[14:58] <pitti> hello
[14:59] <cjwatson> I didn't screw up the timezone, did I?  I can never remember whether Google Calendar is an hour off or not
[15:00] <pitti> looks fine to me
[15:00] <kees> \o
[15:00] <mdz> cjwatson: hi
[15:01] <cjwatson> Keybuk: around?
[15:02] <cjwatson> I have been having a frustrating day involving elusive VESA BIOS specifications and repeated reboots, so a meeting is almost a welcome relief :P
[15:02] <cjwatson> ok, we have quorum, Keybuk can join in if/when he notices
[15:02] <cjwatson> #startmeeting
[15:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:02. The chair is cjwatson.
[15:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:02] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Action review
[15:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Action review
[15:02] <Keybuk> cjwatson: I'm here
[15:02] <cjwatson> are there any actions?  I saw none in the minutes from last time
[15:02] <Keybuk> IRC client wasn't bouncing loud enough
[15:02] <cjwatson> Keybuk: ah, hello
[15:03] <Keybuk> cjwatson: my day has been less frustrating
[15:03] <Keybuk> and there was christmas pudding
[15:03] <cjwatson> lucky you ;-)
[15:03] <cjwatson> I'll take it that there are no actions then
[15:03] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Reorganizing drivers/owners/release managers permissions in Launchpad (Matt Zimmerman)
[15:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Reorganizing drivers/owners/release managers permissions in Launchpad (Matt Zimmerman)
[15:04] <cjwatson> mdz: you have the floor
[15:04] <mdz> cjwatson: ok
[15:04] <mdz> so it's time to throw the switch
[15:04] <mdz> I want to make sure that we've told folks that this is happening, so that if there are rough edges, they know how to get them fixed
[15:05] <mdz> I've passed the word down within Canonical
[15:05] <mdz> but that's obviously not enough
[15:06] <mdz> nothing should actually change in practice
[15:06] <mdz> it's just cleaning up the disorganization in LP
[15:06] <cjwatson> agreed; can we use ubuntu-release for the "release manager" role?
[15:07] <mdz> that sounds appropriate; is that not already what's in the bug report?
[15:07] <pitti> if we can't, there woudl still be something wrong in LP
[15:07] <mdz> [link] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/174375
[15:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/174375
[15:07] <mdz> https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-registry/+bug/174375/comments/17
[15:07] <cjwatson> mdz: you said "Create a new team to fill the 'release manager' role, and populate it appropriately (if we don't already have one)"
[15:07] <mdz> [link] https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-registry/+bug/174375/comments/17
[15:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-registry/+bug/174375/comments/17
[15:07] <cjwatson> so I was just filling that in
[15:07] <mdz> cjwatson: right, if ubuntu-release is the right set of people for those permissions, then we just use that
[15:08] <mdz> if there should be some extra people in there for whatever reason, we should create a new team and put ubuntu-release into it
[15:08] <cjwatson> well, ubuntu-release is kind of informational/social, and I don't think it currently occupies any explicit slots in LP
[15:08] <mdz> oh
[15:09] <cjwatson> so if we need to extend that team we can just extend it, IMO
[15:09] <mdz> the other question is what to do with the 'maintainer' slot for Ubuntu
[15:09] <mdz> that's the one which can do things like administer mirrors
[15:09] <cjwatson> given the description in https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-registry/+bug/174375/comments/18, I think it would be appropriate for that to be techboard
[15:09] <mdz> and announcements
[15:10] <mdz> and AdminSpecification and EditSpecificationSubscription which sound like they should be ubuntu-drivers
[15:10] <pitti> hm, u-release actually sounds more appropriate for this to me
[15:10] <cjwatson> hm, well, announcements aren't all techboard
[15:10] <cjwatson> yeah, I agree with pitti on reflection
[15:10] <pitti> for both mirroring and annoucnements
[15:10] <mdz> I think blueprint stuff should -> ubuntu-drivers
[15:10] <pitti> ^ +1
[15:10] <mdz> and announcements -> release manager
[15:10] <pitti> that's tech leads, team managers, track leads, etc.
[15:10] <pitti> the blueprint-fiddling folks
[15:10] <cjwatson> it might also make sense to add techboard to ubuntu-release
[15:11] <mdz> the more I think about it the less ready I feel...
[15:11] <pitti> out of interest, where in LP does one assign the ubuntu-archive team?
[15:11] <pitti> is that hardcoded?
[15:11] <mdz> somebody needs to make another pass over this and write it down in a comprehensible form
[15:11] <mdz> maintainer can do this, release series manager can do that, drivers can do this
[15:11] <cjwatson> pitti: ubuntu-archive has queueadmin privileges on components
[15:12] <cjwatson> you can see that with lp:ubuntu-archive-tools edit_acl.py
[15:12] <pitti> cjwatson: ah, thanks
[15:12] <pitti> mdz: do you still see something where we disagree?
[15:12] <mdz> pitti: who do you think should be the 'maintainer' of ubuntu?
[15:12] <pitti> mdz: ubuntu-release
[15:13] <Keybuk> ubuntu-release seems obvious
[15:13] <pitti> mdz: that's for announcements and mirrors, right?
[15:13] <mdz> pitti: and AdminSpecification and EditSpecificationSubscription  and the other things in https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-registry/+bug/174375/comments/18
[15:13] <cjwatson> -release is the team most naturally involved with that day-to-day; I agree with mdz that the specification stuff there should be moved to drivers
[15:13] <mdz> so apparently people who need to be able to admin blueprints need to go in there
[15:13] <pitti> mdz: those would be ubuntu-drivers IMHO
[15:13] <mdz> pitti: they are currently inseparable
[15:14] <Keybuk> isn't the only admin being the targetting to releases?
[15:14] <pitti> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu has a separate "mirror admins", though
[15:14] <mdz> how about this
[15:14] <pitti> which already seems to be set correctly
[15:14] <mdz> we set it up so that there is a team for each slot
[15:14] <cjwatson> how about we create an ubuntu-maintainer team, which has ubuntu-release and ubuntu-drivers in it
[15:14] <mdz> ubuntu-drivers, ubuntu-maintainers, ubuntu-release-managers
[15:14] <cjwatson> ... is this GMTA?
[15:14] <mdz> write down in the description of each team what it can actually do
[15:14] <mdz> so that it's self-documenting
[15:15] <pitti> mdz: blueprints and announcements are inseparable? wasn't this the very thing that this bug was all about?
