/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2023/07/04/#ubuntu-meeting.txt

=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
=== cpaelzer_ is now known as cpaelzer
=== JanC is now known as Guest5729
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
cpaelzerhello14:31
dviererbehello o/14:31
cpaelzerlet us see if we reach critical mass for MIR team today14:31
joalifo/14:31
eslermhello o/14:31
cpaelzerthat looks good14:32
cpaelzer#startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status14:32
meetingologyMeeting started at 14:32:06 UTC.  The chair is cpaelzer.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology14:32
meetingologyAvailable commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick14:32
cpaelzerPing for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage ( eslerm dviererbe )14:32
cpaelzer#topic current component mismatches14:32
slyonhola o/14:32
cpaelzerMission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams14:32
cpaelzer#link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg14:32
cpaelzer#link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg14:32
slyonrustc on c-m-p looks new (pulling in new dependencies)14:33
cpaelzerthere is a master bug at the top of the perl tree14:33
cpaelzerindeed rustc shows up as well14:33
cpaelzerslyon: do you happen to know if this is being worked on already?14:34
jamespageo/14:34
slyoncpaelzer: I don't know, but I will clarify14:34
cpaelzerthanks slyon14:34
cpaelzerfurthermore this upload was a bit hijacking the process by bundling all the code of the open cargo MIR IIRC14:34
slyoninteresting ...14:34
cpaelzerby that it (all the cargo) would go into main without being fully processed and approved14:35
cpaelzerthere have been pings flowing around14:35
slyonso shall we mark it "block-proposed" for now, until fully approved?14:35
cpaelzerbut IMHO we should not let the current one pass until this is sorted out14:35
cpaelzeryeah14:35
cpaelzerthat is exactly what I wanted to lead the discussion to14:35
cpaelzerI understand that this is the way you (=Foundation) want to go and I'm not even opposed. But all the bits and how they are tested, built, and updated needs to be clear14:36
cpaelzerThis has come up and seems to have gotten a comment here https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cargo/+bug/199381914:37
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 1993819 in dh-cargo (Ubuntu) "MIR: cargo, dh-cargo" [High, In Progress]14:37
cpaelzerlet me answer there14:38
slyonYes, that'd be best. And I guess we'd also need an additional bug report against rustc (or maybe we add a rustc bugtask to the cargo MIR), to mark it block-proposed.14:38
cpaelzeryeah, for now I said I'd want them to hold it back and assume they'll deal with it14:40
cpaelzerok, it seems clear this was a) unintended and b) shouldn't pass14:40
cpaelzerfrom here we can see how this unfolds14:41
cpaelzer#topic New MIRs14:41
cpaelzerMission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing14:41
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-mir14:41
cpaelzerhehe, I see why jamespage has said hi today :-)14:41
eslermthanks cpaelzer ^14:41
cpaelzeryw14:41
cpaelzertwo to grab14:42
cpaelzer1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pydantic/+bug/200169914:42
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2001699 in jaraco.text (Ubuntu) "[MIR] python-autocommand, python-inflect, pydantic" [Undecided, In Progress]14:42
cpaelzerthat is about jaraco which we have seen a while in component mismatches14:42
jamespagethats me catching up on things at last14:42
cpaelzerthanks14:42
cpaelzerso it is two reviews actually14:42
cpaelzerpydantic and python-inflect14:43
cpaelzerAFAICS14:43
cpaelzerand then the third is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libmail-dmarc-perl/+bug/202397114:43
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2023971 in libmail-dmarc-perl (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libmail-dmarc-perl" [Undecided, New]14:43
cpaelzerwhich is - as mentioned above - actually many perl special cases14:43
cpaelzerI'd try to do pydantic - that sounds fun14:43
cpaelzervolunteers for inflect and one to (get started on) the perl chunk?14:44
jamespageinflect was reviewed previous -14:44
joalifi can take inflect14:44
eslermshouldn't 2001699 have seperate MIRs for each package?14:44
cpaelzereslerm: no it was always ok to group if none of the cases was too complex14:44
cpaelzerIIRC: only later we said we prefer (but not insist) on individual bugs14:44
slyonjoalif: would you mind me taking inflect, as I did the previous review?14:44
slyonyou could take pydantic instead14:45
jamespageI think pydantic may need security review14:45
joalifslyon: ok14:45
cpaelzersorry joalif I didn't get it was reviewed before - just went by the state14:45
cpaelzerthanks joalif, assigning14:46
cpaelzerbut jamespage we need to work out inflect14:46
cpaelzerjamespage: it had two todos14:46
cpaelzer1. update (done)14:46
eslermcpaelzer: I don't think complexity is a factor ? https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/1514:46
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 15 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "require a single Launchpad bug for each MIR request" [Merged]14:46
cpaelzerand 2. automated tests14:46
cpaelzereslerm: as I said "we have changed since" - it was ok in the past14:47
