| === Amaranth_ is now known as Amaranth | ||
| === oubiwann is now known as oubiwann_ | ||
| === oubiwann is now known as oubiwann_ | ||
| === oubiwann is now known as oubiwann_ | ||
| === ogra_ is now known as ogra | ||
| === ogra is now known as Guest94419 | ||
| === Guest94419 is now known as ogra_ | ||
| === rsalveti` is now known as rsalveti | ||
| === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | ||
| === ogra_ is now known as ogra | ||
| === ian_brasil__ is now known as ian_brasil | ||
| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-lunch | ||
| === oubiwann is now known as oubiwann_ | ||
| === fader_ is now known as fader | ||
| === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach | ||
| === vanhoof[weekend] is now known as vanhoof | ||
| === Ursinha-lunch is now known as Ursinha | ||
| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-sick | ||
| === jdstrand_ is now known as jdstrand | ||
| * ara waves | 16:00 | |
| * skaet looks around | 16:00 | |
| skaet | hi ara | 16:00 |
|---|---|---|
| skaet | #startmeeting | 16:01 |
| MootBot | Meeting started at 10:01. The chair is skaet. | 16:01 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 16:01 |
| Daviey | o/ | 16:01 |
| skaet | hi Daviey | 16:01 |
| skaet | The priority for today's meeting is to figure out where we are with 10.04.2. | 16:02 |
| cjwatson | hi | 16:02 |
| skaet | hi cjwatson | 16:02 |
| skaet | cjwatson, pitti - where are we with the 10.04.2 images? | 16:02 |
| pitti | hello all | 16:02 |
| pitti | they build fine, and automatically | 16:03 |
| victorp | skaet - hi | 16:03 |
| pitti | I just gave an update wrt. proposed vs. updates this morning via email | 16:03 |
| skaet | hi pitti, victorp | 16:03 |
| cjwatson | right, that's the main thing we're waiting for at the moment | 16:03 |
| pitti | they currently build from -proposed, as we still need to verify some SRUs | 16:03 |
| cjwatson | one regression known to me, bug 709694 | 16:03 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 709694 in linux-backports-modules-2.6.32 (Ubuntu Lucid) "Lucid package linux-backports-modules-wireless-lucid-generic broken" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/709694 | 16:03 |
| pitti | in particular, d-i and installing with the maverick kernel | 16:03 |
| cjwatson | I believe pitti is handling that | 16:04 |
| pitti | cjwatson: was tested, copying to -updates nwo | 16:04 |
| === wendar_ is now known as wendar | ||
| skaet | pitti, so when will there be an image for ara's team to use? | 16:05 |
| pitti | I still think we should use the current ones for certification (with -proposed) | 16:05 |
| cjwatson | I concur | 16:05 |
| skaet | ok | 16:05 |
| pitti | after a quick test from QA that they install at all (in VM should be fine) | 16:05 |
| pitti | install in normal lucid as well as "maverick backport kernel" modes | 16:05 |
| pitti | d-i and eglibc are the only potentailly hw specific packages | 16:06 |
| pitti | and we already cleaned up the questionable ones from -proposed | 16:06 |
| ara | pitti, the thing is that I don't understand why you don't think those packages are safe enough to move to -updates, yet they are safe to use for certification | 16:06 |
| cjwatson | -updates would cause every user to upgrade | 16:06 |
| pitti | ara: well, the point of that is testing, isn't it? | 16:06 |
| pitti | if we already knew that they don't break anything, then we wouldn't need a cert run | 16:07 |
| pitti | OTOH, if cert passes with those, we can move everything to -updates and are good to go | 16:07 |
| pitti | ara: we don't know of any breakage in the current proposed packages, but nobody tested them yet | 16:07 |
| skaet | jibel, pedro_ ^^ is a test of -proposed as outlined by pitti possible today? | 16:07 |
| cjwatson | the reason to be cautious about cert on -proposed would be if there were several things likely to be pulled out | 16:08 |
| ara | pitti, the point in running a full cert is to "certify" that they keep working, more than testing if it breaks | 16:08 |
| cjwatson | as pitti said, he already removed the questionable proposals, so we're now looking at *unexpected* problems | 16:08 |
| pitti | ara: ok, then we need "normal" sru testing before | 16:08 |
| ara | pitti, we tested it, last week | 16:08 |
| cjwatson | I don't think we should waive the waiting period for cert, so if cert can't use -proposed, the only remaining option is to push through validation | 16:09 |
| pitti | ara: oh? didn't see that; was that with the current d-i already? | 16:09 |
| ara | pitti, when was that uploaded to -proposed? | 16:10 |
| cjwatson | -- Colin Watson <cjwatson@ubuntu.com> Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:19:31 +0000 | 16:10 |
| cjwatson | but it would have needed explicit testing with the maverick boot option, not just "still works as normal" | 16:10 |
| ara | cjwatson, we didn't test the maverick boot option, that's for sure | 16:10 |
| sconklin | o/ | 16:12 |
| sconklin | never mind | 16:12 |
| jibel | o/ | 16:12 |
| skaet | hi jibel, go ahead | 16:12 |
| jibel | hi, to answer your question, there are only 2 packages in -proposed that we can really test : base-files and unattended-upgrades | 16:13 |
| cjwatson | I don't understand why it isn't possible for QA to test d-i | 16:13 |
| pitti | jibel: i. e. QA can't do install smoketests? | 16:14 |
| jibel | yes I can, but at the moment I'm rather low on resources smoketesting A2 | 16:14 |
| cjwatson | you may not be able to confirm that it fixes a given piece of hardware, but you can confirm that it installs successfully and that it uses the proper kernel version both during installation and on the installed system | 16:14 |
| pitti | (i. e. same like for normal alphas, using the iso tracker) | 16:14 |
| cjwatson | (you plural) | 16:14 |
| pitti | perhaps we can also have some community testing on alpha2 | 16:15 |
| jibel | The last package I've validated this way, 'check that it installs' was ubuntu-docs and now users of maverick think they are running natty :( | 16:15 |
| pitti | and I can certainly help testing images as well | 16:15 |
| pitti | jibel: (^ that's fixed in -proposed, FYI) | 16:15 |
| pitti | actuall in -updates already, I think | 16:15 |
| cjwatson | wasn't that xubuntu-docs anyway? | 16:16 |
| pitti | no, ubuntu-docs | 16:16 |
| cjwatson | ok | 16:16 |
| skaet | hmm, so we appear to have run smack into the a2 testing crunch we were afraid of. | 16:17 |
| skaet | jibel, what's your current plan for today? | 16:18 |
| jibel | skaet, I'm nearly done with A2 smoketest, now syncing DVDs, I can do lucid d-i instead. | 16:18 |
| cjwatson | note that the lucid images that need testing in particular for this are DVDs, both amd64 and i386 | 16:19 |
| cjwatson | I can do lucid DVD i386 if people don't mind me doing it as the person who wrote the code | 16:20 |
| jibel | yes. I can sync that now and post the results tomorrow morning. | 16:20 |
| skaet | jibel, thanks. | 16:20 |
| ara | awesome, thanks jibel | 16:20 |
| skaet | cjwatson, not worried. :) | 16:20 |
| jibel | skaet, but no smoketest of natty a2 dvd if you agree. | 16:20 |
| pitti | I think 10.04.2 CDs are more urgent wrt. that | 16:21 |
| skaet | jibel, ok, don't think we have a choice at this point - if we want to get the 10.04.2 cert run done. | 16:21 |
| pitti | we'll get more community feedback on natty alphas than for lucid point releases | 16:21 |
