=== genii is now known as genii-core === not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy === mapreri_ is now known as mapreri === krisstern13 is now known as krisstern [15:29] good morning [15:30] hiho [15:30] #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status [15:30] Meeting started at 15:30:57 UTC. The chair is cpaelzer. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [15:30] ping for MIR team meeting: slyon sarnold jamespage didrocks (ddstreet doko) [15:31] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [15:31] o/ [15:32] I had 3 minutes to prepare this today, please speak up if I go too fast :-) [15:32] #topic Review of previous action items [15:32] none [15:32] #topic current component mismatches [15:32] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg [15:32] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg [15:32] I see four new cases there [15:32] some mentioned last week, but we missed jamespage who had a conflict at the time [15:33] first is pysqml2 -> responses/pytohn-response [15:33] that is openstack [15:33] we asked jamespage to have a look last week [15:33] see https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2021/ubuntu-meeting.2021-12-07-15.30.log.html#l-32 [15:33] jamespage: any update on that what we should expect (MIR requests, uploads to drop the dependencies, ...) ? [15:34] ... give jamespage some time to see the pings ... :-) [15:34] I investigated jeepney a bit, it switched to a new dh-python (using flint build system), that picks up the test-depends for some reason, that probably needs to be fixed in dh-python or flint. [15:34] yeah slyon jeepney was https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2021/ubuntu-meeting.2021-12-07-15.30.log.html#l-29 [15:35] slyon: can we consider this to be "with foundations" whatever the final resolution will be? [15:35] next is dnspython->python-requests-toolbelt [15:35] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-requests-toolbelt/+bug/1751093 [15:35] Launchpad bug 1751093 in python-requests-toolbelt (Ubuntu) "[MIR] python-requests-toolbelt" [Undecided, Fix Released] [15:35] Yes.. I guess, as jeepney is a foundations package and is the culprit here :) [15:36] ok slyon [15:36] that toolbelt has an agreed MIR from the past [15:36] but the package that needs it now is dnspython (=foundations) [15:36] this might be a "no new process, but a new owner" case to be discussed between Openstack and Foundations [15:37] but we will need jamespage to be around and discuss that [15:37] :-/ [15:37] ack [15:37] ok, just heard jamespage is unavailable again :-/ [15:37] this has to wait for january then [15:37] finally suitesparse [15:38] I'm a bit surprised that's in main [15:38] which sone sarnold, suitesparse ? [15:38] depending on some suitesparece-graphblas now [15:38] didrocks isn't around and it is a desktop package [15:39] I feel the end of year phase might already have begun :-/ [15:39] o/ [15:39] hi jamespage [15:39] sorry I'm a little late [15:39] np, can you give the backscroll a look for the caes we highlighted you pelase? [15:39] we'll give you some time to read and answer to those ... [15:40] yeah, I'm skimming through the reverse-depends src:suitesparse, and it all looks like more math packages, hehe [15:41] sarnold: it is libreoffice -> lp-solve -> suitesparse [15:41] cpaelzer: aha! [15:41] pysaml2 - I have an update prepared for that to drop responses (test dependency) and repoze.who (optional runtime dep) to avoid main inclusion [15:42] ok on pysaml2 then [15:42] how about python-requests-toolbelts jamespage [15:42] could we just re-promote this as-is or do you want/need to re-discuss ownership of it with foundations? [15:45] hello ... ? :-) [15:45] yep - looking [15:46] ok, in that case I can wait [15:46] re-promote after a quick hygene check on it [15:46] I'll double check it [15:46] slyon: would you be ok to do the re-check before promotion then? [15:46] oh [15:46] even better jamespage [15:47] thanks jamespage! [15:47] updated https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-requests-toolbelt/+bug/1751093 accordingly [15:48] Launchpad bug 1751093 in python-requests-toolbelt (Ubuntu) "[MIR] python-requests-toolbelt" [Undecided, Fix Released] [15:48] #topic New MIRs [15:48] #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 [15:48] two real new cases [15:48] and one almost done dh-elpa [15:48] let us start on that one [15:48] the upload resolved the open TODOs right slyon ? [15:48] and Desktop agreed to own it [15:48] exactly. And I coordinated with ~desktop that they are