[02:25] <xiaohongaiweno> hello
[16:00] <coreycb> hey all
[16:00] <coreycb> #startmeeting ubuntu-server-team
[16:00] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Jul 19 16:00:20 2016 UTC.  The chair is coreycb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[16:00] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[16:00] <teward> o/
[16:00] <powersj> o/
[16:00] <coreycb> Just going to hang tight for a few minutes and let people show up
[16:01] <jgrimm> o/
[16:01] <rbasak> o/
[16:02] <smb> o/
[16:02] <nacc> o/
[16:02] <coreycb> alright looks like we have a decent number of folks so let's get started
[16:02] <rharper> o/
[16:02] <coreycb> #topic Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:03] <nacc> sorry, i'm bad and haven't updated the wiki; i think there was just hte one for jgrimm to review the qemu bug(s)
[16:03] <coreycb> nacc, ok jgrimm do you have status on that?
[16:03]  * jgrimm goes looking for the bug
[16:04] <jgrimm> coreycb, ask me again during free discussion, i'll have looked up what the bug is by then
[16:04] <coreycb> jgrimm, ok sounds good
[16:05] <coreycb> #topic Yakkety Development
[16:05] <coreycb> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/YakketyYak/ReleaseSchedule
[16:05] <nacc> jgrimm: https://launchpad.net/bugs/1561019
[16:05] <jgrimm> thanks nacc
[16:05] <coreycb> Alpha 2 is in 9 days
[16:05] <coreycb> And we're about a month away from Feature Freeze
[16:07] <teward> nginx is probably going to get a merge for Yakkety, it'll include the dynamic modules that Debian adds.  Test packages are being built on my side now, then in a PPA, and a call for testing install/upgrade will go out
[16:07] <coreycb> keep feature freeze in mind  as new features and new packages will need FFEs after that point
[16:07] <teward> assuming I don't get another case of the lazies :)
[16:07] <teward> that should land for Yakkety then before FeatureFreeze
[16:07] <teward> ('tis all for me today)
[16:07] <coreycb> thanks teward
[16:08] <coreycb> anything else for yakkety development?
[16:08] <jgrimm> otherwise, generally... merges and bugs have been making good forward progress
[16:08] <coreycb> jgrimm, great
[16:09] <coreycb> #subtopic Release Bugs
[16:09] <coreycb> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-x-tracking-bug-tasks.html#ubuntu-server
[16:09] <coreycb> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-y-tracking-bug-tasks.html#ubuntu-server
[16:09] <jgrimm> coreycb, i'll jump in here with status on bug 1561019 action item
[16:10] <jgrimm> hallyn and smb seems to be making progress on that atm.  my action was to find someone to work on it.. so done. :)
[16:10] <coreycb> jgrimm, :)
[16:11] <smb> yeah... ugly
[16:11] <smb> jgrimm, thought that was actually worked around
[16:12] <jgrimm> smb, fair enough
[16:13] <jgrimm> smb, my response was about action item i took last week, to make sure someone took a look at it.
[16:13] <smb> jgrimm, guess at some point I'd have to check whether this was actually pused anywhere
[16:13] <jgrimm> smb, ack!
[16:13] <coreycb> as for other bugs, based on a quick scan, it looks like all the high importance bugs have someone from the server team who's been working on them or communicating at least
[16:14] <coreycb> and some triage is needed for others
[16:14] <coreycb> does anyone have anything else for bugs?
[16:15] <coreycb> #topic Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou)
[16:15] <coreycb> hey caribou
[16:15] <jgrimm> coreycb, unable to attend today
[16:15] <rbasak> caribou sends his apologies
[16:15] <coreycb> apology accepted
[16:15] <coreycb> :)
[16:15] <coreycb> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team
[16:16] <jgrimm> powersj, ^^
[16:16] <powersj> Working with IS to get Jenkins updated to latest LTS version due to a known Jenkins defect, cpaelzer and I are meeting re: 390, and pinged IS on getting torkoal (baremetal system) added and up to Jenkins.
[16:16] <powersj> Turning focus back to Jenkins CI and integration jobs for cloud-init while waiting on Jenkins fix and slave additions.
[16:17] <coreycb> powersj, thanks for the update.  any questions for powersj?
[16:18] <coreycb> alrighty, on we go
[16:18] <coreycb> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb, sforshee, arges)
[16:18] <smb> No news, sorry (at least no bad news).
