[10:00] <udienz> nobuto_mobile, waiting for Asia/Oceania Meeting?
[10:04] <udienz> elky?
[10:07] <elky> persia, lifeless: freeflying?
[10:09] <elky> i can't do anything on my own :(
[10:20] <elky> udienz, sorry, it's not looking like happening tonight
[10:21] <udienz> elky, okay no problem i'll try next meeting
[15:56] <zul> hi
[15:57] <andreserl> \o/
[15:58] <hallyn> \o
[15:59] <hallyn> jolly good morning, all.
[16:00] <JamesPage> o/
[16:00] <JamesPage> Afternoon all....
[16:00] <Daviey> \o
[16:00] <SpamapS> o/
[16:01] <kirkland> o/
[16:01] <ttx> \o
[16:01] <hallyn> no sombreros this morning?  no hunting caps?
[16:01] <SpamapS> Alright, lets begin
[16:01] <hallyn> settle down there, SpamapS
[16:01] <hallyn> #startmeeting
[16:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:01. The chair is hallyn.
[16:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:01] <SpamapS> *\o/*   gooooo rally!
[16:01] <SpamapS> hallyn: err, ok you can do it if you want. ;)
[16:02] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:02] <hallyn> ALL: please check the SRU tracker for 'needs-verification' bugs
[16:02] <hallyn> http://people.canonical.com/~chucks/SRUTracker/sru-tracker-bugs.html
[16:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~chucks/SRUTracker/sru-tracker-bugs.html
[16:02] <hallyn> everyone rais your hands if you're NOT guilty
[16:03] <SpamapS> That one should, I think, roll forward for a bit longer so we remember that its important.
[16:03] <SpamapS> at least until 10.04.2
[16:03] <hallyn> [ACTION] ALL: please check the SRU tracker for 'needs-verification' bugs
[16:03] <MootBot> ACTION received:  ALL: please check the SRU tracker for 'needs-verification' bugs
[16:03] <hallyn> SpamapS: sounds good, i'll try to remember to keep the link in with the action when i carry over
[16:04] <hallyn> robbiew to review ServerTeam wiki [carried over]
[16:04] <Daviey> i thought that was done?
[16:04] <hallyn> hm, is robbiew in?
[16:04] <SpamapS> I recall him claiming he'd done it as well.
[16:04] <robbiew> o/
[16:04] <hallyn> hm, didn't get updated on the meeting page...
[16:05] <hallyn> robbiew: ^ ServerTeam wiki all reviewed and uptodate?
[16:05] <zul> yeah i totally missed the boat on the server page
[16:06] <robbiew> yup...at least the external one
[16:06] <hallyn> zul: meaning action items aren't updated?  in that case let me search the logs for the real ction items
[16:07] <ShootEmUp> Hi everyone!
[16:09] <SpamapS> ShootEmUp: welcome!
[16:09] <ShootEmUp> glad to be here
[16:10] <hallyn> feh, there, jan 4
[16:10] <hallyn> yay, there ARE no actions from the jan 4 meeting
[16:11] <SpamapS> \o/
[16:11] <hallyn> so, barring objections (i.e. if i'm mistaken), i'll move on
[16:11] <ShootEmUp> none? what do they do in those meetings?
[16:11] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Natty Development
[16:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Natty Development
[16:11] <hallyn> ShootEmUp: play duke nukem
[16:11] <hallyn> robbiew: ^ over to you
[16:11] <ShootEmUp> hallyn, what?
[16:12]  * robbiew wonders why he covers the one topic he doesn't do :P
[16:12] <robbiew> heh
[16:12] <robbiew> so we made great progress on work items
[16:12] <ShootEmUp> charlie-tca!
[16:12] <robbiew> lots of Done's, Postpones, and dropped
[16:12] <robbiew> all goodness
[16:12] <robbiew> I haven't checked bugs yet
[16:13] <robbiew> but I usually know of the serious ones...from the irc pings and email
[16:13] <robbiew> that's it!
[16:13] <SpamapS> Thanks Mr. Narwhal!
[16:13] <ShootEmUp> I have a topic to debate
[16:13] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:13] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:13] <SpamapS> ShootEmUp: if its not related to the current topic please hold it until Open Discussion
[16:13] <andreserl> ShootEmUp: wait till the end of the meeting for Open Discussion :)
[16:13] <ShootEmUp> okay
[16:14] <hallyn> didn't actually see hggdh today, is he around?
