/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2012/06/25/#ubuntu-meeting.txt

=== rsalveti` is now known as rsalveti
=== Mkaysi_ is now known as Mkaysi
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
=== doko_ is now known as doko
=== Ursinha` is now known as Ursinha
=== Ursinha is now known as Guest89684
=== Guest89684 is now known as Ursula
=== Ursula is now known as Ursinha
=== Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan
jdstrando/18:04
tyhickshello18:04
* sbeattie waves18:04
jdstrandlet's start18:05
jdstrand#startmeeting18:05
meetingologyMeeting started Mon Jun 25 18:05:31 2012 UTC.  The chair is jdstrand. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.18:05
meetingologyAvailable commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired18:05
jdstrandThe meeting agenda can be found at:18:05
jdstrand[LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Meeting18:05
jdstrand[TOPIC] Weekly stand-up report18:06
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Weekly stand-up report
jdstrandI'll go first18:06
jdstrandI've got a short week this week (working today and friday)18:06
jdstrandI'm on community18:06
jdstrandI've got libreoffice/oo.o that I am going to try to push out today18:06
jdstrandI've also got patch piloting this week18:07
jdstrandand I'm working on an embargoed issue18:07
jdstrandmdeslaur is off today, but he is in the happy place and I know he is working on several updates18:08
jdstrandsbc: you're up18:08
jdstrandmeh18:08
sbeattiehehe18:08
jdstrandsbeattie: you're up18:08
jdstrandsbc: nm18:08
sbeattieI'm in the happy place this week.18:08
sbeattieI'm fighting with openjdk, trying to backport to older releases.18:08
sbeattieOtherwise, I'll try to pick up other work items.18:09
sbeattiethat's it for me; micahg, you're up18:09
micahgsbeattie: I'm finishing up with Thunderbird 13.0.1 (natty) along with a unity-2d update to fix an issue with that, then there's the thunderbird langpack regression that I'll finally fix this week, then webkit all the way aside from helping sbeattie test the openjdk browser plugin when he finishes the backport (fixes a regression for me)18:10
micahgsbeattie: sorry, didn't mean for the highlight :)18:11
micahgand that's it I think18:11
tyhicksI'm in the triage role this week18:11
tyhicksThe pidgin update I had been working on a couple weeks ago had been put on the back burner. I'm actively working it again. Should go out in the early part of this week.18:12
tyhicksmicahg and I will meet after this meeting to discuss ff/tbird testing. I'll likely have some testing to do as the result of that talk.18:13
tyhicksI've still got merges to do18:13
tyhicksThat should keep me busy for this week18:13
tyhicksjjohansen: you're up18:13
jjohansenI've got a short week too (off wed, thurs)18:13
jjohansenI've still got to finish up on debian bug 676515, my last patch was oopsing18:13
ubottuDebian bug 676515 in linux-2.6 "linux-2.6: AppArmor totally broken" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/67651518:13
jjohansenother than that, /me is still trying to get an alpha 1 apparmor out with stacking18:14
jjohansenI don't think that will happen this week now, but /me will be working towards that18:15
jdstrand[TOPIC] Highlighted packages18:16
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Highlighted packages
jjohansenthat is it for /me jdstrand back to you18:16
jdstrandhehe18:16
* jdstrand guessed that was the case18:16
jdstrandThe Ubuntu Security team will highlight some community-supported packages that might be good candidates for updating and or triaging. If you would like to help Ubuntu and not sure where to start, this is a great way to do so.18:16
jdstrandSee https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdateProcedures for details and if you have any questions, feel free to ask in #ubuntu-security. To find out other ways of helping out, please see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/GettingInvolved.18:16
jdstrandhttp://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/libdbd-pg-perl.html18:16
jdstrandhttp://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/net6.html18:16
jdstrandhttp://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/boost1.42.html18:16
jdstrandhttp://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/libsmi.html18:16
jdstrandhttp://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/pkg/xymon.html18:16
jdstrand[TOPIC] Miscellaneous and Questions18:16
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Miscellaneous and Questions
jdstrandThere are a lot of merge opportunities for packages listed in http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/d2u/. Performing these updates is a great way to help Ubuntu and bolster your developer application.18:17
jdstrandDoes anyone have any other questions or items to discuss?18:17
jdstrand#endmeeting18:20
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
meetingologyMeeting ended Mon Jun 25 18:20:20 2012 UTC.18:20
