[15:00] <NCommander> #startmeeting
[15:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:00. The chair is NCommander.
[15:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:00] <ppisati> o/
[15:00] <NCommander> [link] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2011/20110714#preview
[15:00] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/Meeting/2011/20110714#preview
[15:00] <NCommander> who's here?
[15:01]  * GrueMaster apparates into the area.
[15:01] <NCommander> [topic] Standing Items
[15:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Standing Items
[15:02] <NCommander> [topic] http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel.html
[15:02] <janimo`> hi
[15:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel.html
[15:03] <NCommander> [link] http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel-oneiric-alpha-2.html
[15:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel-oneiric-alpha-2.html
[15:03] <NCommander> hrm
[15:03]  * GrueMaster notes that we are now in alpha 3.
[15:03] <NCommander> http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel-oneiric-alpha-3.html
[15:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~platform/workitems/oneiric/ubuntu-armel-oneiric-alpha-3.html
[15:04] <NCommander> we're off treadline
[15:05] <NCommander> GrueMaster: do you need help with your workitems?
[15:06]  * NCommander echos
[15:06] <GrueMaster> I should be able to get them started next week, now that I have systems with sata drives to throw into server testing.  A lot of this can run in parallell.
[15:06] <NCommander> k
[15:06] <NCommander> [topic] ARM Server Status (NCommander, Daviey)
[15:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Server Status (NCommander, Daviey)
[15:08] <NCommander> not much to add here, expect infinity's preinstall pool looks like it got impleeneted (I'm not sure the actual status; infinity ?)
[15:09] <NCommander> I'm guessing he's not here, if he pops up we'll come back
[15:09] <NCommander> Kernel Status (cooloney, ppisati)
[15:09] <NCommander> [topic] Kernel Status (cooloney, ppisati)
[15:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Kernel Status (cooloney, ppisati)
[15:10] <ppisati> got a new drop from agreen today
[15:10] <ppisati> that fixes a displauy problem we have
[15:10] <ppisati> so far i've a 3.0.0-rc7 kernel running quite ok
[15:10] <ppisati> there's still one issue with audio
[15:10] <ppisati> or better, with pulse audio spamming the console (and thus consuming 100%cpu)
[15:10] <ppisati> but the rest looks good to me
[15:10] <ppisati> i've an ubuntu session running since a week
[15:11] <ppisati> this was reklated to oneiric/ti-omap4
[15:11] <ppisati> i think i'll push it today or latest tomorrow
[15:11] <NCommander> great!
[15:11] <ppisati> on zinc, and i'll pubblish a kernel to test too
[15:11] <ppisati> if only i could get rid of that audio problem... :P
[15:12] <NCommander> anytihng have something to add or can I move on?
[15:12] <ppisati> move
[15:12] <NCommander> ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, janimo)
[15:12] <NCommander> [topic] ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, janimo)
[15:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Porting/FTBFS status (NCommander, janimo)
[15:12] <janimo`> fixed a few FTBFS these days
[15:13] <janimo`> having a session on it today in Ubuntu Devel Week
[15:13] <NCommander> w'eve had a toolchain bug which has broken quite a few packages like libkdraw
[15:13] <ogra_> ocaml seems to be in a bad state, i think persia invested some time last night
[15:13] <NCommander> has that gotten fixed?
[15:13] <janimo`> I don't think it has
[15:14] <janimo`> the register spilling issue
[15:14] <NCommander> ugh
[15:14] <ogra_> i dont see it on the ftbfs page though
[15:15] <ogra_> are you sure it didnt build i.e. someone might have given it back
[15:15] <NCommander> ogra_: it causes other packages to blow; gcc itself builds
[15:15] <ogra_> i mean libdkraw
[15:15] <NCommander> it may have gotten uploaded with the workaround set in its compile flags; I havne't checked all my email yet today
[15:16] <ogra_> hmm and gcc-default failed to upload ... since may already
[15:16] <ogra_> i wonder if doko_ just didnt notice or if thats on purpose
[15:16] <ogra_> ghostscript is new on the list
[15:16] <NCommander> antone else got something else?