eslermack, thanks14:47
slyoncpaelzer: jamespage: from a brief check it looks like the TODOs are addressed. But I'll do a full check14:48
cpaelzerthanks slyon14:48
cpaelzerI've assigned the two14:49
cpaelzerand I've given bryce a few todos on  libmail-dmarc-perl to split it out properly14:49
cpaelzerthen we can assign it next time14:50
slyonthx!14:50
cpaelzerthanks eslerm for reminding me, i've updated a new bug to follow the new rule14:50
cpaelzerbut do we still need to split 2001699?14:51
cpaelzerlet me check if one of them has to go through the security queue (and thereby tooling)14:51
slyonbug #200169914:51
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2001699 in jaraco.text (Ubuntu) "[MIR] python-autocommand, python-inflect, pydantic" [Undecided, In Progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/200169914:51
eslermfor me, it's _fine_ not to split as a one-off14:51
cpaelzerok, inflect does not go to security14:51
cpaelzerwe'll have to see what the outcome on pydantic is14:52
cpaelzerthanks, time flies by - I'll go on to reach the later agenda stages ...14:52
cpaelzer#topic Process/Documentation improvements14:52
cpaelzerMission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues14:52
cpaelzer#link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls14:52
cpaelzer#link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues14:52
cpaelzerslyon: is https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/27 good for your questions14:53
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 27 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Document a possible symbols exception for c++ libraries" [Open]14:53
cpaelzerit still fails the spellchecker ...14:53
* slyon looking..14:53
seb128the spellchecker failure is the job having limitations14:54
cpaelzerdviererbe: is https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/23 stuck as WIP (and should we mark it that way) ?14:54
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 23 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Modernize Process States Overview" [Open]14:54
cpaelzerdviererbe: or is that ready for re-consideration14:54
dviererbeIt is ready14:54
seb128abi and SOVER are technical acronyms and not wrong english14:54
slyoncpaelzer: #27 LGMT, will add a comment14:54
cpaelzerthanks slyon14:55
cpaelzerseb128: that is correct, but we land changes to the spellchecker along the PRs that break them14:55
cpaelzerdviererbe: ok, I'll need to re-review it then ...14:55
dviererbenice, thank you14:55
cpaelzerdviererbe: would you want to be a helping hand and provide a spellcheck PR that makes #27 work14:56
dviererbeI can do that :)14:56
cpaelzerthen we could merge #27 and yours14:56
cpaelzerawesome14:56
cpaelzerlet us have a look at security queues14:56
seb128thanks!14:56
cpaelzer#topic MIR related Security Review Queue14:56
cpaelzerMission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable?14:56
cpaelzerSome clients can only work with one, some with the other escaping - the URLs point to the same place.14:56
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-mir14:56
cpaelzer#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-security/+bugs?field.searchtext=[MIR]&assignee_option=choose&field.assignee=ubuntu-security&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=ubuntu-mir14:56
cpaelzerInternal link14:56
cpaelzer- ensure your teams items are prioritized among each other as you'd expect14:56
cpaelzer- ensure community requests do not get stomped by teams calling for favors too much14:56
cpaelzer#link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/59414:57
dviererbeOn the last note: What is SOVER?14:57
cpaelzerversion of a shared object14:57
dviererbeah.. ok, thanks!14:57
slyondviererbe: .so ABI version of a shared library14:57
cpaelzerin too simplified terms the number at libfoo<number>14:58
dviererbeAlways funny how many abreviations ubuntu has ^^14:58
slyonit is part of SONAME (which we might want to allow-list, too)14:59
dviererbeack14:59
cpaelzersarnold: eslerm: in the past the perl packages that were trivial (just wrappers around the module including tests and all) got a fast pathed by Doko. Did those went through security review, at least when they processed potentially external data?14:59
cpaelzeroh this is actually already the next agenda entry14:59
cpaelzerthe security queue LGTM, so I think we can go on to that14:59
cpaelzer#topic Any other business?15:00
eslermI don't believe there is much to update on security's side. Seth is out. Plans to assign cargo may be delayed, dontnet6 conversation is starting, and codecs are being weighed15:00
eslermcpaelzer: I'd wait to ask Seth15:00
cpaelzerack on that15:00
cpaelzeroh yeah, you mention dotent6 - I've doen the review and it is massive15:00
cpaelzerbut for that was actually fine15:00
seb128as a FYI the gtkmm stack should be ready now, we added symbols enforcing for a group of selected architectures15:00
cpaelzerquite a list of questions and required tasks, but better than I expected \o/15:01
cpaelzerthanks seb128, are there cases for us to recheck and ack?15:01
cpaelzerif so we haven't seen them today15:01
eslermiiuc, Seth and Ian will sync on dotnet615:01
cpaelzergreat eslerm15:01
cpaelzerseb128: Maybe they are still in "incomplete" state?15:01
