[15:44] <ara> skaet, ping
[15:44] <skaet> ara, pong
[15:44] <ara> skaet, hey!
[15:44] <skaet> :)
[15:44] <ara> skaet, I have a couple of questions related to the 10.04.2 activity
[15:44] <skaet> ?
[15:45] <ara> skaet, are you going to send the notes from the meeting on Friday at some point (the one with all the dates)
[15:45] <skaet> ara, yup its on my todo list for today.
[15:45] <ara> skaet, OK, cool, so we agreed that we are going to try to have the candidate image for 10.04.2 on the 28th
[15:46] <skaet> that matches my memory,  pitti ^^?
[15:47]  * skaet hmm,  doesn't see pitti on channel.
[15:47] <ara> skaet, yes, I think that was it
[15:47] <ara> skaet, another question :)
[15:48] <ara> skaet, as you know, the full cert is very time consuming, so, the automated testing on the really final image on the week of the 14th... is that really needed?
[15:48] <ara> I mean, we can try to do it if something changed that may affect HW, but that is very unlikely
[15:48] <ara> if only app things changed, that should be covered by QA and the ISO testing
[15:49] <ara> what are you expecting from that run'
[15:49] <ara> ?
[15:49] <ara> I mean, if
[15:49] <ara> I mean, we can run it, but if it is not going to catch any bugs, I don't see the point
[15:50] <skaet> I think we can reassess the week before, and look at what's changed and see if it is needed to do the automated tests again.
[15:51] <ara> skaet, sounds good
[15:51] <skaet> If nothing of substance has changed, there is not much point.   However, until we know what happens over next couple of weeks,  seems prudent to reserve the capability.
[15:52] <ara> skaet, it sounds like a plan. I mean, if no HW specific stuff has changed, there's no point in running the automated tests against all of our systems
[15:52] <ara> skaet, thanks for clarifying
[15:53] <skaet> ara, thanks for asking.  :)
[15:54]  * cjwatson builds a lucid DVD so that he has something to work with to test the business of installing an LTS backport kernel
[15:56] <cjwatson> gives me something to do while tediously rebasing 60-odd branches across an svn->git migration :-/
[15:57] <Laney> d-i?
[15:57] <ara> skaet, we can put a topic in the release meeting of the 11th Feb about whether the automated testing is needed or not, based on what has changed
[15:59] <skaet> ara, sure.  please remind me a little closer to the time if you don't see it on the actual agenda.
[15:59] <ara> skaet, will do
[16:01] <cjwatson> Laney: yeah
[16:02] <Laney> fun :-)
[16:02] <cjwatson> so far, I've completed a grand total of two
[16:03] <Laney> not quite as romantic as joeyh's blog post made it out, eh?
[16:06] <cjwatson> Laney: heh, it's more straightforward to do a single svn->git conversion than it is to rebase a set of long-lived branches on top of the results of that conversion, in general :)
[16:06] <cjwatson> 'bzr rebase-foreign' does most of it but I've had to hack it about a fair bit
[16:23] <ScottK> ara: Kernel is updated, so hardware specific stuff will have changed.
[16:24] <ara> ScottK, sorry?
[16:25] <ScottK> ara: You had a discussion with skaet a bit ago about if hardware specific things had changed for 10.04.2.  Given the kernel changes since release, I think it's a given that hardware specific changes have been made.
[16:26] <cjwatson> I think they meant changed between the cert run on the 28th Jan or so, and the week of the 14th Feb
[16:26] <ara> ScottK, we are talking about other stuff
[16:26] <ScottK> ara: Oh.  OK.  Nevermind me then.
[16:26] <cjwatson> rather than changed between 10.04.1 and 10.04.2
[16:26] <ara> :)
[16:26] <ScottK> cjwatson: Thanks.
[16:26] <ara> ScottK, no problem
[16:26] <ara> cjwatson, thanks