[15:15] <cjwatson> pitti: it was more about separating blueprint admin and bug supervision
[15:15] <mdz> pitti: if so, it's not fixed, according to comment #17
[15:15] <mdz> though bdmurray said he thought it was done
[15:16] <mdz> we just passed the 3-year anniversary for this bug *sigh*
[15:16] <mdz> I'd like to withdraw the agenda item until I can work on it some more
[15:16] <mdz> unless someone wants to take it over from me
[15:16] <cjwatson> your suggestion of writing things in the description of each team sounds good to me
[15:17] <mdz> yeah, then all we need to do is get LP fixed...again
[15:17] <cjwatson> ubuntu-maintainers can be a temporary team until the last bits of separation get fixed
[15:17] <cjwatson> and it should be less damaging than the ubuntu-drivers conflation, and we'll actually more or less understand what it's for
[15:17] <mdz> ok, I'll propose that as the first phase then
[15:18] <cjwatson> except perhaps a better name than ubuntu-maintainers, since maintainer == developer for many people
[15:18] <cjwatson> ubuntu-owner
[15:18] <pitti> that might stir some emotional response
[15:18] <mdz> I chose that because the Launchpad page says 'maintainer'
[15:18] <mdz> but we could ask for that to be changed
[15:18] <Keybuk> ubuntu-leads
[15:19] <cjwatson> ubuntu-release-plus-drivers
[15:19] <cjwatson> since that's what it is. :)
[15:20] <pitti> and it's ugly enough to point out that it's a temporary team
[15:20] <mdz> I'll draft an email to t-b and launchpad-dev and turn the crank on this again
[15:20] <pitti> cjwatson: +1 :)
[15:20]  * kees nods
[15:22] <cjwatson> ok, are we done with this item for now then?
[15:22] <mdz> yes
[15:23] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Appoint Ubuntu Launchpad stake holder
[15:23] <MootBot> New Topic:  Appoint Ubuntu Launchpad stake holder
[15:23] <mdz> there's no name next to this one?
[15:23] <cjwatson> persia
[15:23] <mdz> looks like it was pitti
[15:23] <pitti> it was sent to the ML
[15:23] <cjwatson> persia sent the mail to the list
[15:23] <pitti> and we forgot about it last time
[15:23] <cjwatson> I would like to clarify whether this is in addition to Marjo, or replacing him
[15:24] <pitti> I understood "in addition" when I was talking to him
[15:24] <cjwatson> I spoke to persia about this in Orlando, and we reached agreement then ... but I've forgotten what that agreement was
[15:24] <cjwatson> the few stray neurons I have that remember that conversation think that this was essentially somebody to represent Ubuntu-as-project separately from the Ubuntu platform team
[15:25] <pitti> I proposed Bryce, as he has written tons of scripts for Launchpad, and is also doing massive regular bug triage, and also has experience on LP hacking
[15:25] <mdz> this is for Ubuntu, as opposed to Ubuntu Platform (part of Canonical)
[15:25] <cjwatson> in that case my memory is accurate.  OK.
[15:25] <kees> is it ours to appoint?
[15:25] <kees> should this be TB or CC?
[15:26] <cjwatson> how close an interaction does Bryce have with the wider Ubuntu community, beyond X?
[15:26] <cjwatson> kees: I certainly think the representative should come from the development community; it's not strictly a technical matter but the TB may be better placed to judge
[15:26] <Keybuk> it was definitely persia
[15:27] <pitti> he hangs out in #ubuntu-desktop and discusses integration matters there as well
[15:27] <cjwatson> Keybuk: since you're one of the people persia suggested, do you have any thoughts on this you'd like to share?
[15:27] <Keybuk> I think I got shanghaid on the basis I'm going to shortly be the only TB member who won't be working at Canonical
[15:28] <Keybuk> but I wasn't really clear on why that was important
[15:28] <Keybuk> or indeed, why we needed a new and different stakeholder to LP than the one we already have
[15:28] <pitti> I think the point was to have a strong voice who doesn't have a commercial bias/pressure
[15:28] <Keybuk> I'd vaugely thought that we just needed a bigger stake to stab them with
[15:28] <Keybuk> pitti: everyone has bias or pressure of some sort
[15:29] <cjwatson> my understanding was that the Launchpad stakeholder meetings tend to be somewhat commercial-stake-driven, and that an explicit project representative would find it easier to stand apart from that
[15:29] <pitti> right, they just need to average themselves out
[15:29] <cjwatson> Launchpad certainly used to solicit input from the platform team and the Ubuntu community somewhat separately
[15:30] <kees> is this stake-holder position something the LP team has agreed to having show up? (also, AIUI, such a person would need to sign an NDA due to some of the topics being discussed at the meeting)
[15:31] <cjwatson> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2010-November/000571.html says that Francis agreed that this would be appropriate
[15:31] <kees> okay
[15:32] <cjwatson> as overall Launchpad manager I assume that he's authoritative on this :)
[15:32] <cjwatson> do we need to reach agreement on whether this is an appropriate thing to do at all?
[15:33] <mdz> I support it
[15:33] <kees> I think it's reasonable
[15:33] <cjwatson> my view is that I can't easily say whether it will definitely be useful, but since Marjo has asked us to try and Francis is receptive to it it seems worth a go
[15:34] <cjwatson> I would like to hear from each of the suggested candidates before trying to select someone, though.  Does anyone feel that we should issue a wider call for nominations?
[15:35] <kees> seems only fair -- if someone in ubuntu really wants to jump on this, we should give them a chance.
[15:35] <pitti> my gut feeling is that three candidates are enough, and we already confirmed their willingness to act for this role; and as there are no particular hard privileges assigned to this, I don't think we really need a democratic vote of teh community here
[15:35] <pitti> (not that I'd veto one, I just feel it's a bit overkill)
[15:35] <Keybuk> well, except I'm not really sure I'm the right person
[15:35] <kees> I'm fine with that too
[15:35] <Keybuk> yet I ended up on the list ;)
[15:35] <Keybuk> so I'm not so sure about confirmed their willingness
[15:35] <Keybuk> :p
[15:36] <pitti> Keybuk: hmkay -- that's what Emmet wrote, anyway
[15:36] <cjwatson> sounds like a bit of chinese-whispers going on
[15:37] <Keybuk> (not that I'm saying I'd be bad at it, I just suspect ENOTIME for the next several months)
[15:37] <cjwatson> this sounds to me as though it would be worth a quick call for anyone else who's interested, and in parallel ask the existing candidates to send in a short note to technical-board@ describing their plans?
