[07:05] Hello team, when is today's meeting supposed to happen? I do not see it in the Ubuntu Fridge calendar. [16:00] \o [16:00] o/ [16:00] o/ [16:00] o/ [16:01] o/ [16:11] Where is the other half of the DMB? [16:11] I'm wondering what we need to do. [16:12] teward, tsimonq2, bdmurray: do we need to move the meeting time or something? [16:13] Should we start the meeting anyway to get it rolling (and carry it over to email for the other DMB members to vote)? [16:13] Agreed [16:13] +1 :-) [16:14] Actually I believe there's a rule that if someone's appearing for a second time then those here can make a final decision [16:15] I think that's the case for fheimes, right? [16:15] @rbasak: yes (even here the 3rd time) [16:15] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Voting_and_Quorum [16:15] So let's use that and get to a decision on your application today [16:15] Mine too, it is my second time [16:20] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase#Voting_and_Quorum does not say anything about changed rules for appearing the second time. Only inactive members will reduce the quorum requirement. "Any DMB member who fails to attend 6 consecutive scheduled DMB meetings (during a period no shorter than 12 weeks) shall be considered inactive" [16:20] Oh, OK [16:21] "at the next scheduled meeting, the vote will pass with only a majority of present members" [16:21] That's not my reading though? [16:21] But we should hold the meeting anyway. E.g. if we vote +3 in total, we would just need one more member to vote +1 on the ML to get the application approved. [16:21] Yes we should proceed anyway [16:22] Oh, I missed the part. So we need to vote this time and won't reach quorum. Then we can vote next time with just the majority of present members. [16:23] +1 [16:23] I think we should really start [16:24] Who wants to chair. The agenda still says @utkarsh2102 [16:26] utkarsh2102: ? [16:26] can someone do that today? [16:26] i have so many things going on [16:26] I can take the next ones [16:27] #startmeeting Developer Membership Board [16:27] Meeting started at 16:27:32 UTC. The chair is rbasak. Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [16:27] Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick [16:27] #topic Package Set/Per Package Uploader Applications [16:27] #subtopic PPU application for s390-tools by Frank Heimes at DMB meeting 2024-09-16 (will also join meeting on 2024-09-02, just in case there is remaining time, if not it's also fine). [16:28] fheimes: o/ [16:28] hi \o [16:28] shall I introduce myself quickly? [16:28] Sure, thanks. [16:29] Ok, I'm Frank (fheimes) and work at Canonical's Partner Engineering department (formerly known as hardware enablement) and the Partner I take care of is IBM, with their Z platform (s390x) and their IBM Power family (ppc64el) [16:30] Prior to my time at Canonical I worked at IBM's R&D lab in Germany in the area of Linux, esp. Linux on s390x. [16:30] So, I take care about s390x hw enablement duties, I do quite some work in the s390x space, hence me applying for PPU for s390-tools (package set, consists of two packages). [16:30] rbasak: sorry for lateness. (had an IRL emergency problem) [16:31] OK, questions for fheimes then please. [16:31] Where can the release schedule be found, and on what date was the freeze for Oracular? [16:32] that can be found on discourse, there are release schedule pages for all Ubuntu releases, let me quickly find it ... [16:32] https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/oracular-oriole-release-schedule [16:33] FF was on Aug 15th [16:33] fheimes: OK. And if it's after feature freeze, Oracular has 2.34.0-0ubuntu2 and s390x-tools upstream release 2.34.1, what do you need to check to verify that an upload to Oracular will not violate feature freeze? [16:33] today was beta and hwe freeze [16:34] well, there are several things (I guess) [16:34] one thing to check is if the new release is a bug fix release only [16:35] (there is a high chance with a x.y.1) [16:35] if it incl. new features, that are urgently needed and it would violate the FF, then a FFe can be thought of [16:36] if a new version incl. new features AND bug fixes and some fixes are needed, then they need to be cherry-picked -- the package can no longer be simply version bumped after the FF [16:37] I hope I covered what you were looking for? [16:37] Yes thanks. Typing question next question... [16:37] If you upload and it gets "stuck in proposed", who is expected to resolve the situation? [16:38] well, it's primarily me [16:39] OK. And how would you approach that - for example where's the documentation for dealing with this situation? [16:39] I'll should check and shepared the package through the process and should see when it gets stuck, but I will also get a notification in case it's stuck for a certain amount of time [16:40] I