[17:00] <mdeslaur> \o
[17:00]  * slangasek waves
[17:01]  * stgraber waves
[17:01] <slangasek> #startmeeting
[17:01] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Nov 22 17:01:39 2016 UTC.  The chair is slangasek. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[17:01] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[17:01] <slangasek> oh good, we at least have 3 :)
[17:02] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Apologies
[17:02] <slangasek> none sent
[17:02] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Action review
[17:02] <slangasek> infinity: are you here?
[17:03] <slangasek> ACTION: infinity to follow up with maas SRU exception
[17:03] <slangasek> ACTION: infinity to play with seed/maint-check changes on dogfood to build a new xenial release pocket for support length auditing (ETA: 16.04.2 release)
[17:03] <slangasek> ACTION: slangasek to draft a proposed AA policy to ubuntu-release about removing powerpc binaries that hold up migrations
[17:03] <slangasek> ACTION: Infinity to gather up powerpc community before next TB meeting
[17:03] <slangasek> mail was sent to ubuntu-release
[17:03]  * doko is looking ...
[17:04] <slangasek> [LINK] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2016-November/003971.html
[17:04] <doko> any feedback on this?
[17:05] <slangasek> no feedback sent to the list
[17:05] <slangasek> so I consider it the de facto policy right now ;)
[17:06] <doko> well, this doesn't help for new toolchain versions failing to build without yet hitting the archive
[17:06] <slangasek> as a data point, so far I spent 32 minutes as AA removing binaries for 20 packages from the archive on powerpc
[17:06] <slangasek> doko: which we discussed at last meeting, and did not have agreement that it's the responsibility of the porters to fix pre-release toolchain builds in a ppa
[17:07] <doko> ok
[17:08] <slangasek> if it's prerelease and it FTBFS, that's what it is.  If it hits the archive and it FTBFS, then it's the porters' problem to fix it or be dropped
[17:08] <slangasek> anyway, no infinity so I think that's all for the action review topic
[17:09] <slangasek> I see an agenda item for 're-discuss powerpc port', but I think that was from before last meeting?
[17:09] <slangasek> I'm not sure there's anything new to discuss this week
[17:09] <mdeslaur> we wanted to re-discuss it based if people stepped up or not
[17:09] <doko> no, the last meeting was the first one to discuss
[17:10] <mdeslaur> but infinity isn't here with the results of his attempt to gather up volunteers
[17:10] <doko> please can we have a time line for this?
[17:11] <slangasek> doko: for which part?
[17:11] <slangasek> doko: infinity was supposed to stand up the porter mailing list and gather porters, with a deadline of today.  But there was no concrete next step for the TB to take after that
[17:12] <doko> well, if the result from missing-in-action is to keep the port, then something is wrong
[17:12] <slangasek> I don't think "there is a porter mailing list" is the condition for keeping the port.  The condition for keeping the port is "the port is shown to be in good health".
[17:12] <slangasek> doko: so if you find evidence that it is not, please let us know
[17:13] <slangasek> ideally this feedback should be sent directly to the porter list, but if there's no porter list it falls to us
[17:13] <doko> sic
[17:14] <slangasek> the powerpc and i386 ports were also discussed in a UOS session last week
[17:14] <doko> outcome?
[17:15] <slangasek> I haven't seen a write-up yet from Bryan Quigley, but I think we can say that the desktop flavors are going to drop powerpc this cycle
[17:16] <slangasek> I don't think there's anything more to say on this topic currently; we're mostly in data-gathering phase right now
[17:16] <slangasek> so
[17:16] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Scan the mailing ist archive for anything we missed
[17:16] <slangasek> [LINK] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2016-November/thread.html
[17:17] <slangasek> rbasak raised the question of how to track DMB requests to the TB
[17:17] <slangasek> stgraber favored email
[17:17] <slangasek> I suggested using the bug tracker :)
[17:17] <slangasek> but then I saw on one of the bugs rbasak filed that he doesn't have the ability to assign community bugs to us
[17:18] <slangasek> should we switch to using a tag for our community bug list?
[17:18] <slangasek> or should we just stick with email?
[17:18] <mdeslaur> I have no preference, as long as we can pull up a list during meetings to make sure requests have been handled
[17:19] <slangasek> I think pulling up a list is easier with the bug tracker
[17:19] <slangasek> hard to know for sure from a mailing list view what's "pending" vs. "resolved"
[17:19] <slangasek> stgraber: what do you think?