| ara | pitti, agreed | 16:21 |
| ScottK | And undetected problems in an Alpha release are much less important than a problem in an LTS point release. | 16:22 |
| * skaet nods | 16:22 | |
| charlie-tca | o/ | 16:23 |
| skaet | ok, so A2 smoke test of DVDs goes on the shelf, and we smoke test lucid, so hw cert can start tomorrow (if all goes well) | 16:23 |
| skaet | are the A2 images ready to go to the iso tracker? (so we can get community testing started on those) | 16:24 |
| pitti | if we get results for the DVD in both modes, d-i can go to -updates | 16:24 |
| skaet | pitti, ack | 16:24 |
| cjwatson | a2> no, I was expecting that to start with tomorrow's autobuilds | 16:24 |
| pitti | once hw cert passes, eglibc and basic stuff like consolekit can go, too | 16:24 |
| cjwatson | so that still means running cert against an image built from -proposed | 16:25 |
| pitti | I did some smoketesting on the natty dailies last week and yesterday, looks ok so far | 16:25 |
| cjwatson | which I'm happy with, but we seemed to be at an impasse on it earlier | 16:25 |
| pitti | if we don't run cert against -proposed, we can alternatively switch to -updates right after the d-i smoketest | 16:25 |
| hggdh | and we are still running the server dailies on Hudson | 16:25 |
| hggdh | (natty) | 16:25 |
| pitti | and test the other packages separately, as usual | 16:25 |
| cjwatson | I don't agree - that would mean dropping a bunch of stuff out | 16:25 |
| cjwatson | I think that would create substantial confusion CD-wise | 16:25 |
| pitti | the disadvantage is that we'll do a hw cert test against an older version of pacakges | 16:26 |
| pitti | and the actual 10.04.2 release will be different than what has been tested | 16:26 |
| cjwatson | also, the upstart patch is such that it should be on the CD | 16:26 |
| pitti | that's why I'd much prefer hw cert against the -proposed ones | 16:26 |
| pitti | but I think if that's a no-go, we could cope | 16:26 |
| ara | pitti, anyway, we won't be finishing full cert until late next week | 16:26 |
| ara | cjwatson, why building from -updates will mean that the rest will go out? | 16:28 |
| ara | cjwatson, are we building only one daily from -updates | 16:28 |
| ara | ? | 16:28 |
| pitti | if we require that "image that hw cert tests" == "released image", we'll need to postpone the remaingin proposed updates until after 10.04.2 and miss those fixes | 16:29 |
| pitti | which would be unfortunate | 16:29 |
| pitti | if hw cert is testing the current images, then they would be in | 16:29 |
| pitti | for all intents and purposes, the current dailies are the final 10.04.2 release | 16:29 |
| cjwatson | ara: we only build one set of dailies, and they are from -proposed | 16:29 |
| pitti | unless testing/cert detects regressions | 16:29 |
| cjwatson | ara: the effect of switching to -updates is that anyone testing the CDs tests only -updates | 16:29 |
| skaet | cjwatson, pitti, let me see if I've got it straight - QA suspends rest of A2's smoke tests for today and A2 tomorrow images is for iso tracker (not ideal, but low risk); 10.04.2 - we get DVD runs from QA (and other volunteers) with current dailies (which will become 10.04.2), so we can move to updates, then hw cert can start? | 16:30 |
| cjwatson | alpha images have nearly always gone to the ISO tracker on Tuesday, in practice. | 16:31 |
| ara | skaet, if d-i and eglibc are in -updates, we are happy to test from -proposed | 16:31 |
| skaet | cjwatson, ack | 16:32 |
| jibel | o/ | 16:32 |
| cjwatson | it's also what https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MilestoneProcess says - "release minus 2 days" | 16:32 |
| skaet | jibel, go ahead | 16:34 |
| jibel | re a2, during smoketest I've identified 2 showstoppers on amd64 bug 710582 and bug 710612 . | 16:34 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 710582 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Natty) "ubiquity crashes after step 'Who are you' : segfault in libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0.5.2 on AMD64" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/710582 | 16:34 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 710612 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Natty) "Kubuntu Desktop AMD64 - ubiquity kde_ui crash with File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/debconf.py", line 70, in command self.write.flush() IOError: [Errno 32] Broken pipe" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/710612 | 16:34 |
| jibel | It would be great if someone could confirm it's not just me. | 16:35 |
| jibel | (or better that it is just me) | 16:35 |
| pitti | the second was discussed this morning on #u-devel, I think that's not just you | 16:36 |
| pitti | (unfortunately I don't remember/have read the outcome) | 16:36 |
| cjwatson | it was discussed as a result of jibel mentioning it :-) | 16:36 |
| pitti | ah | 16:36 |
| cjwatson | and that was just me saying "not a debconf bug" | 16:36 |
| Riddell | I couldn't confirm bug 710612 with today's ISO | 16:37 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 710612 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Natty) "Kubuntu Desktop AMD64 - ubiquity kde_ui crash with File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/debconf.py", line 70, in command self.write.flush() IOError: [Errno 32] Broken pipe" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/710612 | 16:37 |
| skaet | jibel, thanks. will work with others then after this meeting to get someone else to confirm 710582 | 16:38 |
| cjwatson | I poked ev about jibel's latest reply to 710582 | 16:38 |
| jibel | skaet, thanks | 16:38 |
| skaet | cjwatson, thanks | 16:38 |
| cjwatson | I don't think it would strongly benefit from other people reproducing it | 16:38 |
| cjwatson | unless those other people are able to debug webkit directly | 16:38 |
| skaet | heh, fair 'nuf | 16:38 |
| cjwatson | 710612 is probably a race of some kind :-/ | 16:39 |
| skaet | :( | 16:39 |
| skaet | okie, back to 10.04.2 then... | 16:39 |
| cjwatson | I expect it depends on how long you take to respond to the parallelised questions | 16:39 |
| skaet | ? | 16:40 |
| * skaet is still jetlagged - parallelised questions isn't parsing | 16:41 | |
| cjwatson | it's a detail of installer design | 16:41 |
| cjwatson | relevant to 710612 | 16:41 |
| pitti | cjwatson: ubiquity is copying files while the user still creates accounts, sets time zone, etc. | 16:41 |
| pitti | that happens in parallel since maverick | 16:41 |
| * cjwatson thinks pitti meant to direct that to skaet | 16:42 | |
| pitti | oops, yes | 16:42 |
| cjwatson | anyway, yes, 10.04.2 | 16:42 |
| * skaet light dawns.... thought "you" was in reference to something I needed to answer about 10.04.2, not 710582.... ok, clarity. | 16:43 | |
| cjwatson | ah, right, sorry | 16:43 |
| ara | o/ | 16:43 |
| skaet | go ara, I think your questions are the ones we need answered now.. | 16:43 |
| ara | OK, so I think that if, as pitti says, QA tests d-i, d-i and eglibc can go to -updates | 16:44 |
| ara | and we are happy to run cert from -proposed cds once those are in -updates | 16:44 |
| ara | pitti, those are the packages that can affect hw, are they? | 16:44 |
| pitti | ara: right | 16:45 |
| pitti | but eglibc also needs extra verification | 16:45 |
| pitti | so a pure smoketest isn't enough for eglibc IMHO | 16:45 |
| cjwatson | hm, there is one quirk here | 16:45 |