[16:14] <hallyn> guess not, moving on, i know smb is here :)
[16:14] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:14] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:15] <smb> So I did some little stuff last week but have no paper records, hence I am not sure anymore what that was
[16:15] <smb> Currently working on bug 686692
[16:16] <smb> which I can locally reproduce but not yet found a final solution
[16:16] <Daviey> smb, Is that the bug that only happend on t1.micro i386's?
[16:16] <smb> just that it would boot if the mem= is a multiple of 4
[16:16] <smb> Daviey, t1.micro but I believe both i386 and x86_64
[16:16] <Daviey> ah
[16:17] <smb> They are doing something different with memory layout too. Just not sure this is just something that happens too or related
[16:17] <hallyn> any questions for smb?
[16:18] <smb> Other thing I pushed for SRU in lucid is the paper over approach for bug 614853
[16:18] <smb> To keep until we found/got a real solution
[16:19] <Daviey> smb, What nasty effects does it have?
[16:19] <smb> The current patch just avoids the divide by zero. While the variable in question is supposed to never be zero in the first place
[16:20] <smb> So I sent two patches for sru, the one preventing the divide and one sort of debug patch to yell when the variable is set/left zero
[16:21] <smb> smoser, Are you arround?
[16:21] <smoser> o/
[16:21] <smoser> yeah, smb, i agree with that.
[16:22] <smb> Just saw your bug 704022
[16:22] <smoser> one thing i had considered would have been to just add the debugging bit, and let it crash
[16:22] <smb> Though I am a bit confused by the logs as the ones which say with option and working seem to contain drops into busybox as well
[16:22] <smoser> even with info like "if you see this message, please add to bug  at https://launcpad.net/..."
[16:23] <smoser> smb i may have uploaded incorrect (un-trimmed) logs
[16:23] <smoser> but it does fail
[16:23] <smb> smoser, What made me rethink a bit is that those affected people seem to run production severs with that and so maybe a avoid and complain is preferable
[16:24] <smoser> yeah, so the reboot with argument i sjust not trimmed
[16:24] <smoser> so it contains the previous boot log (thats why the busybox in the middle of it)
[16:24] <smoser> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/62372677/restart-with-unplug-arg.txt
[16:24] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://launchpadlibrarian.net/62372677/restart-with-unplug-arg.txt
[16:24] <smb> smoser, Ah ok. That xvd* does not show up without the option is ok. Though one would think the sd* devices should always
[16:25] <smoser> smb, yeah, i agree, getting people actually fixed is good, but if you fix the problem you'll never get debug info
[16:25] <smoser> they wont send it becuase they wont know they have a problem
[16:25] <hallyn> so do you want it changed?  (let's either make a decision, or move offline?)
[16:25]  * SpamapS wonders if this couldn't be discussed further offline?
[16:26]  * SpamapS apologizes for smashing hallyn's toes
[16:26] <smoser> i can defer to smb's decision.
[16:26] <hallyn> grrr
[16:26] <hallyn> ok - any other questions for smb?
[16:26] <hallyn> (or from)
[16:26] <hallyn> if not,
[16:26] <smb> I am done
[16:26] <hallyn> thanks, smb
[16:26] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[16:26] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[16:27] <hallyn> sommer is not around
[16:27] <Daviey> :(
[16:27] <hallyn> yup
[16:27] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[16:27] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[16:27] <hallyn> kim0 is also not around
[16:27] <hallyn> and so, we move on to
[16:27] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[16:27] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[16:28] <andreserl> ShootEmUp: your turn
[16:28] <ShootEmUp> should ubuntu try to look like windows or Mac or neither?
[16:28] <andreserl> lol
[16:29] <SpamapS> ShootEmUp: you may want to ask that in #ubuntu
[16:29] <hallyn> like my old palm V
[16:29] <andreserl> ShootEmUp: indeed. This is the Server team meeting
[16:29] <andreserl> lol
[16:29] <ShootEmUp> okay
[16:29] <hallyn> SpamapS: for some reason i thougth there was something you wanted to discuss?
[16:30] <SpamapS> why does everybody always assume I want to TALK? ;)
[16:30] <SpamapS> no I'm good
[16:30] <hallyn> :)
[16:30] <Daviey> wow, first time for everything! :)
[16:30] <hallyn> anybody?  going once...
[16:30] <zul> SpamapS: because you are a chatty cathy
[16:30] <SpamapS> zul: whatever you nervous nelly
[16:30] <hallyn> going twice...
[16:31] <zul> SpamapS: i know what you are but what am i?
