[15:29] <slyon> o/
[15:29] <cpaelzer> o/
[15:29] <slyon> I'll only be passively attending today's MIR meeting, as I got dragged into a conflicting meeting
[15:29] <cpaelzer> I know how that is ...
[15:29]  * cpaelzer hugs slyon
[15:29] <cpaelzer> #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status
[15:29] <meetingology> Meeting started at 15:29:51 UTC.  The chair is cpaelzer.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[15:29] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[15:29] <cpaelzer> Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage eslerm
[15:30] <slyon> (but I think most foundations stuff should be covered, I left comments where needed)
[15:30] <eslerm> good morning o/
[15:30] <cpaelzer> hi, giving everyone a minute or two for everyone to see th eping
[15:30] <cpaelzer> hi eslerm and slyon
[15:30] <didrocks> hey
[15:31] <joalif> o/
[15:33] <cpaelzer> ok, let me get going ...
[15:33] <cpaelzer> #topic current component mismatches
[15:33] <cpaelzer> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[15:33] <cpaelzer> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg
[15:33] <cpaelzer> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg
[15:33] <cpaelzer> we are past FF, so hopefully that is the last huge list
[15:34] <cpaelzer> inetutils is a false positive ont he bug of slyon that tracks those
[15:34] <cpaelzer> but since it was gone and shows up again, I wonder if we can do something about it
[15:34] <cpaelzer> or if someone accidentially promoted something wrong
[15:35] <cpaelzer> perl tihngs are assigned already
[15:35] <slyon> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/inetutils/+bug/2008789
[15:35] <cpaelzer> uh slyon, in that csae let me remove it from bug 1980663
[15:35] <sarnold> good morning
[15:35] <eslerm> o/
[15:36] <cpaelzer> done
[15:36] <cpaelzer> now it will find the right bug
[15:36] <cpaelzer> interesting
[15:36] <cpaelzer> maybe sarnold or eslerm can clarify https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xdp-tools/+bug/2002103
[15:36] <eslerm> just a note, the component mismatches svg is difficult to read with color blindness (protanopia and deuteranopia)
[15:36] <cpaelzer> eslerm: patches welcome
[15:37] <cpaelzer> while you look into that - python-oslo has got bugs filed for their dependencies by jamespage and team - I guess those are under control
[15:37] <cpaelzer> python-yappi seems not yet covered there
[15:38] <didrocks> openstack dep?
[15:38] <cpaelzer> oh crap, I didn't see ndctl yet
[15:38] <cpaelzer> didrocks: yes yappi seems openstack (from python-oslo)
[15:38] <sarnold> cpaelzer: xdp-tools looks ready to migrate to main
[15:38] <cpaelzer> thanks sarnold
[15:40] <cpaelzer> I filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtracefs/+bug/2008799 for ndctl
[15:40] <sarnold> (obligatory thinking aloud that a tracking process like the kernel team sru workflow with entries for each step might be easier to read, eg https://bugs.launchpad.net/kernel-sru-workflow/+bug/1968954  :)
[15:41] <cpaelzer> indeed, worth a look
[15:41] <cpaelzer> could be complex though as this will transition differently per bug task
[15:41] <cpaelzer> if a case has multiple packages affected, they will be in different states
[15:43] <cpaelzer> I'll promote xdp-tools after the meeting
[15:43] <sarnold> man, inetutils .. that's a blast from the past. oof.
[15:43] <cpaelzer> indeed
[15:43] <cpaelzer> ok, all in mismatches have open cases now
[15:43] <cpaelzer> none forgotten
[15:43] <cpaelzer> next section of the meeting
[15:43] <cpaelzer> #topic New MIRs
[15:44] <cpaelzer> Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing
[15:44] <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
[15:44] <cpaelzer> oh wow
[15:44] <cpaelzer> 5
[15:44] <cpaelzer> I could take the perl ones
[15:44] <cpaelzer> they are usually rather mechanical, so I can better do them in between meetings
[15:44] <didrocks> I can take 1 or 2, but it will be for next pulse (already full for this one)
[15:44] <joalif> some are false positives i think
[15:44] <cpaelzer> looking for reviewers of nullboot and mini-iso-tools
[15:44] <sarnold> nullboot is likely in the wrong spot in the flowchart
[15:45] <cpaelzer> joalif: which ones do you tihnk are false positives?
[15:45] <joalif> nullboot
[15:46] <joalif> i had done the review of it
[15:46] <cpaelzer> oh yeah that just ended in an odd state
[15:46] <cpaelzer> it is acked
[15:46] <cpaelzer> and not in mismatches
[15:46] <didrocks> yes
[15:47] <cpaelzer> joalif: was yours an ack as well?
[15:47] <cpaelzer> reading ...
