrier thing (which I understand is a lot harder for those for whom English isn't a native language), or do you think ...
[16:17] <cjwatson> ... it's something you need to work on?  I feel it's important for Ubuntu members to consider criticism they receive, although I know it can be difficult
[16:17] <nixternal> "Also, I still remember him being upset because he wasn't able to find available sponsors for Main. He should be more patient (even a MOTU needs to be patient sometimes  )"  <- that is a comment from your application
[16:17] <nixternal> cjwatson: +1 - however it seemed a bit defensive more so than hostile
[16:17] <cjwatson> maybe that's a better word
[16:18]  * ari-tczew is reading, translating and writing answer, please wait
[16:20] <ari-tczew> nixternal that's right, my answer to Laney 's comment is defensive - only constructive 'discussion'
[16:21] <ari-tczew> heh, patience is a part of heavy character
[16:21] <ari-tczew> I'll try be more patient
[16:21] <cjwatson> may I respectfully suggest that "so I think that Iain Lane can't be a MOTU, because he doesn't have done a lot of security issues" (I know it was meant to be exaggeration to show a point) escalates the argument rather than trying to solve it?
[16:22] <cjwatson> I've probably done the same thing myself on occasion, but I do think it's worth mentioning and trying to avoid
[16:22] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: solve what?
[16:25] <cjwatson> Iain is making some criticisms of you, which he's entitled to do (there's no point in an application process with review from other people if all the review is obliged to be positive).  He may or may not be correct about all of it, and there's certainly no problem about disputing cases where you feel he's incorrect; in other cases perhaps the criticisms are ones you should be thinking about and taking on board (as you ...
[16:25] <cjwatson> ... seem to be doing here in response to nixternal's question).  But I think turning it around in a way that looks like you're attacking Iain is stepping over the line
[16:26] <cjwatson> for example :-), although I don't agree with you that our failure to deal with your application last meeting was a sign of disrespect, I do think it was bad form and we should try to do better
[16:26] <cjwatson> if you see what I mean - there's no need to make things personal
[16:28] <Caesar> Did I make it in time for the DMB?
[16:28] <persia> Caesar: yes
[16:28] <ari-tczew> Caesar: be patient :D
[16:28] <Caesar> Phew, overslept, sorry
[16:29] <cjwatson> patient> *grin*
[16:29] <nixternal> ari-tczew: on to technical matters...there seems to have been a few problems with your sync/merges in the past....what have you been doing to improve your packaging and error checking so you don't experience these same issues in the future?
[16:29] <AnAnt> hah
[16:30] <persia> ari-tczew: Just to make sure, you're preparing an answer for cjwatson, yes?
[16:31] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: as I said: you (as DMB team) had 13 days for manage some minutes on meeting for me. 2 hours wasn't enough... sorry, but I still think that this is disrespect for my and my time
[16:31]  * nixternal needs to be patient this morning...the grumpy old man syndrome is kicking in with phone calls
[16:31] <persia> ari-tczew: For the implementation of QuickResponse, how would you suggest we encourage developers to focus more on sponsoring, rather than their work-of-interest that drew them to Ubuntu initially?
[16:32] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: I think there are definitely things we need to improve; you're entitled to your opinion of course
[16:32] <nixternal> if it was disrespect, it wasn't blatant, however i do not feel it was disrespectful. you have to remember, we are volunteers (well most of us), and we have lives outside of this. we try to get as much done in the time we have
[16:33] <nixternal> today's weather is gorgeous, i am 100% volunteer, and if someone called and said, "Hey, let's go do a bike ride." I am out of here :)
[16:33] <ari-tczew> nixternal: heh, if I did mistake in packaging, sponsor comment on bug or tell me on irc what I did wrong, then I'll read on wiki about it and I'll not do this same bug in future
[16:34]  * ari-tczew is preparing answer for persia
[16:35] <ari-tczew> persia: so, generally provide a sponsors statistics - it would be easier now with syncpackage script (thanks to bdrung)
[16:36] <persia> You mean keep track of how much sponsoring is done by each person?  We do that now, and publish the top folks on the Hall of Fame page.
[16:36] <persia> Or do you mean something richer?
[16:36] <cjwatson> mm, I really hope that we can just fix the silly remaining problems in LP that mean we can't do this via the LP API, but I don't think I really have much of a leg to stand on in objecting to syncpackage since this has been pending for so long
[16:36] <cjwatson> (this> syncs)
[16:36] <persia> cjwatson: It's really close.
[16:37] <cjwatson> asymptotically :-)
[16:37] <ari-tczew> persia: hmm, current hall-of-fame is counting sync sponsorship?
[16:38] <persia> ari-tczew: Should be, if the syncs are processed according to the documentation.
[16:38]  * persia is done with questions
[16:38] <ari-tczew> I think about statistics - count from area "Sponsored by:" because with old sync sponsorship procedure, this area wasn't exist
[16:39] <ari-tczew> current script syncpackage gives this area
[16:40] <cjwatson> I have no more questions
[16:40] <stgraber> I'm good with what I saw in the backlog (sorry, was only half around)
[16:40] <persia> nixternal: geser: cody-somerville: soren: ?
[16:41] <geser> no questions (but I missed too much of the discussion and irclogs.u.c doesn't have it yet)
[16:41] <ari-tczew> in addition, would be nice a statistics who and how many packages has uploaded in $release
[16:42] <cody-somerville> no questions
[16:42] <persia> OK.
[16:42] <nixternal> none here
[16:42] <persia> [VOTE] Artur Rona to be confirmed as MOTU
[16:42] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Artur Rona to be confirmed as MOTU.
[16:42] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[16:42] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[16:43] <persia> -1: I'd like to see endorsements rather than just comments from the security team *OR* more of the active endorsers not citing so many specific examples of things gone wrong.  I think you're close, but not quite there yet.
[16:44] <nixternal> +0 - patience! patience! patience! :)  work on communication and I think you will be golden - and what persia just said
[16:44] <MootBot> Abstention received from nixternal. 0 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:44] <cody-somerville> +0
[16:44] <MootBot> Abstention received from cody-somerville. 0 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:45] <cjwatson> +1 - I was concerned before the meeting, but I think you've addressed most of my concerns in response to questions, and you've certainly been putting in plenty of work
[16:45] <MootBot> +1 received from cjwatson. 1 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 1
[16:46] <cody-somerville> persia, Your vote wasn't counted.
[16:46] <persia> Oops.  colon too close to vote.
[16:46] <persia> -1
[16:46] <MootBot> -1 received from persia. 1 for, 1 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:46] <geser> +0
[16:46] <MootBot> Abstention received from geser. 1 for, 1 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:47] <stgraber> +0
[16:47] <MootBot> Abstention received from stgraber. 1 for, 1 against. 4 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:47] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[16:47] <MootBot> Final result is 1 for, 1 against. 4 abstained. Total: 0
[16:47] <ari-tczew> but what about Ubuntu Contributing Developer Application ? Artur Rona (if MOTU Application will be rejected)
[16:47] <persia> ari-tczew requested to apply for Ubuntu Contributing Developer if not confirmed, so starting that vote now.
[16:48] <persia> [VOTE] Artur Rona to be confirmed as Ubuntu Contributing Developer
[16:48] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Artur Rona to be confirmed as Ubuntu Contributing Developer.
[16:48] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[16:48] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[16:48] <nixternal> +1
[16:48] <MootBot> +1 received from nixternal. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[16:48] <geser> +1
[16:48] <cjwatson> +1
[16:48] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[16:48] <MootBot> +1 received from cjwatson. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[16:48] <cody-somerville> +0
[16:48] <MootBot> Abstention received from cody-somerville. 3 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 3
[16:48] <persia> +1 : Lots of activity, good integration with other developers.  Could benefit from patience, but well aware.
[16:48] <MootBot> +1 received from persia. 4 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 4
[16:48] <stgraber> +1
[16:48] <MootBot> +1 received from stgraber. 5 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 5
[16:49] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[16:49] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 1 abstained. Total: 5
[16:49] <ari-tczew> so what I have to do for become a MOTU?
[16:50] <persia> ari-tczew: I'd recommend addressing the comments made in the vote.  I'm happy to work with you offline to review status at any point.
[16:51] <persia> So, moving on through the agenda:
[16:51] <ari-tczew> heh
[16:51] <persia> [TOPIC] Administrative matters
[16:51] <MootBot> New Topic:  Administrative matters
[16:51] <persia> [TOPIC] Meeting Structure
[16:51] <MootBot> New Topic:  Meeting Structure
[16:51] <persia> So, we spend too much time on admin matters at the beginning of the meeting, and have a poor sorting order for applicants.
[16:51] <persia> I propose we do admin stuff last, and process applicants in a first-come-first-reviewed queue.
[16:52] <persia> Other proposals?  Consensus?  Shall we vote?