[15:17] <doko_> ignore gcc-defaults
[15:17] <ogra_> and cantor (no idea what that is)
[15:17] <ogra_> doko_, thx
[15:17] <ogra_> NCommander, move
[15:17] <NCommander> [topic] ARM Image Status (ogra, NCommander)
[15:17] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Image Status (ogra, NCommander)
[15:17] <janimo`> ah, libkdcraw seems to have beeen rebuilt successfully
[15:17] <doko_> would be nice if somebody could look at bug #810402
[15:18] <ogra_> doko_, see above, persia is on it
[15:18] <NCommander> infinity's preinstall pooled stuff was covered before
[15:18] <ogra_> (with some community member)
[15:18] <NCommander> I don't have anything else to ad
[15:18] <ogra_> well
[15:18] <ogra_> we don and wont have images for a while
[15:18] <ogra_> debootstrap is completely hosed by the /run transition
[15:18] <NCommander> ?
[15:19] <ogra_> since quite a while already
[15:19] <NCommander> bug number?
[15:19] <ogra_> no idea if there is one
[15:19] <ogra_> everyone is working on that though
[15:19] <ogra_> since days
[15:19] <NCommander> .......... if there is a critical bug with debootstrap there should be a bug
[15:19] <GrueMaster> Any status on the imx5# images?
[15:19] <ogra_> there surely is
[15:19] <NCommander> :-P
[15:19] <ogra_> i just dont know the number
[15:20] <ogra_> GrueMaster, persias list points to first images for 20110801
[15:20] <NCommander> GrueMaster: without debootstrap its kinda moot ATM
[15:20] <GrueMaster> ok
[15:20] <ogra_> beyond that ScottK owns them
[15:20] <ogra_> so ask him :)
[15:21] <GrueMaster> Wanted to know as that will provide me with a current SATA system to do HD monitoring tests.
[15:21] <ogra_> i dont think anything has happened on our side yet
[15:21] <NCommander> can I ove on?
[15:21] <ogra_> (will need debioan-cd integration etc)
[15:21] <ogra_> ac100 kernel and flash-kernel support are uploaded to oneiric
[15:22] <ogra_> kernel and meta are sitting in NEW, i chose to use .38 for the newer packages
[15:22] <ogra_> NCommander, move :)
[15:22] <NCommander> [topic] QA Status (GrueMaster)
[15:22] <MootBot> New Topic:  QA Status (GrueMaster)
[15:23] <GrueMaster> Currently have an issue with two boards with overlapping mac addresses.
[15:23] <GrueMaster> This will cause issues with automation testing & PXE boot.
[15:23] <janimo`> ogra_, \o/
[15:24] <NCommander> GrueMaster: the MAC can be set in u-boot if need be
[15:24] <GrueMaster> Rest of the systems now have sata<>usb drives attached and are currently running io tests.  Should be done tomorrow.
[15:24] <ogra_> try plugging the the cable backwards that probanbly changes the order of the MAC :)
[15:24] <GrueMaster> NCommander: Not automated.
[15:24] <ogra_> NCommander, there is already a u-boot patch to use the die-id
[15:24] <NCommander> ogra_: reversing the polarity rarely works in real life
[15:24] <ogra_> just not in yet
[15:25] <GrueMaster> The die id is the same on two systems so that won't help.
[15:25] <GrueMaster> The mac I am referring to is what the kernel is assigning based on die id.
[15:25] <ogra_> ugh
[15:25] <ogra_> same die-id ? thats evil
[15:26] <ogra_> do you need them fixed ?
[15:26] <GrueMaster> One is an EA1, the other is one of davidm's A1 boards.
[15:26] <ogra_> else it could generate based on die-id and timestamp or so
[15:26] <ogra_> so you at least have differing ones for each board
[15:26] <GrueMaster> I have two more boards coming, and A3 and a fixed A1.  A1 should be here early next week.  No eta on A3.
[15:27] <ogra_> hopefully with different IDs then :)
[15:28] <GrueMaster> Work continues on automation using Jenkins.  More ove a learning curve than anything.  Current automated server tests are heavily interwoven with libvirt & kvm, so are all but useless to me.
[15:28] <ogra_> great, so you can reimplement the world
[15:29] <GrueMaster> Spent two days trying to get natty preinstalled netbook image (basis of filesystem testing) to run on btrfs failed.  Based on the current status of that filesystem, I am not recommending it for default.
[15:30] <ogra_> wow
[15:30] <ogra_> did you file bugs ?
[15:30] <ogra_> it should definitely at least *work*
[15:30] <GrueMaster> Coudln't figure out what exactly was broken.
[15:31] <ogra_> probably sluggish and all, but it should
[15:31] <ogra_> did you do any ext4 testing yet ?