[15:47] <cpaelzer> yep
[15:47] <joalif> yes iirc
[15:47] <joalif> was waiting for sec review
[15:47] <cpaelzer> thanks, status updated
[15:48] <didrocks> (it would have been good to have an update on the recommended todo though)
[15:48] <eslerm> nullboot has security's ack
[15:48] <cpaelzer> ack didrocks, I asked for it
[15:49] <cpaelzer> ok in that case mini-iso-tools to grab
[15:49] <didrocks> if this can wait early next pulse, I’m happy to grab it
[15:49] <cpaelzer> maybe license-perl at lower urgency for didrocks then?
[15:49] <cpaelzer> those are usually not as pushy
[15:49] <didrocks> as you prefer :)
[15:50] <cpaelzer> hehe
[15:50] <cpaelzer> joalif: would you be up to have a look at the mini-iso-tools ?
[15:50] <joalif> sure
[15:50] <cpaelzer> thanks
[15:50] <cpaelzer> thereby all new cases are assigned
[15:50] <cpaelzer> #topic Incomplete bugs / questions
[15:50] <cpaelzer> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[15:50] <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
[15:51] <cpaelzer> inetutils isn't ready yet
[15:51] <cpaelzer> bug 2003549 waits for an FFE approval
[15:51] <cpaelzer> other than that is mostly ready as prepared by athos
[15:52] <cpaelzer> bug 2004516 waits on things and was assigned someone to work on (no action from us)
[15:52] <cpaelzer> bug 1997560 also went back and is now assigne to desktop to resolve
[15:52] <cpaelzer> and 2003272 is back on till
[15:52] <cpaelzer> ok all in incomplete have an owner
[15:53] <cpaelzer> good for now I'd think
[15:53] <cpaelzer> #topic MIR related Security Review Queue
[15:53] <cpaelzer> Mission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable?
[15:53] <cpaelzer> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-security/+bugs?field.searchtext=%5BMIR%5D&assignee_option=choose&field.assignee=ubuntu-security&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir
[15:53] <cpaelzer> Internal link
[15:53] <cpaelzer> - ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect
[15:53] <cpaelzer> - ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much
[15:53] <cpaelzer> #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594
[15:53] <cpaelzer> thank you @ extended security team for all the completions recently
[15:53] <cpaelzer> from my teams POV puma is the only one not yet assigned but rather urgent
[15:54] <cpaelzer> I see the face of alexm on the ticket
[15:54] <cpaelzer> but not "in progress"
[15:54] <cpaelzer> does this fit together sarnold eslerm ?
[15:54] <eslerm> I'm working on pcs this week and puma is assigned, should be complete with time to FFe
[15:54] <eslerm> if puma needs extra help I can assist
[15:55] <cpaelzer> puma - as you know - is the last bit of a big change
[15:55] <cpaelzer> hence we'd appreaciate to not come uin much later
[15:55] <cpaelzer> since we will make pacemaker switch crmsh -> pcsd
[15:55] <sarnold> aye, unfortunately amurray is also our primary snapd contact, another high-priority and high-importance demand on our resources; it might make sense to ask eslerm to pick it up if amurray hasn't started yet
[15:55] <cpaelzer> not rushing you but like until today in a week as the latest ?
[15:55] <cpaelzer> ok
[15:56] <sarnold> we can discuss with amurray when his day starts
[15:56] <cpaelzer> you can internally check if there has been progress made, I'd not want to be the reason to step on each others toes
[15:56] <cpaelzer> thanks sarnold
[15:56] <cpaelzer> btw I had to smile on "with time to FFe" eslerm, as that would be -5 back in time from now on
[15:56] <sarnold> yeah :/ trying to fast-context-switch stuff in progress is definintely an exhausting step :)
[15:56] <cpaelzer> indeed
[15:57] <cpaelzer> but time is almost up and the rest looks good
[15:57] <cpaelzer> #topic Any other business?
[15:57] <cpaelzer> not from me
[15:57] <eslerm> should be doable to take puma, but need to run past my workload with aburrage
[15:57] <didrocks> nothing from me
[15:57] <sarnold> heh, aburrage is out all this week. :/ anyway, I'll talk with amurray in a few hours
[15:57] <joalif> nothing
[15:57] <sarnold> nothing from me
[15:57] <eslerm> none from me
[15:58] <cpaelzer> being out means he won't say no :-)
[15:58] <cpaelzer> thank you all!
[15:58] <cpaelzer> #endmeeting
[15:58] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 15:58:13 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-02-28-15.29.moin.txt
[15:58] <sarnold> lol :D
[15:58] <sarnold> thanks cpaelzer, all :)
[15:58] <eslerm> thanks cpaelzer, bye all o/
[15:58] <joalif> thanks cpaelzer, all :)
[19:57]  * vorlon waves
[19:57] <rbasak> o/
[19:58] <amurray> o/
[19:58] <sil2100> o/
[19:59]  * sil2100 semi-present as he is sick and therefore probably not too helpful
[20:00] <rbasak> #startmeeting Technical Board
[20:00] <meetingology> Meeting started at 20:00:59 UTC.  The chair is rbasak.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[20:01] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[20:01] <rbasak> #topic Action review
[20:01] <rbasak> ACTION: amurray to propose amended Ubuntu Backporters Team Charter
[20:02] <amurray> I am still waiting to hear back from the backports team on this - they essentially rejected my proposal so I tried to explain more about it to see if I could get them on board - but still waiting
[20:02] <rbasak> OK, thanks!