[16:52] <cjwatson> yes, I also propose that we prefer to do admin stuff by mail where it doesn't get in people's way
[16:52] <geser> +1 on FIFO on applications
[16:52] <nixternal> persia: we could do applicants like the RMB's do
[16:52] <nixternal> first-come, first-serve
[16:53] <persia> nixternal: That's essentially my proposal :)
[16:53] <nixternal> +1 on that then :)
[16:53] <nixternal> let's vote on that puppy
[16:53] <cody-somerville> I feel we should process core-dev, motu, universe contributors, and then PPU requests.
[16:53] <nixternal> why that order?
[16:53] <persia> Ah, disagreement.  OK voting then.
[16:54] <cjwatson> core-dev tend to be the people who've put most effort in
[16:54] <cjwatson> I guess?
[16:54] <cody-somerville> Because approving a core-dev will provide the most benefit to Ubuntu and requires the highest level of evaluation and critique. I don't want to be fatigued from the meeting when evaluating a core-dev application.
[16:54] <cody-somerville> cjwatson, aye
[16:55] <cjwatson> I tend to agree with Cody; this is the other way round from our prior agenda
[16:55] <cjwatson> but I think it should be FIFO within that.  We're probably somewhat dependent on the honour system when people edit the wiki
[16:55]  * cody-somerville nods.
[16:55] <nixternal> i know there is a hierarchy in the background, however i don't like distinguishing it publically...i think everyone provides the most benefit, no matter what they are applying for
[16:55] <nixternal> i think first-come, first-serve is the most fair of options
[16:55] <cody-somerville> This isn't about being 100% fair.
[16:56] <geser> and I don't like making it unpredictable for PPU applicants when they get processed
[16:56] <nixternal> i don't think it should be about position in the community either, seems to show a bit of favortism in my eyes
[16:56] <persia> If we're doing an order, I'd prefer packagesets, core-dev, all uploaders, contributing developers
[16:56] <geser> and I don't agree in that sorting that PPU comes after UUC
[16:56] <cody-somerville> This isn't about favortism. This is about prioritizing our time.
[16:57] <cjwatson> err, yes, I agree with geser's most recent point (PPU should be before UUC)
[16:57] <persia> To me PPU isn't any different from foo-dev (including MOTU)
[16:57] <maco> geser: potential for resource starvation?
[16:57] <nixternal> if it is about prioritizing time, i think ppu and contribs should go first, since they are usually the easiest and fastest to process
[16:58] <nixternal> or we jsut do roshambo
[16:58] <persia> So because we spend too much time on admin matters, I'm going to run some votes, quick like.
[16:58] <cody-somerville> If someone is fit to be core-dev, we should prioritize giving them that access because they will tend to, based off of the criteria for core-dev, provide the greatest benefit to the project. We shouldn't hold them up because we're busy approving drive by developers.
[16:58] <nixternal> or rock-scissors-paper for those who aren't groovy like me :p
[16:58] <persia> [VOTE] DMB shall switch from per-class order to first-come-first-reviewed order
[16:58] <MootBot> Please vote on:  DMB shall switch from per-class order to first-come-first-reviewed order.
[16:58] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[16:58] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[16:58] <cody-somerville> -1
[16:58] <MootBot> -1 received from cody-somerville. 0 for, 1 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -1
[16:58] <nixternal> +1
[16:58] <MootBot> +1 received from nixternal. 1 for, 1 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:58] <geser> +1
[16:58] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 2 for, 1 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[16:58] <persia> -1 : Based on discussion I like per-class more and more
[16:58] <MootBot> -1 received from persia. 2 for, 2 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 0
[16:59] <nixternal> shite, I meant to do -1 :/
[16:59] <cjwatson> -1
[16:59] <MootBot> -1 received from cjwatson. 2 for, 3 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -1
[16:59] <nixternal> I was with persia's thinking as well...i just had to poke and prod to be persuaded
[17:00] <persia> OK.  motion can't pass at this point.
[17:00] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[17:00] <MootBot> Final result is 2 for, 3 against. 0 abstained. Total: -1
[17:00] <nixternal> groovy
[17:00] <persia> Now, for orders.
[17:00] <cjwatson> PPU and contribs go first> this worked quite badly last time round, I think
[17:00] <persia> [VOTE] DMB should keep the current per-class order
[17:00] <MootBot> Please vote on:  DMB should keep the current per-class order.
[17:00] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[17:00] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[17:00] <cjwatson> although hard cases make bad law and all that
[17:00] <cjwatson> -1
[17:00] <MootBot> -1 received from cjwatson. 0 for, 1 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -1
[17:00] <persia> -1 : PPU+contribs first is working badly
[17:00] <cody-somerville> -1
[17:00] <MootBot> -1 received from cody-somerville. 0 for, 2 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -2
[17:00] <MootBot> -1 received from persia. 0 for, 3 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -3
[17:00] <nixternal> -1
[17:00] <MootBot> -1 received from nixternal. 0 for, 4 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now -4
[17:00] <geser> +0
[17:00] <MootBot> Abstention received from geser. 0 for, 4 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now -4
[17:00] <persia> motion cannot pass.
[17:00] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[17:00] <MootBot> Final result is 0 for, 4 against. 1 abstained. Total: -4
[17:01]  * persia , being chair, picks his version first
[17:01] <persia> [VOTE] DMB shall switch to packageset approvals, core-dev approvals, all uploader approvals (MOTU, PPU, cli-mono-dev, etc.), contributing dev approvals
[17:01] <nixternal> oh, this isn't going to be fun, I can tell that already
[17:01] <MootBot> Please vote on:  DMB shall switch to packageset approvals, core-dev approvals, all uploader approvals (MOTU, PPU, cli-mono-dev, etc.), contributing dev approvals.
[17:01] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[17:01] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[17:01] <persia> +1 : it7s mine :)
[17:01] <MootBot> +1 received from persia. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[17:02] <geser> +0
[17:02] <MootBot> Abstention received from geser. 1 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 1
[17:02] <cody-somerville> +0 : Undecided.
[17:02] <MootBot> Abstention received from cody-somerville. 1 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 1
[17:02] <nixternal> +1 : ok, i can see how this will be beneficial
[17:02] <MootBot> +1 received from nixternal. 2 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 2
[17:03] <cjwatson> +0
[17:03] <MootBot> Abstention received from cjwatson. 2 for, 0 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now 2
[17:03] <persia> motion cannot pass with current attendees
[17:03] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[17:03] <MootBot> Final result is 2 for, 0 against. 3 abstained. Total: 2
[17:04] <persia> This will go to mail, and we'll have a good order next time.
[17:04] <geser> what about an upper limit of applications per meeting? we seem to be only able to handle 4-5 applications in one meeting (10-15 min on average)
[17:04] <persia> geser: Sounds good, but let's continue by mail, as we don't have consensus (and we7re already into the second hour)
[17:05] <persia> [TOPIC] Mozilla Uploaders Package Set
[17:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Mozilla Uploaders Package Set
[17:05] <persia> micahg: Do you have a link for us to review?
[17:05] <micahg> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2010-May/000062.html
[17:05] <persia> [LINK] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2010-May/000062.html
[17:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2010-May/000062.html
[17:06]  * persia has no questions about this set
[17:06] <geser> persia: did "Voting procedures" got also moved to mail?
[17:07] <persia> geser: OOps!  I'll hit that next (before we clear admin matters).  Thanks.
[17:07] <cjwatson> gnome-shell?
[17:07] <nixternal> eclipse?
[17:07] <micahg> cjwatson: it's a xul rdepend in universe
[17:07] <nixternal> isn't there a team working on eclipse uploads already?
[17:07] <micahg> cjwatson: if it goes to main, I would say to remove it
[17:08] <persia> nixternal: The Java team does most of them, but there have been some special xul-related changes over time.
[17:10] <nixternal> gotcha
[17:10] <persia> (as the Java team works almost exclusively in Debian, and relies mostly on syncs)
[17:11] <persia> Is everyone still reviewing the list?  Are there more questions?
[17:12] <nixternal> no more questions
[17:12] <cjwatson> I have no further questions on the list
[17:13] <persia> micahg: In addition to the request for this team, this change would make you an Ubuntu Developer: have you prepared any support for such an application?
[17:13] <micahg> persia: no, I haven't
[17:13] <micahg> but some of my sponsors are in here
[17:13] <nixternal> you need to get to it then, don't make me walk down to your office and give you a smackin' too :)
[17:14]  * chrisccoulson waves
[17:14] <persia> Procedurally, I think we'd want the DMB to be the owner of the team, and process approvals.
[17:14] <micahg> persia: yes, I was going to transfer that
[17:15] <micahg> *ownership
[17:15] <persia> I'd like to separate packageset from micahg's development status: anyone object?
[17:15]  * micahg is fine with that
[17:16] <cjwatson> fine by me
[17:16] <nixternal> +1
[17:16] <persia> [VOTE] Creation of a Mozilla Package set with a set of developers to be administered by the DMB
[17:16] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Creation of a Mozilla Package set with a set of developers to be administered by the DMB.
