[13:42] <cpaelzer> slyon: didrocks: RM planning makes me unavailable this and next week - would you be around to drive the meeting later?
[13:56] <didrocks> cpaelzer: as usual, I have a conflict and will not be available
[14:12] <slyon> cpaelzer: I can drive it today
[15:30] <slyon> o/ paelzer is no available today. I'll run the MIR meeting.
[15:30] <slyon> #startmeeting Weekly Main Inclusion Requests status
[15:30] <meetingology> Meeting started at 15:30:34 UTC.  The chair is slyon.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[15:30] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[15:30] <slyon> Ping for MIR meeting - didrocks joalif slyon sarnold cpaelzer jamespage ( eslerm dviererbe )
[15:30] <slyon> #topic current component mismatches
[15:30] <slyon> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[15:30] <slyon> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.svg
[15:30] <slyon> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.svg
[15:30] <joalif> o/
[15:31] <sarnold> good morning
[15:32] <slyon> for c-m: We got trace-cmd seeded while the MIR is not yet fully ready. But It's beeing worked on. I linked the most recent MIRs for libtraceevent and libtracefs this morning
[15:32] <slyon> libtraceevent is making some progress (patch adding tests needs review & sponsoring), libtracefs is stuck currently reaching out for help from the Foundations system squad
[15:33] <slyon> c-m-proposed: we have a bunch of new stuff in here..
[15:33] <slyon> gst-plugins-good1.0 and roc-toolkit are desktop-packages. So I'd like to ask didrocks to investigate those (later on)
[15:34] <slyon> jaraco.text and python-openstacksdk are ubuntu-openstack packages, for jamespage to look into.
[15:34] <slyon> Everything else seems known/explained
[15:34] <jamespage> will look
[15:34] <slyon> thx!
[15:34] <slyon> #topic New MIRs
[15:34] <slyon> Mission: ensure to assign all incoming reviews for fast processing
[15:34] <slyon> #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
[15:35] <slyon> bug #2056099
[15:35] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2056099 in tree (Ubuntu) "[MIR] tree" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2056099
[15:35] <slyon> was this discussed last week? (I wasn't here)
[15:36] <slyon> looks like foundations agreed to own the package. So it could go through MIR review.
[15:36] <sarnold> I think last week we decided to see if foundations would accept it
[15:36] <ahresse_> Hello, this has been discussed last year and a owner was missing but foundation is actually willing to take it.
[15:36] <sarnold> and the last comment suggests that they have :)
[15:36] <ahresse_> last week*
[15:36] <slyon> do we have any volunteers? (I'd like to abstain, as this will be foundations owned)
[15:36] <slyon> joalif or cpaelzer maybe?
[15:37] <joalif> slyon: I can take it
[15:37] <slyon> thank you!
[15:37] <slyon> assigned.
[15:37] <slyon> #topic Incomplete bugs / questions
[15:37] <slyon> Mission: Identify required actions and spread the load among the teams
[15:37] <slyon> #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
[15:39] <slyon> there are two *trace* updates (bug #2051916 & bug #2051925) that I explained earlier. Nothing actionable for the MIR team, yet.
[15:39] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2051916 in libtraceevent (Ubuntu) "[MIR] promote libtraceevent as a trace-cmd dependency" [Undecided, Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2051916
[15:39] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2051925 in libtracefs (Ubuntu) "[MIR] promote libtracefs as a trace-cmd dependency" [Undecided, Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2051925
[15:39] <slyon> Finally, bug #2054480
[15:39] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2054480 in nbd (Ubuntu) "[MIR] nbd-client" [Undecided, Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2054480
[15:39]  * slyon reading...
[15:40] <slyon> MIR reviewer asked for additional/improved testing. Upstream developers are involved. So this is correctly set to "Incomplete" and back to the reporter for now until resolved.