[16:19] <coreycb> smb, ok thanks
[16:19] <coreycb> smb, same story for the other kernel folks?
[16:19] <smb> likely
[16:19] <arges> yup
[16:20] <coreycb> alright thanks guys
[16:20] <coreycb> #topic Upcoming Call For Papers
[16:20] <coreycb> jumped the gun. any questions for kernel folks?
[16:20] <rharper> well, not now
[16:20] <rharper> =)
[16:20] <coreycb> lol
[16:20] <jgrimm> all good
[16:21] <coreycb> any conferences coming up that have a call for papers?
[16:21] <coreycb> I know openstack summit deadline was last week
[16:22] <coreycb> #topic Ubuntu Server Team Events
[16:23] <coreycb> any events coming up?
[16:24] <rharper> http://containersummit.io/city-series/2016/austin
[16:24] <rharper> tonight
[16:24] <rharper> if you're in Austin
[16:25] <coreycb> rharper, nice, and look at that mug shot!
[16:25] <rharper> lol
[16:25] <coreycb> rharper, what's your talk on?
[16:25] <rharper> fire-side chatting about containers and lxd
[16:26] <coreycb> rharper, awesome
[16:26] <coreycb> #topic Open Discussion
[16:27] <coreycb> jgrimm, did you want to discuss that libvirt bug?
[16:27] <coreycb> or was it qemu bugs
[16:28] <jgrimm> coreycb, we already covered it during release bugs
[16:28] <jgrimm> alll good
[16:28] <coreycb> jgrimm, ah, that was it.  good so no actions to carry over as far as I can tell.
[16:29] <jgrimm> agreed!
[16:29] <coreycb> jgrimm, I still owe you a reply on your email about subscriptions to openstack packages
[16:30] <coreycb> #topic Announce next meeting date, time and chair
[16:30] <coreycb> the next meeting will be the same time next week
[16:30] <jgrimm> coreycb: james took care of it
[16:31] <coreycb> jgrimm, oh, great, thanks jamespage!
[16:31] <coreycb> gaughen is up next week to chair
[16:31] <jgrimm> coreycb, indeed.. i owe him (yet another) beer for his kindly assistance. :)
[16:31] <gaughen> coreycb, I will be at the sprint
[16:31] <coreycb> gaughen, ok
[16:32] <coreycb> next in line is arosales, smoser, rbasak.  any of you not at the sprint next week?
[16:32] <jgrimm> smoser or rbasak should be around
[16:32] <coreycb> jgrimm, alright, it'll be one of them
[16:32] <coreycb> #topic Assigned merges/bugwork (rbasak)
[16:32] <rbasak> o/
[16:32] <coreycb> o/
[16:33] <rbasak> I've been doing some catching up
[16:33] <rbasak> I've mainly been focusing on unblocking existing assignments right now.
[16:33] <rbasak> cpaelzer isn't here, but AFAICT he's mainly blocked on me reviewing his ntp and dovecot merges, so I'll get on with those ASAP.
[16:33] <arosales> coreycb: I am at sprint next weeek
[16:34] <rbasak> (I sponsored a ton of uploads today, more tomorrow)
[16:34] <arosales> rbasak: or smoser could I trade with you?
[16:34] <rbasak> jgrimm and rharper, I think you should be unblocked?
[16:34] <jgrimm> rbasak, i am! thank you
[16:34] <coreycb> arosales, yep it's going to be one of them. I'll nag them.
[16:34] <rharper> rbasak: yes, just need to work the bugs you've assigned
[16:34] <rbasak> nacc, your only assignment right now is the bacula thing according to my sheet. I think I'm waiting on you to tell me when you're ready for upload. Is that right?
[16:34] <arosales> coreycb: smoser rbasak thanks :-)
[16:34] <nacc> rbasak: yep, i think we're pretty close
[16:35] <nacc> rbasak: i need to verify the yakkety changes are good again (some stuff got sent to debian)
[16:35] <rbasak> magicalChicken: around? I've been catching up on your bugs, I think some probably need unassigning perhaps.
[16:35] <nacc> rbasak: did you get a chance to look at hte puppet bug?
[16:35] <rbasak> nacc: OK, I'll wait for you, thanks.
[16:35] <nacc> rbasak: LP: #1570472
[16:35] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Yeah
[16:35] <rbasak> nacc: not in detail, sorry I didn't reply to the puppet bug yet. I'm reluctant though. I don't understand why we can't invert the logic using existing functionality.