[16:31] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[16:31] <MootBot> New Topic:  Announce next meeting date and time
[16:31] <hallyn> hm, the meeting page says feb 1
[16:31] <hallyn> i dont' think that's right
[16:31] <hallyn> I would have assumed:
[16:31] <zul> 25th
[16:31] <hallyn> Tuesday, January 25 2011 16:00 UTC
[16:32] <hallyn> ok, another almost action-free meeting.
[16:32] <hallyn> thanks all
[16:32] <hallyn> #endmeeting
[16:32] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:32.
[16:32] <andreserl> \o/
[16:59] <apw> o/
[16:59] <jjohansen> \o
[16:59] <cking> \o  yes I'm here
[16:59] <smb> \o
[16:59]  * tgardner waves
[17:00]  * ara waves
[17:00] <sforshee> \o
[17:01]  * smb looks expectingly at bjf 
[17:02] <cking> not a US holiday today too?
[17:02] <bjf> 09:59 by my clock
[17:02] <bjf> #startmeeting
[17:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:02. The chair is bjf.
[17:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:02] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:02] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty
[17:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty
[17:02] <bjf> #
[17:02] <bjf> # NOTE: '..' indicates that you are finished with your input.
[17:02] <bjf> #
[17:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] ARM Status (bjf)
[17:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Status (bjf)
[17:03] <bjf> Nothing new
[17:03] <bjf> ..
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Release Metrics (JFo)
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Release Metrics (JFo)
[17:03] <bjf> no JFo today?
[17:04] <bjf> guess not, moving on
[17:04] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Kernel Configuration Review (apw)
[17:04] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-config-review
[17:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Kernel Configuration Review (apw)
[17:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-config-review
[17:04] <apw> o/
[17:04] <apw> Nothing to report here.
[17:04] <apw> ..
[17:04] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Enhancements to the firmware test suite (cking)
[17:04] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-firmware-test-suite-enhancements
[17:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Enhancements to the firmware test suite (cking)
[17:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-firmware-test-suite-enhancements
[17:05] <cking> Changes to fwts (natty development branch):
[17:05] <cking>  * 0.21.0 now in Natty universe.
[17:05] <cking>  * wmi test: handle table not found error more gracefully.
[17:05] <cking>  * report off by one error on month in date.
[17:05] <cking>  * add --disassemble-aml.
[17:05] <cking>  * fix null pointer segfault.
[17:05] <cking>  * syntaxcheck test: add 40 advice lines on specific error output.
[17:05] <cking> ..
[17:05] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Handling of Deviations from Standard Kernels (smb)
[17:05] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-frankenkernel-maintenance
[17:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Handling of Deviations from Standard Kernels (smb)
[17:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-frankenkernel-maintenance
[17:05] <smb> Done.
[17:05] <smb> [ACTION] bjf remove from agenda
[17:05] <smb> ..
[17:05] <bjf> i'll remove from agenda
[17:05] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Review of the Stable Maintenance Process (sconklin / bjf)
[17:05] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-process-review
[17:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Review of the Stable Maintenance Process (sconklin / bjf)
[17:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-process-review
[17:06] <bjf> * The kernel team will take responsibility for setting the verification-needed tags on bugs at the beginning of the verification phase
[17:06] <bjf> ..
[17:06] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Cert. Team  (ara)
[17:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Cert. Team  (ara)
[17:06] <ara> o/
[17:06] <ara> Nothing to report here, we will test the -proposed kernel once the verification is done
[17:07] <ara> we will report on status on the meeting next week
[17:07] <ara> ..
[17:07] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Ubuntu Kernel Delta Review (apw)
[17:07] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-ubuntu-delta-review
[17:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Ubuntu Kernel Delta Review (apw)
[17:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-ubuntu-delta-review
[17:07] <apw> 16 of the 19 personal patch reviews are now done.  Some work remains on compcache which is now superceeded by zram in staging, but some userspace work is required to switch to it.  Nothing else of interest occuring.
[17:07] <apw> ..
[17:07] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Kernel Version and Flavours (apw)
[17:07] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-version-and-flavours
[17:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Kernel Version and Flavours (apw)
[17:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-version-and-flavours
[17:07] <apw> Master kernels are now at v2.6.37 and remain stable.  OMAP3 kernels now switched over to the distro master branch and being used in ARM images.  ti-omap4 is a little behind the curve and being investigated.
[17:07] <apw> ..