| cjwatson | this only applies to live filesystems | 16:46 |
| cjwatson | but live filesystems that are built against -proposed contain -proposed in their sources.list | 16:46 |
| cjwatson | I don't think that's preserved in the installed system, but it means that people e.g. upgrading live USB sticks get stuff from -proposed | 16:46 |
| cjwatson | I don't think we should release that way | 16:46 |
| pitti | agreed | 16:47 |
| cjwatson | so, sorry to put a spanner in the works, but if cert must check the final candidate images, then I think we may really need to finish verification before cert starts | 16:47 |
| pitti | but that shouldn't matter for hw cert, just for final validation? | 16:47 |
| pitti | (i. e. after rebuilding the CD from -updates only at the end) | 16:47 |
| cjwatson | with the exception of server images, which could go ahead | 16:47 |
| cjwatson | hence my "if" | 16:47 |
| pitti | I thought hw certification would be by and large "test default install on different hw" while validation would be "test all install modes on pretty much one kind of hw" | 16:48 |
| pitti | so for hw cert a CD rebuild wouldn't hurt, but it mustn't happen for the latter? | 16:49 |
| cjwatson | are folks agreed that cert does not have to be on the very final set of images that we release? | 16:49 |
| skaet | cjwatson, hw cert is testing the functional equivalent, rather than the final. | 16:49 |
| cjwatson | in that case I withdraw my spanner | 16:49 |
| skaet | heh, that's what was discussed in dallas.. | 16:49 |
| ara | cjwatson, yes, the images don't need to be final, but we need everything that affects hw in -updates | 16:49 |
| cjwatson | round and round we go. sorry. | 16:49 |
| skaet | ok, jibel, are you good with the d-i and eglibc testing today? | 16:50 |
| jibel | skaet, d-i ok, eglibc, I can only install, which doesn't verify anything. | 16:52 |
| skaet | jibel, thanks | 16:53 |
| ara | hggdh should be able to verify https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eglibc/+bug/694772 | 16:53 |
| skaet | cjwatson, what's needed before the eglibc can be moved to updates? | 16:53 |
| ubottu | Ubuntu bug 694772 in Ubuntu Studio "Sudden reboot during server ISO install" [Critical,Confirmed] | 16:53 |
| pitti | bug 702190 is a nuisance to verify, as it doesn't have a test case; if it passes an install check, I'd consider that enough regression testing, though | 16:54 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 702190 in eglibc (Ubuntu Lucid) "__strncmp_ssse3 can segfault when it over-reads its buffer" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/702190 | 16:54 |
| cjwatson | pitti may or may not agree, but TBH, it's had enough pre-release testing that I'd be happy with regression testing | 16:54 |
| skaet | thanks cjwatson, pitti. ok | 16:54 |
| pitti | bug 694772 should be verified as part of validation testing, as it happened during iso tests | 16:54 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 694772 in Ubuntu Studio "Sudden reboot during server ISO install" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/694772 | 16:54 |
| cjwatson | 702190 does have a test case, it's just rather opaque and involves compiling and running a program on the right kind of hardware (comment 1) | 16:55 |
| pitti | bug 672177 is the third eglibc bug and should be testable during validation | 16:55 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 672177 in upstart (Ubuntu Natty) "libc6 upgrade causes umount to fail on shutdown because init cannot be restarted" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/672177 | 16:55 |
| cjwatson | it's also a multi-part bug - I think the pre-release testing has covered much of that, although it's known not to be sufficient on its own | 16:56 |
| skaet | hggdh, can you help out on 694772? | 16:57 |
| cjwatson | so on the whole I think install + upgrade smoketests should be sufficient for that | 16:58 |
| cjwatson | otherwise it could easily be a rabbithole that consumes QA forever | 16:58 |
| skaet | cjwatson, ok. | 16:58 |
| hggdh | skaet, looking into it | 16:59 |
| skaet | thanks hggdh. | 16:59 |
| skaet | jibel: are you ok with cjwatson's proposal? | 16:59 |
| jibel | skaet, if everybody is ok, I'm fine with his proposal. | 17:00 |
| skaet | pitti, you ok? | 17:01 |
| pitti | ack | 17:01 |
| skaet | ok, that's the plan then. | 17:01 |
| skaet | we'll carry this conversation over to #u-release | 17:02 |
| skaet | we're running late now | 17:02 |
| skaet | any other critical issues to bring up? | 17:02 |
| hggdh | pitti, for 694772 -- is it OK if I install the updates, then reboot into busybox and send in a telinit u? | 17:02 |
| cjwatson | as long as it's busybox init ... | 17:03 |
| cjwatson | (this may not be entirely trivial to arrange) | 17:03 |
| cjwatson | it might be easier to boot the server CD in rescue mode and then use 'telinit u' there | 17:04 |
| pitti | hggdh: I thought the fix in eglibc was to precisely not to that? | 17:04 |
| cjwatson | but none of that validates whether eglibc is doing the right thing in its postinst, of course! | 17:04 |
| cjwatson | so actually I don't think that's a valid test | 17:04 |
| hggdh | hum | 17:04 |
| cjwatson | yeah, pitti's right too | 17:04 |
| hggdh | darn, indeed :-( | 17:05 |
| pitti | I'd think the test case for this is "validate that the server iso installs"? | 17:05 |
| cjwatson | hggdh's proposal is a way to test upstart in isolation | 17:05 |
| cjwatson | but I agree with pitti, I don't think there's much point in lots of detailed messing about here | 17:05 |
| hggdh | the problem is I would need to be in ISO install to test | 17:05 |
| pitti | note that upstart only adds a breaks to older eglibc versions | 17:06 |
| cjwatson | we haven't fixed the upstart part yet anyway | 17:06 |
| pitti | i. e. testing the the new upstart in isolation won't give us anything for this bug | 17:06 |
| cjwatson | any d-i install smoketest by anyone would be sufficient validation for 694772 | 17:06 |
| pitti | I agree | 17:06 |
| skaet | ok | 17:06 |
| ara | cjwatson, then jibel's test should be enough? | 17:07 |
| cjwatson | it wouldn't be comprehensive proof, but the server team have been working on establishing that independently. it would be regression-testing, which I think in this case will be enough | 17:07 |
| skaet | on that note, probably time to end the meeting. | 17:08 |
| skaet | thanks cjwatson, pitti, ara, jibel, hggdh, Riddell, ScottK | 17:08 |
| skaet | #endmeeting | 17:09 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 11:09. | 17:09 |
| ara | thanks skaet, all! | 17:09 |
| pitti | thanks everyone *phew* | 17:09 |
| skaet | jibel, can you hang out in #u-release today - so we can work through this. | 17:10 |
| * skaet agrees with pitti - *phew*.... need more 'spresso! | 17:10 | |
| jibel | skaet, after 2000UTC, when everything is back to normal here, I need to deal with the kids now, see you later. | 17:13 |
| skaet | jibel, thanks! | 17:13 |
| kees | \o | 18:01 |
| jjohansen | o/ | 18:01 |
| jdstrand | o/ | 18:02 |
| mdeslaur | yellow | 18:02 |
| * sbeattie waves | 18:03 | |
| jdstrand | shall I run the meeting? | 18:03 |
| * mdeslaur pushes jdstrand to front of room | 18:04 | |
| jdstrand | ok then :) | 18:04 |
| jdstrand | #startmeeting | 18:04 |
| MootBot | Meeting started at 12:04. The chair is jdstrand. | 18:04 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 18:04 |
