[15:01]  * slangasek waves
[15:01] <slangasek> #startmeeting
[15:01] <meetingology> Meeting started Thu Mar 23 15:01:31 2017 UTC.  The chair is slangasek. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[15:01] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[15:01] <slangasek> [TOPIC] Lightning round
[15:02] <slangasek> $ echo $(shuf -e barry doko bdmurray slangasek caribou infinity sil2100 robru cyphermox tdaitx xnox chiluk mwhudson rbalint)
[15:02] <slangasek> tdaitx infinity doko barry robru sil2100 chiluk rbalint slangasek cyphermox bdmurray caribou xnox mwhudson
[15:02] <slangasek> tdaitx: tag
[15:02] <tdaitx> = JCK
[15:02] <tdaitx>   * firewall exception to run interactive tests not working
[15:02] <tdaitx>   * executing full tests
[15:02] <tdaitx> = Other
[15:02] <tdaitx>   * Checking a few openjdk-7/openjdk-8 errors on error tracker
[15:02] <tdaitx>     - unable to find a reproducer for GMenuModelItemsChangedInvalidIndex; error is still being reported on Trusty though, might be related to LP: #1499747 but need a reproducer to check if glib update fixes that
[15:02] <tdaitx>     - An awt bug happening since 8u121-b13-0ubuntu1.16.04.2 which seems like a regression; working on a reproducer
[15:02] <tdaitx> (done)
[15:03] <infinity>  - Wasted some time trying unsuccessfully to smooth over the kernel/snappy issues.
[15:03] <infinity>  - Helped sort out a glibc security regression.
[15:03] <infinity>  - glibc uploads to zesty.
[15:03] <infinity>  - SRU/AA faff.
[15:03] <infinity>  - Beta, beta, beta.
[15:03] <infinity> (done)
[15:04] <slangasek> doko is off
[15:04] <slangasek> barry is off
[15:04] <slangasek> robru:
[15:04] <robru> britney
[15:04] <robru> * reviewed a couple branches by laney
[15:04] <robru> * made Email Policy resend mails periodically, with a decreasing frequency
[15:04] <robru> archive maintenance
[15:04] <robru> * troubleshoot a number of packages stuck in proposed (mentored by cyphermox)
[15:04] <robru> * poked at curl, which is blocked by MIR of two new dependencies
[15:04] <robru> (done)
[15:05] <cyphermox> robru: did you file the MIR bugs or update them? I could review those
[15:05] <bdmurray> robru: was there any discussion about stable releases?
[15:05] <robru> bdmurray: stable releases still not being emailed as far as I know. do you want that?
[15:06] <robru> cyphermox: yeah I think mterry is on top of those two MIRs, was just blocked trying to find a team bug subscriber, which is settled now
[15:06] <slangasek> no sil2100?
[15:06] <cyphermox> alrighty
[15:06] <slangasek> chiluk:
[15:06] <chiluk> * Been mostly working on quite a few ceph and ceph performance issues lately, so not much foundation-y stuff.
[15:06] <chiluk> * 2 half days PTO
[15:06] <chiluk> - done -
[15:06] <robru> cyphermox: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpsl/+bug/1668568 and https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libidn2-0/+bug/1668566 both "fix committed" not sure what else needs to happen to finish those off
[15:07] <cyphermox> aye aye
[15:07] <cyphermox> fix committed means it's approved, just needs magic AA powers to complete
[15:08] <slangasek> rbalint: welcome :)
[15:08] <slangasek> rbalint: your turn, if you have anything
[15:08] <rbalint> * entered the foundation team just earlier this week (Hello, Everyone! :-))
[15:08] <rbalint> * triaged nama's ftbfs looks like to be caused by perl bug https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839218
[15:08] <rbalint> * pushed forward boost1.62 transition providing patches for the last 3 packages to transition http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/boost1.62.html
[15:08] <rbalint> seems I should copy one by one :-)
[15:08] <slangasek> robru, bdmurray: I guess the mail policy for stable releases needs to be different, since a one-day delay in migrating isn't "stuck"
[15:09] <tdaitx> rbalint, hi there! welcome =)
[15:09] <bdmurray> I think Laney might have said everything in -proposed for stable would appear stuck.