[17:16] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[17:16] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[17:16] <nixternal> +1
[17:16] <MootBot> +1 received from nixternal. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[17:16] <geser> +1
[17:16] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[17:16] <persia> +1 : It's basically already there in practice
[17:16] <MootBot> +1 received from persia. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[17:18] <cjwatson> +1
[17:18] <MootBot> +1 received from cjwatson. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[17:18] <persia> cody-somerville: stgraber ?
[17:19] <cody-somerville> +1
[17:19] <MootBot> +1 received from cody-somerville. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[17:20] <nixternal> i have to let the dogs out...I will be back in like 5 minutes
[17:21]  * persia times out waiting
[17:21] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[17:21] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5
[17:21] <barry> nixternal: who let the dogs out?
[17:21] <persia> micahg: Do you want to be considered later in today's agenda (time permitting), or make an application for next time?
[17:22] <micahg> persia: next time I think
[17:22] <persia> OK.
[17:22] <persia> [TOPIC] Voting Procedures
[17:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  Voting Procedures
[17:22] <highvoltage> persia: tumbleweed is (probably still) afk for a little while, I know he'd like to be considered today (time permitting)
[17:23] <persia> It was raised that it can be very stressful being voted on directly live in an IRC session, and that the nature of a time-pressured meeting may make the DMB unable to give a considered recommendation to a deferred applicant.
[17:23]  * tumbleweed is (mostly) back
[17:23] <persia> One proposal to address this would be to not have the voting inline at the meeting, but rather ask the questions, and vote via the mailing list, preparing a decision and recommendation for each candidate by the following meeting.
[17:25] <geser> do we get enough votes for the next meeting based on the expierence with email votes in MC and the few deferred votes in DMB?
[17:26] <persia> Based on that experience, I'd say no, although we could certainly try to be better about that.
[17:26] <cjwatson> dual-running between email and IRC is difficult
[17:26] <cjwatson> when it's primarily one or the other it works better I think
[17:27] <persia> Primary email worked well as long as folks were actually voting.  At some point, the members of the MC stopped voting in a timely manner.  I'm unsure whether that behaviour would carry to the members of the DMB.
[17:27] <persia> One advantage of primary email is that it7s asynchronous nature tends to reduce the perception of "not getting to folks".
[17:27] <nixternal> ok, back
[17:30] <nixternal> did the world end? it is so quiet for a meeting right now
[17:30] <persia> OK.  I'm not seeing significant discussion, and I don't think there's a clear answer.
[17:30] <cjwatson> perhaps we can vote on it by e-mail ;-)
[17:30] <persia> Let's discuss via email.
[17:31] <persia> And now to the actual applications :)
[17:31] <nixternal> lol
[17:31]  * geser hopes to see a real discussion and not only one or two emails
[17:32] <persia> First up: barry: my apologies for not noticing earlier, but I'd like to ask you to wait for the next meeting, due to not having had a very long perio of peer review for your application (added to wiki 22nd may, no devel-permissions post)
[17:32] <persia> Would that be acceptable to you?
[17:32] <barry> persia: not a problem at all!
[17:33] <persia> Thanks, and sorry for not noticing earlier.
[17:33] <barry> no worries.  i knew i was cutting it short, but was feeling optimistic :)
[17:33] <geser> was no email sent or is it in the moderation queue?
[17:33] <persia> [TOPIC] Contributing Developer Application for Andrew Pollock
[17:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  Contributing Developer Application for Andrew Pollock
[17:33]  * micahg apologizes, but has to duck out and thanks the DMB for their time
[17:33] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AndrewPollock/DeveloperApplication
[17:33] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AndrewPollock/DeveloperApplication
[17:33] <barry> geser: i'm fairly certain i sent an email.  never heard back though
[17:33] <persia> Caesar: Still about?
[17:34] <cjwatson> geser: there was nothing in the moderation queue today
[17:36] <persia> OK.  Skipping ahead (we'll come back if Caesar reappears)
[17:36] <persia> AnAnt: You still about?
[17:36] <AnAnt> yes
[17:36] <AnAnt> but I'm sorry that I'll have to leave after 10 mins
[17:36] <geser> barry: hmm, then it seems to get lost somewhere as it isn't on https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2010-May/thread.html either. Could you resend it?
[17:37] <persia> [TOPIC] MOTU Application for Ahmed El-Mahmoudy
[17:37] <MootBot> New Topic:  MOTU Application for Ahmed El-Mahmoudy
[17:37]  * persia apologises for the copy&paste issues limiting correct typography
[17:37] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/أحمد المحمودي/MOTUApplication
[17:37] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/#-E/ 'DE-EH/J/MOTUApplication
[17:37] <barry> geser: will do
[17:38] <AnAnt> the link by MootBot won't work
[17:38] <cjwatson> AnAnt: there was a controversial sl-modem bug I saw going past in e-mail; I mostly ignored it at the time :-), but could you give us your take on that?
[17:38] <AnAnt> this might work: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/%D8%A3%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%AF%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%88%D8%AF%D9%8A/MOTUApplication
[17:39] <AnAnt> cjwatson: yes, there is a problem in upstream itself
[17:39] <cjwatson> yay for WTF-8
[17:39] <AnAnt> there is no upstream development
[17:39] <AnAnt> they're doing their best & they just accept patches
[17:40] <AnAnt> they = guys @ linmodems.org
[17:40] <barry> geser: resent.  i'm heading to lunch now tho.  see you next week :)
[17:40] <AnAnt> also there might have mistakes from my side regarding the specific bug you mentioned
[17:41] <persia> barry: Two weeks :)
[17:41] <AnAnt> for example I would prepare the package on intrepid (because that is the system I am using), to fix a bug in karmic
[17:41] <cjwatson> right, that's the part I'm most interested in your comments on, I realise that sometimes we're stuck with a mostly-inactive upstream - it's a fact of life sometimes
[17:41] <AnAnt> yet dkms in karmic had a change that made the package break (& I didn't know until the bug reporter told me about that)
[17:43] <AnAnt> another thing (if I recall correctly) is that the package used to use module-assistant, hence a package that is not really maintained by developers used to exist on systems that installed old packages of sl-modem
[17:43] <AnAnt> or maybe that wasn't the issue
[17:44] <AnAnt> s/the/an
[17:44] <AnAnt> but I cannot put all the blame on myself
[17:44] <AnAnt> a package on PPA is not really guaranteed to work, and I am asking the reporter to try it
[17:45] <AnAnt> sorry if I forgot some details (that has been months ago)
[17:45] <barry> persia: two weeks: ack
[17:45] <AnAnt> but I agree with Rolf that I shouldn't have closed the bug
[17:45] <AnAnt> but rather set its status as incomplete
[17:46] <AnAnt> nothing else to say I suppose
[17:46] <cjwatson> fair enough, I'm happy with that answer
[17:46] <cjwatson> thanks
[17:46] <persia> Other questions quick?  We're at the 10 minute boundary, so we either need to finish this next time, or decide we can vote.
[17:47] <nixternal> nothing here
[17:47] <cjwatson> I have no further questions
[17:47] <persia> cody-somerville: stgraber geser ?
[17:47] <geser> no
[17:48] <cody-somerville> one second
[17:49] <cody-somerville> okay, read
[17:49] <persia> cody-somerville: Are you comfortable voting?
[17:50] <cody-somerville> Yes.
[17:50] <persia> [VOTE] Confirm Ahmed El-Mahmoudy as MOTU
[17:50] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Confirm Ahmed El-Mahmoudy as MOTU.
[17:50] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[17:50] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[17:50] <persia> +1 : my main concern with this application is that I failed to arrange time to add an endorsement prior to it making the agenda
[17:50] <MootBot> +1 received from persia. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[17:50] <nixternal> +1
[17:50] <MootBot> +1 received from nixternal. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[17:50] <geser> +1
[17:50] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[17:51] <cjwatson> +1 - good endorsements, good answer to my question, my personal experience doesn't suggest anything to worry about
[17:51] <MootBot> +1 received from cjwatson. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[17:51] <Caesar> persia: sorry, child responsibilities, back now
[17:51] <cody-somerville> +1 - good endorsements, reviewed changes look good, etc.
[17:51] <MootBot> +1 received from cody-somerville. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[17:51] <persia> stgraber: ?
[17:52] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[17:52] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5
[17:53] <persia> Caesar: We're tight on time, please forgive us if we don't finish (there's another meting coming)
[17:53] <persia> before we start that, could I ask for a volunteer to chair next time?
[17:53] <AnAnt> well, thanks
[17:53] <Caesar> persia: I can live with a deferral
[17:53] <AnAnt> I've really got to run now
[17:53] <AnAnt> bye
[17:53]  * persia will not be able to attend, being on holiday
[17:53] <cjwatson> I can chair
[17:54] <persia> cjwatson: Thanks.