[17:08] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Ecryptfs (jj)
[17:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Ecryptfs (jj)
[17:08] <jjohansen> Currently working with light testing, if you don't mind losing your data you can play with it (it doesn't handle unexpected stuff yet)
[17:08] <jjohansen> current issues, that need to be resolved
[17:08] <jjohansen>  - code cleanup
[17:08] <jjohansen>  - name collisions
[17:08] <jjohansen>     - actual fs name
[17:08] <jjohansen>       - multiple uses of same name from different directories
[17:08] <jjohansen>          - dentry tag on lookup
[17:08] <jjohansen>     - could use inode tag (force verifying for all names on tagged file)
[17:08] <jjohansen>   - Graceful fallback
[17:08] <jjohansen>     - should fallback to shortname if xattr is missing, currently fill_dir fails
[17:08] <jjohansen>     - should fallback to something that earlier versions of ecryptfs can
[17:08] <jjohansen>       support (ie. a valid shortname).
[17:08] <jjohansen>       - currently Fill dir, detects unencrypted names with leading // as
[17:08] <jjohansen>         shortname tag
[17:09] <jjohansen> - need to expand current testing into a full regression test suite
[17:09] <jjohansen> ..
[17:09] <tgardner> jjohansen, do you have a branch somewhere for this work?
[17:09] <jjohansen> ah yeah
[17:10] <apw> make sure its on something which is backed up! :)
[17:10] <jjohansen> kernel.ubuntu.com/jj/ubuntu-natty.git
[17:10] <jjohansen> give me a sec to push the latest up
[17:12] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Natty (apw)
[17:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Natty (apw)
[17:12] <apw> The main distro kernel is now at 2.6.37-12.26 (v2.6.37 final based).  We are still in an extended merge window for v2.6.38-rc1, but testing of Ubuntu kernels based on this is looking ok so far.
[17:12] <apw> ..
[17:12] <bjf> [TOPIC] Security & bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper (sconklin / bjf)
[17:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Security & bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper (sconklin / bjf)
[17:12] <bjf> || Package                                    || Upd/Sec              || Proposed             ||  TiP || Verified ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || dapper   linux-source-2.6.15               || 2.6.15-55.90         || 2.6.15-55.91         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || hardy    linux                             || 2.6.24-28.81         || 2.6.24-28.84         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || karmic   linux-ec2                         || 2.6.31-307.23        || 2.6.31-307.24        ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> || ---      linux                             || 2.6.31-22.70         || 2.6.31-22.71         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || lucid    linux-ec2                         || 2.6.32-311.23        || 2.6.32-312.24        ||    5 ||        5 ||
[17:12] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta-lts-backport-maverick  || 2.6.35.22.34         || 2.6.35.23.35         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> || ---      linux-lts-backport-maverick       || 2.6.35-22.34~lucid1  || 2.6.35-23.41~lucid1  ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-firmware                    || 1.34.1               || 1.34.3               ||    2 ||        2 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux                             || 2.6.32-27.49         || 2.6.32-28.55         ||    5 ||        5 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta                        || 2.6.32.27.29         || 2.6.32.28.31         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:13] <bjf> || maverick linux-meta                        || 2.6.35.24.28         || 2.6.35.25.31         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-firmware                    ||                      || 1.38.3               ||    3 ||        3 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux                             || 2.6.35-24.42         || 2.6.35-25.43         ||   20 ||       18 ||
[17:13] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:13] <bjf> * New kernels were uploaded and published to -proposed for all supported releases. We are now in the verification phase for these kernels.
[17:13] <bjf> * There is a regression in Maverick proposed  having to do with Radeo graphics ( bug 703553 ) that we'll be looking into.
[17:13] <bjf> * The kernel currently in -proposed for Lucid is the one which we anticipate being released for the .2 release.
[17:13] <bjf> ..
[17:14] <apw> o/
[17:14] <bjf> apw, go
[17:14] <apw> bjf is that TiP the cound that verified needs to get to
[17:14] <apw> ie is that showing a very good verification percentage ?
[17:15] <apw> ..
[17:15] <bjf> apw, yes and yes, most of the bugs were in fact fixed by upstream stable release
[17:15] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Discussion or Questions: Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion or Questions: Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:16] <cking> what does TiP mean?
[17:16] <ara> Test in Proposed?
[17:17] <tgardner> o/
[17:17] <bjf> tgardner, go
[17:17] <tgardner> once you upload to canonical-kernel-team, do you have to annoy an archive admin to pocket copy?
[17:17] <bjf> tgardner, yes
[17:17] <tgardner> as there is no queue
[17:17] <tgardner> hmmm
[17:17] <tgardner> ..