[15:38] <cjwatson> Keybuk: would you like to explicitly excuse yourself, then?
[15:38] <Keybuk> cjwatson: yes, for now
[15:38] <cjwatson> OK
[15:38] <Keybuk> if the position was regularly chosen, I may well put myself up for it in future, for example
[15:38] <cjwatson> fair enough
[15:39] <cjwatson> so shall I do the above as part of writing up minutes for this meeting, then?
[15:39] <mdz> cjwatson: fine by me
[15:39] <mdz> though we shouldn't wait too long
[15:39] <mdz> persia already canvassed and got volunteers
[15:39] <mdz> so we don't really need any more
[15:40] <mdz> but if someone is dying for the job I don't mind them coming forward
[15:40] <cjwatson> I agree, I was thinking no longer than two weeks
[15:40] <kees> sure. could even go 1 week, just to avoid holidays, but yeah, 2 is fine.
[15:41] <cjwatson> one week is OK by me
[15:41] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Schedule and chair (Matt Zimmerman)
[15:41] <MootBot> New Topic:  Schedule and chair (Matt Zimmerman)
[15:41] <cjwatson> I shall not be here on the 28th
[15:41] <mdz> just some points of order
[15:42] <mdz> I'll just paste from the wiki
[15:42] <mdz> Next meeting is scheduled for 28 December
[15:42] <mdz> Will we have quorum, or should we skip it?
[15:42] <mdz> Mark is unavailable to chair 11 January
[15:42] <mdz> will anyone else be absent the 28th?
[15:42] <pitti> I won't be online
[15:42] <pitti> I'm in a train on that day
[15:43] <cjwatson> will Mark be around on the 28th?
[15:44] <mdz> cjwatson: I don't know
[15:44] <mdz> I've negotiated with clan that she will tell me when he's unavailable for TB
[15:44] <kees> I won't be here the 28th
[15:44] <mdz> so we don't end up without a chair
[15:44] <cjwatson> sounds to me as though we'll be at most barely quorate on the 28th, and probably inquorate
[15:44] <Keybuk> I'm unlikely to be available that day
[15:44] <mdz> so no pitti, no cjwatson, no kees, no keybuk
[15:44] <mdz> no quorum
[15:45] <cjwatson> ok, that's a definite no.  next meeting on the 11th, then?
[15:45] <pitti> sounds like skipping then
[15:45] <mdz> so we just need a chair for the 11th
[15:45] <cjwatson> next in alpha sequence is kees
[15:46] <kees> \o/
[15:46] <cjwatson> I'll take that as a yes :)
[15:46] <kees> :)
[15:46] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed
[15:46] <MootBot> New Topic:  Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed
[15:46] <cjwatson> there are a few dangling items regarding SRUs and the like
[15:46] <kees> 11th is the rally.
[15:46] <cjwatson> are any of them currently blocked on TB approval?
[15:46] <cjwatson> kees: I think we can probably manage, maybe with a time adjustment
[15:47] <cjwatson> we have:
[15:47] <cjwatson>   bzr (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2010-December/000596.html
[15:47] <cjwatson> )
[15:47] <cjwatson>   xubuntu-docs (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2010-December/000599.html)
[15:47] <cjwatson>   linux (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2010-December/000597.html)
[15:49] <cjwatson> pitti: do you know which of those if any are outstanding?
[15:49] <pitti> xubuntu and bzr are missing a few more votes
[15:49] <pitti> which could just be sent to the ML (should be straightforward), then I'll add them to the exception page
[15:49] <pitti> the kernel process has by and large been worked out now
[15:49] <pitti> there was some misunderstanding at first
[15:50] <pitti> but now it's by and large what we had before, just that we now copy from teh PPA instead of accepting from -proposed
[15:50] <pitti> although there are still some technical difficulties, it didn't change on a policy level
[15:51] <cjwatson> I will follow up to xubuntu-docs and bzr then
[15:51] <cjwatson> ok
[15:51] <cjwatson> Check up on community bugs: no change from last time
[15:52] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] AOB
[15:52] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[15:52] <mdz> I'd like to make a suggestion
[15:52] <mdz> that we ask for AOB at the start of the meeting, rather than at the end
[15:52] <mdz> so that if someone turns up with an issue, we can get it on the agenda and leave time for it if necessary
[15:52] <Keybuk> you have OB, don't you? ;-)
[15:52] <mdz> just that
[15:53] <Keybuk> doesn't seem unreasonable
[15:53] <cjwatson> I'm fine with that, I'll adjust the agenda
[15:53] <kees> yeah
[15:53] <Keybuk> should be a call for additional points or something
[15:53] <mdz> so the first agenda item becomes "make sure the agenda is complete"
[15:53] <mdz> I've started doing this in my meetings and it's more effective
[15:54] <cjwatson> sounds like that's a wrap, then
[15:55] <cjwatson> #endmeeting
[15:55] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 09:54.
[15:55] <cjwatson> oh, mdz: thanks for organising that brainstorm review, it seems to have been a success
[15:55] <mdz> cjwatson: indeed, the thanks goes to the folks who wrote the responses
[15:57] <pitti> thanks everyone
[15:57] <kees> thanks!
[15:58] <hggdh> ~ô~
[15:59] <hallyn_> \0
[15:59] <Daviey>  /o\
[16:00] <jjohansen> \o
[16:00] <JamesPage> o/
[16:00] <smoser> ok. weell, its that time of day again
[16:00] <RoAkSoAx> o/
[16:00] <SpamapS> \O/
[16:00] <smoser> err... week.
[16:00] <smoser> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[16:01] <SpamapS> smoser: take us out Mr. Sulu
[16:01] <smoser> how do i "start meeting " ?
[16:02] <SpamapS> you say <pound>startmeeting
[16:02] <SpamapS> or for some.. <hash>startmeeting
[16:02] <zul> mmmm...hash
[16:02] <smoser> #startmeeting
[16:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:02. The chair is smoser.
[16:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:02] <robbiew> o/
[16:02]  * robbiew will lurk today....call in 30min
[16:02] <ScottK> \o
[16:02] <smoser> hm.. seems my clever trick to get someone else to scribe has failed.