[17:54] <persia> [TOPIC] Contributing Developer Application for Andrew Pollock
[17:54] <MootBot> New Topic:  Contributing Developer Application for Andrew Pollock
[17:54] <persia> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AndrewPollock/DeveloperApplication
[17:54] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AndrewPollock/DeveloperApplication
[17:54] <Caesar> I may have misunderstood the totem pole. If I can upgrade to MOTU without being a huge pain in the arse...
[17:55] <Caesar> Otherwise I'll run with what I've got here now, and go for MOTU later
[17:55] <persia> I'm not convinced we have time for MOTU at all.
[17:55] <Caesar> Okay
[17:55] <Caesar> Stick with what we've got
[17:55] <cjwatson> you can but the pro-forma for MOTU applications usually involves rather more extensive documentation, so I think it would be best to go with what we've got
[17:55] <Caesar> Yeah no worries
[17:55] <cjwatson> I have no questions here anyway
[17:55] <Caesar> I can upgrade to MOTU at another time
[17:56] <persia> Caesar: In your "What I like least about Ubuntu" statement, you suggest that other decisions ought be made for LTSs.  Do you have any specific suggestsions?
[17:56] <geser> Caesar: I hope I sorted your application correctly, as the title was a little bit confusing
[17:56] <persia> Or rather, suggestions for a process that helps ensure that goal?
[17:56] <nixternal> yeah, no questions here really... I guess I have always assumed you were already a MOTU or more
[17:56] <Caesar> geser: I was a little confused about what a Contributing Developer was
[17:57] <Caesar> I thought that was a rebadged MOTU at the time
[17:57] <Caesar> persia: I think just slightly more conservatism at the time that blueprints are accepted for the LTS release?
[17:57] <cjwatson> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#Ubuntu%20Contributing%20Developers
[17:57] <Caesar> cjwatson: right, I read that
[17:58] <cjwatson> still requires sponsorship, but confers membership, essentially
[17:58] <Caesar> I think the "continue with sponsored uploads" bit had me slightly confused
[17:58] <persia> OK.  Starting a vote: please vote +0 if you have more questions (as we're out of time)
[17:58] <cjwatson> I would be happy to discuss conservatism or otherwise over a beer or something :)
[17:58] <cjwatson> I don't think we really need to dig into it at this point
[17:58] <Caesar> cjwatson: if I ever make another UDS :-\
[17:59] <persia> [VOTE] Confirm Andrew Pollock as a Contributing Developer
[17:59] <MootBot> Please vote on:  Confirm Andrew Pollock as a Contributing Developer.
[17:59] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[17:59] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
[17:59] <nixternal> +1
[17:59] <MootBot> +1 received from nixternal. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[17:59] <cjwatson> Caesar: dependents, huh?
[17:59] <cjwatson> +1
[17:59] <MootBot> +1 received from cjwatson. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[17:59] <persia> +1 : Caesar has been around (and helpfully so) for a very long time
[17:59] <MootBot> +1 received from persia. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[17:59] <Caesar> cjwatson: that and I'm not working on Goobuntu any more
[17:59] <geser> +1
[17:59] <MootBot> +1 received from geser. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[17:59] <cjwatson> ah
[17:59] <persia> cody-somerville: stgraber: ?
[17:59] <cody-somerville> +1
[17:59] <MootBot> +1 received from cody-somerville. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[18:00] <persia> [ENDVOTE]
[18:00] <MootBot> Final result is 5 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 5
[18:00] <persia> out of time
[18:00] <Caesar> Woot. Thanks guys
[18:00] <persia> AnAnt, Caesar: Congratulations.
[18:00] <cody-somerville> Congratz!!
[18:00] <nixternal> congrats and welcome! \o/
[18:00] <persia> cjwatson: Please accept an action to set up the mozillla package set.
[18:00] <nixternal> is it time for a beer yet?
[18:00] <persia> #endmeeting
[18:00] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:00.
[18:00] <JFo> o/
[18:01] <lag> o/
[18:01] <cking> \o
[18:01] <smb> \o
[18:01] <manjo> \o\
[18:01] <apw> o/
[18:01] <bjf> Roll Call
[18:01]  * ogasawara waves
[18:01]  * JFo here
[18:01]  * tgardner waves
[18:01] <jjohansen> \o
[18:01]  * manjo rolls in
[18:01] <apw> o/
[18:01] <bjf> #startmeeting
[18:01] <smb> \o
[18:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 12:01. The chair is bjf.
[18:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[18:01] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[18:01] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Maverick
[18:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[18:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Maverick
[18:02] <cnd>  /o
[18:02] <cjwatson> persia: ok
[18:02] <bjf> #
[18:02] <bjf> # NOTE: '..' indicates that you are finished with your input.
[18:02] <bjf> #
[18:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Action Item: ogasawara to email out reminder regarding blueprint disposition
[18:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Action Item: ogasawara to email out reminder regarding blueprint disposition
[18:02] <ogasawara> bjf: done
[18:02] <ogasawara> ..
[18:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Action Item: smb to add work item for updating karmic fsl-imx51 in line with lucid
[18:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Action Item: smb to add work item for updating karmic fsl-imx51 in line with lucid
[18:02] <smb> done
[18:02] <smb> ..
[18:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Action Item: jfo to explain new bug review process
[18:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Action Item: jfo to explain new bug review process
[18:03] <JFo> in progress
[18:03] <JFo> ..
[18:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Release Metrics: (JFo)
[18:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Release Metrics: (JFo)
[18:03] <JFo> Release Meeting Bugs (none yet)
[18:03] <JFo> [18:03] <JFo> Alpha 1 Milestoned Bugs (0)
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux kernel bugs ()
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux-fsl-imx51 bugs ()
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux-ec2 bug ()
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux-mvl-dove bugs ()
[18:03] <JFo> [18:03] <JFo> Release Targeted Bugs (34 across all packages)
[18:03] <JFo>  * 1 linux kernel bugs
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux-fsl-imx51 bugs
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux-ec2 bug
[18:03] <JFo>  * 0 linux-mvl-dove bugs
[18:03] <JFo> [18:03] <JFo> Milestoned Features -
[18:03] <JFo>  * 13 blueprints
[18:03] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-config-review
[18:03] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-ubuntu-delta-review
[18:03] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-tracing-support
[18:03] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-bug-handling
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-upstart
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-union-mounts
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-new-kernel-on-lts
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-misc
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-firewire-stack
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-reducing-dkms-packages-required-for-hardware-enablement
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-arm-single-zimage
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-arm-kernel-as-bootloader
[18:04] <JFo> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-bios-test-automation
[18:04] <JFo> *** NOTE: This listing includes HWE Blueprints***
[18:04] <JFo> [18:04] <JFo> Bugs with Patches Attached:130 (down 2 from last week)
[18:04] <JFo> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs?field.has_patch=on
[18:04] <JFo> Breakdown by status:
[18:04] <JFo> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ogasawara/csv-stats/bugs-with-patches/linux/
[18:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ogasawara/csv-stats/bugs-with-patches/linux/
[18:04] <JFo> ..
[18:04] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-apparmor (jjohansen)
[18:04] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-apparmor
[18:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-apparmor (jjohansen)
[18:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-apparmor
[18:04] <jjohansen>   Working on dfa translation for the compatibility patch for old kernel interface, and will use this to cross verify the upstreaming interface changes.
[18:05] <jjohansen> so current upstreaming code isn't yet compatible with lucid
[18:05] <jjohansen> ..
[18:05] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-firewire-stack (manjo)
[18:05] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-firewire-stack
[18:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-firewire-stack (manjo)
[18:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-firewire-stack
[18:05] <manjo> I emailed out a description of what needs to be done, and why we need to do it t
[18:05] <manjo> o the ukml. Waiting on responses.
[18:06] <manjo> looks like we need help from foundations
[18:06] <manjo> ..
[18:06] <ogasawara> manjo: I was thinking you might want to CC foundations on that email as well.
[18:06] <ogasawara> manjo: as they likely don't follow ukml
[18:06] <manjo> apw, was of the opinon that we discuss it on the list 1st I thought
[18:06] <apw> thats fine we can point them at it either way
[18:06] <manjo> ogasawara, yes I can cc them as well..
[18:06] <manjo> ..
[18:07] <apw> we need their input for sure
[18:07] <apw> ..
[18:07] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-misc (apw)
[18:07] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-misc
[18:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-misc (apw)
[18:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-misc
[18:07] <apw> Tim has pulled out the -preempt flavour from Maverick with a view to it being a community supported flavour from its own source package.  The new ubuntu-debian.git repository is up and seeded with Maverick debian plus some fixes developed f
[18:07] <apw> ollowing testing on Karmic and Lucid; scripts now exist to apply this back to th
[18:07] <apw> ose releases.  Finally the broadcom wl driver has been fixed for Maverick.
[18:07] <apw> ..