[17:17] <apw> that is similar to the normal need to hastle an AA to source NEW the package anyhow
[17:18] <bjf> tgardner, yes not the best of situations
[17:18] <bjf> thanks everyone
[17:18] <bjf> #endmeeting
[17:18] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:18.
[17:18] <ara> OK, thanks all!
[18:11]  * stgraber waves
[18:11] <stgraber> wendar: pong
[18:12] <wendar> stgraber: seems we're the only two
[18:12] <stgraber> apparently
[18:12] <stgraber> anyway, the only thing I really had for this meeting was the question about the version number
[18:12] <wendar> yes, we got a reply from the techboard on that
[18:13] <stgraber> cool, so we'll be able to get at least one of the apps uploaded to extra then
[18:14] <stgraber> that was the only thing I was waiting for to get suspended sentence uploaded
[18:14] <wendar> 2.5.1-0extras10.10.1
[18:14] <wendar> so <appversion>-<debianversion>-extras<ubuntuversion>.<packageversion>
[18:14] <wendar> where debian version is expected to be 0
[18:15] <stgraber> right
[18:15] <stgraber> also, one I push that to the PPA, it's going to get synced to extra and everyone will see it
[18:15] <stgraber> what was the magic part about the icon or something like that ?
[18:15] <stgraber> or the screenshots
[18:15] <stgraber> I seem to remember that we need to get a branch merged or something
[18:16] <wendar> it's in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PostReleaseApps/Metadata
[18:17] <stgraber> ok, and who do I need to ping to get the branch merged ?
[18:17] <stgraber> because I'm going to upload the package in the next 5 minutes or so, meaning it'll appear in the next 24 hours, so we'll need the branch merged before that
[18:19] <stgraber> he proposed the merge when he sent the application, but my guess is that the branch shouldn't be merged until we give the app a +1
[18:19] <stgraber> but should be merged before we upload
[18:19] <wendar> that I don't know (first time through the process)
[18:19] <wendar> I believe mvo has access
[18:19] <wendar> otherwise, I'd check in with stuart
[18:19] <wendar> (on UK timezone, though)
[18:20] <stgraber> I see it's commercial-ppa-uploaders
[18:20] <stgraber> checking who's in there
[18:21] <wendar> ah, robbiew is on there, he's online now
[18:24] <stgraber> ok, I poked tumbleweed about one last detail, then I'll wait for someone to merge that branch and will upload to the PPA
[18:30] <wendar> great, thanks!
[18:31] <wendar> I'll send a note to the ARB on version numbers
[18:31] <stgraber> ok
[18:33] <wendar> looks like we have one new application
[18:34] <wendar> no other progress on other applications
[18:35] <fagan> hey all sorry for being late
[18:36] <fagan> I looked into the code of the app that I said I would before christmas and its pretty big
[18:36] <fagan> id say they should go to universe rather than extras
[18:39] <wendar> that was 4dtris?
[18:42] <wendar> stgraber: if you're still on, 3 of us is enough to vote
[18:44] <fagan> wendar: yeah it was
[18:45] <fagan> its like 20 source files of C
[18:46] <wendar> fagan: ack!
[18:46] <fagan> so its pretty complex
[18:46] <fagan> I went through it and its ok though
[18:46] <wendar> well, it's a bit of a judgement call
[18:46] <fagan> there isnt anything harmful in there but I think in terms of complexity we should pass it on to universe
[18:47] <wendar> do you feel comfortable with the level of security review?