[15:40] <slyon> Nothing to do for us
[15:41] <slyon> #topic Process/Documentation improvements
[15:41] <slyon> Mission: Review pending process/documentation pull-requests or issues
[15:41] <slyon> #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pulls
[15:41] <slyon> #link https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues
[15:42] <slyon> https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/52 which is related to the `tree` MIR above
[15:42] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Issue 52 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Suggested owner should provide a confirmation from the owning team" [Open]
[15:42] <slyon> being addressed via https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/pull/53
[15:42] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Pull 53 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "Rationale and ownership" [Open]
[15:43] <slyon> let's put our +1 or suggestions for improvement on GitHub, so paelzer can mere once ready
[15:43] <slyon> merge*
[15:44] <slyon> Then we have eslerm's https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/51
[15:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Issue 51 in canonical/ubuntu-mir "cargo vendor adds unnecessary crates" [Open]
[15:45] <slyon> consensus seems to be adding per-package hacks in debian/rules to delete unnecessary vendored crates. Which was my understanding, too.
[15:46] <slyon> This is not nice, but probably better than shipping (and reviewing) lots of unused code.
[15:46] <slyon> I brought the cause up with the Foundations toolchaing squad. They are currently busy, so we should not expect a centralized solution soon. I'll try to push it for next cycle's roadmap, though.
[15:47] <slyon> so I guess that it's mostly for didrocks to look into fixing/cleaning up his package manually
[15:47] <slyon> #topic MIR related Security Review Queue
[15:47] <slyon> Mission: Check on progress, do deadlines seem doable?
[15:47] <slyon> Some clients can only work with one, some with the other escaping - the URLs point to the same place.
[15:47] <slyon> #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
[15:47] <slyon> #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-mir
[15:47] <slyon> Internal link
[15:47] <slyon> #link https://warthogs.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/SEC/boards/594
[15:47] <slyon> sarnold: what's the security-team's status?
[15:49] <slyon> bug #2055434 looks like it needs a `sec-*` tag
[15:49] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Bug 2055434 in pemmican (Ubuntu) "[MIR] pemmican" [Undecided, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2055434
[15:49] <sarnold> slyon: I belivee that we're still doing alright, but some departures from the team may impact our velocity if we have late additions in the cycle
[15:50] <slyon> The number of new MIRs has been relatively low (or rather balanced before feature freeze) this cycle. Let's hope it stays this way and we don't get a lot of late additions.
[15:50] <sarnold> there we go, https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/SEC-3971
[15:50] <slyon> sweet thanks!
[15:51] <slyon> #topic Any other business?
[15:51] <sarnold> yeah, it's felt very calm .. a little too calm .. *harmonica music*
[15:51] <joalif> sarnold: wrt https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/SEC-3971 it may not need a sec review after all
[15:51] <sarnold> none here (well, I've got a very small nagging feeling that I've forgotten something. sigh. but if I can't remember it now...)
[15:53] <slyon> joalif: that's because it's not a root daemon?
[15:53] <sarnold> joalif: it sounded a bit like it's got a root daemon and a client of some sort, but I couldn't quickly tell if non-root was supposed to be able to use it, etc ..
[15:53] <sarnold> if non-root processes are communicating with a root daemon as part of the task, then it's probably worth a quick look
[15:54] <joalif> well it's not a deamon, and th i spent quite some time if this needs a sec review and decided to play on safe side and put it for sec review
[15:55] <joalif> ok lemme discuss it with waveform  on the bug and if need be i'll remove it from sec review
[15:55] <slyon> thanks joalif!
[15:55] <sarnold> nice, thanks :)
[15:56] <slyon> If nothing else, that's all for today.
[15:56] <joalif> nothing else from me
[15:56] <slyon> thanks all!
[15:56] <slyon> #endmeeting
[15:56] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 15:56:10 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2024/ubuntu-meeting.2024-03-12-15.30.moin.txt
[15:56] <joalif> thanks slyon, all:)
[15:56] <sarnold> thanks slyon, all :)
[19:58]  * vorlon waves
[19:59] <amurray> o/
[20:02] <seb128> hey
[20:02] <amurray> hey seb128
[20:02] <vorlon> amurray: wiki says you're chair?