[17:19] <mdeslaur> good point
[17:20] <stgraber> well, lets just say that I saw rbasak's e-mail to the ML but I didn't see his bug report until you closed it :)
[17:20] <slangasek> indeed
[17:20] <stgraber> so one is very visible in a low-traffic mailbox, the other isn't so visible in the massive bucket of LP bugs
[17:21] <slangasek> well, unless you're already subscribed to all ubuntu-community bugs, you wouldn't have seen it at all
[17:21] <stgraber> if he could have assigned it to us, it'd have shown up in a more visible mailbox for me and I guess I can setup yet another filter for that specifically
[17:21] <stgraber> but that's more work than just looking at the existing TB mailbox :)
[17:21] <slangasek> right, I guess that's a point - can we set up a filter on behalf of ~techboard so that the tagged bugs go to the mailing list automatically?
[17:22] <slangasek> how about if I take an action to try to figure that out, and if it can't be done, we fall back to the mailing list approach?
[17:22] <stgraber> we can add a subscription for ~technical-board for a specific LP tag
[17:23] <slangasek> stgraber: if we do that, does the bugs approach work for you?
[17:24] <stgraber> I guess it'd be vaguely more visible at least. I don't think we can have it land on the list without getting stuck in moderation since LP shows the reporter as the sender, so it'd just show up as regular bugmail for us which we'd need to setup filters for
[17:24] <slangasek> and actually we would have to get sabdfl to set up the subscription
[17:24] <slangasek> or have him give us all administrator rights :)
[17:25] <slangasek> mailing list moderation should also allow us to auto-approve based on specific LP headers
[17:25] <stgraber> so we have two options 1) have the DMB file bugs with the right tag, have sabdfl setup a filter to send that tag to ~technical-board and have us all setup mail filters to catch said tags or 2) have the DMB e-mail the TB list
[17:26] <stgraber> ultimately both give us the same result, we get an e-mail with a bunch of commands to run (though badly wrapped if coming from LP)
[17:26] <slangasek> why would you need to set up additional mail filters, if the mail goes to the list?
[17:26] <slangasek> which AIUI is where ~techboard mail would go
[17:27] <stgraber> ah yeah, contact is indeed the list
[17:27] <stgraber> so instead of setting up filters, we'll have to go through mailman moderation queue regularly
[17:27] <slangasek> or fix mailman config to auto-approve based on LP headers
[17:27] <slangasek> (and I already process the moderation queue daily)
[17:27] <stgraber> yeah, that'd work too
[17:28] <stgraber> anyway, sure, if we ultimately get those requests on the TB list, I'm fine with it. It does seem to be quite a bit of extra work just to get another e-mail saying it's "Fix released" but if you're willing to do that work, fine
[17:28] <slangasek> [ACTION] slangasek to investigate getting tagged ubuntu-community bugs automatically forwarded to technical-board, and if not feasible, fall back to DMB sending signed emails to list for ACL requests
[17:28] <meetingology> ACTION: slangasek to investigate getting tagged ubuntu-community bugs automatically forwarded to technical-board, and if not feasible, fall back to DMB sending signed emails to list for ACL requests
[17:28] <slangasek> agreed :)
[17:29] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Check up on community bugs
[17:29] <slangasek> [LINK] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bugs?field.assignee=techboard
[17:29] <slangasek> oh look there's one there now ;)
[17:29] <slangasek> anyone want to claim it?
[17:29] <slangasek> [LINK] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/1643648
[17:31] <slangasek> alright, then I'll claim it and follow up after the meeting
[17:31] <slangasek> :)
[17:31] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Select a chair for the next meeting
[17:31] <mdeslaur> I'm not sure how to do that, someone would need to walk me through it or point me at some docs
[17:32] <slangasek> mdeslaur: edit-acl in lp:~ubuntu-archive/ubuntu-archive-tools/trunk/
[17:32] <mdeslaur> slangasek: ah! thanks
[17:32] <slangasek> rbasak didn't supply the specific command in this case, so I'll follow up with him regardless to confirm exactly what he's asking for
[17:34] <slangasek> next up: stgraber, backup: infinity
[17:34] <slangasek> ^^ correct?
[17:35] <stgraber> sounds right
[17:35] <slangasek> [AGREED] next chair: stgraber, backup: infinity; next meeting 2016-12-06 @ 17:00 UTC
[17:35] <slangasek> ok
[17:35] <slangasek> anything else?
[17:35] <stgraber> not sure I'll be around though since we'll be sprinting that week
[17:36] <slangasek> right, maybe it'll be a quick meeting then :)
[17:36] <slangasek> #endmeeting
[17:36] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Nov 22 17:36:49 2016 UTC.
[17:36] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting-2/2016/ubuntu-meeting-2.2016-11-22-17.01.moin.txt
[17:36] <slangasek> stgraber, mdeslaur, doko: thanks
[17:36] <mdeslaur> thanks slangasek, stgraber!
[17:37] <mdeslaur> thanks doko