[18:47] <wendar> yes
[18:47] <fagan> well i didnt see anything bad
[18:48] <fagan> im very confident that its fine security wise
[18:49] <kees> 18:14 < wendar> so <appversion>-<debianversion>-extras<ubuntuversion>.<packageversion>
[18:49] <kees> 18:14 < wendar> where debian version is expected to be 0
[18:49] <kees> should be no dash between <debianversion> and extras:
[18:50] <kees> <upstream version>-<debianversion == 0>extras<ubuntu release version>.<packaging version>
[18:50] <wendar> kees: yah, I caught that when I reposted to ARB list
[18:50] <kees> (just saw that in backscroll)
[18:50] <kees> wendar: okay, cool :)
[18:51] <wendar> kees: the "for example" was right, I just got caught up in all the angle brackets in the detailed explanation :)
[18:51] <kees> hehe
[18:51] <kees> yeah
[18:52] <wendar> fagan: ENOSTGRABER, I think we'll have to wait until next meeting to vote on 4dtris
[18:53] <fagan> yeah
[18:53] <fagan> that sounds fair
[18:53] <wendar> fagan: but, it's worthwhile to post a summary of your recommendation to the ARB list
[18:53] <fagan> sure
[18:53] <wendar> that way we can talk about it between now and then
[18:53] <fagan> yeah I think its a judgement call if its accepted or not
[18:54] <fagan> depending on our view on large complex programs
[18:55] <wendar> yeah, we don't have a hard measure of "complexity"
[18:55] <wendar> (one of the things we talked about at UDS)
[18:55] <wendar> so, we'll make our best judgement
[18:55] <wendar> 20 C files is certainly a lot less than, say, the CPython interpreter
[18:56] <wendar> lines of code may enter into it
[18:57] <wendar> and dependencies (stand-alone/using system libraries/installing its own libraries)
[18:58] <wendar> I'll take on a task to review the new application before next meeting
[18:59] <wendar> call that a wrap on the ARB meeting
[19:02] <fagan> cool thanks wendar
[19:02] <wendar> fagan: do you want to be meeting chair next meeting?
[19:02] <fagan> wendar: sure
[19:02] <wendar> fagan: cool, I'll put you in the agenda
[19:03] <fagan> awesome
[19:53] <ShootEmUp> Hi everyone
[20:55] <paultag> sorry I'm late, guys
[20:55] <paultag> Oh wait, I'm not
[20:55] <paultag> I think this is the first meeting I've been on-time for.
[20:56] <czajkowski> paultag: you're early you special lad!
[20:56] <pleia2> just a reflex to apologize for being late? :)
[20:56] <paultag> pleia2: yeah!
[20:56] <czajkowski> not sure the others may remember though.. no mail was sent out till um about 4 mins ago
[20:57] <leogg> thank you for the reminder czajkowski :)
[20:58] <czajkowski> not sure we actualy have a meeting tbh folks
[20:58] <czajkowski> one thing on the agenda
[20:58] <czajkowski> and that was dealt with via email
[20:58] <pleia2> thank you for all your awesome work, loco council! :)
[20:58] <paultag> pleia2: :)
[20:59] <leogg> pleia2: :)
[20:59] <czajkowski> :)
[20:59] <popey> o/
[21:00] <paultag> Well, since we're all here
[21:00] <paultag> anyone have anything to say?
[21:00] <czajkowski> II've mailed team re re approvals
[21:01] <czajkowski> this cycle we only have a few
[21:01] <czajkowski> 	so we could do with picking a few from early next cycle as that list is massve
[21:01] <czajkowski> just a thought...
[21:01] <czajkowski> also paultag mentioned about coming up with some policies to help teams which would be ideal given the last few months with helping teams
[21:01] <leogg> yes, that's a great idea
[21:02] <paultag> I can formalize a few of them. Do we have any kind of RFC process for loco-contacts?
[21:02] <czajkowski> we have the guidelines page which is great
[21:03] <czajkowski> but I am noticing a good few teams having issues and I'd love to do more to help
[21:03] <czajkowski> but it'd be nice if we had something written down so we can get it translated
[21:03] <paultag> +1
[21:04] <czajkowski> simple things like if you're struggling come to us we cna help, for team elections if you need mediate  perhaps have 2 or 3 leaders if you cant reach a vote or if the team is small
[21:04] <czajkowski> share the roles/tasks
[21:04] <czajkowski> but some teams go the other extrme and that I do worry as it seems to end up with them in lots of hassle
[21:04] <czajkowski> aka unapproved or inhouse fighting
[21:05] <huats> eveing everyone
[21:05] <paultag> 'lo huats
[21:05] <paultag> huats: just chatting, making use of this chance where we're all online
[21:05] <huats> oh realy ?
[21:06] <czajkowski> the facotid in here is helping btw
[21:06] <czajkowski> *factoid
[21:06] <huats> hello czajkowski
[21:09] <czajkowski> leogg: paultag popey any comments?
[21:09] <czajkowski> if not I'm going to go back to dyingsick here!
[21:09] <paultag> czajkowski: hahaha
[21:09] <paultag> I have a comment --
[21:09] <paultag> If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution.
[21:09] <popey> nope
[21:10] <leogg> :)
[21:10] <paultag> Oh, on topic? this sounds great, and I think we should move forward with it
[21:10] <czajkowski> right love you and leave you all nn
[21:11] <paultag> night! I'll stay on if anyone comes about. Don't think we need logs or anything, aye?