[20:03] <amurray> ah right - yep
[20:03] <amurray> #startmeeting Ubuntu Technical Board
[20:03] <meetingology> Meeting started at 20:03:08 UTC.  The chair is amurray.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[20:03] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[20:03] <amurray> #topic Apologies
[20:03] <amurray> rbasak sent his apologies earlier
[20:03] <amurray> #topic Action review
[20:03] <amurray> ACTION: seb128/amurray/sil2100 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage
[20:04] <seb128> carry over again I guess
[20:04] <amurray> yep
[20:04] <amurray> #action seb128/amurray/sil2100 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage
[20:04] <meetingology> ACTION: seb128/amurray/sil2100 to help drafting the snap-store Ubuntu-specific tracks usage
[20:04] <amurray> ACTION: seb128 to organize a meeting to unblock the draft of the tracks usage section
[20:05] <seb128> rbasak took over this one as we planned to squeeze also that topic in the meeting he is organizing
[20:05] <amurray> will carry-over since we will try again once rbasak is feeling better
[20:05] <seb128> which was supposed to be today but got postponed
[20:05] <amurray> #action rbasak to organize a meeting to unblock the draft of the tracks usage section
[20:05] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to organize a meeting to unblock the draft of the tracks usage section
[20:05] <amurray> will carry over rbasak's items then too
[20:06] <amurray> #action rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification
[20:06] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to draft a proposal of the DMB-proposed inactivity expiration policy for TB ratification
[20:06] <amurray> #action rbasak to follow up on finding consensus on question of test plans for third party apps
[20:06] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to follow up on finding consensus on question of test plans for third party apps
[20:06] <amurray> #action rbasak to open wider discussion on third-party repo policy
[20:06] <meetingology> ACTION: rbasak to open wider discussion on third-party repo policy
[20:06] <amurray> ACTION: seb128 to continue working with SRU, AA, Release, Backporters and Security teams to document their membership process and link to it from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard#Team_Delegations
[20:06] <seb128> carry over please
[20:07] <amurray> I wanted to ask a quick question on this - I have the process ready for the security team but just wasn't sure where to post it? any ideas? discourse / wiki?
[20:07] <seb128> either is fine I think
[20:08] <seb128> people seem to prefer discourse nowadays
[20:08] <amurray> ok - will go with that then - thanks
[20:08] <amurray> ACTION: seb128 to follow-up with ubuntu cinnamon on 24.04 request
[20:08] <seb128> great :)
[20:08] <amurray> oops forgot to carry over the other one
[20:08] <amurray> #action seb128 to continue working with SRU, AA, Release, Backporters and Security teams to document their membership process and link to it from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard#Team_Delegations
[20:08] <meetingology> ACTION: seb128 to continue working with SRU, AA, Release, Backporters and Security teams to document their membership process and link to it from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoard#Team_Delegations
[20:09] <seb128> please carry this one also over again but I will handle it tomorrow, feature freeze and proposed stated had been time sinks
[20:09] <amurray> #action seb128 to follow-up with ubuntu cinnamon on 24.04 request
[20:09] <meetingology> ACTION: seb128 to follow-up with ubuntu cinnamon on 24.04 request
[20:09] <amurray> ACTION: vorlon to look into scripting for packages in flavor-specific overlays
[20:09] <vorlon> sorry, haven't gotten to this yet
[20:10] <vorlon> I guess if we're voting yes on Kubuntu now it's not urgent?
[20:10] <vorlon> but I would still like to keep the action, to do before 24.04, unless someone else wants to learn about this stuff from me and work on it
[20:10] <amurray> not urgent but I would still like to see them finalise their list before the LTS goes out
[20:10] <vorlon> indeed
[20:11] <amurray> hmm also should there be an action item on me for the kubuntu LTS request?