[15:09] <slangasek> rbalint: oh oops, I removed nama from zesty-proposed because I had assumed that was a bug in nama rather than perl; should I un-delete it?
[15:10] <Laney> hi
[15:10] <rbalint> slangasek: i think it can be readed
[15:10] <cyphermox> slangasek: needs fixing in Debian first, no need to undelete it, I'd say
[15:10] <cyphermox> oh?
[15:10] <slangasek> cyphermox: according to rbalint the bug is perl rather than nama
[15:10] <cyphermox> well, yeah, but in the meantime it's still broken
[15:10] <rbalint> it can be fixed in perl or nama by a workaround
[15:10] <cyphermox> oh, I didn't remember that
[15:11] <rbalint> cyphermox: it just came up today
[15:11] <cyphermox> rbalint: do you have the workaround ready? we could land that and unblock it once re-added?
[15:11] <slangasek> cyphermox: yes, but once perl is fixed we still won't have a nama package in the archive unless the Debian maintainer happens to upload a new one
[15:11] <slangasek>  * systemd SRU (LP: #1673860, LP: #1647031, LP: #1651518).
[15:11] <slangasek>  * ordered more memory for laptop, so I can run a web browser
[15:11] <slangasek>  * discussions around signed custom kernels for ubuntu-core
[15:11] <slangasek>  * debugging of k8s testsuite failures in GCE
[15:11] <slangasek>  * worked on shim-signed, which we've just gotten our first signed binary through the new community process (https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/47438.html)
[15:11] <slangasek>  * proposed-migration un-sticking work
[15:11] <slangasek>   * have requested more email reminders about stuck packages
[15:11] <slangasek>  * miscellaneous ppc64el triage and uploads
[15:11] <slangasek> (done)
[15:11] <cyphermox> - multipath-tools fix for missing dm-queue-length + SRUs
[15:11] <cyphermox> - multipath-tools path-selector change
[15:11] <cyphermox> - merge slideshow update for mascot
[15:11] <cyphermox> - more slideshow merges to complete for 17.04 updates
[15:12] <cyphermox> - shim testing and grub2 changes for shim SRUs.
[15:12] <cyphermox> - subiquity livefs fixes
[15:12] <cyphermox> - netplan cloned mac support / convincing systemd-networkd to properly apply .li
[15:12] <cyphermox> nk file changes
[15:12] <cyphermox> - "mentoring" rbalint on +1 maintenance
[15:12] <cyphermox> (done)
[15:12] <bdmurray> cyphermox: why the quotes?
[15:12] <cyphermox> wtf, vi
[15:12] <bdmurray> had apport updated in staging / production Error Tracker
[15:12] <bdmurray> looked for and found other crashes which make gdb sad
[15:12] <bdmurray> reported snappy bug (LP: #1674847) regarding manifest files
[15:12] <bdmurray> fixed snap of apport so that hooks get run, logging works
[15:12] <cyphermox> bdmurray: because the force is strong with rbalint.
[15:13] <bdmurray> confirmed apport snap catches cores of other snaps
[15:13] <bdmurray> created an ubuntu-core general hook for apport snap
[15:13] <bdmurray> modified ubuntu-core hook to capture dpkg.list file, "snap --version"
[15:13] <bdmurray> modified ubuntu-core hook to not complain about free space
[15:13] <rbalint> cyphermox: :-)
[15:13] <bdmurray> uploaded SRUs of update-notifier / update-manager for LP: #1654008
[15:13] <bdmurray> improved test case for LP: #1623856, uploaded aptdaemon Y SRU
[15:13] <bdmurray> troubleshoot of my upgrade to Yakkety
[15:13] <bdmurray> ✔ done
[15:13] <cyphermox> (it's weird to say that when I've never watched any star wars)
[15:13] <caribou> Bugfix:
[15:13] <caribou>   LP #1654600 : unattended-upgrades breaks shutdown when /var is FS
[15:13] <caribou>   - Created DEP8 tests for new systemd fix
[15:13] <caribou>   - Needs review before upload
[15:14] <caribou>   LP: #1342580 : tftp does not start
[15:14] <caribou>   - Applied SRU version break suggestion & re-uploaded
[15:14] <caribou>   Sponsored  LP: #1566508 & rolled back
[15:14] <caribou>   Sponsored LP: #1590799
[15:14] <caribou>   Reviewed LP: #1645324 for sponsoring & provided comments
[15:14] <caribou>  Need AA magic on releasing tomsfastmath into Main following MIR completion
[15:14] <caribou>  - LP: #1619239
[15:14] <caribou>  - Will unblock clamav from zesty-proposed
[15:14] <caribou> Meetings
[15:14] <caribou>  ☑ Done
[15:14] <tdaitx> cyphermox, didn't you meant to say "it's weird that I've never watched any star wars"?