| jdstrand | [TOPIC] weekly standup report | 18:05 |
| MootBot | New Topic: weekly standup report | 18:05 |
| jdstrand | I've got several things tugging at me at present | 18:05 |
| jdstrand | I am helping the release team with my archive admin duties, and that has slowed me down a bit as I learn the processes | 18:06 |
| jdstrand | I'm working on the dbus-glib update and the qrt script for dbus bindings | 18:07 |
| jdstrand | there is also a lot of various followup work I am trying to catchup on | 18:07 |
| jdstrand | that should be it for me | 18:08 |
| jdstrand | kees: you're up | 18:08 |
| kees | okidoky | 18:08 |
| kees | I've got OOo to publish, and kernel to do USNs for | 18:08 |
| kees | I'm on triage, and I'm going to try to clean up some of the open security bugs | 18:09 |
| kees | I've also got a regression in the kernel I need to test a fix for. I'm kind of all over the place. | 18:09 |
| kees | that's it, mdeslaur you're up :) | 18:09 |
| mdeslaur | I'm writing a subversion test script. I should get it published today | 18:09 |
| mdeslaur | after that, I was to work on the new fuse stuff | 18:10 |
| mdeslaur | and maybe take a look at exim4 if I have time | 18:10 |
| mdeslaur | that's it. | 18:10 |
| mdeslaur | sbeattie: you're next | 18:10 |
| sbeattie | I'm on community this week. | 18:11 |
| sbeattie | I've got another openjdk update planned this week; amazingly the arm hamsters managed to complete all the builds over the weekend. | 18:12 |
| sbeattie | so I'll be testing those today. | 18:12 |
| sbeattie | I need to put together snapshots for apparmor 2.5.2 and 2.6.0 releases at some point, but that's been stalled on reviewing patches for 2.5.2. | 18:13 |
| sbeattie | I think that's it for me. | 18:13 |
| jdstrand | cool | 18:13 |
| jdstrand | [TOPIC] miscellaneous | 18:14 |
| MootBot | New Topic: miscellaneous | 18:14 |
| jdstrand | so I have several random things to bring up that have been sitting in tomboy for far too long :) | 18:14 |
| jdstrand | first (and speaking of apparmor), we need to have an upstream apparmor meeting | 18:15 |
| jdstrand | is that something we can do this week? | 18:15 |
| sbeattie | yeah. | 18:15 |
| jjohansen | yep | 18:15 |
| jdstrand | (to discuss the rally stuff) | 18:15 |
| jdstrand | cool | 18:15 |
| jdstrand | we can schedule that in #apparmor | 18:15 |
| jjohansen | yep | 18:16 |
| jdstrand | one thing that has been asked of the security team in the past, and mentioned to be recently, is that we should strive to be as open as possible | 18:16 |
| jdstrand | I'd like to provide summaries of our weekly security meetings somewhere | 18:17 |
| === oubiwann_ is now known as oubiwann | ||
| jdstrand | I'm not sure where. I'm not convinced it is super interesting to devel@, so I thought maybe somewhere in the wiki? | 18:17 |
| kees | summary of the stand-up? | 18:17 |
| jdstrand | kees: stand-up and anything else. ie, this meeting :) | 18:18 |
| mdeslaur | jdstrand: our activity reports are way more interesting than our meetings... | 18:18 |
| jdstrand | mdeslaur: yes, but other teams do log there meetings (eg, the server team) | 18:19 |
| mdeslaur | unless we talk about something other than what we have planned for the week | 18:19 |
| kees | I'm not opposed to it, but it seems like summarizing our stand-ups isn't very useful. if it was a long meeting, it would make more sense? | 18:19 |
| jdstrand | now, there could be a concern about people saying "I'm going to work on this", get sidetracked and not do it, and then mentioning it the next week | 18:19 |
| * ScottK suspects it's interesting enough for ubuntu-devel. | 18:19 | |
| jdstrand | I'm open to not doing anything with the stand-up report (ie "I'm working on foo this week"), but including the other bits as they come up | 18:20 |
| jdstrand | what do other people think? | 18:20 |
| kees | yeah, I'm not against it, I just question the value. if people think there's value, then let's do it. | 18:20 |
| jdstrand | well, in a discussion I had it was implied that it should be done, and it isn't | 18:21 |
| jdstrand | so I am trying to figure out the best way to do that | 18:21 |
| * jjohansen thinks its extra work for very little gain | 18:21 | |
| jdstrand | jjohansen: maybe, but it is an action item I can take | 18:22 |
| mdeslaur | jdstrand: I wouldn't include the stand up report, but if we discuss anything else it could be worth it | 18:22 |
| jdstrand | I don't think it is much work. our meetings are short, the summary even more so | 18:22 |
| jdstrand | mdeslaur: well, what if we did this: | 18:23 |
| jdstrand | kees is on triage, sbeattie is on community. sbeattie also hopes to work on apparmor 2.5.2 | 18:23 |
| jdstrand | ie, don't mention the specific security updates/audits we are working on | 18:23 |
| mdeslaur | that's fine | 18:24 |
| jdstrand | just that 'mdeslaur is working on foo in addition to various security updates) | 18:24 |
| jdstrand | s/)/'/ | 18:24 |
| jdstrand | I'll come up with some sort of summary, and we can discuss it outside of the meeting | 18:24 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] jdstrand to write up meeting minutes and submit to team for review | 18:25 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: jdstrand to write up meeting minutes and submit to team for review | 18:25 |
| jdstrand | perhaps we can table where the will reside based on what we decide should be in them | 18:25 |
| jdstrand | s/the will/they will/ | 18:25 |
| jdstrand | I also have various items from my rally notes that I think should either be assigned or documented somewhere for todo | 18:26 |
| jdstrand | please feel free to add any to this list | 18:27 |
| jdstrand | * respin ia32-libs (natty and earlier) | 18:27 |
| jdstrand | * add mvo's apt script to qrt | 18:27 |
| jdstrand | * kernel capabilities tests | 18:27 |
| jdstrand | * kernel keyring tests (LTP?) | 18:27 |
| jdstrand | * /etc/apparmor.d/mysqld.d for akonadi (currently assigned to me) | 18:28 |
| mvo | jdstrand: hm? | 18:28 |
| mvo | qrt? | 18:28 |
| jdstrand | * vm-iso changes to get rid of vm-new stuff | 18:28 |
| jdstrand | mvo: hi! not an action item for you | 18:28 |
| jdstrand | mvo: we discussed at the rally how we might want to snag your apt tests | 18:28 |
| jdstrand | mvo: and somehow incorporate them into qa-regression-testing | 18:28 |
| kees | http://people.ubuntu.com/~mvo/apt/auth-test-suit/ | 18:29 |
| MootBot | LINK received: http://people.ubuntu.com/~mvo/apt/auth-test-suit/ | 18:29 |
| jdstrand | mvo: and then conceivably run them on a release basis to be sure we are ok | 18:29 |
| mvo | aha, this one :) | 18:29 |
| mvo | ta! | 18:29 |
| jdstrand | * add ipc to kernel tests | 18:29 |
| jdstrand | so, with the exception of ia32 and akonadi, it seems it is fine and appropriate to add these as TODO's to the various scripts if we don | 18:30 |
| jdstrand | 't/can't do them right away | 18:30 |
| jdstrand | does anyone want to claim any of these? the akonadi one is assigned to me currently, but it is likely I won't get to it anytime soon, so can consider that up for grabs | 18:31 |
| mdeslaur | I can put ia32-libs at the end of my to-do list | 18:31 |
| kees | what were the details on the caps tests? | 18:31 |
| kees | just for qrt? | 18:32 |
| jdstrand | kees: yeah-- something in qrt to verify that they work properly | 18:32 |
| * kees ponders | 18:32 | |
| jdstrand | kees: positive and negative tests | 18:32 |
