=== cpaelzer_ is now known as cpaelzer [14:30] good morning [14:30] o/ [14:31] good morning [14:31] Hello o/ [14:31] hello [14:32] hello [14:32] ok, geting things started [14:32] #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status [14:32] Meeting started at 14:32:48 UTC. The chair is cpaelzer. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [14:32] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [14:32] Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage ( eslerm dviererbe ) [14:33] most are already here and waiting :-) [14:33] #topic current component mismatches [14:33] Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams [14:33] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg [14:33] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg [14:33] one day this will copy&paste an embarrassing buffer of mine :-) [14:33] new is kea [14:33] which is an approved MIR [14:33] and intentional [14:33] just needs to be acted on by an AA [14:33] I've done a lot in this case and own the team doing it [14:33] it felt odd to also promote [14:34] didrocks: would you think you could have a look and promote if it LGTY ? [14:34] we're far enough along in the process I think it's probably about time to promote yourself [14:34] for sure! [14:34] ah, if we've got another one to hand, that's fine then :) [14:34] sarnold: I could and I have done so at times, but that doesn't have to be the common pattern :-) [14:34] thanks didrocks [14:34] * didrocks will be the monkey key pusher :) [14:34] nothing else in there [14:34] :D [14:34] +1 credit to didrocks [14:35] #topic New MIRs [14:35] Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing [14:35] #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 [14:35] as seb128 warned us last week, dbus-broker will come [14:35] and he mentioned to better do this in nearly 23.10 than late [14:35] so here it is [14:35] I think I could do the review on dbus-broker, as I've already been involved with this in the past [14:35] mir open before the cycle starts, impressive :) [14:35] oh you were slyon, didn't realize that [14:35] yeah sure [14:36] thank you [14:36] assigned [14:36] sarnold: it is not a "first", all of pcs and a few more were early as well [14:36] cpaelzer: heh, good thing too, that was big [tm] [14:36] sarnold: and "early 23.10" is just 3-6 weeks away, so things are as urgent as always [14:37] #topic Incomplete bugs / questions [14:37] Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams [14:37] #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 [14:37] one recent comment on cpdb-backend-file [14:37] ok, that is no action on us [14:38] yep :) [14:38] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cpdb-libs/+bug/1747759 is on security [14:38] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 1747759 in cpdb-libs (Ubuntu) "[MIR] cpdb-libs" [High, Confirmed] [14:38] good for the scope of this meeting [14:38] all else is older [14:38] #topic Process/Documentation improvements [14:38] Mission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues [14:38] #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls [14:38] #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues [14:38] we have landed a few small but helpful changes last week [14:38] one more is up [14:38] https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/16 [14:38] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 16 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Remove use of wiki specific url syntax" [Open] [14:39] dviererbe: already commented there [14:39] I think we should wait until the owner responded [14:40] ack [14:40] that is my thought as well now reading it [14:40] I'm sure seb128 will update once he has a chance to do so [14:40] generally I think we all feel +1'ish [14:40] #topic MIR related Security Review Queue [14:40] Mission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable? [14:40] #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 [14:40] Internal link [14:40] - ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect [14:40] - ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much [14:40] #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594 [14:41] I see all in the LP list also in jira [14:41] seems to normally progress [14:41] slyon: do you have context on the urgency of libheiff related things [14:41] slyon: will that be 23.10 or ... ? [14:42] it's non-urgent and currently disabled in the packages [14:42] but would be a nice to have to support heif/heic images (e.g. iPhone images) in libgd2 [14:42] I think it put the priorities accordingly in jira [14:43] i.e. it should be after cargo + depends [14:43] thanks [14:43] #topic Any other business? [14:43] i have a question [14:43] ok, we finally reach the "end of cycle calmness" phase [14:43] go joalif [14:44] i reviewed bug 1973031 , libwpe for jammy, that got a sec review for kinetic [14:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 1973031 in libwpe (Ubuntu Jammy) "[MIR] libwpe" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1973031 [14:44] do i need to assign for sec review again ? [14:44] package is generally good [14:44] that was the "now let us also consider for jammy" case [14:45] yup [14:45] you'd want to also have security ack that [14:45] so yes, assign them [14:45] but [14:45] ok thanks cpaelzer [14:45] we'd not expect another full review [14:45] ack [14:45] I'll followup with the previous security reviewer for libwpe [14:45] jammy is shipping 1.12, which was also reviewed by security already.. [14:45] we expect them, to check the difference back then and comment if that should still be ok (or if not what needs to be adressed) [14:45] I haven't looked [14:45] even the same packaging version ? [14:46] "1.12.0-1 as checked into kinetic" [14:46] yes [14:46] so I think we should be fine... [14:46] in this case I expect pretty much a rubber stamp; marc was liable to use it