[16:03] <JamesPage> smoser: nice try :-)
[16:03] <smoser> fyi, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ScribesTeam/MootBot has such info
[16:03] <smoser> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:03] <smoser>  * ALL: please check the SRU tracker for 'needs-verification' bugs  [http://people.canonical.com/~chucks/SRUTracker/sru-tracker-bugs.html]
[16:04] <SpamapS> Imre Gergely has been *heroic* in verifying server SRU's
[16:04] <smoser> it looks like i need to take a look at that.
[16:04] <smoser> and i will.
[16:04] <smoser> thanks to Imre
[16:05] <smoser>  * ACTION: robbiew to review ServerTeam wiki
[16:05] <smoser> robbiew, ?
[16:05] <robbiew> yeah..yeah...slowly but surely
[16:05] <robbiew> keep it
[16:05] <robbiew> damn it!
[16:05] <smoser> [ACTION]: robbiew to review ServerTeam wiki [carried over]
[16:05] <MootBot> ACTION received: : robbiew to review ServerTeam wiki [carried over]
[16:05] <smoser>  * ACTION: Kernel team to follow up on bug 661294
[16:06] <smoser> jjohansen, smb ?
[16:06] <smb> I added some potential debuuging steps today
[16:06] <smb> Though that is the one I am not able to reproduce
[16:07] <SpamapS> smb: there are 2 users who are reproducing it consistently, right?
[16:07] <smb> I think yes. A third one has opened another bug as he thinks it might be a too different setup
[16:08] <smb> bug 688437
[16:08] <Daviey> smb: Would it help if we try and reproduce it?
[16:08] <smb> Daviey, Sure, it helps to know what exactly triggers it
[16:09]  * Daviey will try this.
[16:09] <smb> The second bug seems to have some vmware involved. (at least on a quick look)
[16:09] <smoser> Daviey, you want an action ?
[16:09] <Daviey> smoser: Yeah... i have rouble with committment without an action item.
[16:09] <smoser> [ACTION] Daviey to try to reproduce bug 661294
[16:09] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Daviey to try to reproduce bug 661294
[16:10] <smoser> hope that helps your rouble.
[16:10] <Daviey> smoser: Yeah, that has changed my life for the better... thanks :)
[16:10] <smoser> It sounds to me like smb has a handle on it.  if anyone else can add reproduce, that would be nice.
[16:11] <smoser>  * ACTION: JamesPage to arrange URL for Hudson CI Server
[16:11] <Daviey> ^ done
[16:11] <JamesPage> Done: http://hudson.qa.ubuntu-uk.org:8080
[16:11] <smoser> JamesPage, ^
[16:11] <JamesPage> Cheers Daviey!
[16:11] <smoser> gracias.
[16:11] <Daviey> hah
[16:11] <hggdh> FWIW, I have seen other bugs with a hang on remote FS, and a kernel trace involving sys_sync
[16:12] <SpamapS> JamesPage: any reason that has to run on 8080 ?
[16:12] <JamesPage> SpamapS: only my lack of time to make it run on port 80 - will do by the end of the week
[16:12] <SpamapS> JamesPage: btw, that is amazing. ;)
[16:13] <hggdh> SpamapS: not really, but now we have the firewall set, and I would rather not mess with it
[16:13] <Daviey> to be fair, the subdomain only went live about 30 mins ago... give JamesPage a break :)
[16:13] <hggdh> JamesPage: mind the firewall...
[16:13] <JamesPage> hggdh - will do
[16:13] <smoser>  * ACTION: spamaps to talk to his friend to try and get more info on Bug 684304
[16:13] <smb> btw it is not only cciss that has problems
[16:14] <hggdh> just tried the options given by smb, but no luck (and a kernel trace)
[16:14] <SpamapS> smb: oh?
[16:14] <smb> hggdh, yep just saw it
[16:14] <smb> sadly no luck
[16:14] <SpamapS> I just spoke with him yesterday and he has the hardware in the rack but not hooked up to the network yet.. should be getting a DL360 G5 with ILO support to play with.
[16:14] <smb> SpamapS, Yes, there is something odd going on here, all of the pcie root ports have msi not enabled and no drivers bound
[16:15] <SpamapS> so carry that one forward, but maybe carry it forward as "spamaps to confirm bug #684304 on borrowed DL360 G5"
[16:15] <hggdh> smb: you are aware that you can play with the machines, right?
[16:15] <smoser> [ACTION] spamaps to confirm bug #684304 on borrowed DL360 G5
[16:15] <MootBot> ACTION received:  spamaps to confirm bug #684304 on borrowed DL360 G5
[16:15] <smb> hggdh, No, you probably need to make me aware offline
[16:16] <hggdh> ack
[16:17] <smoser> [ACTION] hggdh to tell smb about how to get at machines
[16:17] <MootBot> ACTION received:  hggdh to tell smb about how to get at machines
[16:17] <smoser> next is
[16:17] <smoser>  * ACTION: zul to request feedback on the install-service blueprint to the mailing list
[16:17] <zul> not done
[16:18] <Daviey> smoser: Is that a topic shift, or a warning what is the next stop?
[16:18] <smoser> topic shift.
[16:18] <smoser> [ACTION] zul to request feedback on the install-service blueprint to the mailing list (carry over)
[16:18] <MootBot> ACTION received:  zul to request feedback on the install-service blueprint to the mailing list (carry over)
[16:18] <smoser> moving on
[16:18] <smoser> [TOPIC] Natty Development
[16:18] <MootBot> New Topic:  Natty Development
[16:18] <smoser> robbiew, are you leading this topic ?
[16:19] <Daviey> I have one thing relevant under that topic....
[16:19] <Daviey> Did everyone see the FTBFS email?
[16:19] <JamesPage> Yep
[16:19] <kirkland> Daviey: yup
[16:19] <robbiew> sure...I'll start with I need someone to represent us in the weekly status meeting
[16:19] <zul> ill do it
[16:20] <Daviey> robbiew: rota? :)
[16:20] <SpamapS> Daviey: indeed, looks like there are a few still left.
[16:20] <kirkland> Daviey: one question about that ... what's difference between that and Lucas Nussbaum's?  that yours focuses on server packages, perhaps?
[16:20] <Daviey> kirkland: mine is JUST the server seed.
[16:20] <kirkland> Daviey: okay
[16:20] <robbiew> zul: thnx
[16:21] <kirkland> robbiew: what does that entail?