| kees | I can take it, but it's not going to be very high priority for a while. | 18:32 |
| jdstrand | oh sure | 18:32 |
| sbeattie | what sort of tests for caps? | 18:32 |
| jdstrand | this isn't about 'can we do it *now*' as much as if people want to do it, they can claim it, otherwise we can just pop it into the script as a todo | 18:33 |
| * sbeattie notes the apparmor regression tests test a few of the capabilities, but doesn't test the whole bounding set/inheritance stuff. | 18:33 | |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] mdeslaur to take ia32-libs when time allows | 18:33 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: mdeslaur to take ia32-libs when time allows | 18:33 |
| mdeslaur | so, I can put ia32-libs on my to-do list, just as long as you don't expect it to ever get done | 18:33 |
| mdeslaur | \o/ | 18:33 |
| jdstrand | hehe | 18:34 |
| sbeattie | actually, I should probably take a look at that one, to learn how its done. | 18:34 |
| sbeattie | (ia32-libs) | 18:34 |
| kees | [ACTION] kees to take kernel capabilities tests when time allows | 18:34 |
| jdstrand | mdeslaur: you cool with sbeattie doing that? | 18:34 |
| kees | aw, that only works for the chair, unlike urls | 18:34 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] kees to take kernel capabilities tests when time allows | 18:34 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: kees to take kernel capabilities tests when time allows | 18:34 |
| jdstrand | I think the apt and keyring ones are pretty big | 18:35 |
| jdstrand | (potentially) | 18:35 |
| jdstrand | I'll add TODO notes for them, and maybe Roadmap the apt one | 18:35 |
| sbeattie | yeah, kernel keyring's had lots of bugs. | 18:36 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] jdstrand to add keyring and apt tests to TODO in the scripts | 18:36 |
| mdeslaur | jdstrand: sure, I don't care | 18:36 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: jdstrand to add keyring and apt tests to TODO in the scripts | 18:36 |
| mdeslaur | jdstrand: either way, I won't be doing it :) | 18:36 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] sbeattie to respin ia32-libds | 18:36 |
| kees | *snicker* | 18:36 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: sbeattie to respin ia32-libds | 18:36 |
| jdstrand | hehe | 18:36 |
| jdstrand | sbeattie: I'd focus on natty first, then maybe do earlier releases? | 18:37 |
| kees | s'okay, we'll have multiarch before natty releases, and then we won't need ia32-libs! :) | 18:37 |
| jdstrand | \o/ | 18:37 |
| mdeslaur | kees: lol | 18:37 |
| kees | slangasek: right? ^^ :) | 18:37 |
| slangasek | can't promise ia32-libs will go away this cycle | 18:37 |
| kees | :) | 18:37 |
| slangasek | especially as Yokozar has been adding more packages to it on the other end | 18:37 |
| slangasek | which I'm unhappy about but am not going to meddle with | 18:38 |
| sbeattie | heh | 18:38 |
| jdstrand | sbeattie: oh, if Yokozar's been doing that, natty may not need the respin anyway | 18:38 |
| jdstrand | so no one took the akonadi one. I'll leave it on my todo liest then | 18:38 |
| jdstrand | list | 18:38 |
| jdstrand | that leaves vm-iso. how important is this? | 18:38 |
| sbeattie | jdstrand: I have it on my personal todo list as well, but not sure when I'll get the round tuits. | 18:39 |
| mdeslaur | jdstrand: what is the vm-iso one? | 18:39 |
| sbeattie | (it == mysql-akonadi) | 18:39 |
| jdstrand | sbeattie: k. if one of us starts, let's let the other know | 18:39 |
| sbeattie | jdstrand: will do. | 18:39 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] mysql/akonadi work coordinated between sbeattie and jdstrand | 18:39 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: mysql/akonadi work coordinated between sbeattie and jdstrand | 18:39 |
| jdstrand | oh, I can take the kernel ipc tests for qrt | 18:40 |
| jdstrand | (fallout from dbus work) | 18:40 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] jdstrand to add kernel ipc tests to qrt | 18:40 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: jdstrand to add kernel ipc tests to qrt | 18:40 |
| jdstrand | ok. back to vm-iso. how important is this? on the one hand, vmbuilder has been a handful, on the other hand it mostly works | 18:41 |
| kees | jdstrand: I think it's as important as the person wanting to use it makes it. i.e. I think I was the one complaining about vmbuilder, so if I'm going to use vm-iso, I should work on it. | 18:42 |
| jdstrand | (vm-iso is from ubuntu-qa-tools/vm-tools and it has been suggested we use that instead of vm-new for creating new VMs (see wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/TestingEnvironment) | 18:43 |
| jdstrand | kees: fair enough | 18:43 |
| jdstrand | kees: I don't think it needs an action or assignment | 18:43 |
| kees | right | 18:43 |
| jdstrand | I just had it on my list to bring up | 18:43 |
| kees | cool by me | 18:44 |
| mdeslaur | jdstrand: put it here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Roadmap | 18:44 |
| jdstrand | does anyone have anything else from the rally that we should get out of our personal notes and assigned or put some where? | 18:44 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] jdstrand to add vm-iso work to Roadmap | 18:45 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: jdstrand to add vm-iso work to Roadmap | 18:45 |
| kees | I'll check my laptop, but I don't have that list handy at the moment. | 18:45 |
| jdstrand | (excepting apparmor stuff) | 18:45 |
| kees | (it was short, if not empty) | 18:45 |
| jdstrand | that's cool | 18:45 |
| jdstrand | I think that is everything on my list | 18:45 |
| jdstrand | oh, want to talk to skaet about dapper eol | 18:45 |
| jdstrand | skaet: you around? :) | 18:46 |
| * jdstrand takes that as a no | 18:46 | |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] jdstrand to followup with skaet regarding dapper eol announcement | 18:47 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: jdstrand to followup with skaet regarding dapper eol announcement | 18:47 |
| kees | btw, I'm going to replace u-maint with ubuntu-dev-tools's update-maintainer. | 18:47 |
| jdstrand | kees: oh? not the other way around? | 18:47 |
| kees | jdstrand: all the missing logic is included in udt's version now. | 18:48 |
| jdstrand | I thought you said u-maint had some advantages over update-maintainer | 18:48 |
| jdstrand | sweet :) | 18:48 |
| jdstrand | no more 2 year lag for us anymore! :P | 18:48 |
| kees | it did, but that's been fixed now, after I pointed it out. There's one feature left I'm going to forward. | 18:48 |
| mdeslaur | \o/ | 18:48 |
| jdstrand | I'm sorry. 18 months | 18:48 |
| mdeslaur | hehe | 18:49 |
| jdstrand | [ACTION] kees to update umt to use update-maintainer | 18:49 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: kees to update umt to use update-maintainer | 18:49 |
| jdstrand | [TOPIC] questions | 18:49 |
| MootBot | New Topic: questions | 18:49 |
| jdstrand | does anyone have any other questions or items to discuss? | 18:49 |
| kees | nothing here | 18:51 |
| jdstrand | alrighty then | 18:52 |
| jdstrand | thanks everyone! | 18:52 |
| jdstrand | #endmeeting | 18:52 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 12:52. | 18:52 |
| kees | thanks jdstrand! | 18:52 |
| jdstrand | sure! :) | 18:52 |
| mdeslaur | thanks! | 18:52 |