[16:36] <rbasak> magicalChicken: where are we with bug 1394403 right now please?
[16:36] <nacc> rbasak: oh we could; but upstream has already taken that change; it won't affect the SRU -- and upstream may chagne the logic altogether (they're working on adding a new extension that may allow for calling arbitrary conditional functions
[16:36] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Still unable to reproduce with the first patch that went in
[16:37] <nacc> rbasak: but if we change first, then we're diverging from upstream's change, which seems less than ideal
[16:37] <nacc> rbasak: i agree with you for 16.10
[16:37] <nacc> rbasak: i disagree with you for 16.04 :)
[16:37] <nacc> rbasak: if that makes sense :)
[16:37] <magicalChicken> rbasak: I did LP: #1534538, but I need to redo it because a security update went into repos first
[16:37] <rbasak> nacc: right, but we need to fix 16.10 first for the SRU. And I don't want to upload a change I know will be broken in three months.
[16:38] <nacc> rbasak: ok, i'll work on upstream then
[16:38] <rbasak> nacc: I'd be happy for us to fix Yakkety with a temporary delta that we know is right, even if that isn't upstream.
[16:38] <rbasak> nacc: unless that's particularly awkward? Then that would unblock the SRU.
[16:38] <nacc> rbasak: right, i was thinking the opposite direction, but the same result
[16:38] <rbasak> nacc: otherwise we're defeating the object of fixing development rist.
[16:38] <rbasak> first
[16:39] <nacc> rbasak: in that, yakkety gets the current fix, and then i fix upstream and yakkety
[16:39] <nacc> rbasak: fix the fix, i guess
[16:39] <nacc> rbasak: either way, one delays the sru more :)
[16:39] <nacc> rbasak: and takes more of my time :-P
[16:39] <rbasak> I'm not sure I follow.
[16:39] <nacc> rbasak: i have to learn ruby :)
[16:39] <rbasak> What I'm asking for is to fix Yakkety and then to fix Xenial. The Xenial fix can be minimal.
[16:39] <nacc> well, enough ruby :)
[16:40] <rbasak> I'm sayingi that the Yakkety fix must not be known broken, but it can be a delta.
[16:40] <rbasak> Is that OK?
[16:41] <rbasak> If upstream are planning a big picture fix, then the Yakkety delta can also be minimal I think.
[16:41] <rbasak> As long as it's not autombroken.
[16:42] <nacc> rbasak: well, given that i'm the one who will probably have to fix upstream; that's what i was trying to say. I will work on fixing upstream and yakkety. But the fix we have now, which is minimal, works for both, right now. The future fix will just be future-proof (which doesn't matter for the current releases). But I will just work on it instead of yammering furhter
[16:42] <rbasak> magicalChicken: for 4403, it's not clear to me that you can't reproduce from reading the bug.
[16:42] <rbasak> magicalChicken: am I missing something, or else could you please update the bug?
[16:42] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Sure, I'll redo the verification and post logs
[16:43] <magicalChicken> I had been able to reproduce before the first patch I submitted, but after that patch the duplicate rewrite message isn't present in apache's log
[16:43] <rbasak> magicalChicken: sorry, I don't follow. What do we need to do to resolve the bug?
[16:44] <rbasak> Are we stuck because unreproducible?
[16:44] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Yes. I had submitted a patch earlier that fixed it for me, but the user said that it did not fix it for them
[16:44] <rbasak> magicalChicken: but the user has since provided a reproducer, right?
[16:45] <magicalChicken> rbasak: I posted logs of me running the test case they provided with the patch in place, and the bug doesn't show up in them
[16:45] <magicalChicken> rbasak: I haven't heard from the user since then
[16:45] <rbasak> Sorry, I know I'm confused here.
[16:45] <rbasak> Ah, OK.
[16:45] <rbasak> I think I follow. I didn't read your comment as there being a problem.
[16:45] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Right yeah, I need to rewrite that to clarify
[16:45] <rbasak> OK, thanks.
[16:45] <magicalChicken> I'll go ahead and try to reproduce 1 more time too
[16:46] <rbasak> I saw the security team trump your progress in 538.
[16:46] <rbasak> Can I leave that to you to redo, please?
[16:46] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Sure, it shouldn't take long, it was a simple patch
[16:47] <rbasak> OK, thanks!
[16:47] <rbasak> magicalChicken: next, in bug 1511222, it looks like the reporter hasn't replied.
