[15:30] <cpaelzer> hi
[15:30] <slyon> \o
[15:30] <cpaelzer> #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status
[15:30] <meetingology> Meeting started at 15:30:29 UTC.  The chair is cpaelzer.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[15:30] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[15:30] <cpaelzer> slyon: didrocks: jamespage: sarnold: (doko ddstreet) - MIR Team meeting
[15:30] <didrocks> hey
[15:31] <sarnold> good morning
[15:31] <cpaelzer> #topic Review of previous action items
[15:31] <cpaelzer> I had one to inform ubuntu-devel about the new MIR templates
[15:31] <cpaelzer> that is done
[15:31] <sarnold> \o/
[15:31] <cpaelzer> AFAICS there was no negative feedback
[15:31] <cpaelzer> #topic current component mismatches
[15:31] <cpaelzer> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg
[15:31] <cpaelzer> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg
[15:32] <cpaelzer> libsdl2 -> libdecode-0 -> Server
[15:32] <cpaelzer> haproxy -> opentracing-c-wrapper / opentracing-cpp -> Server as well
[15:32] <cpaelzer> *sigh* - I'll have someone look after those
[15:32] <cpaelzer> the regular gifts of auto-syncing :-)
[15:32] <didrocks> sounds "fun"
[15:32] <cpaelzer> python-cliff -> pathon-autopage - that was jamespage last week, still no bug - any reasons?
[15:32] <cpaelzer> rather python-autopage
[15:32] <jamespage> should be
[15:32] <cpaelzer> if there is a bug it misses something to be detected as MIR bug
[15:32] <jamespage> I think icey completed the bug for me but I've been off work until today - I'll dobule check
[15:33] <cpaelzer> ok
[15:33] <cpaelzer> cache -> hiredis -> Foundations ?
[15:33] <cpaelzer> slyon: another one for you to distribute the hadnling in the team?
[15:33] <jamespage> (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-autopage/+bug/1951129)
[15:33] <jamespage> missed sub
[15:33] <slyon> cpaelzer: yeah.. there is currently some discussion about demoting ccache inside foundations
[15:33] <sarnold> the other day mwhudson asked why ccache is in main in the first place.. it's something from the mists (or midsts?) of time..
[15:34] <cpaelzer> as long as it is handled it is fine, thanks slyon
[15:34] <cpaelzer> thanks jamespage - let us stare at it why it wasn't detected as such
[15:34] <cpaelzer> oh it is still assigned to you
[15:34] <cpaelzer> jamespage: if this is ready for review let us know
[15:34] <cpaelzer> we then have to look for a reviewer here
[15:35] <jamespage> I'll pick it up if that's OK
[15:35] <cpaelzer> ok for me
[15:35] <cpaelzer> assigned
[15:35] <cpaelzer> #topic New MIRs
[15:35] <cpaelzer> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/?field.searchtext=&orderby=-date_last_updated&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&assignee_option=none&field.assignee=&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir
[15:36] <cpaelzer> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/raqm/+bug/1951069 is ready for review now
[15:36] <cpaelzer> that was one of those slyon took to the foundations team
[15:36] <cpaelzer> looking at who got how much today so far, maybe didrocks you could take a look at reviewing that one?
[15:36] <didrocks> sure, will do
[15:36] <cpaelzer> thanks
[15:36] <slyon> thanks!
[15:37] <cpaelzer> #topic Incomplete bugs / questions
[15:37] <cpaelzer> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/?field.searchtext=&orderby=-date_last_updated&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir
[15:37] <cpaelzer> nothing of this week in there
[15:37] <cpaelzer> #topic Any other business?
[15:37] <cpaelzer> I know of two topics
[15:37] <slyon> ahh wait
[15:37] <cpaelzer> onw is wireguard
[15:37] <cpaelzer> one
[15:37] <cpaelzer> and one is the next step for the rust rules
[15:37] <slyon> There is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireguard/+bug/1950317
[15:37] <cpaelzer> ok, that is one of those I listed
[15:38] <slyon> ack. I'd like to get a 2nd opinion from you folks, about duplication of wireguard-tools vs netplan.io+systemd-networkd
[15:38] <cpaelzer> slyon: wanted to reject it for duplication, but there was plenty of feedback to say no we need this
[15:38] <cpaelzer> I'm biased as the requesting team, but if I'd count I'd say yes we should probably have it
[15:38] <cpaelzer> after all we also have openvpn + strongswan
[15:39]  * didrocks opens the bug, but unsure I know enough of the difference in real/advanced use
[15:39] <cpaelzer> there also is an important use case which we are checking right now if that could work with "just netplan" or of the wg tool is needed for that
[15:39] <cpaelzer> since slyon and I are part of the current discussion we are looking for opinions on this by didrocks jamespage and sarnold
[15:40] <slyon> I've also had a heated discussion with WG upstream about this today. and he was pushing very hard for it to be included in main..