[16:21] <smoser> so everyone should take a look at that and see if they can't knock off a few ftbfs.
[16:21] <robbiew> Daviey: as long as the rotation doesn't involve me...I'm fine with it
[16:21] <Daviey> robbiew: heh.
[16:21] <robbiew> kirkland: means keeping https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty up-to-date
[16:21] <Daviey> robbiew: assume this is the release meeting?
[16:21] <Daviey> ah yes.
[16:21] <robbiew> mostly just tracking the bug stuff
[16:21] <kirkland> robbiew: ah
[16:21] <robbiew> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty/Detail is generated from a script
[16:21] <kirkland> robbiew: okay cool;  zul -- it's all yours :-P
[16:21] <robbiew> and pulls into https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty
[16:22] <robbiew> lol
[16:22] <Daviey> zul: If you want a hand, lemme know. :)
[16:22] <ScottK> Daviey: Server seed or server package set?
[16:23] <SpamapS> robbiew: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty/Detail doesn't exist
[16:23] <zul> Daviey: ack
[16:23] <smoser> anything else here ?
[16:23] <robbiew> SpamapS: add an "S"
[16:23] <Daviey> ScottK: Seed
[16:24] <kirkland> zul: (yeah, i'm happy to back you up too)
[16:24] <ScottK> OK.  I thought there were Universe packages in there, but OK.
[16:24] <robbiew> SpamapS: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReleaseStatus/NattyDetail
[16:25] <SpamapS> ah
[16:25]  * kim0 knocked off 2 ftbfss 
[16:25] <smoser> anything else here ?
[16:25] <smoser> hggdh, you're on
[16:25] <smoser> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:25] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:25] <hggdh> I am still dead in the water re. testing UEC
[16:26] <robbiew> hggdh: is this to do with that kernel bug
[16:26] <hggdh> I have requested two machines to be set local, but right now I simply cannot test any
[16:26] <hggdh> robbiew: yes
[16:26] <robbiew> smb is supposed to be looking at it
[16:26] <hggdh> the only machines I currently have access to -- the UEC test rig have not been working on Nattty
[16:27] <robbiew> was on patch pilot yesterday
[16:27] <hggdh> this is blocking UEC testing
[16:27] <smb> right, robbiew pinged me yesterday and I checked what I could about it
[16:28] <hggdh> apart from that... JamesPage, myself, and others have been adding tests under Hudson. Contributions are welcome (and machines to run them under)
[16:28] <smb> So atm we don't have anything new
[16:28] <smoser> hggdh, i dont think it will affect you (my test was that it did not affect lucid UEC) but bug 688773 affects euca2ools on natty with python2.7
[16:28] <smb> But maybe when I know how to play remotely
[16:28] <hggdh> smoser: I will add it in to test when I can
[16:29] <hggdh> thank you
[16:29] <smoser> hggdh, well, if it fails, it will fail all over the place, as you wont be able to upload images :)
[16:29] <smoser> anything else, hggdh ?
[16:29] <hggdh> heh
[16:29] <hggdh> no, I am done, smoser
[16:30] <smoser> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:30] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:30] <smb> There are more? :)
[16:30]  * smoser claps for smb and bug 651370
[16:31] <smoser> and i'm under the impression that bug 667796 is soon to be fixed
[16:31] <smb> Thanks, though I think that was still jjohansen at work
[16:31] <smb> smoser, right that one is simply the option
[16:31] <smoser> and also that jjohansen is epxecting to push bug 614853 into lucid (with the wonderful patch attached there)
[16:31] <smb> its in the next proposed kernel
[16:32] <smb> I hope so, though we would need to ask him
[16:32] <smoser> all in all, i'm quite happy. i expect to have refreshed maverick images as soon as that one gets into maverick-proposed
[16:32] <smb> I had been tied up severely by a support escalation and another nfs bug
[16:33] <jjohansen> smb: no its not yet, and I believe its likely causing another bug
[16:33] <smoser> and hiping for lucid update this week, which will include lucid images that can be booted with pv-grub
[16:33] <smoser> s/hiping/hoping/
[16:33] <smb> (or to say which was another nfs bug)
[16:33] <smoser> that will make jjohansen and smb's life easier, as pv-grub makes kernel testing much easier.
[16:33] <jjohansen> \o/
[16:33] <SpamapS> I haven't tried natty on ec2 yet.. is it working?
[16:33] <smoser> [ACTION] smoser to write a blog entry on how to use grub 'fallback' with our images.
[16:33] <MootBot> ACTION received:  smoser to write a blog entry on how to use grub 'fallback' with our images.
[16:33] <smb> except micro it should by now
[16:34] <smb> SpamapS, ^
[16:34] <smoser> SpamapS, natty boots on non-t1.micro
[16:34] <smoser> and... possibly (if ami-2470864d works) we have an hvm image now (cluster compute)
[16:35] <smoser> smb, jjohansen the other bug that I see getting hit in maverick is bug 613273
[16:35] <SpamapS> ack
[16:35] <smoser> although my "in system call fastpath" description is probably competely bogus
[16:35] <smb> well it only means in a system call
[16:36] <smoser> right. not generally helpful.
[16:36] <smoser> so thats all from me...
[16:36] <smb> I will update the description when I know more
[16:37] <smb> There was one I was looking at today which had mostly screenshots as jpg which is hard to reassemble in mind
[16:37] <smoser> smb, i can provide more console logs (i think) if necessary from https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-on-ec2/ubuntu-on-ec2/ec2-test-results
[16:37] <smoser> anyone else have anything for kernel team ?
[16:38] <smoser> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[16:38] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[16:39] <smoser> mr sommer ?
[16:39] <sommer> hey all, don't have anything new this week
[16:39] <sommer> should have time to works on docs soon
[16:39] <sommer> :-)
[16:39] <smoser> any one have questions for the great sommer ?
[16:40] <SpamapS> sommer: wb!
[16:40] <smoser> if not, then we move onto kim0
[16:40] <smoser> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[16:40] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[16:40] <kim0> Hey everyone
[16:40] <kim0> Daviey has agreed himself to be bugged about identifying venues for community contributions to cloud related projects
[16:40] <kim0> Such venues will be featured on the cloud portal, and regularly advertised on our communication channels (blogs, twitter, FB, IRC events ...etc), with the aim of hopefully attracting more contributors
[16:40] <kim0> I think it shouldn't be overly technical, however still fairly challenging
[16:40] <SpamapS> kim0: have you linked to harvest from the cloud portal yet btw?