meetingologyMinutes (wiki):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-06-25-18.05.moin.txt18:20
meetingologyMinutes (html):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-06-25-18.05.html18:20
jdstrandsbeattie, micahg, tyhicks, jjohansen: thanks!18:20
jjohansenthanks jdstrand18:20
tyhicksthanks jjohansen18:20
micahgjdstrand: thanks18:20
jjohansenhehe18:20
sbeattiethanks18:21
joshuahooverralsina: so bug #1017019 appears to be popping up in support requests now...xp and possibly vista users describing the same problem18:45
ubottuLaunchpad bug 1017019 in Ubuntu One Client "3.0.2 not run on XP" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/101701918:45
ralsinajoshuahoover: right18:45
joshuahooverralsina: i see you have brian assigned to it, just wanted to let you know that i've seen at least a couple complaints via support about this too18:45
ralsinajoshuahoover: ack18:46
ralsinajoshuahoover: it fails on vista too, it seems18:46
ralsinajoshuahoover: also, wrong channel ;-)18:46
joshuahooverralsina: oops18:46
keeso/20:56
* stgraber waves20:57
soreno/20:59
cjwatsonhere, though just woke up from a nap so excuse idiocy21:00
cjwatsonoh, ugh, and I'm chair21:01
cjwatsonplease wait while I put the forgotten sugar in my coffee or else I'm going to be even more stupid21:01
lifelessI read that as 'I'm chdir'21:01
slangasekI'm ftrunc21:02
cjwatsonmdz: here?21:03
cjwatsonright, time to start I suppose21:05
cjwatson#startmeeting21:05
meetingologyMeeting started Mon Jun 25 21:05:20 2012 UTC.  The chair is cjwatson. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.21:05
meetingologyAvailable commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired21:05
cjwatsonhttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda21:05
cjwatsonI don't see apologies from either mdz or pitti, but at least pitti is apparently offline, so I'll record them as absent for now21:05
mdzcjwatson, here21:05
cjwatsonaha, excellent, thanks21:06
cjwatsonaction review: none assuming the prior chair wasn't lying when they updated the agenda :)21:06
cjwatsonso21:06
cjwatson#topic The process of granting a Microrelease Exception for Stable Release Updates - bdmurray21:06
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: The process of granting a Microrelease Exception for Stable Release Updates - bdmurray
cjwatsonbdmurray: Are you around and would you like to speak to this?21:06
bdmurraycjwatson: yes and yes21:06
cjwatsonI know there's been a good deal of on-list discussion21:07
cjwatson(Some of which I've even had a chance to read ...)21:07
bdmurrayreading some of the recent micro release exception requests on the mailing list I'm lead to believe that some TB members want to see a history of successful microreleases21:07
bdmurrayHowever, this isn't an official policy and if this is going to be one a procedure should be created for it21:08
keesI (erroneously) convinced myself that successful SRU history was a requirement. This isn't documented, and may be counter-productive in some cases.21:08
keesI think successful SRU history is just an additional piece of evidence, rather than a hard requirement.21:08
sorenkees: I'd agree with that.21:08
kees(it's a very good piece of evidence)21:09
cjwatsonslangasek has articulated a fairly clear bootstrapping problem in some cases21:09
keesyes21:09
cjwatsonI think we should be clear that we want a successful history when it's practical, and that we shouldn't institute a permanent MRE until there's been some track record of doing it right21:09
keesit sounds like the main problem is bundling upstream fixes for bugs Ubuntu may not either have nor have run into yet, and how it is hard/impossible for the SRU team to deal with that.21:09
cjwatsonBut I don't see why we can't unblock cases where there's essentially no practical non-microrelease way to update the package by saying "OK, let's give it a try"21:10
keescjwatson: ah, good idea21:10
cjwatson(Whether "we" is the TB or the SRU team is a separate issue)21:10
bdmurrayAnd the SRU team needs to somehow know that a particular package is a candidate for an MRE and therefore should be evaluated differently21:10
kees"provisional MRE" then21:10
cjwatsonThere doesn't seem to have been *too* much problem in establishing that by vociferous discussion in this case21:11
cjwatsonNext time, if we communicate all this a bit more clearly, maybe the uploader can just tell us up-front21:11
cjwatsonBut, indeed, the policy as written says nothing about SRU history, as far as I can see21:12
cjwatsonSo this appears to be guidance, not a policy change21:12
stgraberI'd be happy to see the TB grant a one-time/provisional MRE for such packages to proove themselves, then we can look at the result of that SRU and discuss a standard MRE21:12
mdzIIRC the SRU team wanted the TB to make the call on these initially21:12
mdzbut maybe we should confirm that's still desirable?21:12