| * persia looks for stgraber | 19:01 | |
| cdbs | poolie, welcome! | 19:01 |
| poolie | hi cdbs | 19:02 |
| ari-tczew | persia: Are new DMB members know? | 19:03 |
| persia | ari-tczew, No. See https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-January/000653.html and followups | 19:04 |
| bdrung | stgraber: meeting or not meeting? | 19:06 |
| persia | I think we want a meeting, but it's a matter of chair. | 19:06 |
| ari-tczew | persia: so yours memberships were extended, when we get to know new members? | 19:06 |
| persia | ari-tczew, When they are decided. | 19:06 |
| ari-tczew | persia: I'd like to vote, but I guess is out of time. | 19:06 |
| persia | Rather the opposite: the nomination period just ended: a request for input from Ubuntu Developers will start soon. | 19:07 |
| cdbs | ari-tczew, Did you apply for nomination? | 19:07 |
| ari-tczew | cdbs: not me, I want to vote for someone else. | 19:08 |
| cdbs | I just tried my luck, though I am pretty much sure I won't get in | 19:08 |
| poolie | hi persia | 19:08 |
| persia | Hey poolie | 19:08 |
| ari-tczew | cdbs: your changes are more than me anyway :P | 19:08 |
| persia | bdrung, stgraber seems afk, would you mind taking over? | 19:09 |
| bdrung | k | 19:09 |
| bdrung | cody-somerville, cjwatson, soren, stgraber: DMB meeting now! | 19:10 |
| cody-somerville | I'm very sorry. I unfortunately won't be able to make today's meeting. | 19:10 |
| cjwatson | oh, seriously? bah | 19:10 |
| bdrung | are we quorable? | 19:11 |
| cody-somerville | I'll send a write-up re: Marco via e-mail in lieu | 19:11 |
| persia | We are if cody-somerville can attend :) | 19:11 |
| bdrung | (if that's a word) | 19:11 |
| persia | quorate | 19:11 |
| * cody-somerville is just about to head out the door to Ottawa otherwise he'd be here. | 19:11 | |
| cdbs | :( | 19:12 |
| persia | So we're waiting on one of geser, stgraber, soren to be quorate | 19:12 |
| poolie | perhaps the board should get bigger, or the quorum requirement should get smaller? | 19:13 |
| bdrung | i pinged geser on devel | 19:13 |
| persia | poolie, The two are tightly linked. That said, if too much time passes, we could perhaps begin, and resolve outstanding votes via email (as poolie is here, by special arrangement) | 19:14 |
| bdrung | ok, let's start then | 19:16 |
| bdrung | #startmeeting | 19:16 |
| MootBot | Meeting started at 13:16. The chair is bdrung. | 19:16 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 19:16 |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Review of previous action items | 19:16 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Review of previous action items | 19:16 |
| bdrung | poolie is here, so the first point is processed | 19:17 |
| * cjwatson switches to his phone, sorry, had already booked family time without noticing this meeting so will have to get off the laptop | 19:17 | |
| bdrung | persia started the selection process for DMB renewal and requested a term extension for current DMB members | 19:18 |
| persia | Does anyone have permission to flush the d-m-b@ moderation queue? I think we have 10 nominees, but there's at least one I've had confirmed on IRC for whom I haven't seen the mail yet. | 19:19 |
| cjwatson | persia: I do | 19:21 |
| ari-tczew | persia: do you have informations who has been nominated? | 19:21 |
| persia | ari-tczew, Yes. | 19:21 |
| ari-tczew | persia: pm | 19:21 |
| cjwatson | but it's empty anyway | 19:22 |
| persia | Hmm.. | 19:22 |
| persia | Ah, went to me personally. I'll forward. | 19:23 |
| * persia needs to check headers more carefully | 19:23 | |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Review progress of probationary period of Marco Rodrigues | 19:23 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Review progress of probationary period of Marco Rodrigues | 19:23 |
| persia | Let's skip this, as cody-somerville is on his way to Ottawa and sending email. Maybe [ACTION] it? | 19:24 |
| bdrung | [ACTION] cody-somerville to write-up progress of probationary period of Marco Rodrigues | 19:24 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: cody-somerville to write-up progress of probationary period of Marco Rodrigues | 19:24 |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Confirm renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar | 19:25 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Confirm renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar | 19:25 |
| persia | So, six months ago we granted bhavi probabtionary MOTU status. We're supposed to review that. Personally, I haven't seen any issues: has anyone else? | 19:25 |
| bdrung | i haven't | 19:25 |
| ari-tczew | Sorry for interrupt. I want to see bhavi still in MOTU. | 19:26 |
| cjwatson | I | 19:26 |
| cjwatson | er | 19:26 |
| cjwatson | I've seen some teething troubles, but generally things seem OK now from my POV | 19:27 |
| bdrung | do we need to vote? | 19:27 |
| persia | Let's do so formally, as we have to pass to email anyway. | 19:27 |
| bdrung | [VOTE] renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar | 19:29 |
| MootBot | Please vote on: renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar. | 19:29 |
| 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 | 19:29 |
| MootBot | E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting | 19:29 |
| bdrung | +1 | 19:29 |
| MootBot | +1 received from bdrung. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 | 19:29 |
| cjwatson | +1 | 19:29 |
| MootBot | +1 received from cjwatson. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 | 19:29 |
| persia | +1 : most of my concerns from the time of application have been addressed during the probationary period | 19:29 |
| MootBot | +1 received from persia. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 | 19:29 |
| bdrung | [ENDVOTE] | 19:30 |
| MootBot | Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3 | 19:30 |
| bdrung | [ACTION] collect vote from other DMB members via email | 19:31 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: collect vote from other DMB members via email | 19:31 |
| geser | Hi | 19:32 |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Martin Pool's application for per-package upload rights for bzr and related packages | 19:32 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Martin Pool's application for per-package upload rights for bzr and related packages | 19:32 |
| bdrung | geser: hi. we reached the quorum. | 19:33 |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Confirm renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar | 19:33 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Confirm renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar | 19:33 |
| bdrung | geser: Six months ago we granted bhavi probabtionary MOTU status. We haven't seen any issue since then, did you? Are you ready to vote? | 19:35 |
| geser | I didn't heard about any complains and I'm ready to vote | 19:35 |
| bdrung | [VOTE] renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar | 19:35 |
| MootBot | Please vote on: renewal of MOTU status for Bhavani Shankar. | 19:35 |
| 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 | 19:35 |
| MootBot | E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting | 19:35 |
| poolie | hi, yes, i'm here | 19:36 |
| poolie | so, | 19:37 |
| poolie | i don't do a lot of packaging, but i think i know enough not to be dangerous | 19:37 |