for the next security update anyway -- if I understand corrrectly, it's the only thing upstream supports anyway [14:46] well then, I'd still want them to say yes - but sarnold can probably do that in a minute [14:46] thanks for bringing it up joalif [14:47] steps from here: 1. joalif to assign it to security 2. security giving it a glimps if that is really the same 3. ack 4. adding dependencies 5. promotion to main [14:47] Yes.. there might be some fixes that we'd want to cherry-pick: "The bugs discovered during review were immediately fixed by the upstream project and now waiting for upstream's input on assigning CVEs to some of them." [14:47] ok, makes sense [14:48] anything else ? [14:48] nothing for me [14:48] not from me or server-team [14:48] nothing else [14:48] nothing from me [14:48] nothing from foundations [14:49] I have actually a heif question, but after we close the official part [14:49] #endmeeting [14:49] Meeting ended at 14:49:41 UTC. Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-04-11-14.32.moin.txt [14:49] o/ [14:49] didrocks: (or anyone) does the desktop be able to do HDR in 24.04 ? [14:50] because able to read heif (among other things HDR) is only as shiny as we can display anyway [14:50] I think there is a hackfest starting this at the end of the month on it [14:50] so, it’s planned, but if you want more details, you can talk to trevhino [14:50] is it https://www.phoronix.com/news/Red-Hat-2023-HDR-Hackfest ? [14:50] yep [14:51] we will have 2 members of the desktop team there [14:51] people with black and white tvs still wanted to watch color tv programming when that was introduced; even if they don't look quite right, folks might still like to see them :) [14:51] so, crossing fingers this pans out for the LTS :) [14:51] awesome, best of luck & progress to them [14:51] I'd really wish to have a reason to buy new screens :-) [14:51] lol [14:51] haha [14:52] thanks cpaelzer, all :) [14:52] yeah, see you all [14:52] and thanks! [14:52] o/ [14:53] thanks! [19:00] o/ [19:00] o/ [19:01] rbasak: do you know if seb128 is around? otherwise it might just be the two of us :) [19:02] o/ [19:02] hey seb128 :) [19:02] hey :) [19:02] #startmeeting Ubuntu Technical Board [19:02] Meeting started at 19:02:21 UTC. The chair is amurray. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [19:02] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [19:02] #topic Apologies [19:02] vorlon, might be around, he was active on #ubuntu-release [19:03] vorlon and sil2100 both sent their apologies via the mailing list earlier [19:03] oh right, just saw that [19:03] #topic Action review [19:04] ACTION: amurray to propose amended Ubuntu Backporters Team Charter [19:04] I've a feeling that's going to be a quick one.. :-/ [19:04] (not that item but the meeting) [19:04] I am not sure how to progress this - I think we need some input from other TB members [19:05] reading the past discussion that item is just confusing to me [19:05] #link https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2023-March/002723.html [19:05] it feels like that should be a simple 'the TB delegate the backport team power to handle backports'? [19:06] why do we need drafts or suggestions there? [19:06] rbasak, I think you have the history/context and opinions on that one [19:07] ... [19:08] My original draft tried to cover what I think caused the previous failure that took a very long discussion over multiple attempts over multiple years (?) to try to resolve. [19:08] The specific points I suggested in the draft directly spoke to what I perceived to have been previous sticking points. [19:09] I'd also note that *everybody involved* at the time of the discussion in ubuntu-devel@ agreed with my draft, so it's really weird to me to get so much push back against it. [19:09] I feel like we should just do a reset and suggest the trivial version unless someone here feels like it's problematic or controversial [19:10] rbasak, do you perceive pushback here about your version? [19:10] The trivial version seems like a no-op to me. It doesn't address the previous issues. [19:10] if so it's probably misunderstanding, I would be personnally fine with what you proposed [19:10] The pushback is from the backporters team. And of course we need them on board for any progress to be useful. [19:12] I also liked your draft rbasak but I think we need to be pragmatic since I would rather have something which both the TB and backporters team can agree on than nothing (although I do also agree the current draft is a bit if a no-op and hence may not even be needed) [19:13] Sorry I don't mean to imply any blocking of the current draft. This is just my opinion of it. [19:14] so we have 3 options here from what I can see - 1. push back to the backporters team with something more rigorous again, 2. go with the more trivial version or 3. drop the whole thing and leave it as is [19:14] Maybe we should just accept Mattia's draft and call it done. Hopefully there will be no further issues. If there are, then I fear that they will drag on again as they did last time, but that'll be how it [19:14] do you have a pointer to Mattia's draft? [19:14] how it'll have to be I guess. [19:15] Message-ID: [19:15] Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:22:13 +0100 [19:15] thanks [19:15] (it is also at the bottom of the link I posted earlier assuming I quoted it correctly in my reply) [19:16] FWIW, I think that the third point partially crosses over into terrority I don't think it's up to the TB to dictate either. Specifically to define a set of rules to handle its internal structures and members' responsiblities. [19:17] I would be fine giving a +1 to those 3 bullet points [19:17] However, requiring them to have a policy on team membership is important, because anybody should be able to join their team if they are appropriately qualified. [19:17] But, to make progress, I don't think that's