[18:08] <bjf> Just an observation, lots of people have items in the whiteboard for this blueprint but there are very few subscribers
[18:08] <bjf> ..
[18:08] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-new-kernel-on-lts (tgardner)
[18:08] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-new-kernel-on-lts
[18:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-new-kernel-on-lts (tgardner)
[18:08] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-new-kernel-on-lts
[18:08] <tgardner> LTS backport is undergoing tests (no problems so far). I've uploaded to the kernel PPA at http://ppa.launchpad.net/kernel-ppa/ppa/ubuntu. I've also created a new branch in the Lucid repository called lts-backport-maverick
[18:08] <tgardner> ..
[18:08] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-pv-ops-ec2-kernel (jjohansen)
[18:08] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-pv-ops-ec2-kernel
[18:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-pv-ops-ec2-kernel (jjohansen)
[18:08] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-pv-ops-ec2-kernel
[18:08] <jjohansen>   Playing with paravirt-ops kernel for legacy /dev/tty and /dev/sdX used by EC2 and integrating in to the virtual kernel, currently /dev/hvc -> /dev/tty changes require !VT
[18:08] <jjohansen>   Have built and Produce kernels with paravirt-ops enabled for testing, but they aren't quite ready for hand off to scott and others for further testing
[18:09] <jjohansen> ..
[18:09] <apw> how big si the delta there ?
[18:09] <jjohansen> it is small
[18:09] <apw> just configuration ?
[18:09] <jjohansen> I couple of patches that touch hvc and xen_blkdev
[18:09] <abogani> bjf: subscribed
[18:10] <tgardner> mostly device name changes, right?
[18:10] <jjohansen> some config changes, and removing wireless-crda from packaging
[18:10] <jjohansen> yes
[18:10] <jjohansen> /dev/hvc -> /dev/sd
[18:10] <jjohansen> and /dev/hvc -? /dev/tty
[18:10] <apw> jjohansen, thanks ..
[18:11] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-tracing-support (cnd)
[18:11] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-tracing-support
[18:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-tracing-support (cnd)
[18:11] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-tracing-support
[18:11] <cnd> I'm currently in the process of reviewing the configs for tracers in maverick, other work (tooling packaging) has yet to be started
[18:11] <cnd> ..
[18:11] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-ubuntu-delta-review (ogasawara)
[18:11] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-ubuntu-delta-review
[18:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-ubuntu-delta-review (ogasawara)
[18:11] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-ubuntu-delta-review
[18:11] <ogasawara> I'm hoping to update iscsitarget today.  apw had a rather large set of patches associated to his name during the
[18:11] <ogasawara> delta review, so I could see him extending this work item to Alpha2.  manjo only has one patch to follow up on, so I suspect he should be able to complete this by next week, ie. Alpha1.
[18:11] <ogasawara> ..
[18:11]  * apw squeeks ..
[18:11] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-union-mounts (apw)
[18:11] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-union-mounts
[18:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-union-mounts (apw)
[18:11] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-union-mounts
[18:12] <manjo> smb, I emailed you regarding that patch as you requested
[18:12] <apw> kernels are up for testing in my purple PPA, no feedback as yet from foundations
[18:12] <apw> ..
[18:12] <smb> manjo, Yes I saw it, but have not got time to follow up
[18:12] <smb> ..
[18:12] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-config-review (ogasawara)
[18:12] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-config-review
[18:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-config-review (ogasawara)
[18:12] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-config-review
[18:13] <ogasawara> The two bugs/work items are Fix Committed and should close when I upload today.  This will then complete the blueprint.
[18:13] <ogasawara> ..
[18:13] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-bug-handling (jfo)
[18:13] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-bug-handling
[18:13] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-bug-handling (jfo)
[18:13] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-bug-handling
[18:13] <JFo> Working on the wiki pages with input from apw, ogasawara and smb. this is an action on 2 BPs misc and bug handling. Which should it be under?
[18:13] <apw> bug handling
[18:13]  * ogasawara votes bug handling too
[18:13] <apw> as you are doing most of it
[18:13] <JFo> also we have discovered that the Expired status is missing from Launchpad so the done item will need to be reopened
[18:14] <JFo> apw, ok
[18:14] <smb> sounds reasonable ..
[18:14] <JFo> I'll remove it from misc then
[18:14] <apw> JFo, 'missing' ?
[18:14] <JFo> missing as in not there
[18:14] <bjf> apw, will look into it after the meeting
[18:14] <apw> bibble ..
[18:14] <JFo> so the expired script is doing its job but unable to actually expire bugs
[18:14] <JFo> ..
[18:14] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-upstart (apw)
[18:14] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-upstart
[18:14] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-upstart (apw)
[18:14] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-upstart
[18:15] <apw> Leann has written up the new modules.builtin rules exceptions.  Other progress i
[18:15] <apw> s slow but still hoped to hit Alpha-1.
[18:15] <apw> ..
[18:15] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-reducing-dkms-packages-required-for-hardware-enablement (cking)
[18:15] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-reducing-dkms-packages-required-for-hardware-enablement
[18:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-reducing-dkms-packages-required-for-hardware-enablement (cking)
[18:15] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-reducing-dkms-packages-required-for-hardware-enablement
[18:16] <cking> nothing to report
[18:16] <cking> ..
[18:16] <bjf> [TOPIC] kernel-maverick-bios-test-automation (cking)
[18:16] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-bios-test-automation
[18:16] <MootBot> New Topic:  kernel-maverick-bios-test-automation (cking)
[18:16] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kernel-maverick-bios-test-automation
[18:16] <cking> Identified some tests "low-hanging fruit"
[18:16] <cking> Git repo: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=cking/ubuntu-firmware-test-suite/.git;a=summary
[18:16] <cking>   Test suite framework complete (fancy logging, execution mechanism, kernel log parsing, etc..)
[18:16] <cking>   Test added in past week:
[18:16] <cking>      dmi_decode:  test DMI/SMBIOS tables for errors
[18:16] <cking>      acpiinfo:    general ACPI sanity check
[18:16] <cking>      syntaxcheck: check for DSDT AML syntax errors
[18:16] <cking>      klog:        check for generic errors in kernel log
[18:16] <cking>      wakealarm:   ACPI wakealarm test
[18:16] <cking>      s3:          suspend/resume test (in progress)
[18:16] <cking>      with the help of some code lifted from the Intel Firmware Test kit
[18:16] <cking>   Working on:
[18:16] <cking>      common:      check common kernel log errors
[18:16] <cking>      s4:          hibernate/resume test
[18:16] <cking>      semanticAML: some semantic AML checking
[18:16] <cking> ..
[18:17] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Maverick (ogasawara)
[18:17] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Maverick (ogasawara)
[18:17] <ogasawara> It's been almost a week since I've uploaded and I've accumulated quite a bit of patches since then.  We've pulled in the -omap flavour, tweaked multiple config options per our UDS config review, and dropped a number of patches based on our UDS delta review.  We're also now carrying the two security kernel hardening patches for hardlink/symlink protections.  That being said, I'll be uploading 2.6.34-4.11 today (note the A
[18:17] <ogasawara> BI bump).  I'll likely do one last upload on Friday, so get your patches to the list and ack'd before then if you want something to land in the Alpha1 kernel. Also, please test once 2.6.34-4.11 is uploaded if you are able to.
[18:17] <ogasawara> ..
[18:18] <bjf> [TOPIC] Security & bugfix kernels - Karmic/Jaunty/Intrepid/Hardy/Others (gnarl/smb)
[18:18] <MootBot> New Topic:  Security & bugfix kernels - Karmic/Jaunty/Intrepid/Hardy/Others (gnarl/smb)
[18:18] <smb> Noting changed since last week. Currently working with priority on getting
[18:18] <smb> all of the topic branches ready for security plus providing test kernels for
[18:18] <smb> all ec2 and arm branches. Will send out separate mail for testing.
[18:18] <smb> Target for security release is early next week.
[18:18] <smb> ..
[18:18] <bjf> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs: Regressions (JFo)
[18:18] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs: Regressions (JFo)
[18:18] <JFo> Incoming Bugs
[18:18] <JFo> 1134 Lucid Bugs
[18:18] <JFo> 4 Maverick Bugs
[18:18] <JFo> Current regression stats (broken down by release):
[18:18] <JFo> [18:18] <JFo>   * 3 maverick bugs
[18:18] <JFo>   * 302 lucid bugs (to be converted to regression-release)
[18:18] <JFo> [18:18] <JFo>   * 25 lucid bugs (down 1)
[18:18] <JFo>   * 9 karmic bugs (no change)
[18:18] <JFo>   * 5 jaunty bugs (no change)
[18:18] <JFo>   * 2 intrepid bugs (no change)
[18:18] <JFo>   * 2 hardy bug (no change)
[18:18] <JFo> [18:18] <JFo>   * 149 lucid bugs (up 8)
[18:19] <JFo>   * 50 karmic bugs (down 2)
[18:19] <JFo>   * 20 jaunty bugs (down 1)
[18:19] <JFo>   * 10 intrepid bugs (no change)
[18:19] <JFo>   * 3 hardy bugs (no change)
[18:19] <JFo> [18:19] <JFo>   * 1 lucid bug (no change)
[18:19] <JFo>   * 1 karmic bug (no change)
[18:19] <JFo> ..