[15:31] <GrueMaster> It was having mount issues in intramfs.
[15:31] <GrueMaster> yes.  Results were posted.
[15:31] <ogra_> ah, great
[15:31] <GrueMaster> Slightly faster than ext3.
[15:31] <ogra_> where ? :)
[15:31] <GrueMaster> They are in the blueprint.
[15:32] <ogra_> well, ext4 has a bunch of flash optimization settings you can apply, there should be more differences if you flick all the switches
[15:32] <GrueMaster> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/Specs/FasterPreinstallFilesystem
[15:32] <ogra_> (i.e. the now well known TRIM support we banged our heads on durign the sprint)
[15:32] <ogra_> ah, on the wiki
[15:33] <ogra_> i looked at the spec
[15:33] <ogra_> :)
[15:33] <NCommander> anything else?
[15:34] <GrueMaster> There is probably a way to combine the results into a single chart, but I haven't looked into it yet.
[15:34] <ogra_> yeah, who cares
[15:34] <GrueMaster> Nothing else to report on from here.
[15:34] <ogra_> we only want the numbers for one shot anyway
[15:34] <NCommander> [topic] AOB
[15:34] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[15:35] <NCommander> GIONG ONCE
[15:35] <NCommander> TWICE
[15:36] <NCommander> THREE TIMES
[15:36] <NCommander> #endmeeting
[15:36] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:36.
[16:59] <bdmurray> Hello
[16:59] <pedro_> hi
[17:00] <bdmurray> #start-meeting
[17:01] <bdmurray> #startmeeting
[17:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 12:01. The chair is bdmurray.
[17:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:01] <bdmurray> Time for the Bug Squad meeting
[17:01] <bdmurray> the agenda is at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad/Meeting
[17:02] <bdmurray> [TOPIC] Updates of action items from previous meeting
[17:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Updates of action items from previous meeting
[17:02] <bdmurray> vish to send an email to the lists re mentoring team admins
[17:02] <bdmurray> vish: Did this get done?
[17:02] <pedro_> that was done IIRC
[17:03] <bdmurray> I seem to recall an email also
[17:04] <bdmurray> [Bugsquad-mentorship-group-alpha] Admin List in Bugsquad Mentoring team
[17:04] <pedro_> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/2011-June/003335.html <- that one ?
[17:04] <bdmurray> there we are
[17:04] <bdmurray> so that's done
[17:04] <pedro_> yeah
[17:04] <bdmurray> hggdh: around?
[17:04] <bdmurray> hggdh to announce RedSingularity joining ubuntu-bugcontrol
[17:05] <bdmurray> that's been long enough that I think it should be dropped if its not done
[17:05] <bdmurray> we'll leave the other one pending
[17:06] <bdmurray> [TOPIC] Mentorship program discussion
[17:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Mentorship program discussion
[17:06] <bdmurray> Is there anything to discuss here?
[17:07] <bdmurray> Moving on then
[17:07] <bdmurray> [TOPIC] New bug control members
[17:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  New bug control members
[17:08] <bdmurray> We've recently added the following two people to the Bug Control team
[17:08] <bdmurray> Daniel Manrique - roadmr
[17:08] <bdmurray> Brendan Donegan - brendand
[17:08] <bdmurray> Both of whom have been doing some great work and participating in Bug Days
[17:08] <bdmurray> Thanks for helping out!
[17:09] <pedro_> just wanna say that they are both doing an amazing work, congrats guys :-)
[17:09] <bdmurray> [TOPIC] Open Discussions
[17:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussions
[17:09] <charlie-tca> o/
[17:10] <bdmurray> charlie-tca: yes?
[17:10] <charlie-tca> I forwarded a message that went to ubuntu developers about a response given on a bug.
[17:10] <charlie-tca> The user requested the response be changed. Checking standard responses, he would like us to use that instead
[17:11] <charlie-tca> Apparently, the triager used his own response, which is worded slightly off.
[17:11] <charlie-tca> We need triagers using the standard responses, I think.
[17:12] <charlie-tca> The response in question is
[17:12] <charlie-tca> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Responses#Needing_testing_in_the_development_release
[17:12] <charlie-tca> ..
[17:12] <bdmurray> charlie-tca: I'm fine with modifying the wording of the response - is that something you are willing to do?
[17:12] <charlie-tca> I didn't see any need to change it
[17:13] <charlie-tca> The response the user got was bad
[17:13] <micahg> where's this e-mail
[17:14] <micahg> ah, found it now....