taking ownership [15:49] "new" state suggests a review, but I think we do not need another one [15:49] slyon: you can ask Desktop to now really subscribe [15:49] Yeah I didn't want to self-ACK this [15:49] slyon: any once done get in touch with an AA to promote it [15:49] okay, will do. [15:49] I see, I ahve taken a look and will give the ack [15:50] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dh-elpa/+bug/1951066/comments/7 [15:50] Launchpad bug 1951066 in dh-elpa (Ubuntu) "[MIR] dh-elpa" [Undecided, New] [15:50] real new cases [15:50] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libio-interactive-perl/+bug/1951067 [15:50] Launchpad bug 1951067 in libio-interactive-perl (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libio-interactive-perl" [Undecided, New] [15:50] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glusterfs/+bug/1950321 [15:50] Launchpad bug 1950321 in glusterfs (Ubuntu) "[MIR] glusterfs" [Undecided, New] [15:50] glusterfs is ours and libiop is slyon [15:51] my suggestion would be: 1. sarnold does a security review 2. slyon reviews glusterfs 3. I review libio (to avoid self-acks) [15:51] so shall we review each other's? [15:51] sounds good [15:52] so we keep sarnold off MIR reviews but trading for getting security reviews to happen which is a regular topic I nudge him and now also his team :-) [15:52] :) [15:52] consider it my christmas present from you sarnold [15:52] lol [15:52] slyon: I assigned the other two to us [15:52] ack [15:53] anyway I'll stop bashing on security-reviews while OTOH I also can not overstate how much many teams are dependent on getting them soon'ish [15:53] #topic Incomplete bugs / questions [15:53] #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 [15:54] last updates int he last 7 days [15:54] raqm between slyon and didrocks [15:54] now on waveform to enhance the package to be ready [15:54] hm, dave put some reasons why the enhancement might not be needed [15:55] hmm, I need to read it mor thoroughly then ... [15:55] indeed [15:56] it is re-assigned to didrocks to have a look again [15:56] but it might be january until that happens [15:56] the other incomplete is ledmon which I re-reviewed today [15:56] thanks for that cpaelzer! [15:56] this case is a victim of the evolution of our MIR process [15:57] I reviewed it 3 years back and found a few issues, it took a lot of time and recently found founations as owner [15:57] but after all the time I did a re-review [15:57] and todays rules and tests found more [15:57] so I beg your pardon sil2100 as this is back on you / your team to resolve [15:57] but once done it can be promoted, no extra round through security review for that one [15:57] that is it in this list [15:58] #topic Any other business? [15:58] nothing [15:58] this is my last tuesday of the year [15:58] I already said that I started to request more time from security for these reviews, but it seems everone wants more time from them :-/ [15:59] I'd ask every team waiting to regularly kindly nidge them to make it clear how dependent we are on it [15:59] so very true :( [15:59] now to a better topic [15:59] as sarnold said, this likely is the last tuesday for many [15:59] indeed [15:59] until probably the 4th of January 2022 [15:59] doko is the meeting owner, only he can do group-cancel [16:00] will enough change between then and now to justify a meeting on the 4th? [16:00] but I'd say we all skip the next two (21st & 27th december) and meet again in January [16:00] sarnold: yes there will be things changing [16:01] there will be a lot of activity by hobby debian maintainers over this phase (usually there is) which triggers plenty of good and odd auto-syncs [16:01] okay, cool. 7:30 am as my first welcome back to work is a bit much, it'd be nice if there's at least a reason for it and not a quickie "looks like nothing changed" :) hehe [16:01] that will be seen in proposed and needs someone to handle them [16:01] oh, makes sense [16:01] and I need to remind you right when your year starts that we are all blocked on security reviews [16:01] :-P [16:01] I need to get to the next meeting [16:02] So see you all in January! [16:02] yeah, see you [16:02] I've got something peniciled in for right after the viewing of "Dinner For One" [16:02] thank you all for a great year [16:02] #endmeeting [16:02] Meeting ended at 16:02:32 UTC. Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2021/ubuntu-meeting.2021-12-14-15.30.moin.txt [16:02] thanks cpaelzer, all, :) [16:02] o [16:02] o/ === genii-core is now known as genii === bdmurray_ is now known as bdmurray