keesso, in rl discussion with slangasek, the idea of an upstream micro release "breaking $foo number of users and fixing $bar number of users.", and that we (Ubuntu) needs to decide how we're comfortable with the foo/bar ratio.21:12
cjwatsonmdz: Steve spoke up in favour of continuing that today21:12
keesright21:13
mdzah, I'm just reading his email now21:13
cjwatsonOn the basis that the SRU team isn't in a much better position to evaluate this than the TB, and is already rather stretched in dealing with specifics of updates21:13
keesI think the number of things wanting MRE will drop over time, so I'm happy with the TB continuing to be the gate-keeper here. One thing I might like to do is allow the SRU team to _revoke_ an MRE.21:14
cjwatsonThese discussions do last a while when they come up, but I've not noticed us having so much in our queue that they've frozen out other work21:14
keesi.e. if something goes really sideways enough times, the SRU team can require that the MRE process restart for a package.21:15
cjwatsonslangasek: Do you have anything you'd like to add to what you wrote in mail on this?21:15
slangasekI think the folks that have been requesting the MREs have found the TB process to take longer than they would like; but I also think some of that is an artifact of the process not having been used where it should up to now21:15
cjwatsonkees: That seems like common sense, yes; the MRE process allows creating exceptions, not mandates21:15
cjwatsonslangasek: While that's true, I'm not sure they'd have found an ~ubuntu-sru-based process any quicker :-)21:16
slangaseki.e. if there had been a clearer understanding on everyone's part that they need to apply for an MRE, they wouldn't have found themselves nearly so squeezed for time21:16
slangasekcjwatson: well, I think they might have found it quicker, but only at the cost of the quality of the review21:16
slangasekI think developers are much less likely to try to browbeat the TB ;)21:17
keesdo we have good ways to quickly measure regression-from-update for a package?21:19
slangaseknot at present21:19
slangasekwe're hoping errors.ubuntu.com will help with that this cycle21:19
slangasekbut until that's done, it's all very wishy-washy21:19
keesokay.21:19
slangasekwe are making an effort now to have the SRU team actively track bugs tagged regression-update; that still relies on bug submitters using the tag correctly21:20
keescjwatson: do we need to vote on nova MRE, or can we just declare a provisional MRE for it?21:20
cjwatsonWe clearly don't need to vote as the policy says that any single TB member can approve21:21
cjwatson(Which I assume we'd talk about if there were contention)21:21
keesyeah21:21
cjwatsonThis is the chair-as-rules-lawyer principle, right? :)21:22
keesokay, then I'll grant a provisional MRE on nova and document it.21:22
cjwatsonThere seems to have been no objection to the general notion of provisional MREs, so please document that as a practice for cases where we don't have enough prior information21:22
keesdoes anyone object to my adding some language around provisional MREs and how SRU history is good evidence?21:22
bdmurraykees: document it where?  I'm curious about the SRU team will find out about the provisional MREs21:22
keesbdmurray: I intend to put it here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions21:23
cjwatsonhttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions seems like the obvious place21:23
sorenkees: No objection here. Sounds like a good idea.21:23
cjwatson#action kees to document provisional MRE for nova, and practice for insufficient-information cases in general21:23
meetingologyACTION: kees to document provisional MRE for nova, and practice for insufficient-information cases in general21:23
cjwatsonDo we feel this is enough to get us moving for the moment?21:23
bdmurrayI do21:24
slangasekapropos of nothing, I think it would also be helpful if the TB would document rationale for the MREs21:24
slangasekso that it's documented in the wiki page what the standard is that upstream is expected to continue to meet21:25
cjwatson(I think http://paste.ubuntu.com/1059791/ says something but I'm not sure what)21:25
slangasekheh21:25
cjwatsonI think at one point I tried to establish a tradition of linking to the summary of the discussion21:26
cjwatsonOr somebody did21:26
cjwatsonI'll just edit the page now to say "please link to a summary of the discussion when adding to this list)21:26
cjwatson"21:26
cjwatsonkees: Or I won't because you have the lock.  Could you?21:27
keescjwatson: sure21:29
cjwatsonOK, anything more on this topic?21:31
keesalright, I've updated https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions if people want to take a quick read21:32
slangasekdo we have a shared understanding of what "micro-version updates" means there?  does that mean "bugfix-only releases"?21:33
slangasekthat's how I interpret it anyway, but other devs might understand it otherwise when reading this page21:34
slangasekI'm happy with what's there21:35
sorenWhen the TB gets an application for an MRE, it'll probably say something about what a micro-version update usually contains.21:35