[16:41] <SpamapS> kim0: last time I looked, harvest was pretty low on server specific stuff to do
[16:41] <kim0> I think I need a good way to link cloud stuff to harvest first
[16:41] <kim0> the portal is only cloud btw ..
[16:41] <SpamapS> the cloud is the server is the cloud ;)
[16:42] <kim0> not sure .. cloud seems to be part of server for me
[16:42] <kim0> anyway, @everyone, if you think something cloudy you're working on, is a good candidate for community contributions, please send suggestions to me kim0@ubuntu.com
[16:42] <zul> well....a cloud would be nice if you have something to run in it
[16:42]  * kim0 hugs Daviey for all the help
[16:42] <smoser> for anyone not aware, kim0 is making some really nice blog posts that can be seen there on the http://cloud.ubuntu.com or at http://foss-boss.blogspot.com/
[16:42] <Daviey> kim0: Ubuntu One is personal cloud... covering that? :)
[16:42] <kim0> Daviey: I guess it would count :)
[16:43] <kim0> smoser: and screencasts
[16:43] <kim0> which brings up the other topic
[16:43] <smoser> i really liked http://foss-boss.blogspot.com/2010/11/ubuntu-server-in-ec2-cloud-easy.html
[16:43] <kim0> any suggestions on "trainings" or screencasts
[16:43] <smoser> kim0, one thing... you should be syndicated on "cloud planet" if you are not already
[16:43] <kim0> you guys think would be useful
[16:43] <kim0> please flood me
[16:43] <SpamapS> There is no 'cloud' section of harvest, and the ubuntu-server section has *one* package.. erlang
[16:44] <kim0> smoser: where is that ? isn't that the one on the portal ?
[16:44] <smoser> hm.. i guess you handled it.
[16:44] <kim0> smoser: yep ..
[16:44] <smoser> nijaba, used to have it.
[16:44] <smoser> ok. good.
[16:44] <kim0> aha yeah .. I'm on that
[16:44] <kim0> SpamapS: I can add a cloud section to harvest
[16:44] <kim0> I'd just need you guys to point at some jobs
[16:44] <kim0> the community can help with
[16:44] <kim0> that's really all for me .. don't forget .. flood me :)
[16:45] <smoser> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[16:45] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[16:45]  * RoAkSoAx has an announcement to make!
[16:45]  * kim0 makes drum roll
[16:45] <RoAkSoAx> The Cluster Stack is Finally in Main!!
[16:45] <kim0> woohooo
[16:45] <nijaba> \o/
[16:45] <SpamapS> oohhhh snap
[16:45] <Daviey> RoAkSoAx: Awesome!!
[16:45] <RoAkSoAx> Next steps are to enable some missing features, update to latest versions, and continue with the research on HA for UEC
[16:46] <nijaba> RoAkSoAx really rocks
[16:46] <RoAkSoAx> and will announce it via blog post and ML later today
[16:46] <kim0> RoAkSoAx: awesome
[16:46] <Daviey> RoAkSoAx: Does it need better docs?
[16:47] <RoAkSoAx> Daviey: well I wanna get docs into the server guide
[16:47] <RoAkSoAx> that's also what I've planned for this cycle
[16:47] <Daviey> RoAkSoAx -> talk with sommer... :)
[16:47] <smoser> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[16:47] <MootBot> New Topic:  Announce next meeting date and time
[16:47] <sommer> I'll help definitely
[16:47] <smoser> next meeting: Tuesday 2010-12-21 at 1600 UTC
[16:48] <Daviey> sommer: \o/
[16:48] <smoser> i'm sure it will be well attended, since lots of people will have more time for such things since they'll be taking vacation.
[16:48] <SpamapS> yeah the community will probably show up in droves. ;)
[16:49] <zul> ill be on vacation :)
[16:49] <JamesPage> me too :-)
[16:49] <Daviey> zul: Great... turn up as a community member :)
[16:49] <zul> Daviey: umm....no :)
[16:49] <kim0> hehe
[16:49] <smoser> #endmeeting
[16:49] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:49.
[16:49] <SpamapS> quick, shut it down!
[16:49]  * zul is going to go see tron that day
[16:49] <RoAkSoAx> lol
[16:49] <sommer> yay for tron!
[16:50] <RoAkSoAx> i could have watched it yesterday if I haven;t had to graduate
[16:50] <SpamapS> boo for sark!
[16:50] <SpamapS> RoAkSoAx: congrats!
[16:50] <Daviey> RoAkSoAx: priorities!
[16:50] <RoAkSoAx> thanks ;)
[16:54]  * JFo straggles in
[16:55]  * ara waves
[16:55] <JFo> straggling is very tiring
[16:55] <JFo> ara! :)
[16:59]  * smb \o
[17:00]  * cking \o
[17:00] <JFo> o/
[17:00] <sconklin> \o
[17:00] <bjf> #
[17:00] <bjf> # lets "get 'er done"!
[17:00] <bjf> #
[17:00] <bjf> #startmeeting
[17:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:00. The chair is bjf.
[17:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:00] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:00] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Maverick
[17:00] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:00] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Maverick
[17:00] <bjf> #
[17:00] <bjf> # NOTE: '..' indicates that you are finished with your input.
[17:00] <bjf> #
[17:00] <bjf> [TOPIC] ARM Status (bjf)
[17:00] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Status (bjf)
[17:01] <bjf>  * Marvel (mvl-dove)
[17:01] <bjf>    * Nothing new this week.
[17:01] <bjf>  * Texas Instruments (ti-omap)
[17:01] <bjf>    * Bug 633227: Native building crash.
[17:01] <bjf>      * Tested with Linaro 2.6.37 kernel which is close to upstream mainline. Native building still fails even with highmem disabled.
[17:01] <bjf>    * X-loader and U-boot update from TI.
[17:01] <bjf>    * Received 1700+ patch update from TI for 2.6.35 based Natty branch. This has been submitted to the mailing list, applied and pushed.
[17:01] <bjf>  * Freescale i.MX51
[17:01] <bjf>    * Bug 605042: Java crash issue.
[17:01] <bjf>      * Due to a lack of FSL HW in the kernel team this has been difficult to diagnose. However, some testing was done on a Babbage 2.0
[17:01] <bjf>        board but was unable to reproduce the issue.