seb128cpaelzer, I think they are in the normal process so should be picked up again by the reviewers15:01
cpaelzerchecking one (as example) - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtkmm4.0/+bug/202047215:02
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2020472 in gtkmm4.0 (Ubuntu) "[MIR] gtkmm4.0" [Undecided, Incomplete]15:02
cpaelzerthere is no "reviewer" anymore15:02
seb128I will check with Jeremy15:02
seb128jbicha, ^15:02
cpaelzerthe process hand them back to the reporter - and the expectation is "set incomplete -> new once ready for a look again"15:02
cpaelzerthat would have been seen in our queue each week15:03
cpaelzerand then probably got a quick pass as they indeed LGTM on a glance15:03
seb128right, I though Jeremy was going to do that before the meeting but he didn't, they will be back to review by next meeting15:03
cpaelzerif you can wait until next week, just fix the state and it will be done15:03
cpaelzerif not, fix the state and ping me and I'll check them in between15:03
seb128ack, will do, thanks15:03
seb128also as a FYI I plan to start a discussion about the current policy of nacking hardware enablement related packages when we don't have access to the hardware15:03
jbichacpaelzer: glibmm2.68 is ready. I will update the others tomorrow15:03
cpaelzerpuh, only 3 minute over today :-/15:04
cpaelzerthank you all15:04
slyonhaha, those meetings are getting longer these days :)15:04
seb128I think that just hurt Ubuntu for no valid reason15:04
cpaelzerseb128: which hurts?15:04
seb128well not valid ... let's say that the tradeoff is in our disfavor15:04
jbichawe can wait on gtkmm4 and friends until next week though15:04
seb128cpaelzer, bugs like https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libqrtr-glib/+bug/196370715:04
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 1963707 in libqrtr-glib (Ubuntu) "[MIR] libqrtr-glib" [Low, Incomplete]15:04
seb128I've some new cases in pipewire15:05
seb128an extra library needed to support firewire audio devices15:05
seb128but it's going to end up in the same case, our team doesn't own the hardware and doesn't have budget to buy some15:06
slyonMaybe we'd need some kind of community testing process? To involve external people that actually have the hardware to run some test plans?15:06
seb128meanwhile we fall behind other distros in term of hardware which is working on our platform15:06
cpaelzerWe had too many cases where people just even bothered to try to test, but this really wasn't meant to block things entirely. We might need to revisit that.15:06
cpaelzerIt seems Desktop in particular is victim of "special HW" cases15:07
seb128slyon, we can try, in practice finding people to verify updates is hard15:07
seb128and unreliable15:07
seb128they might show and then disappear15:07
slyonyes. But might be better than doing no testing at all.15:07
seb128anyway, I will open a ticket on github about that15:07
slyonthanks, sounds good!15:08
cpaelzerI think this is a problem were all of us see both bad outcomes - we neither want to deny or fall behind. But neither do we want to accept untestable things in main, since a fair question is how you'd think you ever support those.15:08
cpaelzerIt is clearly worth a call up on an Issue and potentially there to a higher place to decide15:08
seb128ack15:09
* cpaelzer forecasts that this will need to be converted to a mail to the TB, but please start the discussion as GH issue and we'll work on it together from there15:10
seb128will do15:10
cpaelzerseb128: if I might suggest, this might be worth a mid-cycle sprint breakout - potentially even including release team / sru team and sabdfl (depending on how ready the state of the discussion is by then)15:10
cpaelzerI'll end this meeting here today15:11
seb128for the record I don't see why that would need the TB, we used to have more flexibility in our promotion process15:11
seb128the recent strictness of the review is coming from this team afaik15:11
slyonand maybe include certlab people, too.15:11
cpaelzershort summary before I call an end15:11
cpaelzer1. we used to be flexible15:11
cpaelzer2. people have been living in pain to support/test things15:11
cpaelzer3. quality assurance part of the Mir process was upped to avoid that15:12
cpaelzer4. now you rightfully challenge the other side of this decisions consequence15:12
cpaelzerMaybe not TB, but as you mentioned it seems to be "do we put it to main (which implies guarantees) without being able to test it"? or "do we allocate budget to be able to test it"15:12
cpaelzerthe strictness has come from this team for the reason of ensuring quality in Ubuntu15:13
cpaelzerbut I agree it shouldn't render you unable to do anything15:13
cpaelzerhence we might need to bring it up15:14
seb128alright, well let's follow the logic steps, I will start with the github ticket15:14
cpaelzerthank you15:14
seb128thanks!15:14
cpaelzer#endmeeting15:14
meetingologyMeeting ended at 15:14:52 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-07-04-14.32.moin.txt15:14
dviererbethanks!15:15
dviererbecpaelzer: The PR adding spellchecker terms is here: https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/2915:15
-ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 29 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Add spellchecker terms" [Open]15:15
eslermthanks all o/15:15
slyonthanks! o/15:15

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!