[13:46] <cpaelzer> preping for doko cyphermox didrocks jamespage and jdstrand
[13:46] <cpaelzer> since most of us missed the meeting last few times and today we have something to discuss  (plus being in the week were daylight savings disagree) I thought it is worth to pre-ping :-)
[13:51] <didrocks> cpaelzer: ahah, almost :)
[13:52] <cpaelzer> :-)
[14:00] <cpaelzer> but now ...
[14:00] <didrocks> should be now
[14:01] <cpaelzer> I'm actually fine if no one has objections on the email that I sent about the many mailman3 triggered MIRs
[14:01] <cpaelzer> but doko correctly mentioned that it feels odd that the same person files and acks them
[14:01] <cpaelzer> so we wanted to discuss how to handle at least some of these
[14:01] <cpaelzer> lets give everyone some time to show up
[14:03] <cyphermox> tbh I'd prefer if you just wrote whatever you want to write, so I can pay attention but we don't need to block on anyone
[14:03] <cpaelzer> cyphermox: well I wrote what I wanted to write (in the mail on Friday)
[14:04] <cpaelzer> and I summarized above what doko wanted to discuss
[14:05] <cpaelzer> my initial approach was: I will handle all the more trivial MIRs that I opened, and for the more complex cases (or those that I think a Nack is needed or likely) I'd pull one of you in
[14:05] <cpaelzer> as mentioned doko said this morning to me that it feels odd that the same guy opens and Acks them
[14:05] <cpaelzer> that is it, opinions about this?
[14:05] <cyphermox> if it's a trivial thing; no
[14:06] <cyphermox> if it feels like there might be contention, then I suppose yeah asking for help is a good plan
[14:06] <didrocks> yeah, I always refused to be the person NEWing new packages I upload or ACKing MIR I filed
[14:07] <didrocks> it's a little bit like a peer review, never a bad thing to have another person keeping you honest :)
[14:07]  * doko is late 
[14:07] <cpaelzer> well I'm not NEWing the packages they are in Debian/Ubuntu for quite a while, I'm just driving the MIR bugs as requestor and first level reviewer
[14:07] <cpaelzer> and I already spread the creation of the MIR requests in our team
[14:08] <cpaelzer> Here is a list of all the involved packages and MIR bugs https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-server/+git/mailman3-MIR-party/tree/package-list.txt
[14:08] <cpaelzer> I'm trying to make the biggest problems to go away by cutting the dependency to e.g. nodejs and ruby bits
[14:08] <cpaelzer> therefore those have no bugs assigned to the Team yet
[14:09] <doko> right, but in the past, the MIR bug submitter was the same as the MIR author
[14:09] <didrocks> sounds like a MIR list similar the old unity time ;)
[14:09] <cpaelzer> yeah didrocks, might be
[14:09] <cpaelzer> a bit smaller thou I guess
[14:09] <didrocks> cpaelzer: I can only sympathize :)
[14:10] <cpaelzer> so how about letting me doing the first run on all of these - and next week same time we can dirstibute the more interesting cases that are left in the Team
[14:10] <didrocks> sounds good to me
[14:11] <cpaelzer> this would keep the majority of blunt processing from you, but get your opinions and insights on the cases where it is needed
[14:11] <cpaelzer> unless you distrust me that I silently bypass something
[14:11] <cpaelzer> in that case I'm very happy to -not- do all those reviews :-)
[14:12] <doko> I can certainly help with stuff
[14:12] <cyphermox> cpaelzer: the only thing that jumps out to me is nose
[14:12] <cyphermox> it was previously in main
[14:12] <cyphermox> I'd be for not dropping the dep; avoiding delta, and just putting it back in main.
[14:12] <doko> are the S tags complete?
[14:13] <doko> we should get these done first
[14:13] <cpaelzer> cyphermox: I'm ok with handling nose that way - thanks
[14:13] <cpaelzer> doko: the S tags got on the security Teams list just today
[14:13] <cpaelzer> more S tagged packages will come
[14:13] <cyphermox> ah, and one more thing; how about we decide right now if it's mailman3 or mailman3 + hyperkitty, whatever that is?
[14:14] <cpaelzer> it is all of them mailman3-full is the package starting the dependency tree
[14:14] <cpaelzer> we discussed that in the Team upfront and later in Malta
[14:14] <cyphermox> ah ok
[14:15] <cpaelzer> the problem is that only core (tag C) or core+archive (tags C+H) is not what people would want to use
[14:15] <cpaelzer> you want a ML with frontent or you don't want a mailing list at all
[14:15] <cpaelzer> not promoting all of mailman3-full was just one of the options we evaluated in the past
[14:16] <cpaelzer> thanks for the hint on nose cyphermox - I'll give that a check later on
[14:16] <cyphermox> well, it depends what the server team feels comfortable supporting I guess
[14:16] <cpaelzer> but it is nose(1) not nose2 - was that in main as well?
[14:17] <cyphermox> src:nose is what I looked up in rmadison
[14:18] <cpaelzer> yeah that is the right one
[14:18] <cpaelzer> thanks
[14:19] <cpaelzer> I'l do the paperwork and updates in regard to that
[14:19] <cpaelzer> and as I said, I hope that next week by that time the list is down to those that I need your help on anyway
[14:19] <cpaelzer> ok it seems that works for everyone then
[14:19] <cpaelzer> doko: are you ok with distributing only those among the team next week then?
[14:26] <cpaelzer> doko: can we take no answer as a yes and conclude until next weeks meeting?
[14:27]  * cpaelzer thinks doko is busy building two more glibc updates for Disco
[14:34] <doko> cpaelzer: sorry, phone call. yes, sounds fine
[14:34] <cpaelzer> ok, thanks
[20:43] <donofrio> dang missed the metting wanted to know how do I get inxi to be inxi 3.0.32-00 (2019-02-07) to be included with 19.04?
[21:07] <sarnold> donofrio: what's different between 3.0.32-00 and the 3.0.31-1-1 that's packaged? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/inxi/3.0.32-1-1