[15:40] <didrocks> would formulating something on the bug itself for next week would be quick enough?
[15:40] <cpaelzer> slyon: in a reasonable way (with the heat aside, were there good arguments as well) ?
[15:41] <slyon> yes the primary argument on the pro side is about wireguard key generation
[15:41] <cpaelzer> didrocks: I think giving it some time is ok if you need to read into it
[15:41] <sarnold> on my focal system I see 'wg' is packaged in wireguard-tools, and dman wg shows 'The wg utility provides a series of  sub-commands  for changing WireGuard-specific aspects of WireGuard interfaces.' and the subcommands show a bunch of stuff for generating and adding keys
[15:41] <slyon> the "wg" tools can generated the required tools, whereas netplan+networkd cannot
[15:41] <cpaelzer> we will also deliver that info from the further use case
[15:41] <sarnold> re heated discussion, I think it's impossible to have any other sort with the upstream..
[15:41] <didrocks> I only know about the WG UI part, so no opinion on the -tool for now
[15:41] <cpaelzer> slyon: would you summarize the outcome of that upstream discussion leading to a +1 from their side as well
[15:42] <cpaelzer> we didn't plan to do any UI work, just the toolsets
[15:42] <slyon> well it was less a discussion and more of upstream accusing Ubuntu of only supporting netplan because of NIH
[15:42] <sarnold> there we go
[15:42] <cpaelzer> taking the heat and NIH accusation out of it there is the argument of key generation
[15:42] <cpaelzer> which you have already mentioned IIRC
[15:42] <slyon> exactly
[15:43] <slyon> and with the comments made on the LP bug, I'm leaning towards doing the full MIR review and trying to get it accepted for that reason
[15:43] <sarnold> my inclination is to include wireguard-tools in the MIR
[15:44] <cpaelzer> sarnold: that is from the same source, you mean to ensure they are promoted as well?=
[15:44] <cpaelzer> slyon: I'm leaning towards "+1 and full review" as well by now
[15:44] <sarnold> cpaelzer: yeah.. sigh it's a bit early here :)
[15:44] <cpaelzer> np
[15:44] <cpaelzer> slyon: maybe give everyone a day to read&comment - and if there are no tremendous changes do a full review then?
[15:44] <slyon> sounds good!
[15:44] <cpaelzer> ok
[15:45] <cpaelzer> -- context switch --
[15:45] <cpaelzer> the rust rules
[15:45] <cpaelzer> Our discussion kind of settled in https://github.com/cpaelzer/ubuntu-mir/pull/3
[15:45] <cpaelzer> Next I'd present that that to a few key people and Team managers, just to ensure everyone had a saying in this
[15:46] <cpaelzer> is that ok to all of you or does someone say "wait I had no chance to review it yet"
[15:46] <cpaelzer> or "... is still totally missing here
[15:46] <slyon> that's a good approach, IMO! I already pulled in schopin, but tried not to publish this PR too much outside of MIR otherwise
[15:47] <didrocks> yeah, I have made my comments on it, but didn’t rereview it
[15:47] <didrocks> will do it this week (hard because we are in sprinting in Paris, but I will try as much as possible)
[15:47] <cpaelzer> I'll try to CC you all on that mail that I'm sending
[15:47] <cpaelzer> that concludes all open items I had
[15:47] <cpaelzer> anything else from you?
[15:48] <didrocks> nothing for me
[15:48] <slyon> nothing here
[15:48] <sarnold> mmm I remember a few good restaurants in paris..
[15:48] <didrocks> :)
[15:49] <sarnold> we covered a lot more ground inthat pull than I remembered. good job us. :)
[15:49] <sarnold> nothing from me
[15:49] <cpaelzer> ok, closing then - thank you all!
[15:49] <didrocks> Thanks!
[15:49] <sarnold> thanks cpaelzer, all :)
[15:49] <slyon> thanks! o/
[15:49] <cpaelzer> #endmeeting
[15:49] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 15:49:23 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2021/ubuntu-meeting.2021-11-23-15.30.moin.txt
[20:00] <sil2100> o/
[20:01] <rbasak> o/
[20:02] <rbasak> mdeslaur, vorlon: around?
[20:02] <mdeslaur> o/
[20:02] <rbasak> \o/
[20:03] <rbasak> sil2100: are you able to chair please?