| persia | geser, ? The rest of us voted. Vote is at +3. | 19:37 |
| geser | +1 | 19:37 |
| MootBot | +1 received from geser. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 | 19:37 |
| poolie | i think having ppu would help me push proposed bzr SRUs into -proposed, where they can be reviewed, and this would save people some time | 19:38 |
| bdrung | [ENDVOTE] | 19:38 |
| MootBot | Final result is 1 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 1 | 19:38 |
| bdrung | summa summarum that's four of us | 19:38 |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Martin Pool's application for per-package upload rights for bzr and related packages | 19:40 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Martin Pool's application for per-package upload rights for bzr and related packages | 19:40 |
| persia | poolie, When considering the differences between SRUs and security updates, what must one concern oneself about in terms of ensuring the user is not surprised by the output of bzr? | 19:40 |
| bdrung | [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinPool/DeveloperApplication | 19:40 |
| MootBot | LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinPool/DeveloperApplication | 19:40 |
| poolie | persia, security updates are more conservative | 19:41 |
| poolie | and i wouldn't expect our MRE would apply there | 19:41 |
| bdrung | MRE? | 19:41 |
| poolie | so, there should not be any changes to the output of bzr, unless they are absolutely necessary to fix the security problem | 19:41 |
| poolie | bdrung, micro release exception | 19:41 |
| poolie | the TB agreed that for instance bzr should upload 2.2.x into Maverick that originally shipped with 2.2.0 | 19:42 |
| poolie | this process is very halting at the moment and i'd like to see it flow more smoothly | 19:42 |
| poolie | persia, is that the answer you were you asking looking for, or are you asking about some more specific aspect of bzr output? | 19:44 |
| persia | That's fine. The only part of the differences between -security and -updates you didn't mention is about build-dependencies, which affect things, but aren't so important in the context of bzr. | 19:45 |
| poolie | ah | 19:45 |
| geser | poolie: so the most benefit of PPU for you would be SRU and normal uploads to natty still go through Debian and sync? | 19:45 |
| poolie | right, so we/i know to not change them in updates either | 19:45 |
| poolie | this is a little more conservative than is required but we can normally do that | 19:46 |
| poolie | geser, basically | 19:46 |
| poolie | we have a pretty good pipelines of maxb and jelmer uploading to debian, but it falls down a bit for ubuntu-specific uploads | 19:46 |
| poolie | i would like to do some more ubuntu work generally, but that's the specific thing | 19:47 |
| bdrung | poolie: are you involved in packaging bzr on the debian side? | 19:48 |
| poolie | bdrung, mostly by committing to our packaging branches, and then jelmer or max will upload from there | 19:49 |
| poolie | not quite so much of that at the moment as they've been taking more of the initiative | 19:49 |
| poolie | oh, i might also mention that i did a lot of work on packaging bzr into PPAs | 19:50 |
| persia | poolie, The latest version of bzr in maverick (representing the sort of SRU you're likely to be targeting) has an automatic patch in debian/patches : How do you think this might be better represented? | 19:50 |
| bdrung | 2.2.0-1 and 2.2.1-0ubuntu1 added automatic patches to debian/patches | 19:53 |
| poolie | good question, i'll look | 19:53 |
| bdrung | same for 2.3.0~beta5-1 | 19:54 |
| poolie | i'm looking at debian-changes-2.2.3-0\~bazaar1\~maverick1 | 19:57 |
| poolie | the commentary on it says that this contains upstream changes introduced in that version | 19:58 |
| cjwatson | the autocommentary can be a bit ... misleading :-) | 19:58 |
| poolie | mm | 19:58 |
| poolie | it looks like this is a change that should have been marked as a packaging patch, but this has got misclassified as coming in an upstream update | 19:59 |
| cjwatson | it means changes to the upstream source (i.e. not debian/) | 19:59 |
| cjwatson | it's just poor wording | 19:59 |
| poolie | i see | 19:59 |
| poolie | the point of this patch is that bzr ships a copy of a small xml library | 20:00 |
| poolie | which i think we preferentially import | 20:00 |
| poolie | and debian/ubuntu policy is to not do that, but rather to depend on it from a package | 20:00 |
| poolie | which makes sense of course | 20:00 |
| poolie | (this makes me wonder if we should in fact just cut it out of upstream now) | 20:01 |
| persia | That makes perfect sense. So, when applying that clearly distro-specific patch, how might one represent it to be obvious when encountering the source? | 20:01 |
| poolie | persia, i think it would be better as an explicitly named patch, describing its purpose | 20:02 |
| poolie | and mentioned in the series file | 20:02 |
| persia | That's how I'd do it :) | 20:02 |
| poolie | actually we don't prefentially import it | 20:03 |
| poolie | as far as i can tell this patch has no effect, assuming that the external elementtree library is present, which it always should be | 20:03 |
| poolie | this patch only seems to touch the fallback case? | 20:03 |
| poolie | ah, there is a second part fixing what i guess is an api version skew with configobject | 20:04 |
| poolie | so, one other thing i would think of doing is splitting them into the conceptually separate patches | 20:04 |
| persia | That would be even better. | 20:05 |
| poolie | and perhaps pushing the second upstream | 20:05 |
| poolie | so? | 20:08 |
| * persia doesn't have any more questions | 20:08 | |
| * geser neither | 20:08 | |
| persia | cjwatson, ? bdrung ? | 20:09 |
| bdrung | cjwatson: do you have questions? | 20:09 |
| cjwatson | nope | 20:10 |
| bdrung | poolie: oh, i have one: you wrote "In a small fraction of cases the emotional tone is unattractive and offputting" | 20:11 |
| poolie | ah, this is under 'things i'd like to improve in ubuntu'? | 20:12 |
| bdrung | yes | 20:12 |
| bdrung | poolie: isn't the CoC enough? how can we do better? | 20:12 |
| poolie | i think the CoC is a great document | 20:13 |
| poolie | just having the document isn't enough | 20:13 |
| poolie | those of you i know from this meeting, i consider to be forces in the right direction on this | 20:14 |
| poolie | so i don't want to cast this as "you're getting it all wrong and I'll make the project nicer" | 20:14 |
| === bjf is now known as bjf[afk] | ||
| poolie | but, it's a thing i care about | 20:14 |
| persia | What do you think you can do to help improve the tone? | 20:15 |
| poolie | one thing you can do is that if you see someone give a harsh reply on a bug or list, just also offer a not-harsh to-the-point reply too | 20:15 |
| bdrung | poolie: we do that on irc channels | 20:16 |
| poolie | i think generally speaking just setting an example of how things ought to be is good | 20:16 |
| poolie | right | 20:16 |
| poolie | do any of you think there's stuff i should do, or keep in mind, in this department? | 20:18 |
| bdrung | but it's harder to do for bugs and lists | 20:18 |
| poolie | oh, one other thing is | 20:18 |
| poolie | it's remarkable how much more forgiving people will be of criticism if they get it promptly and if there is a way forward | 20:18 |
| poolie | this is one reason i care a lot about patch piloting | 20:19 |