[15:15] <cyphermox> not really no
[15:15] <bdmurray> cyphermox: is that some kind of choice?
[15:15] <cyphermox> I litterally didn't have to do anythign
[15:16] <cyphermox> don't know, it never came up, I was never interested, I've got plenty with Trek
[15:16] <cyphermox> cue holy war: Star Trek vs. Star Wars.
[15:16] <bdmurray> xnox is still on holiday right?
[15:16] <gaughen> bdmurray, yes
[15:17] <cyphermox> are we at AOB now then?
[15:18] <bdmurray> I thought there was somebody after xnox
[15:18] <slangasek> it was mwhudson next
[15:18] <slangasek> and he gets a pass
[15:18] <slangasek> because he's so far off the edge of the world I don't even know how to look up his TZ
[15:18] <slangasek> any questions on status?
[15:19] <gaughen> not from me
[15:19] <bdmurray> No, but could we talk about emails for SRUs stuck in -proposed?
[15:19] <slangasek> [TOPIC] emails for SRUs stuck in -proposed
[15:19] <slangasek> ok let's talk :)
[15:20] <slangasek> but also http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/05/tourist-claims-detained-kazakhstan-officials-refused-believe/
[15:20] <rbalint> cyphermox: if you miss star wars :-) telnet towel.blinkenlights.nl
[15:20] <cyphermox> https://xkcd.com/1769/
[15:20] <bdmurray> Laney: You have an opinion on not sending emails right?
[15:21] <cyphermox> oh, IPv6 has extra bling
[15:22] <davmor2> cyphermox: it lies
[15:22] <davmor2> cyphermox: also like there is a war, firefly all the way ;)
[15:23] <bdmurray> Well he said things are expected to delayed in -proposed for some period of time.
[15:23] <slangasek> yes
[15:23] <slangasek> so emailing folks after a single day of a package in -proposed for an SRU would be annoying and not helpful
[15:23] <Laney> bdmurray: don't you already have tooling to mail people?
[15:23] <bdmurray> And that he thought > 10 days was common.
[15:23] <Laney> Anyway, two practical issues
[15:23] <slangasek> Laney: yes, but they only get emailed after 197 days or so
[15:23] <Laney>  - Need to make the delay configurable
[15:23] <cyphermox> there was a bit of discussion on the exact process for emailing yesterday in #u-release... robru?
[15:24] <cyphermox> ah, Laney's there.
[15:24] <slangasek> configurable by whom / how?
[15:24] <robru> Hmm?
[15:24] <bdmurray> Laney: it comments on the bugs purported to be fixed by the SRU if its in -proposed for > 90 days or so
[15:24] <Laney>  - Blocked packages, of which SRUs all are, won't trigger emails, so need to deal with that somehow
[15:24] <Laney> slangasek: in the britney.conf, so by b1
[15:24] <bdmurray> So it doesn't directly email the uploader
[15:24] <slangasek> Laney: ok, so configured per-suite, not per-package or per-uploader; fair
[15:24] <robru> We could make the threshold configurable in britney.conf, devel could be set to 3 days and stable could be set to 14 days or something
[15:25] <slangasek> robru: where did 3 days come from?
[15:25] <slangasek> changing the configuration for devel isn't on the table here :)
[15:25] <Laney> run
[15:25] <slangasek> Laney: ?
[15:26] <robru> slangasek: i decreased devel from 1 to 3 days because Laney wouldn't merge it with such a short repetition frequency
[15:26] <bdmurray> maybe its not a change slangasek and it's already 3 days!
[15:26] <slangasek> robru: but the first mail still comes out after 1 day?
[15:27] <robru> slangasek: no, the current email schedule for devel is day 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, 78, 108...