[20:02] <rbasak> ACTION: seb128 to help draft an exception to the "must build on all architectures" requirement for snaps
[20:02] <vorlon> do they have a deadline for feedback?
[20:02] <amurray> no - that is a good point- I'll follow up on it again today
[20:03] <vorlon> seb128 not here, so punt?
[20:03] <rbasak> ack
[20:03] <rbasak> ACTION: seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage
[20:04] <amurray> apologies I haven't had a chance to look at that properly - can we carry over?
[20:04] <rbasak> OK
[20:04] <rbasak> ACTION: rbasak to raise any on-going blockers with third-party seeded snap security policy
[20:04] <rbasak> The above two, and waiting on me to get back from leave to finish off the draft I think.
[20:04] <rbasak> ACTION: sil2100 to start a draft summarizing the OEM archive portion of the meeting which x-nox and TB will review, edit, and ratify before we move on to figuring out the next step
[20:05] <rbasak> I guess he's half elsewhere so I'll move on
[20:05] <rbasak> ACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification
[20:05] <rbasak> Still pending. I'll carry.
[20:06] <rbasak> ACTION: rbasak to create initial bugs against the LP techboard project to track third party repo and DMB expiration policies
[20:06] <rbasak> Again, pending on my return from leave. I'll carry
[20:06] <rbasak> #topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item)
[20:07] <rbasak> I don't see anything not already being addressed.
[20:07] <rbasak> #topic Check up on community bugs (standing item)
[20:07] <rbasak> #info
[20:07] <rbasak> There are currently no open bugs.
[20:07] <rbasak> #info There are currently no open bugs.
[20:07] <rbasak> #topic Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members)
[20:08] <vorlon> short and sweet :)
[20:08] <vorlon> I believe I'm next
[20:08] <vorlon> with sil2100 as backup
[20:08] <rbasak> Great, thanks!
[20:08] <rbasak> #info vorlon next, with sil2100 as backup
[20:08] <rbasak> #topic AOB
[20:08] <rbasak> AOB?
[20:08] <amurray> nothing from me
[20:09] <rbasak> I was going to ask about telegram-desktop, but I think that's sorted for now, and information is on the ubuntu-devel@ ML if anyone would like to catch up.
[20:09] <rbasak> #endmeeting
[20:09] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 20:09:36 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-02-28-20.00.moin.txt
[20:09] <rbasak> Thanks all!
[20:09] <amurray> thanks for the swift meeting rbasak
[20:09] <vorlon> seb128 seemed to have a view on telegram-desktop that differed from my own/rbasak's and I'm not sure we've converged, but he's not here so
[20:10] <vorlon> I do have questions about whether sabdfl's particular views here contradicted our draft snap policy
[20:10] <rbasak> I think seb128 did say (to me privately) that he was interested in doing the explicit opt-in transitional thing
[20:10] <vorlon> ack
[20:11] <vorlon> anyway I removed the package that was there, which I think we agree was wrong; and I'd prefer framework for this in ubuntu-release-upgrader rather than per-package stuff
[20:11] <rbasak> My interpretion of sabdfl's email was that it makes sense to have a transitional mechanism in ubuntu-release-upgrader that isn't debconf, but is explicit user opt-in, for any deb that is going away for which a snap is recommended instead.
[20:11] <rbasak> I think that would be fine, but would need specific feature work in ubuntu-release-upgrader from I guess the desktop team?
[20:12] <rbasak> (and I agree that a dedicated UI for desktop users would be far better than a debconf prompt at preinst time)
[20:13] <rbasak> Nothing further to discuss for now then I guess anyway? seb128 might want to reply when he sees this.
[20:13] <vorlon> I think it's reasonable to ask the Foundations Team to take that on as maintainers of the package (but no one has actually asked yet)
[20:13] <vorlon> seb128 isn't on channel
[20:13] <rbasak> I think sabdfl asked? :-)
[20:14] <vorlon> not explicitly ;)
[20:14] <sil2100> Apologies, wandered off an dozed off on the couch!
[20:14] <vorlon> I'll poke it into the Foundations backlog
[20:14] <rbasak> Thanks!
[20:14] <vorlon> sil2100: you're sick, don't apologize and go rest :P
[20:15] <rbasak> If it happens it'd be a nice bit of polish to add to the future ratification of the third party repo requirements policy. Generally sorting out consistent behaviour and expectations for deb to snap transitions would be great for everyone I think.
[20:15]  * vorlon nods
[20:15]  * amurray agrees