[16:47] <rbasak> magicalChicken: would you prefer to drive it anyway and SRU verify yourself, or drop it?
[16:48] <rbasak> It looks like only one person has reported affected since October.
[16:48] <rbasak> So I don't mind which you prefer - depends on your confidence in the fix and your view on the impact of the bug on other users.
[16:48] <magicalChicken> rbasak: I had tested out the patch and it worked okay for me. I can go ahead and rerun that test and post the logs. I don't think the user is going to reply
[16:48] <rbasak> magicalChicken: OK, so would you like to continue with landing the fix, or forget about it until someone replies?
[16:49] <magicalChicken> rbasak: It might be good to wait for someone to reply, since I may have been wrong about a patch working on the RewriteRule bug earlier
[16:50] <magicalChicken> rbasak: If anyone else reports they're affected, I can ask them to test out the patched version and see if it fixes it for them
[16:50] <rbasak> OK, that's fine. Please could you note this in a comment on the bug, and then I'll treat it as unassigned? If you could stay subscribed in case the user does reply, that would be helpful.
[16:50] <magicalChicken> Sure, thanks
[16:50] <magicalChicken> Yeah, I'll pick it up again if anyone replies to it
[16:51] <rbasak> magicalChicken: OK great! Next, bug 1296835 needs SRU verification. Are you planning on doing that, or is the bug stalled because you're waiting on a reporter to do it?
[16:52] <magicalChicken> rbasak: I can go ahead and do the verifiction for that
[16:52] <rbasak> OK great. Thanks!
[16:52] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Thanks
[16:53] <rbasak> Almost there :)
[16:53] <magicalChicken> haha
[16:53] <rbasak> Just one more - any progress on the logwatch bugs please?
[16:53] <rbasak> I realise this is quite a few bugs you have on at once, so no worries if not. Just trying to update my spreadsheet :)
[16:54] <magicalChicken> I hadn't been aware of a logwatch bug
[16:54] <magicalChicken> I can handle that this week, it just had slipped my mind, sorry
[16:55] <rbasak> No worries. It's a whole collection of bugs - various messages. Looks like mostly regexp updates needed, each small individually.
[16:55] <magicalChicken> rbasak: Cool, shouldn't be too hard to get fixed then
[16:55] <rbasak> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/logwatch is the list - I mean the "unmatched" and "not being reported" type bugs.
[16:55] <rbasak> Great. Thank you!
[16:55] <magicalChicken> Thanks
[16:56] <rbasak> magicalChicken: and thank you for your patience. I'm focusing on getting rid of the bugs from my spreadsheet - it's fine if they aren't making progress because of reporter silence - as long as we communicate what they need to do, I'm happy to drop them from my tracking. As long as I can forget about them :)
[16:57] <magicalChicken> rbasak: No problem, I'll stay subscribed to the ones we're waiting on so that I can pick them up again when the reporter replies
[16:57] <rbasak> I'm done for today, thanks all. I think everyone has something to get on with, possibly with the exception of cpaelzer until I unblock him.
[16:57] <rbasak> I intend to triage more this week and get a backlog of assignments again.
[16:57] <rbasak> Any other comments or questions?
[16:58] <nacc> rbasak: feel free to put more on my plate again, i'm mostly caught up now that you've sponsored stuff
[16:58] <rbasak> nacc: thanks. And thank you for all the uploads! I need to do that endorsement :)
[16:58] <rbasak> coreycb: #endmeeting please
[16:58] <coreycb> #endmeeting
[16:58] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Jul 19 16:58:42 2016 UTC.
[16:58] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2016/ubuntu-meeting.2016-07-19-16.00.moin.txt
[16:58] <coreycb> thanks all
[16:58] <nacc> rbasak: i'm trying to figure out the ftbfs you found; as it works on amd64; and it's not clear why my chnage owuld have broken anything
[16:59] <rbasak> nacc: looking at the build failure, I suspect it's a latent bug in debian/rules trigerred by building using a Yakkety dpkg-buildpackage or something.
[16:59] <nacc> rbasak: yep, that sems likely, i'm digging into it
[16:59] <nacc> thanks!
[16:59] <rbasak> nacc: IIRC, it said something about build-arch not existing? Debian policy probably requires that.
[17:00] <rbasak> nacc: sorry I didn't dig further - I was trying to get through as much of the sponsorship queue as possible.
[17:00] <nacc> rbasak: eyp, i think so -- and np, of course!