| poolie | if there's a substantive criticism, fair enough, but it feels much worse if the person gets it after a month of silence | 20:19 |
| poolie | or with no invitation to do something with it next | 20:19 |
| poolie | this is kind of hard to fix because it's a matter of time, but you can try | 20:20 |
| poolie | to put it ahead of other work | 20:20 |
| bdrung | the second thing you dislike is the profusion of stacked or alternative toolchains makes packaging very complicated. any ideas of making packaging easier? | 20:21 |
| poolie | heh | 20:21 |
| bdrung | 3.0 (quilt) helped with getting rid of the different patch systems. | 20:21 |
| poolie | i'd like to get source package branches to the point they are used for every package | 20:21 |
| poolie | which would avoid some profusion | 20:22 |
| poolie | using quilt there is definitely a good setp | 20:22 |
| poolie | *step | 20:22 |
| poolie | in other aspects of packaging, i do see it as a thing that erects a barrier to working in ubuntu, but | 20:23 |
| bdrung | with source package branches for every package do you mean that the binary packages should be build from bzr branches instead of source tarballs? | 20:23 |
| poolie | right, so the source package would be generated as part of building | 20:23 |
| poolie | rather than uploaded by the developer | 20:23 |
| poolie | obviously some work has to be done both to actually make this work at all, and to make it a compelling alternative | 20:24 |
| poolie | but i would like to do it | 20:24 |
| === persia-uds is now known as _persia | ||
| poolie | https://dev.launchpad.net/LEP/BuildFromBranchIntoMain | 20:25 |
| bdrung | more ideas how to make packaging simpler? | 20:26 |
| bdrung | would GUI tools help? should the amount of files in debian/ reduced? | 20:26 |
| poolie | i think the Quickly idea of seeing packaging as part of the development toolchain is promising | 20:26 |
| poolie | that's only going to cover a fraction of apps that were written that way | 20:27 |
| poolie | separately, i think it's very interesting how ppas and recipe builds have taken off | 20:27 |
| poolie | that gives people a useful spot between upstream and ubunut | 20:27 |
| poolie | *ubuntu | 20:27 |
| poolie | i think we can do a lot by building on that, to make it easier for people who care about a particular branch to get that packaged, perhaps cooperating with people who have more packaging expertise | 20:28 |
| bdrung | re recipe builds, i have a bunch of projects where the bzr import fails and therefore i am unable to create daily builds. | 20:28 |
| poolie | (and that connects too to making the main distribution more consistent with what's happening there) | 20:28 |
| poolie | ok, i'd like to fix that | 20:29 |
| poolie | do you have a bug, or can you tell me which branches they are? | 20:29 |
| poolie | bug # | 20:29 |
| bdrung | poolie: vlc, xmms2, audacious - let me search for the bug number | 20:30 |
| bdrung | poolie: bug #402814 is the biggest blocker | 20:30 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 402814 in Launchpad itself "Importing revisions with submodules is not supported" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/402814 | 20:30 |
| bdrung | poolie: http://overbenny.wordpress.com/2010/08/16/daily-builds-rock-but-bzr-imports-suck/ | 20:31 |
| poolie | ok | 20:31 |
| poolie | i think the first of those bugs is fixed? | 20:32 |
| * jelmer wakes up | 20:32 | |
| poolie | heh | 20:32 |
| poolie | hi jelmer | 20:32 |
| poolie | https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/594294 is interesting; i haven't seen it before and it seems like it ought to be just a one line fix | 20:33 |
| ubottu | Ubuntu bug 594294 in Launchpad itself "Launchpad disallows valid CVS module of '.' from being imported" [Medium,Triaged] | 20:33 |
| poolie | but perhaps it's actually complicated | 20:33 |
| poolie | the submodules thing is on our list, though not at the top at the moment | 20:33 |
| poolie | bdrung, how should we stay in touch about these things in the future? | 20:33 |
| poolie | perhaps it's enough to just have bug reports, but i would like to hear other feedback about which ones really matter most | 20:34 |
| jelmer | by weird coincidence, bug #519709 happens to be one of the bugs I'm working on at the moment | 20:34 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 519709 in Launchpad itself "Import fails with infinite recursion through _reconstruct_manifest_and_flags_by_revid" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/519709 | 20:34 |
| bdrung | poolie: i am subscribed to the bugs that affect me and i am always available via irc | 20:34 |
| poolie | ok, likewise | 20:35 |
| bdrung | let's continue the discussion after the meeting. we should vote. | 20:35 |
| poolie | if you want to bump a bug up, just ask | 20:35 |
| bdrung | poolie: in which channel? | 20:35 |
| poolie | #bzr, #launchpad, #ubuntu-devel | 20:36 |
| poolie | (hm, the latter of which i used to lurk in but this client doesn't seem to auto-join it; fixed) | 20:36 |
| bdrung | [VOTE] Martin Pool to gain per-package upload rights for bzr and related packages | 20:37 |
| MootBot | Please vote on: Martin Pool to gain per-package upload rights for bzr and related packages. | 20:37 |
| 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 | 20:37 |
| MootBot | E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting | 20:37 |
| cjwatson | +1 | 20:37 |
| MootBot | +1 received from cjwatson. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 | 20:37 |
| geser | +1 | 20:37 |
| MootBot | +1 received from geser. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 | 20:37 |
| bdrung | +1 | 20:38 |
| MootBot | +1 received from bdrung. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3 | 20:38 |
| persia | +1 | 20:38 |
| MootBot | +1 received from persia. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4 | 20:38 |
| bdrung | [ENDVOTE] | 20:38 |
| MootBot | Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 4 | 20:38 |
| persia | Just to make sure, we're voting on the extended list in the application, right? | 20:38 |
| bdrung | yes | 20:38 |
| bdrung | probably all bzr-* packages | 20:39 |
| bdrung | poolie: congrats | 20:39 |
| bdrung | [TOPIC] Select a chair for the next meeting | 20:40 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Select a chair for the next meeting | 20:40 |
| bdrung | who want to be chair? | 20:40 |
| persia | I can chair. | 20:41 |
| bdrung | you won ;) | 20:42 |
| bdrung | [ACTION] persia to be chair in the next meeting | 20:42 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: persia to be chair in the next meeting | 20:42 |
| bdrung | #endmeeting | 20:43 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 14:43. | 20:43 |
| bdrung | how do i give poolie PPU rights? | 20:45 |
| persia | bdrung, Add him to ~ubuntu-dev and ask cjwatson nicely | 20:45 |
| bdrung | cjwatson: can you please give poolie (~mbp) PPU rights? | 20:47 |
| poolie | thanks, guys | 20:47 |
| bdrung | poolie: btw, did you check the bzr upload with lintian? | 20:48 |
| cjwatson | bdrung,poolie: done | 21:05 |
| poolie | bdrung, do i in general? yes; i'll make a point of doing that | 21:06 |
| === bjf[afk] is now known as bjf | ||
| === Ursinha-sick is now known as Ursinha-afk | ||
| === bjf is now known as bjf[afk] | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!