[17:14] <charlie-tca> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/2011-July/003374.html
[17:14] <bdmurray> charlie-tca: okay I'm with you now
[17:15] <charlie-tca> If the standard had been used, I think it would not have been questioned
[17:15] <bdmurray> Do we know who used the response in question?  I ask because the writer says "The n-th time"
[17:15] <charlie-tca> I don't know
[17:15] <charlie-tca> no bug number was given
[17:16] <bdmurray> okay I'll find out
[17:16] <bdmurray> [ACTION] bdmurray to find out who wrote comment in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/2011-July/003374.html
[17:16] <MootBot> ACTION received:  bdmurray to find out who wrote comment in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/2011-July/003374.html
[17:17] <bdmurray> and if the person really is saying that a lot I'll contact them
[17:17] <micahg> bdmurray: see bug 688586
[17:17] <bdmurray> well I guess my action is done!
[17:18] <pedro_> oh was it me?
[17:18] <bdmurray> I wasn't gonna say that but since you did ...
[17:18] <pedro_> guess i should update the comment in the script then
[17:18] <pedro_> first comment i got about it though
[17:19] <pedro_> but one is enough
[17:19] <charlie-tca> well... I agree
[17:19] <bdmurray> pedro_: if its a script you might consider look at the number of comments in addition to the status
[17:20] <bdmurray> pedro_: that's bug.message_count in the api
[17:20] <pedro_> bdmurray, i look at all that
[17:20] <pedro_> number of comments, status, date last changed etc
[17:20] <bdmurray> okay cool
[17:21] <micahg> well, the reporter was the last one to comment in this case, so that type of response isn't warranted
[17:22] <bdmurray> micahg: that may not the best way to check since any apport bug has the first comment from the reporter
[17:22] <micahg> comment_count > 1, last_commenter=reporter (not real API usage)
[17:23] <bdmurray> okay lets let pedro write his own code
[17:23] <bdmurray> don't need any backseat coders!
[17:23] <bdmurray> Is there any other business?
[17:23] <micahg> wasn't suggesting code...but rather a possible algorithm
[17:23] <micahg> o/
[17:24] <bdmurray> micahg: okay as long as its not about algorithms
[17:24] <micahg> heh
[17:25] <micahg> about a year ago we discussed about not giving stock replies to users when all the reproduce steps are there, this seems to be happenning now with some of these automated scripts
[17:26] <micahg> this seems to include bugs already in the triaged state
[17:26] <bdmurray> ah this is leading into algorithm to detect bug descriptions with steps to reproduce?
[17:26] <micahg> no
[17:26] <bdmurray> darn!
[17:26] <micahg> just wanted to bring it up :)
[17:27] <pedro_> could be those updated with the 'TEST CASE' thing as the SRU's ?
[17:27] <bdmurray> I honestly don't know how to test for steps to reproduce in the bug description
[17:27] <micahg> although, if there were a keyword in the description, we could check for that on newer bugs
[17:27] <bdmurray> However if they were Triaged then modifying the description to add TEST CASE as pedro suggests makes sense
[17:28] <bdmurray> Additionally, tagging 'testcase' would be much easier to search on
[17:28] <pedro_> yup
[17:28] <charlie-tca> hm, actually, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Description does say use TEST CASE
[17:29] <bdmurray> so what actions can we take / make out of this
[17:30] <bdmurray> don't auto incomplete triaged bugs via a script
[17:30] <pedro_> i'd like the idea of having the tag too
[17:30] <bdmurray> tag bugs with 'TEST CASE' in description testcase
[17:30] <bdmurray> recommend people modify description with 'TEST CASE' words if steps to reproduce exist in bug description
[17:30] <micahg> start moving steps to reproduce to description as "test case"?
[17:31] <charlie-tca> caps, please, micahg
[17:31] <bdmurray> yeah if they are in comment like #28 out of 100
[17:31] <bdmurray> heh you don't hear that very OFTEN!
[17:32] <charlie-tca> caps makes it easier to see in the descriptions
[17:32] <micahg> charlie-tca: OK, I WILL TRY TO REMEMBER :)
[17:32] <charlie-tca> oh, man!
[17:32] <pedro_> lol
[17:32] <bdmurray> are we agreed on the actions then?