[18:19] <cnd> can we drop the intrepid bugs now?
[18:19] <cnd> ..
[18:19] <JFo> I assume so
[18:19] <JFo> ogasawara?
[18:19] <ogasawara> I'd say drop em
[18:19] <JFo> EOL was end of April
[18:19] <JFo> ok
[18:19] <JFo> will so
[18:20] <JFo> err do..
[18:20] <apw> yep no obvious reson to report them
[18:20] <manjo> should atleast add comment saying update to latest version of ubuntu
[18:20] <bjf> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs: Bug day report (JFo)
[18:20] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs: Bug day report (JFo)
[18:20] <JFo> Bug Days will start back next week. I plan to send out an announcement for the next one later this week with a reminder the business day before. The current plan is to review Bugs with Patches attached to eliminate misreported patches and prepare the list for team review.
[18:20] <JFo> I am however, open to suggestion should the Bug day topic need to change
[18:21] <apw> seems a valid use of the day ..
[18:21] <JFo> I assume we'd like to focus on those as a team at some point as well
[18:21] <JFo> so we can see what is cruft and what is not
[18:21] <JFo> so I am open to a Kernel Bug Day soon too
[18:22] <JFo> ..
[18:22] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Discussion or Questions: Anyone have anything?
[18:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion or Questions: Anyone have anything?
[18:22] <JFo> o/
[18:22] <abogani> Who could review my -lowlatency package (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2010-May/010707.html) ?
[18:22] <abogani> AND
[18:22] <abogani> Who could upload it when will be ready?
[18:23] <smb> I probably would volunteer but I am already badly behind reviewing -rt
[18:23] <smb> ..
[18:24] <abogani> lowlatency is a very simple package.
[18:24] <cnd> abogani: I can try to review
[18:24] <cnd> but I don't have upload rights
[18:24] <cnd> ..
[18:24] <bjf> JFo, go
[18:24] <JFo> apw, did you want to discuss the priority listing briefly?
[18:24] <JFo> or wait?
[18:24] <apw> abogani, i have it on my list to review
[18:24] <apw> we can worry about upload after that
[18:24] <abogani> apw: Ok. Thanks.
[18:25] <apw> JFo, sure
[18:25] <cjwatson> would it be hard to get at least fbcon built-in in the near future (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/Grub2BootFramebuffer)?  I guess vesafb might require a bit more thought
[18:25] <ogra> vesafb might get tricky with arm :)
[18:25]  * ogra agrees fully on fbcon
[18:26] <ogasawara> cjwatson: I can look into it, can you open me a bug so it doesn't fall off the radar
[18:27] <bjf> thanks everyone
[18:27] <bjf> #endmeeting
[18:27] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:27.
[18:27] <JFo> thanks bjf
[18:27] <lag> Cheers bjf
[18:27] <apw> ok
[18:27] <cking> ditto
[18:30] <cjwatson> ogasawara: ok
[18:31] <cjwatson> ogra: obviously vesafb is per-arch
[18:31] <ogra> indeed thus the ":)" :)
[18:33] <cjwatson> ogasawara: bug 585490
[18:34] <ogasawara> cjwatson: thanks, will try to get it in for the Alpha1 kernel
[18:36] <cjwatson> kewl
[18:52] <ivoks> sommer: o/
[18:52] <sommer> yo :)
[18:56] <sommer> how's it going
[18:56] <ivoks> quite good
[18:56] <Daviey> \o
[18:57] <ivoks> \o/
[18:57] <ttx> o/
[18:57] <mcas> o/
[18:57]  * Daviey and kirkland need to make our apologies.  We are sprinting
[18:57] <Daviey> (Sorry)
[18:57] <sommer> o//
[18:57] <Daviey> \o
[18:57] <hggdh> ~o~
[18:58] <ttx> Daviey: why do you need to apologize ? You plan to miss the meeting ?
[18:58] <ivoks> o7
[18:58] <zul> hi
[18:58] <jjohansen> \o
[18:59] <mathiaz> o/
[18:59]  * SpamapS yawns
[19:00] <ttx> Hello everyone
[19:00] <ttx> jiboumans is on a call and might be late, asked me to start without him.
[19:00] <ttx> #startmeeting
[19:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 13:00. The chair is ttx.
[19:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[19:00] <SpamapS> ajoi
[19:00] <smoser> 0/
[19:00] <ttx> Welcome to the 15428th Ubuntu Server Team meeting
[19:01]  * smoser claps
[19:01] <ttx> Agenda is fresh at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[19:01] <ttx> Lucky scribe is SpamapS
[19:01]  * SpamapS bows
[19:01] <ttx> SpamapS: details about minutes publication at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#Team%20policy
[19:01] <zul> muhaha
[19:01] <ttx> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[19:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[19:02] <ttx> * ttx to confirm spec submission deadlines with Jos: DONE
[19:02] <ttx> Deadline was today EOB, but we'll discuss that later
[19:02] <ivoks> oh?
[19:02] <ttx> * ttx to walk SpamapS through the spec process
[19:02] <ivoks> doh.
[19:02] <ttx> DONE as well, I think. He ran out of questions
[19:03] <ttx> [TOPIC] Maverick Alpha2 subcycle and specs
[19:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Maverick Alpha2 subcycle and specs
[19:03] <ttx> We need to finalize specs, review them and assign some of them to the Alpha-2 iteration this week
[19:04] <ttx> Specs that are ready must be set to "Review" status
[19:04] <ttx> Given that a fair number of them are not yet in that status, I assume that today's deadline might be difficult to reach
[19:05] <ttx> So please move as many as you can to that status today. And the new deadline is tomorrow EOB
[19:05] <zul> yay!
[19:05] <ivoks> thank you!
[19:05] <mathiaz> ttx: what'S the most important items that should be part of the specs?
[19:05] <ttx> We'll review the specs starting today, asking questions on the whiteboard
[19:05] <mathiaz> ttx: should WI be already defined?
[19:05] <ScottK> ivoks: I'll take care of the mail stack spec.
[19:05] <mathiaz> ttx: can the user stories be postponed?
[19:05] <ivoks> ScottK: ok
[19:06] <mathiaz> ttx: or should the spec be completly ready?
[19:06]  * ScottK even started on it already.
[19:06] <ttx> mathiaz: design is the most important. Implementation (or WI) should at least give an idea of how much work is involved
[19:06] <ttx> mathiaz: if you need to pick something to leave out, user stories are a good candidate
[19:07] <mathiaz> ttx: ok - so in order of importance: 1. Design 2. Work Items (=implementation) 3. Other sections
[19:07] <ttx> mathiaz: I have a few specs where I'm missing info, so having an open plan in the spec is ok too. Something where the first steps of Implementation is "find the right design" :)
[19:08] <ttx> mathiaz: yes
[19:09] <SpamapS> such as "cloud-loadbalancer - create proof of concept LB config backend (puppet or REST): TODO
[19:09] <ttx> Ideally community specs would be filed by that deadline as well. Especially if they rely on some outside help
[19:09] <ttx> If they are not ready by tomorrow EOB we'll have trouble incorporating them in the general server roadmap
[19:09] <jiboumans> appologies for the late join, a call ran somewhat over. Thanks ttx for getting things started.
[19:10] <ttx> jiboumans: floor is yours, sir
[19:10] <jiboumans> ttx: that went fast :)
[19:10] <jiboumans> so, what ttx said ^ ;)
[19:10] <mathiaz> ttx: well - you've started the meeting
[19:10] <mathiaz> ttx: so only you can drive the bot
[19:10] <ttx> mathiaz: I can drive the bot.
[19:10] <mathiaz> ttx: (that may be a detail in the meeting though)
[19:11] <jiboumans> ttx: anything more on blueprint/spec prep?
[19:11] <ttx> I don't think so... Questions ?
[19:11] <ttx> Of course you can start working on urgent items on your specs.
[19:11] <jiboumans> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[19:11] <ttx> Also last thing...
[19:12] <ttx> Remember that merging is in full swing, and needs your help :)
[19:12] <zul> done and done
[19:12] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[19:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[19:12] <hggdh> none ATM. I just marked my specs for review
[19:12] <jiboumans> hggdh: excellent. any input needed from us for those that you'd like to bring up?
[19:12] <zul> i would like to bring up something actually
[19:12] <hggdh> only the additional test rig
[19:13] <hggdh> zul, please go ahead
[19:13] <jiboumans> hggdh: let's sync up on that outside this meeting to get the fine points clear
[19:13] <zul> it seems my access to nominate bugs for lucid has disapeared which slows me down is there a way to get that fixed?