[20:11] <amurray> I don
[20:11] <amurray> 't see anything - will add one
[20:11] <amurray> #action amurray to follow-up with kubuntu on 24.04 LTS request
[20:11] <meetingology> ACTION: amurray to follow-up with kubuntu on 24.04 LTS request
[20:12] <amurray> #topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item)
[20:12] <amurray> #link https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2024-March/thread.html
[20:12] <amurray> nothing new
[20:12] <amurray> #topic Check up on community bugs and techboard bugs
[20:12] <amurray> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bugs?field.assignee=techboard
[20:12] <amurray> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/techboard
[20:13] <amurray> nothing here either
[20:13] <amurray> #topic Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members)
[20:13] <amurray> looks like its rbasak with seb128 as backup
[20:13] <amurray> #agreed next meeting chair: rabask, backup: seb128
[20:13] <meetingology> AGREED: next meeting chair: rabask, backup: seb128
[20:14] <seb128> ack
[20:14] <amurray> #topic AOB
[20:14] <vorlon> one item for AOB
[20:14] <vorlon> I noticed when doing a "census" from the Release Team side of our LTS qualifications
[20:14] <vorlon> that Ubuntu MATE doesn't appear to have applied yet for LTS status
[20:14] <vorlon> does someone want to reach out to them and find out if they plan to?
[20:14] <seb128> right, that was discussed yesterday during the flavors sync call
[20:14] <vorlon> (it's fine if they don't do LTS, of course)
[20:15] <vorlon> seb128: oh ok - what's the news?
[20:15] <seb128> someone took an action item to reach to Martin to ask
[20:15] <seb128> but the few people who had feedback said that the MATE team seems mostly inactive recently
[20:16] <vorlon> ok
[20:16] <seb128> ah, someone was Mauro
[20:16] <vorlon> that's fine then
[20:16] <seb128> (just checked the meeting note)
[20:16] <vorlon> I just didn't want this to slip by unnoticed
[20:16] <amurray> there is a topic over in their discourse but I don't see anything definitive there
[20:16] <vorlon> since the MATE team's communications preferences seem misaligned with the Release Team's and the Tech Board's these days
[20:16] <amurray> #link https://ubuntu-mate.community/t/plans-for-24-04-lts/27110/4
[20:17] <seb128> amurray, right, I think that one was used as a basis for the claim that the dev team isn't responsive/around much recently
[20:19] <amurray> I'll ask in that thread as well and tag Martin as well
[20:19] <seb128> amurray, thanks (and maybe check first with Mauro if he already did since he took an action about it yesterday)
[20:19] <seb128> well I mean reaching out to them
[20:20] <seb128> though I guess a public post wouldn't hurt in any case
[20:20] <vorlon> Martin *did* come to the Ubuntu Summit so it's not entirely moribund?
[20:20] <amurray> yeah I think its fine for the TB to enquire for our own purposes - it would definitely be a shame for MATE to not be part of the LTS
[20:20] <vorlon> again, it's fine if a flavor doesn't want to do LTS support
[20:21] <seb128> right, well let's see what they reply
[20:21] <vorlon> just don't want to make sure that's a conscious decision (or the outcome of an assessment of the flavor's capacity), not an accident of timing
[20:21] <vorlon> s/don't//
[20:21] <amurray> agreed
[20:21] <amurray> thanks for raising it vorlon
[20:22] <amurray> anything else?
[20:22] <vorlon> nothing else here
[20:22] <seb128> nothing from me
[20:22] <amurray> easy - thanks folks
[20:22] <amurray> #endmeeting
[20:22] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 20:22:59 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2024/ubuntu-meeting.2024-03-12-20.03.moin.txt
[20:23] <seb128> thanks!
[20:23] <vorlon> seb128, amurray: thank you!
[20:24] <amurray> likewise :)