[17:32]  * micahg does use caps in the descriptions though :)
[17:32] <micahg> +1
[17:33] <charlie-tca> +1
[17:33] <pedro_> +1
[17:33] <bdmurray> [ACTION] bdmurray tag bugs with 'TEST CASE' in description testcase
[17:33] <MootBot> ACTION received:  bdmurray tag bugs with 'TEST CASE' in description testcase
[17:34] <micahg> I would think the only exceptions might be  kernel/X since hardware might not be available
[17:34] <bdmurray> [ACTION] bdmurray recommend people modify description with 'TEST CASE' words if steps to reproduce exist in bug description or in comments
[17:34] <MootBot> ACTION received:  bdmurray recommend people modify description with 'TEST CASE' words if steps to reproduce exist in bug description or in comments
[17:34] <charlie-tca> If the steps are there to reproduce, it doesn't matter if you have the hardware, does it?
[17:34] <micahg> charlie-tca: for kernel/X it can
[17:34] <charlie-tca> it is still a TEST CASE, though?
[17:35] <bdmurray> It doesn matter but its still worth noting there is a TEST CASE
[17:35] <micahg> if the bug is hardware specific
[17:35] <micahg> right, I was referring to the triaged part
[17:35] <bdmurray> ah well the kernel's special
[17:35] <charlie-tca> oh, kernel team is different on that
[17:36] <bdmurray> okay any other business?
[17:36] <bdmurray> o/
[17:36] <micahg> bdmurray: you forgot one of the actions from your list :)
[17:37] <bdmurray> I recently wrote an update-manager apport package hook - this is now in natty-proposed and could use some SRU verification
[17:37] <bdmurray> that is bug 797894
[17:37] <bdmurray> micahg: which action is that?
[17:37] <micahg>  <bdmurray> don't auto incomplete triaged bugs via a script
[17:38] <bdmurray> micahg: I won't and don't - should I email others not to either?
[17:38] <micahg> maybe?
[17:39] <micahg> bdmurray: you proposed it as a possible action, was wondering what you had in mind
[17:39] <bdmurray> yes so was I
[17:39] <charlie-tca> Heh
[17:41] <micahg> maybe just a reminder about the triaged state and why bug reports end up there and that people should keep that in mind when writing these scripts?
[17:41] <bdmurray> [ACTION] bdmurray to recommend that auto bug modifiers not incomplete bug reports that have been triaged as triaged is a state settable only by people who know
[17:41] <MootBot> ACTION received:  bdmurray to recommend that auto bug modifiers not incomplete bug reports that have been triaged as triaged is a state settable only by people who know
[17:41] <bdmurray> that sounds reasonably close to what micah said
[17:41] <bdmurray> so any other business?
[17:44] <bdmurray> okay thanks everyone!
[17:44] <bdmurray> #end-meeting
[17:44] <charlie-tca> bdmurray: Thank you for chairing these meetings!
[17:44] <micahg> bdmurray: no dash
[17:45] <bdmurray> #endmeeting
[17:45] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:45.
[17:45] <micahg> thanks bdmurray
[17:45] <pedro_> thanks!
[17:58] <kees> heya, i'll be a few minutes late...
[17:59] <cjwatson> I have to say I don't actually remember what's left on the agenda
[18:00] <cjwatson> we handled a good deal of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda at the rally
[18:00] <mdz> I've missed the past two and have no idea what's going on
[18:00] <cjwatson> I believe that the question of MRE for banshee is still open, but I think we were going to follow up on the mailing list for that
[18:00] <mdz> I therefore un-volunteer to chair
[18:00] <cjwatson> the series RM bit I was going to take care of, though haven't yet
[18:01] <cjwatson> how about I start and we can move through the things I know about, and anyone with more of a clue about what's going on can chip in
[18:01] <cjwatson> #startmeeting
[18:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 13:01. The chair is cjwatson.