[19:14] <ttx> Daviey/kirkland: are you around ?
[19:15] <jiboumans> i'll take that as a 'no'
[19:15] <jiboumans> zul: can you raise it with kirkland/daviey via mail please?
[19:15] <SpamapS> not sure if this is pertinent exactly, but I added myself as a bug triager on Fridays
[19:15] <zul> jiboumans: sure
[19:15] <ttx> jiboumans: my question was unrelated to zul's problem
[19:15] <SpamapS> per zul's request I might add
[19:15] <ttx> I don't think they can help
[19:15] <jiboumans> ttx: my bad
[19:16] <mathiaz> zul: hm - has you membership in some team expired latelyÉ
[19:16] <mathiaz> zul: ?
[19:16] <zul> mathiaz: i dont think so
[19:16] <jiboumans> zul: in that case we'll need to contact a losa right?
[19:17] <mathiaz> zul: I talk to bdmurray - he may be able to figure it out
[19:17] <ttx> zul: see with bdmurray first
[19:17] <zul> jiboumans: probably lemme poke around a bit more
[19:17] <jiboumans> alright, anything else on QA?
[19:17] <hggdh> no news there for now
[19:17] <zul> not from me
[19:17] <ttx> hggdh: should the qa workflow spec be considered a server or a QA spec ?
[19:18] <ttx> i.e. who should be the approver ?
[19:18] <hggdh> ttx: this is a good Q, I cannot answer. I would venture a mix
[19:18] <ttx> jiboumans: where do you want it ?
[19:18] <jiboumans> ttx: since we initiated it, leave me as the approver for now
[19:19] <ttx> ok, same for UEC testing, I suspect.
[19:19]  * hggdh thinks it saner
[19:19] <jiboumans> definitely for UEC testing
[19:19] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[19:19] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[19:19] <jiboumans> jjohansen: o/
[19:19] <jjohansen> hey :)
[19:19] <jiboumans> i was wondering about the kernel upgrades in uec/ec2
[19:19] <jjohansen> So I have started playing with the maverick pv-ops ec2 kernel
[19:20] <jiboumans> you're way ahead of me i see
[19:20] <jjohansen> I have built several but none have successfully booted :(
[19:20] <jjohansen> At the moment I am trimming configs and rechecking packaging/builds
[19:20] <zul> jjohansen: need help?
[19:20] <jjohansen> nah, not yet any way
[19:21] <jjohansen> its early can't really expect it to go right the first few times
[19:21] <zul> jjohansen: its probably nothing to do with the configs, its probably more to do with the vmlinuz you'll have to strip it
[19:21] <jjohansen> so hopefully we will have a kernel in a few days
[19:21] <SpamapS> I have an item in the cluster filesystem spec about Ceph being available as a module in the maverick kernel (which it is not in the latest). Do I need to add a work item in my spec for somebody on the kernel team?
[19:22] <jjohansen> zul: hrmm it should be stripped but I'll check
[19:22] <ivoks> one thing
[19:22] <zul> jjohansen: xen versions have different boot loaders
[19:22] <jjohansen> We already have that on our misc configs
[19:22] <ivoks> that's a cloud filesystem
[19:23] <jjohansen> ceph should be enabled with the next upload
[19:23] <SpamapS> jjohansen: ty. :)
[19:23] <jiboumans> SpamapS: good to add a workitem anyway so we can keep track of it
[19:23] <ttx> ok, any other questions for kernel ?
[19:24] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly status for Server documentation (sommer)
[19:24] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly status for Server documentation (sommer)
[19:24] <ttx> That's a new point :)
[19:25] <jiboumans> hi sommer
[19:25] <ttx> sommer: As discussed, it's good for you to have a forum for us to sync our respective needs, so here you go :)
[19:25] <sommer> there's been some good discussion on the ubuntu-doc list about new formats
[19:25] <ScottK> Is the 10.04 server guide available as a PDF?  It came up on #ubuntu-server recently and I didn't know where to point someone.
[19:25] <sommer> ScottK: there was an issue with the PDF for lucid, but I committed a change yesterday to take care of it
[19:26] <sommer> it just now needs to be rebuilt and uploaded to h.u.c
[19:26] <ttx> sommer: do you have a spec covering new sections that you want written for Maverick ?
[19:26] <ScottK> sommer: Great.  Thanks.
[19:26] <sommer> ttx: yep, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu-docs/+spec/server-maverick-serverguide-updates
[19:27] <ttx> hm, I don't think that one can be picked up by our work items system, since it's not the same project
[19:27] <ttx> sommer: so you'll have to use that lot in the meeting to shout when you need outside help.
[19:27] <sommer> oh, should I change it?
[19:27] <jiboumans> ttx: would be great to have all server related blueprints in the WI tracker though
[19:27] <jiboumans> wonder how we can do that
[19:27] <ttx> jiboumans: it needs to be an Ubuntu spec
[19:28] <ttx> jiboumans: then if targeted against Maverick, work items assigned to team members would show up in our tracker
[19:28] <mathiaz> can't the spec be just reattached to the ubuntu project?
[19:28] <sommer> if not I can recreate it
[19:28] <ttx> I doubt that's possible
[19:28] <mathiaz> or recreate it
[19:29] <ttx> sommer: that would be great. Then you can have work items like "write draft of section x" and assign that to someone, and keep "Review draft of X" on your plate
[19:29] <jiboumans> that'd work very well indeed
[19:30] <ttx> [ACTION] sommer to try to move server doc spec to Ubuntu specs
[19:30] <MootBot> ACTION received:  sommer to try to move server doc spec to Ubuntu specs
[19:30] <jiboumans> next is you ttx on papercuts
[19:30] <ttx> [TOPIC] Maverick Papercuts: Start of the alpha-2 round (ttx)
[19:30] <MootBot> New Topic:  Maverick Papercuts: Start of the alpha-2 round (ttx)
[19:30] <sommer> what's the project name?
[19:30] <ttx> sommer: "Ubuntu" ?
[19:30] <sommer> doh, sooo simple :)
[19:30] <ttx> So in order to have a full alpha-2 round for papercuts, I anticipated the review and prepared the round in advance. I'll call for nominations today, and open nominations (until next week's meeting where we'll decide on the bugs for the round)
[19:31] <ttx> delaying one more week would jeopardize the length of that subcycle
[19:31] <jiboumans> ttx: that warrants a seperate mail to u-devel/-server right?
[19:32] <ttx> jiboumans: yes. I start with a blog post, then tomorrow an email... Then I would appreciate some echo on blogs of yours
[19:32] <ttx> I already know Yokozar will echo it, since he was in that UDS room
[19:32] <ttx> any other blogger with a large audience is welcome (kirkland ?)
[19:32] <ttx> We already have a few candidates from previous leftovers
[19:33] <ttx> Note that this time, you can nominate minor features as well !
[19:33] <zul> minor features like what?
[19:33] <ivoks> like utf8 in mysql by default?
[19:33] <ttx> The method is the same, mark as affecting the "server-papercuts" project
[19:33] <ttx> like things that would impact behavior, and that we refused because of FeatureFreeze during the lucid cycle
[19:34] <ttx> ivoks: a papercut needs to be non-conflicting
[19:34] <ttx> and simple to implement :)
[19:35] <SpamapS> otherwise we'd have to call it a paper stab
[19:35] <ivoks> it's simple alright
[19:35] <ttx> We'll review the nominations next week to come up with a list of candidates
[19:35] <ttx> and start the subcycle on Jun 2nd
[19:35] <ttx> to end it end of week before the Alpha2 release
[19:35]  * sommer heh stab
[19:35] <ttx> questions ?
[19:36] <ttx> we'll need everyone's help in fixing those papercuts btw
[19:37] <ttx> choosing them is the easiest part of the job :)
[19:37] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly SRU review: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review (mathiaz)
[19:37] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly SRU review: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review (mathiaz)
[19:37]  * mathiaz opens up the links
[19:37] <mathiaz> two bugs nominated for lucid:
[19:37] <mathiaz> bug 567179
[19:38] <mathiaz> bug 583542
[19:38] <zul> ubottu: im testing bug 567179
[19:38] <zul> stupid bot
[19:38] <zul> i have it fixed for maverick (567179) just need to get people in lucid to test it
[19:39] <mathiaz> I think both bugs are not ready for SRU as of now
[19:39] <ttx> mathiaz: ack
[19:39] <mathiaz> as they still need to more information to get to the triage state
[19:39] <mathiaz> I'm going to decline them
[19:39] <mathiaz> any bugs worth fixing from http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html ?