[20:03] <sil2100> Oh my, it's my turn? I will need a moment
[20:06] <sil2100> #startmeeting Technical Board Meeting
[20:06] <meetingology> Meeting started at 20:06:47 UTC.  The chair is sil2100.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[20:06] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[20:07] <sil2100> #topic Apologies
[20:07] <sil2100> I think there were none this time o/
[20:08] <sil2100> #topic Action review
[20:10] <sil2100> Okay, I think all actions might still be in progress. I must say that I'm a bit embarrassed of myself, as I indeed have some action items that I did not yet move forward - especially discussion regarding third party repositories...
[20:11] <rbasak> The pad is making good progress. It's mainly just pending sil2100 taking a look, if you could please. I'd like to understand if you agree with the general principle of the proposed requirements (some or all as you think) and then I can start trying to draft something more solid.
[20:12] <rbasak> This will probably take you some time and isn't worth doing in the middle of the meeting.
[20:12] <sil2100> I will do that now in that case, straight after the meeting. I think I always was meant to read into it but get distracted
[20:12] <rbasak> Thanks!
[20:12] <sil2100> Apologies, eh
[20:12] <sil2100> Hopefully I'll unblock everyone today
[20:12] <sil2100> Okay, moving on for now:
[20:12] <sil2100> #topic Mailing list items
[20:13] <sil2100> I'm looking, but I can't find anything - is it just me and bad e-mail filtering? Hope not
[20:13] <rbasak> mdeslaur: if it's OK with you, in response to your commment on line 6, I'm going to go ahead with my suggestion on line 8 - we'll find rough understanding first, then I'll try and refine it to which of your scenarios those proposed requirements would map to. I suspect we won't struggle to reach agreement there.
[20:14] <rbasak> Sorry I got ahead of myself there.
[20:14] <rbasak> :
[20:14] <rbasak> I don't see any ML traffic awaiting a response.
[20:14] <mdeslaur> one sec, let me pull it up
[20:14] <sil2100> I'll move on with the meeting in the meantime and we can discuss further in the AOB section o/
[20:15] <sil2100> #topic Community bugs
[20:15] <sil2100> ...none!
[20:15] <mdeslaur> rbasak: yeah, that makes sense
[20:15] <sil2100> #topic Chair for next meeting:
[20:16] <sil2100> That would be cyphermox, but I'm not sure about the backup as I don't think this is going alphabetically anymore?
[20:17] <mdeslaur> I pull up the launchpad list and use that
[20:17] <mdeslaur> ie: https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members
[20:18] <mdeslaur> backup would be rbasak
[20:18] <sil2100> Let's use that indeed, but hm, cyphermox wasn't after me in this case, so I got confused!
[20:18] <sil2100> But let's make it rbasak as backup then
[20:18] <mdeslaur> I think I filled in which is why
[20:18]  * mdeslaur shrugs
[20:19] <sil2100> Ah, makes sense, possibly
[20:19] <sil2100> #topic AOB
[20:19] <rbasak> o/
[20:19] <rbasak> Just more questions on the pad please
[20:19] <sil2100> Anything else to discuss before I go dive into the etherpad?
[20:19] <rbasak> mdeslaur: line 30 - can I check I have the sense of your statement correct please?
[20:20] <mdeslaur> sure
[20:20] <rbasak> Are you saying that you're now thinking that we _shouldn't_ permit snaps to make feature breaking changes by default, or that we should?
[20:21] <mdeslaur> I think packaging is irrelevant to the discussion...either Ubuntu allows feature breaking changes, or it doesn't
[20:21] <mdeslaur> and I'm uneasy making that change as a tech board member without involving the Ubuntu community as a whole as it will change the very definition of what Ubuntu is
[20:21] <mdeslaur> I'm not sure I get to make that decision
[20:22] <rbasak> OK, so by "making that change" you mean changing from generally not allowing feature breaking changes to generally allowing feature breaking changes, right?
[20:22] <mdeslaur> yeah
[20:22] <rbasak> Got it. Thanks!
[20:22] <rbasak> FWIW, I agree with you.
[20:23] <rbasak> OK so once sil2100 is done, I think I'm good with the pad - thanks! I can try and write up a firmer draft from there.
[20:24] <mdeslaur> awesome
[20:25] <sil2100> huh, I can't type ' in etherpad, it just moves my cursor down when I do that
[20:26] <sil2100> #endmeeting
[20:26] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 20:26:19 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2021/ubuntu-meeting.2021-11-23-20.06.moin.txt
[20:26] <rbasak> Yeah I have that problem too :-/
[20:26] <rbasak> Thanks sil2100!
[20:27] <mdeslaur> thanks everyone!
[20:27] <sil2100> Thanks o/
[20:27] <sarnold> hah, it moves my cursor to the right..