[17:01] <bjf> ..
[17:01] <tgardner> I uploaded ti-omap4 for natty this AM.
[17:01] <tgardner> It includes a new BSP from TI, over 1700 patches since Maverick.
[17:01] <tgardner> ..
[17:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] Release Metrics (JFo)
[17:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Release Metrics (JFo)
[17:02] <JFo> Release Meeting Bugs (8 bugs, 14 Blueprints)
[17:02] <JFo> [17:02] <JFo>  * 1 linux kernel bugs (no change)
[17:02] <JFo>  * 0 linux-ti-omap bugs (no change)
[17:02] <JFo>  * 0 linux-meta-ti-omap bug (no change)
[17:02] <JFo> [17:02] <JFo>  * 11 linux kernel bugs (up 2)
[17:02] <JFo>  * 0 linux-ti-omap bugs (no change)
[17:02] <JFo>  * 0 linux-meta-ti-omap bug (no change)
[17:02] <JFo> [17:02] <JFo>  * 6 blueprints (Including HWE Blueprints)
[17:02] <JFo> [17:02] <JFo>  * 54 Linux Bugs (up 2)
[17:02] <JFo> [17:02] <JFo>  * 111 Linux Bugs (no change)
[17:02] <JFo> [17:02] <JFo>  * [[https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs?field.has_patch=on | Bugs with Patches]]
[17:02] <JFo>  * [[http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ogasawara/csv-stats/bugs-with-patches/linux/ | Breakdown by status]]
[17:02] <JFo> ..
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Natty Bug Handling (JFo)
[17:03] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-bug-handling
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Natty Bug Handling (JFo)
[17:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-bug-handling
[17:03] <JFo> nothing to report.
[17:03] <JFo> ..
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Enhancements to the firmware test suite (cking)
[17:03] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-firmware-test-suite-enhancements
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Enhancements to the firmware test suite (cking)
[17:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-firmware-test-suite-enhancements
[17:03] <cking> Changes to fwts (natty development branch):
[17:03] <cking>  * Method test - check for null object returns
[17:03] <cking>  * s4 - check for swap before hibernate
[17:03] <cking> ..
[17:04] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Handling of Deviations from Standard Kernels (smb)
[17:04] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-frankenkernel-maintenance
[17:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Handling of Deviations from Standard Kernels (smb)
[17:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-frankenkernel-maintenance
[17:04] <smb> The last piece (script) has been started but users, support and other incidents have a tendency of getting into the path of progress *sigh*. Translation: nothing new
[17:04] <smb> ..
[17:04] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Review of the Stable Maintenance Process (sconklin / bjf)
[17:04] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-process-review
[17:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Review of the Stable Maintenance Process (sconklin / bjf)
[17:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-process-review
[17:04] <sconklin> Kernels for both Lucid and Maveric had all associated bugs verified last week.
[17:04] <sconklin> This means that it was not necessary to revert any fixes or re-upload the kernels,
[17:04] <sconklin> as described in the stable cadence process:
[17:04] <sconklin> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/StableReleaseCadence
[17:04] <sconklin> This means that the kernels currently in -proposed could immediately enter
[17:04] <sconklin> the Testing phase by the Cert and QA teams.
[17:05] <sconklin> Thanks to everyone who tested their bugs promptly. This is the optimal
[17:05] <sconklin> way to run the new process, with fast testing and no reverts. It's been
[17:05] <sconklin> a little chaotic at times, and I'd like to thank the archive admins, members
[17:05] <sconklin> of the cert team, and everyone else who is helping shepard this new process
[17:05] <sconklin> through the first few cycles.
[17:05] <sconklin> All releases other than Lucid and Maverick (except Hardy) have new packages
[17:05] <sconklin> in -proposed, which contain only security CVE fixes. Hardy is delayed due to
[17:05] <sconklin> a problem we encountered in moving to the new non-virtualized build ppa, and
[17:05] <sconklin> should be built by the end of this week.
[17:05] <sconklin> Testing status for these security-only kernels is unknown. They do not follow
[17:05] <sconklin> the same testing process as the Lucid and Maverick stable kernels.
[17:05] <sconklin> Most members of the kernel team are on holiday until after the new year. We
[17:05] <sconklin> plan to try to upload -proposed kernels to begin a new cycle by Friday, Jan 7th.
[17:05] <sconklin> ..
[17:07] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Current -proposed testing by cert. team  (ara)
[17:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Current -proposed testing by cert. team  (ara)
[17:07] <ara> Hello!
[17:07] <ara> Very little to update at this point.
[17:07] <ara> The certifcation testing has started for Lucid proposed kernel, but we cannot report on results yet.
[17:07] <ara> cr3 and brendand are working hard on this and they should be able to have results for both Maverick and Lucid before the end of the week
[17:07] <ara> ..
[17:07] <JFo> welcome to the meeting ara :)
[17:07] <JFo> .
[17:07] <JFo> ..
[17:07] <ara> JFo, thanks
[17:08] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Natty (apw)
[17:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Natty (apw)
[17:08] <tgardner> The Natty kernel is at 2.6.37-9.22 (rebased against 2.6.37-rc5).  Items of interest include:
[17:08] <tgardner> 1) A number of external drivers have been updated: dm-raid4-5, omnibook, ndiswrapper, and iscsitarget.
[17:08] <tgardner> 2) The module RO/NX patches have been re-instated with bug fixes.
[17:08] <tgardner> 3) 2.6.37-rc6 is imminent and will likely be the last kernel version until after the holidays.
[17:08] <tgardner> 4) New firmware files to support new intel wifi adapters in the 6000 and 6050 family.
[17:08] <tgardner> ..