[19:39] <smoser> there is no fix for 583542 available
[19:40] <zul> 577165
[19:40] <mathiaz> smoser: ok
[19:40] <mathiaz> bug 577165
[19:40] <jiboumans> bug 573206 sounds important enough
[19:41] <zul> jiboumans: its already fixed in lucid
[19:41] <ttx> jiboumans: it's already done apparently. Zul's magic
[19:41] <jiboumans> zul++ also way ahead of me
[19:41]  * jiboumans notes that being in UTC+8 means he's behind the times
[19:42] <RoAkSoAx> lol :P
[19:42] <mathiaz> I've written up the Spec for the updated sru-process in maverick:
[19:42] <mathiaz> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/server-maverick-sru-process
[19:42] <mathiaz> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerMaverickSruProcess
[19:42] <ttx> ooo, a graph !
[19:42] <mathiaz> so if you wanna comment on what's coming up please head there
[19:43] <mathiaz> and there are shiny diagrams as wel :)
[19:43] <zul> wohoo diagrams!
[19:43] <ttx> mathiaz: now I know why you don't have time to write user stories. Too busy doing shiny diagrams
[19:43] <mathiaz> ttx: :)
[19:44] <mathiaz> ttx: it's an experiment:
[19:44] <mathiaz> a picture is worth a thousand words!
[19:44] <jiboumans> agreed there
[19:44] <RoAkSoAx> +1
[19:44] <ttx> now you need to automate paperboard -> dia transition
[19:44] <mathiaz> that's all from me on the SRU front
[19:44] <mathiaz> ttx: I've got some ideas there :)
[19:45] <mathiaz> anything else?
[19:45] <mathiaz> on the SRU front?
[19:45] <jiboumans> smoser, you had something on ami/api tools?
[19:45] <smoser> yes.
[19:45] <smoser> seeking feedback.
[19:45] <smoser> ec2-ami-tools and ec2-api-tools are multiverse packages
[19:45] <smoser> they are updated by amazon to expose new features (or regions) on occasion
[19:46] <smoser> in the past we have provided backports of these via a ppa
[19:46] <mathiaz> smoser: one option is to push them to -backports
[19:46] <smoser> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-on-ec2/+archive/ec2-tools
[19:46] <mathiaz> smoser: they may actually be SRUable as well
[19:46] <smoser> right. so 3 options:
[19:46] <smoser> a. SRU
[19:46] <smoser> b.
[19:46] <smoser>  backports
[19:46] <smoser> c. ppa backports
[19:46] <smoser> we've been doing c.
[19:46] <ttx> (a) needs a TB derogation
[19:47] <mathiaz> smoser: under the exception that they're useless (?) if the network service changes
[19:47] <smoser> well they're never useless.
[19:47] <mathiaz> smoser: landscape-client is an example of package that an SRU exception
[19:47] <smoser> the old tools work, they just do not expose new functionality
[19:47] <mathiaz> smoser: right
[19:47] <mathiaz> smoser: so -backports is the best option
[19:48] <smoser> is there a reason to prefer -backports over ppa ?
[19:48] <mathiaz> smoser: -backports are easily discoveralbe
[19:48] <mathiaz> smoser: whereas PPA are less discoverable
[19:48] <smoser> i question it because there is a fair amount of use of the ppa, and education to use backports instead would be needed.
[19:48] <mathiaz> smoser: there is an option in the sources list manager to enable backports
[19:49] <mathiaz> smoser: and I think there -backports options in sources.list are also set but commented
[19:49] <jiboumans> we do have the option to enable the ppa on EC2 images ourselves
[19:49] <mathiaz> smoser: right - if it's common knowledge to enable the PPA then I'd stick with the existing option
[19:49] <SpamapS> In my brief time running Ubuntu server I've never used thes ources list manager.. but I've definitely setup a few PPA's to pull from
[19:49] <smoser> jiboumans, well.. tools are in multiverse, they're not in our images by design.
[19:50] <mathiaz> smoser: if the use of the PPA is advertised and documented then I'd stick with the PPA
[19:50] <smoser> mathiaz, if backports is the right thing, then i think we should go that route.
[19:50] <SpamapS> can the server guide be updated with that?
[19:50] <mathiaz> smoser: it seems that the use of the PPA is already common knowledge
[19:51] <ScottK> smoser: I've got no problem pushing the updated ec2 tools in backports.
[19:51] <ttx> since this derived from the SRU process discussion, let's move to
[19:51] <ttx> [TOPIC] Open discussion
[19:51] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open discussion
[19:51] <mathiaz> smoser: so I wouldn't change that
[19:51] <mathiaz> smoser: and as mentioned by ScottK we could publish the package to both -backports and a PPA
[19:51] <ScottK> mathiaz: Generally I think it's a problem to push people to use third party repositories when it's not really required.
[19:51] <mathiaz> smoser: it may add some overhad though
[19:51] <smoser> mathiaz, somewhat common knowledge.  googling probably finds it, but it finds backports also.
[19:52] <smoser> i am leaning towards re-education
[19:52] <smoser> backports is a common place for backports
[19:52] <mathiaz> ScottK: right - IMO the main issue here is how discoverable the repository to use is (be it a PPA or a -backports)
[19:52] <SpamapS> smoser: that is almost t-shirt worthy
[19:52]  * ttx leans towards reeducation too
[19:52] <ScottK> smoser: You know the backports procedure?
[19:52] <Daviey> o/
[19:53] <smoser> i can read
[19:53] <smoser> :)
[19:53] <ttx> SpamapS: we have a "quotes" page.
[19:53] <ScottK> OK.  Ping me if you have questions.
[19:53] <smoser> yeah. thanks ScottK
[19:53] <jiboumans> so... open discussion? :)
[19:53] <ScottK> I'd like to talk about package stack names.
[19:53] <SpamapS> I like the idea of having them in both
[19:53] <mathiaz> smoser: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports
[19:53] <ScottK> So far we have mail and cluster stack.
[19:53] <SpamapS> The PPA will get them right away.. backports upon completion of the process. Seems useful.
[19:53] <jiboumans> ScottK: go right ahead
[19:54] <zul> i like to say that im melting
[19:54] <ScottK> In mail stack, we're planning on using mail-stack-foo package names.
[19:54] <ScottK> I think having a general rule of [stackname]-stack-[function] is a good way to go.
[19:55] <jiboumans> ScottK: i've been following the thread on naming and i'd agree there
[19:55] <ScottK> I think cluster stack is similar, but not sure.
[19:55] <sommer> that makes sense to me
[19:55] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK: yes it is similar, though the difference is that in our scenarios we are in need of multiple machine
[19:55] <ScottK> Since I know you are pushing the idea of more community supported stacks, it seems like a good idea to have a standard naming scheme and have that documented.
[19:55] <jiboumans> ScottK: it caters to the road of least surprise (as opposed to 'dovefix' which makes sense mostly to those in the know)
[19:56] <SpamapS> are there other stacks in the pipeline?
[19:56] <ScottK> SpamapS: Not that I know of, but I know Canonical wants to encourage the concept.
[19:56] <RoAkSoAx> For Cluster Stack, names I've been thinking of is: cluster-stack-failover and cluster-stack-loadbalancing
[19:57] <ttx> ScottK: you apparently do not meet any resistance :)
[19:57] <SpamapS> how do stacks differ from tasks?
[19:57] <ttx> let's wrap up.
[19:57] <ScottK> ttx: Could you have someone document this policy?
[19:57]  * SpamapS will takethe answer offline. :)
[19:57] <ttx> ScottK: where would you see this policy ? As a server team policy ?
[19:57] <mcas> the stack packages are virtual packages?
[19:58] <ttx> ScottK: or something more TB-level ?
[19:58] <mathiaz> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase
[19:58] <mathiaz> ^^ seems like a good place to document that for the time being
[19:59] <ttx> [ACTION] ttx to document (or delegate documentation of ) package stack names
[19:59] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ttx to document (or delegate documentation of ) package stack names
[19:59] <ttx> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[19:59] <MootBot> New Topic:  Announce next meeting date and time
[19:59] <ttx> Next week, same place same time
[19:59] <ttx> #endmeeting
[19:59] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 13:59.
[19:59] <ttx> Thanks everyone :)
[19:59] <jiboumans> with a minute to spare
[19:59] <jiboumans> thanks people
[20:00] <ScottK> ttx: I was thinking server team policy
[20:00] <ttx> ScottK: I'll make it so
[20:00] <ScottK> Thanks.
[21:34] <legreffier> i heard there was a meeting at 21pm utc
[21:34] <legreffier> obviously i got the date wrong
[21:35] <legreffier> oh no it was next week, nevermind!
[21:41] <Pendulum> legreffier: what sort of meeting?
[21:42] <legreffier> ubuntu council
[21:57] <czajkowski> which council
[21:58] <BlackZ> legreffier: do you mean the membership board?
[21:59] <BlackZ> (I think yes, since you're there (in the table of the candidates))
[21:59] <legreffier> yes!
[21:59] <BlackZ> it's the 1st june
[21:59] <legreffier> it's next week.
[21:59] <legreffier> yeah
[21:59] <BlackZ> at 20:00 UTC
[21:59] <BlackZ> good luck