important enough to block either. [19:17] it's basically 'the backport team is in charge or handling the backport pocket and free to define they processes and membership rules' [19:17] which seems fair to me [19:18] I would trust them to accept qualified contributors [19:18] my preference is to go with this since this issue has dragged on for too long at this point [19:18] Indeed - but the precise problem with the previous team was that they did not (through their absence) and that was a blocking issue. [19:19] amurray: +1 [19:19] let's presume good-faith with the new team and hope there won't be similar issues this time around [19:20] Oh to be clear I am also absolutely assuming good faith. [19:20] no policy is going to fix a lack-of-people issue [19:20] I was just looking for a clearer path to a reset should difficulties arise again in the future - but hopefully they won't. [19:20] I'm +1 as well to go with ^ [19:21] ok, so should I perhaps respond to that email thread and ask the backporters team to more formally acknowledge Mattia's draft? [19:21] We're quorate here I believe. [19:21] +1 [19:21] #action amurray to follow up with backporters team on Mattia's draft charter proposal [19:21] ACTION: amurray to follow up with backporters team on Mattia's draft charter proposal [19:21] So how about we agree that if the backporters team agree, then Mattia's draft becomes final? [19:22] sounds good to me [19:23] ACTION: seb128 to help draft an exception to the "must build on all architectures" requirement for snaps [19:23] I didn't have time for any of my item with Lunar release get closing [19:23] will carry it over [19:23] but it's getting better so I hope to have updates by the next meeting [19:23] thanks [19:23] #action seb128 to help draft an exception to the "must build on all architectures" requirement for snaps [19:23] ACTION: seb128 to help draft an exception to the "must build on all architectures" requirement for snaps [19:23] carry over... [19:23] ACTION: seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage [19:24] also I guess [19:24] I took a quick stab at this yesterday [19:25] out of interest, is this document already public? [19:25] Thanks! [19:25] Yes - it's public. [19:25] I'd like to clean it up some more, then post it to ubuntu-devel@ for wider consultation. [19:26] ok so perhaps if you could take a quick look at what I wrote their rbasak and let me know your thoughts [19:26] s/their/there/ [19:26] ack [19:27] It'd be good to get a review from those who know what actually happens. [19:27] I'll leave this on the agenda as it was from last time though since I think it would be useful to get seb128 and sil2100 to provide feedback as well if they have time [19:27] Please, thanks [19:27] #action seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage [19:27] ACTION: seb128/amurray/sil200 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage [19:27] yes, I will block time before the next meeting [19:27] ACTION: rbasak to raise any on-going blockers with third-party seeded snap security policy [19:27] (I just mean that I definitely *don't* know exactly what happens :-) [19:27] I'm not aware of any. [19:28] (except for these two action items we have already, and pending my cleanup) [19:28] ok, I'll drop it from the agenda then for next time and we can revisit it if we have to [19:28] 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 [19:28] carry over as sil2100 is unavailable today [19:28] #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 [19:28] 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 [19:29] ACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification [19:29] * vorlon waves [19:29] Carry over again please [19:29] #action rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification [19:29] ACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification [19:29] sorry I couldn't be here from the start [19:29] Welcome! [19:29] hey vorlon :) [19:29] ACTION: rbasak to create initial bugs against the LP techboard project to track third party repo and DMB expiration policies [19:30] Done! https://bugs.launchpad.net/techboard [19:30] awesome - thanks rbasak :) [19:30] Perhaps long standing action items should move to the bug tracker instead [19:30] And perhaps we could use Triaged status or a tag to track them or something. [19:31] Now that we're using the bug tracker. [19:31] Anyway, just thoughts. No action needed right now I guess. [19:31] yes I think that was the intent - the only thing that would meet this criteria at this point is the backporters charter but I hope this will progress this week so hopefully won't be needed to be added to the bug tracker [19:32] ACTION: sil2100 to follow up on the Ubuntu Cinnamon flavor addition thread and announce their official status [19:32] this was done https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2023-March/002725.html [19:33] #topic Mailing list review [19:34] I don't see anything here other than your announcement of the git-ubuntu-import annoucement rbasak [19:34] #topic Bug review [19:35] nothing new here either :) (but thanks again for creating the techboard bugs rbasak) [19:37] next meeting will be during the product roadmap sprint - and you would be chair rbasak as per the rotation [19:37] I think we should skip that one in advance [19:37] realistically most of us will decline [19:37] Yes it seem unlikely many of us will be able to make that [19:38] fair enough - next meeting will be on the 9th May with rbasak as chair and seb128 as back-up [19:38] +1 [19:38] #topic AOB [19:39] nothing from me [19:39] nothing from me either [19:41] ok I think we are done then :) [19:41] \o/ :) [19:41] Thank you for chairing amurray! [19:41] #endmeeting [19:41] Meeting ended at 19:41:14 UTC. Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-04-11-19.02.moin.txt [19:41] thanks amurray for chairing ! [19:41] no worries [19:42] thanks!