[17:08] <bjf> [TOPIC] Security & bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper (sconklin / bjf)
[17:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Security & bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper (sconklin / bjf)
[17:08] <sconklin> | Package                                  | Upd/Sec              | Proposed             |  TiP | Verified |
[17:08] <sconklin> |                                          |                      |                      |      |          |
[17:08] <sconklin> | karmic   linux-ec2                       | 2.6.31-307.22        | 2.6.31-307.23        |    0 |        0 |
[17:08] <sconklin> | ---      linux                           | 2.6.31-22.69         | 2.6.31-22.70         |    0 |        0 |
[17:08] <sconklin> |                                          |                      |                      |      |          |
[17:09] <sconklin> | lucid    linux-ec2                       | 2.6.32-310.21        | 2.6.32-311.23        |    3 |        3 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-ports-meta                | 2.6.32.26.19         | 2.6.32.27.20         |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-lts-backport-maverick     | 2.6.35-22.34~lucid1  | 2.6.35-23.41~lucid1  |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-backports-modules-2.6.32  | 2.6.32-26.25         | 2.6.32-27.26         |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux                           | 2.6.32-26.48         | 2.6.32-27.49         |    3 |        3 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-meta                      | 2.6.32.26.28         | 2.6.32.27.29         |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-meta-ec2                  | 2.6.32.310.11        | 2.6.32.311.12        |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> |                                          |                      |                      |      |          |
[17:09] <sconklin> | maverick linux-backports-modules-2.6.35  | 2.6.35-23.13         | 2.6.35-24.15         |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-ports-meta                | 2.6.35.23.17         | 2.6.35.24.18         |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux-meta                      | 2.6.35.23.25         | 2.6.35.24.28         |    0 |        0 |
[17:09] <sconklin> | ---      linux                           | 2.6.35-23.41         | 2.6.35-24.42         |   14 |       14 |
[17:09] <sconklin> |                                          |                      |                      |      |          |
[17:09] <sconklin> ..
[17:09] <bjf> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs: Regressions (JFo)
[17:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs: Regressions (JFo)
[17:10] <JFo> Incoming Bugs
[17:10] <JFo>  38 Natty Bugs (up 6)
[17:10] <JFo>  1127 Maverick Bugs (up 14)
[17:10] <JFo>  1096 Lucid Bugs (down 14)
[17:10] <JFo> Current regression stats (broken down by release):
[17:10] <JFo> [17:10] <JFo>   * 26 maverick bugs (up 1)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 76 lucid bugs (down 7)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 6 karmic bugs (no change)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 0 hardy bugs (no change)
[17:10] <JFo> [17:10] <JFo>   * 177 maverick bugs (up 2)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 198 lucid bugs (no change)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 40 karmic bugs (no change)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 2 hardy bugs (no change)
[17:10] <JFo> [17:10] <JFo>   * 13 maverick bugs (no change)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 3 lucid bugs (down 3)
[17:10] <JFo>   * 1 karmic bug (no change)
[17:10] <JFo> .
[17:10] <JFo> ..
[17:11] <bjf> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs: Bug day report (JFo)
[17:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs: Bug day report (JFo)
[17:11] <JFo> The next bug day will be next week. I'd like for that one to focus on regression-proposed bugs
[17:11] <JFo> since the ones that I have on my list have been there too long to be seriously considered as legitimate
[17:11] <JFo> bugs in the proposed queue. I've decided to use this small segment of bugs due to the majority
[17:11] <JFo> of interested people being on holiday.
[17:11] <JFo> ..
[17:11] <bjf> [TOPIC] Triage Status (JFo)
[17:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Triage Status (JFo)
[17:11] <JFo> I have begun testing the script that replaces one tag with another. There is a pre-existing script
[17:11] <JFo> that bjf made me aware of, and I am looking at that for some of the other scripts I have/had planned.
[17:11] <JFo> ..
[17:12] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Discussion or Questions: Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion or Questions: Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:12] <JFo> o/
[17:13] <bjf> one thing i'd like to point out is that this will be the last irc meeting of this year, the next will likely be Jan. 4, 2011
[17:13] <bjf> JFo, go
[17:13] <JFo> If I don't speak to some of you before the holidays, Happy Holidays!! Hope you enjoy your vacations.
[17:13] <JFo> ..
[17:13] <JFo> :-)
[17:13] <sconklin> +1
[17:13] <kamal> happy holidays all!
[17:13] <ara> Happy holidays!
[17:13] <smb> \o/
[17:13] <smb> and +1
[17:14] <bjf> thanks everyone
[17:14] <bjf> #endmeeting
[17:14] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:14.
[17:14] <jjohansen> thanks bjf
[17:14] <kamal> thanks bjf
[17:14] <JFo> thanks bjf
[17:14] <ara> thanks all!
[17:14] <smb> thanks bjf
[17:14] <sconklin> thanks!
[17:14] <ara> you run a fast meeting!
[17:14] <JFo> heh
[17:14] <JFo> we are infamous for that ara :)
[17:14] <smb> ara, we don't like long ones
[22:54] <bioterror> good evening
[22:56] <Emerling> bioterror, good evening hi
[22:59] <JackyAlcine> Good evening, everyone. I'm pretty excited.
[22:59] <ChrisDruif> Your here too JackyAlcine?
[22:59] <Emerling> JackyAlcine, :D congratulation
[22:59] <JackyAlcine> ChrisDruif: Yup. :D
[23:00] <tenach> :)
[23:00] <ChrisDruif> I might still be here when the meeting starts....still gotta finish something <_<"
[23:01] <JackyAlcine> I'll leave the window open; just so I can check up on it.
[23:07] <bioterror> hi phillw  ;)
[23:08] <phillw> bioterror: nervous yet?
[23:08] <bioterror> nope
[23:10] <phillw> well, you should be... having people decide if you are a fit and proper person is an ordeal. I trust you are preapred.
[23:11] <JackyAlcine> Fit for what?
[23:11] <JackyAlcine> And time remaining?
[23:11] <ChrisDruif> Thought the same JackyAlcine xD
[23:12] <JackyAlcine> you have a launchpad, ChrisDruif ?
[23:12] <ChrisDruif> I don't think so, sorry...:)
[23:12] <phillw> JackyAlcine: , ChrisDruif https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw#Testimonials
[23:12] <ChrisDruif> I'm just here to help....don't wanna fuss with a launchpad page of myself...
[23:13] <JackyAlcine> Oh, okay. :D
[23:18] <ChrisDruif> Did you mean this with launchpad: https://launchpad.net/~chrisdruif
[23:38] <JackyAlcine> I'm not sure if I either missed the meeting or it hasn't started.
[23:39] <bioterror> starts in 20 minutes
[23:39] <bioterror> if you
[23:39] <bioterror> if you're talking about the beginners team
[23:40] <JackyAlcine> Okay, thanks bioterror
[23:58] <UndiFineD> o/
[23:58] <head_victim> \o
[23:59] <JackyAlcine> :D
[23:59] <hajour> \o