[15:27] <slangasek> robru: ok, that wasn't what we discussed, please change it back to sending the first mail at 1 day and *I'll* merge it
[15:27] <robru> slangasek: should i just make it configurable?
[15:28] <slangasek> robru: that's orthogonal
[15:29] <robru> slangasek: but why would i submit one branch to change it from 3 to 1, and then submit a second branch that makes it configurable? I can just make it configurable and then that solves both problems
[15:30] <slangasek> robru: because we haven't defined what all is configurable, and I want the devel thing fixed today :)
[15:30] <robru> slangasek: i can have a configuration branch submitted today
[15:31] <slangasek> robru: that is not the same as having the configuration branch reviewed, agreed, and merged today
[15:32] <robru> slangasek: ok I'll submit a 1-day-mail branch after breakfast then
[15:32] <slangasek> robru: thanks
[15:32] <slangasek> as for SRUs
[15:32] <Laney> robru: I think you need to restore the 1 or 5 thing
[15:32] <robru> Sigh
[15:32] <slangasek> where have we gotten to?
[15:32] <Laney> if you're doing that
[15:32] <slangasek> 1-or-5?
[15:33] <Laney> 1 if excuse.is_valid else 5
[15:33] <Laney> or the other way around, I forget
[15:33] <robru> The other way
[15:33] <robru> I can't even remember why that existed
[15:34] <Laney> for things blocked at update_output.txt time, which need to be given more time
[15:34] <slangasek> ah
[15:34] <slangasek> seems fair
[15:34] <robru> Do those things really take more time? Isn't that just installability checks which would be known right away? Why does that take extra time?
[15:34] <slangasek> but I don't think we're converging on a plan for SRUs
[15:34] <Laney> you often have to sort out other packages
[15:35] <slangasek> so can we table this until after the meeting and take it up in #ubuntu-release?
[15:35] <infinity> It *can* take extra time, or it *might* be an indication of a bug.
[15:35] <Laney> it'll still be a bug in 5 days
[15:35] <slangasek> (US table, not UK table)
[15:35] <infinity> Failing in output checks doesn't necessarily mean a transition, it might be that you broke something. :P
[15:35] <Laney> ok, let's do that
[15:35] <slangasek> ok
[15:35] <slangasek> [TOPIC] AOB
[15:35] <slangasek> anything else?
[15:36] <rbalint> slangasek: i was about to ask about the libssl 1.0.2 transition for zeisty
[15:36] <infinity> When is our team pony coming?
[15:36] <slangasek> rbalint: we are not transitioning to 1.0.2 for zesty
[15:36] <rbalint> ok
[15:37] <infinity> We carry a delta specifically to prevent transitioning.
[15:38] <rbalint> there are some packages on http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/zesty/update_excuses.html which depend on 1.0.2
[15:38] <slangasek> rbalint: xnox had taken the lead on that, maybe send an email to the list to ask about plans for 17.10
[15:38] <slangasek> rbalint: transgui?
[15:38] <slangasek> that one's a mess and we don't need to spend time fixing it this cycle
[15:38] <cyphermox> yep transgui
[15:38] <rbalint> and a few others
[15:38] <slangasek> it should self-fix once we upgrade openssl
[15:39] <rbalint> but they don't seem to be important indeed
[15:39] <rbalint> i'm looking for important packages to fix on excuses list
[15:40] <slangasek> rbalint: hopefully most of the "important" ones aren't stuck there; but we still want to clean up -proposed as much as possible.  It's just that for a package that is synced from Debian and needs no changes to be eventually correct, no clean-up is really needed (transgui)
[15:41] <slangasek> anything else?
[15:41] <cyphermox> I suppose looking at main mainly might be good, but as you said, the cleanup in general is important
[15:43] <slangasek> #endmeeting
[15:43] <meetingology> Meeting ended Thu Mar 23 15:43:09 2017 UTC.
[15:43] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2017/ubuntu-meeting.2017-03-23-15.01.moin.txt
[15:43] <slangasek> thanks, all!
[15:43] <rbalint> i remember a page for debian's testing migration which ordered blocked packages by the number and importance of other packages waiting for it
[15:43] <rbalint> but I can't find it now