[15:59] <dsmythies> For the doc tream meeting, please go to #ubuntu-doc.
[16:00] <kees> \o
[16:00] <mdeslaur> o/
[16:00] <infinity> o/
[16:01]  * slangasek waves
[16:01] <pitti> o/
[16:01] <pitti> infinity: so, your turn today?
[16:01] <infinity> Yep.
[16:01] <infinity> Just waiting for more hands to go up. :P
[16:02] <pitti> i. e. stgraber's?
[16:02] <infinity> We'll live without him, I guess.
[16:02] <infinity> #startmeeting
[16:02] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Sep  1 16:02:50 2015 UTC.  The chair is infinity. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:02] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[16:03] <infinity> [TOPIC] Action review
[16:03] <infinity> slangasek: Looks like you had two.
[16:03] <infinity> ACTION: slangasek to forward complaint to Canonical legal
[16:03] <infinity> ACTION: slangasek to document maas, juju, docker exceptions on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Special_Cases
[16:04] <slangasek> infinity: both carried over
[16:04] <infinity> pitti: ACTION: pitti to propose amendment to general SRU policy for new features in LTS
[16:05] <pitti> yay! done
[16:05] <pitti> (after some 4 times bouncing)
[16:05] <pitti> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2015-September/thread.html
[16:05] <infinity> \o/
[16:05] <mdeslaur> \o/
[16:05] <pitti> I also used the opportunity to propose and clean up the SRU policy at large
[16:05] <pitti> the actual "new features" amendment is rather small
[16:06] <pitti> but admittedly I only sent this an hour or so ago, so I don't expect anyone to have read it yet and thought about it
[16:06] <pitti> so maybe replies on the list?
[16:06]  * stgraber waves
[16:06] <pitti> ça va stgraber !
[16:06] <mdeslaur> I skimmed it, but haven't thought it through yet
[16:06] <infinity> Right, let's take that to the list, and if we don't get anywhere, discuss it at the next meeting.
[16:07] <infinity> [ACTION] Everyone to review pitti's SRU policy ammendments and +1/-1 on-list.
[16:07] <meetingology> ACTION: Everyone to review pitti's SRU policy ammendments and +1/-1 on-list.
[16:07] <stgraber> pitti: très bien, merci! Sorry for being a bit late, was changing location.
[16:07] <mdeslaur> pitti: this basically removes the need to get an explicit tech-board ack for SRU microreleases, right?
[16:07] <slangasek> hadn't seen the mail until just now
[16:08] <infinity> Do we need to tackle jcastro's driver update stuff in the meeting, or is the healthy list debate working for everyone.
[16:08] <infinity> ?
[16:08] <pitti> mdeslaur: that's the intention -- as we basically always ask the same question etc.
[16:08] <mdeslaur> pitti: ok, was just making sure I parsed it correctly
[16:08] <pitti> so I'd rather generalize the principles, and stop this (IMHO rather unmaintainable) list
[16:08] <mdeslaur> infinity: I think jcastro was ok with the discussion
[16:08] <pitti> Alberto had some followup with some new points (short-lived drivers)
[16:09] <pitti> but I'm still firmly opposed to enabling random PPAs with some driver GUI
[16:09] <infinity> Ditto.
[16:09] <stgraber> yup
[16:09] <infinity> I had some rather strong opinions off-list about that.
[16:09] <mdeslaur> yeah, I'd rather see more driver updates in the actual archive
[16:10] <slangasek> full agreement
[16:10] <stgraber> short-lived test drivers can go to a PPA. Production-ready drivers can go in as SRUs.
[16:10] <infinity> Alright, let's keep this discussion on-list, since there's plenty there already, and it's nice to keep the discussion in the same spot.
[16:10] <stgraber> and said PPA would have to be manually added by any user/tester of said driver
[16:10] <pitti> yeah, nothing wrong with having PPAs, just don't use them as SRU bypasses
[16:10] <jcastro> yes the plan is for us to iterate in the PPA, and then people can steal that into distro as necessary
[16:10] <mdeslaur> I have no objection to perhaps making the SRU waiting period shorter in the future if we're trying to get day-one drivers for specific games in though
[16:11] <jcastro> just in case people missed my email withdrawing the PPA proposal
[16:11] <infinity> mdeslaur: Given past quality of those updates, I object to that until there's a better history.
[16:11] <pitti> I do belive that we have stalled SRU/NEW queues, but enabling PPAs by default doesn't sound like the answer
[16:11] <infinity> mdeslaur: They introduce packaging regressions often.
[16:11] <jcastro> pitti: agree 100%
[16:11] <mdeslaur> infinity: yes, I agree. hence the "in the future"
[16:11] <slangasek> I didn't get a chance to point this out on the list yet, but one factor in NEW being slow for SRUs is that it's a different queue
[16:12] <slangasek> I think for jcastro's use case the packages should be continuous SRUs of a single source package, to avoid this
[16:12] <pitti> yeah, hardly ever looked at
[16:12] <slangasek> (technical details etc)
[16:12] <pitti> or at least we need to plant the "look at NEW" idea into ~ubuntu-sru's habits
[16:12] <infinity> I'm training a couple of new AAs to try to help the queue depth issue, but it might help to get formal about driver updates, much like I did for kernel SRUs when they were having issues a few years ago.
[16:12] <stgraber> right, that'd also mean getting potentially reviewable diffs instead of the unreviewable monstrosity we get today
[16:12] <slangasek> pitti: planting in habits won't change the problem of multiple queues + queue starvation, really
[16:13] <pitti> TBH, the nvidia driver is comparatively hard to source-NEW, as it's such a complex package (both license-wise and packaging-wise)
[16:13] <slangasek> anyway, the TB doesn't need to micromanage this part I think, sorry for bringing it up :)
[16:13] <infinity> Heh.
[16:13] <infinity> [TOPIC] Mailing list archives
[16:14] <pitti> nothing new aside from the driver thingies that I can see
[16:14] <infinity> Anything else interesting that we've been missing?
[16:14]  * pitti pats his mutt filters marking TB email green
[16:15] <infinity> [TOPIC] Community bugs
[16:15] <infinity> Nada.
[16:15] <infinity> [TOPIC] Next chair
[16:15] <pitti> next time: me, then slangasek ?
[16:15] <infinity> The wiki claims pitti, which is oddy out of order if today was me.
[16:15] <infinity> But sure, pitti, then slangasek.
[16:16] <slangasek> infinity: was yours a catch-up?
[16:16] <pitti> hm, can't remember the history; we might have swapped due to non-attendance or whatnot
[16:16] <slangasek> anyway
[16:16] <infinity> slangasek: Might have been.
[16:16] <infinity> [TOPIC] AOB
[16:16] <infinity> Anybody have any OB?
[16:16] <pitti> nothign from me
[16:17] <mdeslaur> nope
[16:17] <stgraber> nope
[16:17] <slangasek> no
[16:17] <infinity> Alright, off to edit the wiki.
[16:17] <infinity> #endmeeting
[16:17] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Sep  1 16:17:23 2015 UTC.
[16:17] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting-2/2015/ubuntu-meeting-2.2015-09-01-16.02.moin.txt
[16:17] <mdeslaur> thanks everyone!
[16:17] <mdeslaur> thanks infinity
[16:17] <pitti> thanks folks
[16:17] <stgraber> thanks!
[16:18] <kees> thanks all