sorenI suspect it'll almost alwys be bugfix-only releases.21:35
cjwatsonhttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#New_upstream_microreleases kind of talks about it21:35
cjwatsonSlightly circularly but I think the meaning is clear21:36
slangasekhmm yes, I think that is problematically circular :)21:36
bdmurrayshould the diff being reviewed part be in the 'sru verification' part of the page?21:36
slangasekbecause that page explicitly talks about microreleases *not* requiring an exception, which is something else21:37
cjwatsonI don't think it needs to be attached to the bug, but I do think that somebody should look it over so that we know what we're getting21:37
bdmurrayright but that happens before the package is accepted into -proposed not during the verification process21:37
cjwatsonOh, yes21:37
slangasekmy own understanding is that a "new upstream microrelease" is always bugfix-only, and that a developer *may* put such a release through without an exception if they intend to do traditional SRU verification of all the changes individually... and otherwise they can apply for an MRE21:38
keesslangasek: that matches my understanding as well.21:39
slangasekif the TB as a whole agrees with that, I'm happy to update https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates to make this clearer21:40
cjwatsonI agree21:40
stgraber+121:40
soren+121:40
slangaseksounds like the vote passes - thanks21:41
cjwatsonRight, let's move on to the rest of the agenda.  Thanks21:41
cjwatson#topic Recurring: Brain storm review (Next due: May 2012)21:42
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Recurring: Brain storm review (Next due: May 2012)
cjwatsonWhose turn is it?21:42
cjwatsonI know we've had some discussion about how useful this has been; but I'd kind of like to see us give it one more go and see if it's just a matter of personal efficiency :)21:42
* kees failed terribly at it21:42
cjwatsonMine was qualified success at best, but mdz did it very efficiently as I recall21:43
cjwatsonSo we have three left21:43
sorenI'm not sure what this involves?21:43
cjwatsonhttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard/BrainstormReview21:44
cjwatsonOh yes, pitti did it pretty efficiently too, so two left21:44
cjwatsonThe hypothesis that kees and I are just slackers has not been disproven21:44
sorenSure, let me have a stab at it.21:46
sorenI won't meet the May deadline, though.21:46
cjwatsonSLACKER21:46
cjwatsonBut great :-)21:46
stgrabersoren: thanks! did we have a year associated with that deadline? :)21:47
sorenI'm afraid so.21:47
cjwatsonI fear that the agenda does21:47
sorenI'm apparently false.21:47
sorenfalse (1)            - do nothing, unsuccessfully21:47
sorenI've not even started and I'm already almost a month behind schedule.21:47
sorenOh, well.21:48
cjwatson#action soren to start on brainstorm review21:49
meetingologyACTION: soren to start on brainstorm review21:49
cjwatson#topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed21:49
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed
cjwatsonThe main thing I see is the LibreOffice MRE21:49
cjwatsonWhich seems to have been slightly stalled on the same discussion as above21:49
cjwatsonDoes anyone want to restart that discussion on-list in light of this?  It looks like the most recent dissent was between kees and pitti21:50
cjwatsonkees: ?21:51
keesI'm find with it21:52
kees*fine21:52
keeswe should probably do a provisional for it, just to be safe21:52
cjwatsonIt looks like a decent case for a provisional one given your concern about earlier history21:52
cjwatson#action kees to follow up to LibreOffice MRE discussion in light of today's debate21:53
meetingologyACTION: kees to follow up to LibreOffice MRE discussion in light of today's debate21:53
cjwatsonNothing new on community bugs and I have a long enough queue to not want to volunteer to move those LP bugs forward *just* yet, though maybe in future :-)21:54
cjwatson#topic AOB21:54
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: AOB
stgrabernothing here21:54
cjwatsongoing once21:55
cjwatsongoing twice21:55
cjwatson*gavel*21:55
cjwatson#topic Select a chair for the next meeting21:55
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Select a chair for the next meeting
cjwatsonkees: looks like you're next in rotation - is that OK?21:55
cjwatsoncal(1) says 2012-07-0921:56
* kees double checks21:56
keesyup, I'm around.21:56
cjwatsonGreat21:56
cjwatson#endmeeting21:56
=== meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
meetingologyMeeting ended Mon Jun 25 21:56:45 2012 UTC.21:56
meetingologyMinutes (wiki):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-06-25-21.05.moin.txt21:56
meetingologyMinutes (html):        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-06-25-21.05.html21:56
cjwatsonThanks all21:56
keesthanks cjwatson!21:57
stgraberthanks!21:57

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!