[14:30] hello [14:30] #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status [14:30] Meeting started at 14:30:46 UTC. The chair is cpaelzer. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [14:30] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [14:30] Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage ( eslerm dviererbe ) [14:30] o/ [14:30] Not sure if everyone made it back from the sprint yet [14:31] good morning o/ [14:31] Hello o/ [14:31] but in case you did - hello o/ [14:31] hi, I'll be filing the MIRs related to transmission soon [14:31] ok, good to know ahead of time jbicha [14:31] let us see if syncs brought us something already [14:31] #topic current component mismatches [14:31] Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams [14:31] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg [14:31] #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg [14:32] transmission (as mentioned by jbicha) [14:32] jaraco.text was there last cycle and is still on openstack [14:32] policykit-1 -> duktape seems known (didn't we resolve that in the past? [14:32] o/ [14:32] jamespage: in case you read this now or later, what is the mantic minotaur plan for dependencies of jaraco ? [14:32] hello [14:32] oh, one more thing [14:32] I have went backwards on duktape IIRC [14:33] it is still seen in component mismatch proposed right now [14:33] I guess that is meant to land soo, was that ready - if not what was yet open? [14:33] cpaelzer: unsure - I need to sync with coreycb and the ubuntu-ceph team to figure that out [14:33] ok jamespage, do that and get back to us [14:33] but I'll find out and return with news... [14:33] I just want to avoid it hangs in mismatches for many more months [14:33] yep me too [14:34] cpaelzer: I believe Desktop still has a required autopkgtest TODO for duktape [14:34] yes, there were some open tasks [14:35] that very much could be one [14:35] jbicha: do you know if that task of getting it ready is on the roadmap or anyones desk? [14:35] So I think duktape should be marked "Incomplete" to reflect that? [14:35] It was incomplete after my review [14:35] cpaelzer: duktape is on Desktop's roadmap to try to get done within the next few weeks [14:35] went to security [14:36] and they marked it "ok" after their ack [14:36] incomplete is indeed the right status, thanks for suggesting slyon [14:36] thanks jbicha, so in some near future Desktop will come back , call it ready, we will look again and then it can move [14:36] sounds reasonable [14:36] 👍 [14:38] status fixed [14:38] thx! [14:38] ok, next [14:38] #topic New MIRs [14:38] Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing [14:38] #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 [14:39] nothing there yet [14:39] next [14:39] #topic Incomplete bugs / questions [14:39] Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams [14:39] #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 [14:39] no recent updates [14:39] the sprint and recent release made things rather easy :-) [14:40] #topic Process/Documentation improvements [14:40] Mission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues [14:40] #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls [14:40] #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues [14:40] We have my PR, but I'd postpone that to the AOB section at the end [14:40] it is meant to trigger discussion and bikeshedding, that asks for the open-end section of the meeting [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 [14:41] - ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much [14:41] #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594 [14:41] We have discussed about them just before the sprint [14:41] a few things in there, related to cargo and heif [14:41] (where cargo should be high priority and heif best effort) [14:41] I haven't seen sarnold or eslerm today to ask about openscap/smartcards if they got new focus [14:41] slyon: that prio isn't reflected [14:41] but we can fix it up [14:42] cargo discussion at the sprint was productive, unblocked our dependency concerns [14:42] libgit2 was related to cargo right? [14:42] cpaelzer: yes, so is http-parser [14:42] I've set those to "high" priority on the board [14:42] iirc, smartcards were removed a cycle or two ago since desktop was no longer owning them [14:43] I see the "high" so year, you are good [14:43] sorry for the noise [14:43] previously, we needed hardware for testing and at least one package needed significant work [14:43] eslerm: ok, so no comeback of them yet [14:43] thanks [14:43] yes, unless desktop wants them [14:43] yep [14:43] #topic Any other business? [14:43] it would be nice to support them [14:44] from me, get the discussion on https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/17 going [14:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 17 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "add re-reviews to the MIR process" [Open] [14:44] thanks for tackling this cpaelzer! [14:44] ^ [14:44] +1! [14:44] yw, it isn't perfect but a start [14:44] Question #1 I have is on preference of how to express the rules [14:45] right now I have copied the template and modified it [14:45] pro: readable [14:45] con: duplication / redundancy [14:45] I suggested to add an asterisk (*) to the TODOs/sections that are needed for re-review [14:45] would you rather prefer to merge the "re-review" with the "review" template and flag them somehow? [14:45] I'm afraid the templates will diverge if handled separately [14:45] imo, clarity justifies redundancy [14:45] +1 on slyon's proposal [14:46] +1 on slyon's suggestion - at least let me do that and then we can have a look [14:46] I haven't seen that yet [14:46] the asterisk shouldn't affect clarity too much and we can give a nice explanation about the * below the template [14:46] I think a copy would be fine, because the template is much more often copied that edited, but I also like the * Idea [14:46] We already filter out the RULE: sections [14:46] slyon: that makes sense [14:46] I think the same way we can restrict to only or without those [14:46] one question though [14:47] there are things which "ONLY" apply to re-review [14:47] would you be ok with "*** TODO: ..." for those? [14:47] "Then potentially having a new [Re-review*] section below for stuff that's only relevant for re-reviews. And giving an explanation about the * below, too (as usual)." [14:47] oh that is nice [14:47] but those are the exceptions, correct? I guess a dedicated marker is fine [14:47] thanks for having better ideas on the layout [14:47] ok, I'll overhaul with that in mind for next week [14:48] dviererbe: I've seen your question as well [14:48] dviererbe: it is meant to be a continuous effort [14:48] dviererbe: but no high hopes please [14:48] thanks sylon also answered that in the github isue [14:48] dviererbe: the amount we can do is <<< things in main [14:48] so it will be slow [14:49] ok, the TL;DR is [14:49] 1. you are all generally +1 as you love Ubuntu with quality as much as I do [14:49] 2. I'll integrate all your good feedback [14:49] 3. I'll reset this PR to needs review [14:49] from there we can work on GH and talk again here next week [14:49] that is ok for me for today [14:49] sounds great, thanks! [14:50] sounds good :) [14:50] sounds good :) [14:50] thanks cpaelzer [14:50] thanks for all the work! [14:50] ok, there was nothing else [14:50] closing this .... [14:50] thank you all! [14:50] o/ [14:50] #endmeeting [14:50] Meeting ended at 14:50:27 UTC. Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-05-09-14.30.moin.txt [14:50] thanks! [14:50] thanks cpaelzer all :)