[18:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[18:02] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Action review
[18:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Action review
[18:02] <cjwatson> cjwatson to set series RM to ubuntu-release
[18:02] <cjwatson> not done
[18:02] <Laney> the banshee MRE is done, fyi: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions
[18:02] <cjwatson> everyone to follow up to mailing list threads
[18:02] <cjwatson> no ideda
[18:02] <cjwatson> Laney: oh good, thanks
[18:02] <cjwatson> (er, one moment, need to attend to my daughter)
[18:03] <cjwatson> we have the DMB voting procedure question still outstanding, I think, but that really does need to be handled by e-mail
[18:04] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Patent enquiry - mesa floating point buffer support (RAOF)
[18:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Patent enquiry - mesa floating point buffer support (RAOF)
[18:04] <cjwatson> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-July/000961.html
[18:04] <mdz> I'm very behind on Ubuntu email right now, I'm afraid
[18:04] <cjwatson> mdz: understandable :)
[18:05] <cjwatson> I was under the impression that our standing policy was only to take action when notified of patent infringement by a patent holder
[18:05] <cjwatson> however, given the form of the question, I think we need somebody who can assume risk on behalf of Canonical to answer
[18:05] <mdz> I think we err on the side of making the software better
[18:05] <cjwatson> does anyone object if I forward the question to legal and/or Mark?  or should we tell RAOF to go ahead?
[18:05] <mdz> and patent claims can push back iff there is a genuine problem
[18:06] <mdz> cjwatson, I think according to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PatentPolicy RAOF should go ahead
[18:07] <cjwatson> RAOF seems to be following the last section of that
[18:07]  * kees agrees
[18:07] <cjwatson> but I guess the answer is "we are not aware of any active claims here"
[18:08] <mdz> precisely
[18:08] <cjwatson> and we seem to have a plausible defence anyway in the form of RAOF's belief that the patent involves a hardware circuit
[18:09] <mdz> yes
[18:09] <cjwatson> so that's agreed, I'll reply to Chris' mail in the course of preparing minutes for this meeting
[18:09] <mdz> there is no claim as far as we're aware, and our best guess at a read of the patent says we can't possibly infringe
[18:09] <cjwatson> [ACTION] Brainstorm Top 10 for June 2010
[18:09] <MootBot> ACTION received:  Brainstorm Top 10 for June 2010
[18:09] <cjwatson> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-July/000962.html
[18:10] <cjwatson> mdz: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-July/000968.html is directed at you
[18:10] <cjwatson> bah!
[18:10] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] Brainstorm Top 10 for June 2010
[18:10] <MootBot> New Topic:  Brainstorm Top 10 for June 2010
[18:10] <cjwatson> sorry, brain failure
[18:10] <mdz> 2011? :-)
[18:10] <cjwatson> further brain failure, but this time on the part of the enquirer ... I was just copying and pasting :-)
[18:11] <mdz> so I did the first one, and pitti did the second one
[18:11] <cjwatson> sounds like it's not your turn then
[18:11] <cjwatson> kees: should we flip a coin?
[18:11] <mdz> I'd appreciate if we could rotate, yes :-)
[18:11] <mdz> between me and pitti, there's a pretty well established formula
[18:11] <cjwatson> yeah
[18:12] <cjwatson> I'm happy to do it and get it out of the way for a while
[18:13] <mdz> cjwatson, thank you
[18:13] <cjwatson> [ACTION] cjwatson to initiate brainstorm review
[18:13] <MootBot> ACTION received:  cjwatson to initiate brainstorm review
[18:13] <kees> cjwatson: cool; I'll take the next one
[18:13] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] AOB
[18:13] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[18:13] <cjwatson> I don't see anything else in the mailing list or community bugs, aside from a few threads in progress
[18:14] <mdz> cjwatson, https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-March/000726.html has all of the brainstorm review resources
[18:14] <mdz> at least, what existed when pitti started the last round
[18:14] <mdz> no other business from me
[18:15] <cjwatson> [TOPIC] chair for next meeting
[18:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  chair for next meeting
[18:15] <cjwatson> I have no idea whose turn it is.  kees, can you take the next one maybe?
[18:16] <mdz> 28 July
[18:16] <kees> yup!
[18:16] <cjwatson> sorry, woefully underprepared here
[18:16] <mdz> I'll be at OSCON, but hopefully will be able to attend
[18:16] <kees> it's certainly my turn by now
[18:16] <cjwatson> I'll be at Debconf, but likewise
[18:16] <mdz> it's during Debconf too
[18:16] <kees> I'll be around (not at debconf)
[18:16] <mdz> ok, thanks for chairing cjwatson
[18:16] <cjwatson> OK, let's call it a day then
[18:16] <cjwatson> mdz: hope the holiday's going well!
[18:16] <cjwatson> #endmeeting
[18:16] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 13:16.
[18:17] <mdz> cjwatson, it's been grand. getting back to work Monday
[18:17] <cjwatson> ah, have fun
[18:18] <cjwatson> right.  pub! :-)