would first of all look at launchpad, trying to find out why it's stuck (FTBFS, missing approval) [16:41] britney is another source, actually the update excuses page, like: [16:41] https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/oracular/update_excuses.html#s390-tools [16:42] Do you get dep8 results for s390-tools in practice? [16:42] there are many docs where someone can find more info on what to do, for example in case of an SRU: https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html [16:42] I see the packaging doesn't ship tests (I think?) but maybe you get rdep dep8 tests triggered? [16:43] @rbasak: the status on that is what I can see here: https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/oracular/update_excuses.html#s390-tools [16:44] There's nothing there at the moment though because it isn't pending migration right now [16:44] and I can often find directly the reason there (failt to build, missing approval etc) [16:44] yes, that's correct atm there is nothing there (was just an example in case its stuck) [16:44] question: what if it's not there (update_excuses.html) and the package has still not migrated? [16:45] where will you look? [16:45] or what will you do? [16:45] and failed tests of dependent packages can be identified and if needed, retriggered (in different ways) or tests fixed (if needed) [16:46] this is a good doc on this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ProposedMigration#How_to_re-run_autopkgtests_with_dependencies_on_other_packages_in_the_proposed_pocket that I sometimes refer to [16:47] Thanks. I have no further questions! [16:47] Does anyone else have any further questions for fheimes? [16:47] my question^ [16:47] fheimes, have you considered adding dep8 tests to s390-tools? [16:48] so far I got cases where things fauiled to migrate (https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/) via LP itself, and update excuses [16:48] ok, gotcha [16:48] fine, it's okay [16:48] Sorry I thought he was answering it in his subsequent messages [16:49] OK, are we all ready to vote? [16:49] yes, I have considered that - there is a local version that I havebut it's difficult to trigger that automatically, since special hw access is needed, that is no always possible in KVM [16:49] yes, ready to vote [16:49] i am ready to vote as well [16:50] #vote Grant fheimes PPU for s390-tools and s390-tools-signed [16:50] Please vote on: Grant fheimes PPU for s390-tools and s390-tools-signed [16:50] Public votes can be registered by saying +1, -1 or +0 in channel (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1|-1|+0 #channelname') [16:50] +1 [16:50] +1 received from rbasak [16:50] +1 [16:50] +1 received from bdrung [16:50] (for example test on s390x hw cryptography can only be run if the hw got passed throught to a KVM instance, and ensuring that in PS is barely possible ...) [16:50] Sorry I was just checking the application page for the exact set of package names, and then started pondering about the -signed PPA business. [16:50] oh ... [16:50] But I think it's probably irrelevant for initial PPU. [16:50] +1; Frank has a lot of experience with the package and I think I trust him to be an excellent in taking care of the package. [16:50] +1; Frank has a lot of experience with the package and I think I trust him to be an excellent in taking care of the package. received from utkarsh2102 [16:50] +1 [16:50] +1 received from bdmurray [16:51] omg, bdmurray, hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii! [16:51] teward: are you available to vote? [16:51] yes i am 1 minute [16:51] rbasak: we already have 4 votes [16:51] +1 [16:51] +1 received from teward [16:51] ah nice [16:51] perfect! [16:51] Yeah but people should have the opportunity to register if they dissent :) [16:51] rbasak: voted. sorry but like 2 minutes ago I get a call from CEO at DAYJOB [16:52] and that's one of those "Always Answer" cases [16:52] (and it's nice when they also +1) [16:52] #endvote [16:52] Voting ended on: Grant fheimes PPU for s390-tools and s390-tools-signed [16:52] Votes for: 5, Votes against: 0, Abstentions: 0 [16:52] Motion carried [16:52] fheimes: hey, congratulations! <3 [16:52] Congratulations fheimes! [16:52] congrats fheimes :) [16:52] rbasak: can you add his acl and I can take care of the announcement? [16:52] Any volunteers for the action items to enact this? [16:52] congrats fheimes [16:52] ack [16:52] coolio [16:52] #action utkarsh2102 to announce fheimes' successful application [16:52] ACTION: utkarsh2102 to announce fheimes' successful application [16:52] Many thx ! I'm excited and happy ! [16:52] #action rbasak to add fheimes PPU ACL [16:52] ACTION: rbasak to add fheimes PPU ACL [16:53] congratulations [16:53] I know we are running out of time but can we look at aciba, too? [16:53] I have a hard stop [16:53] fheimes, I missed to ask one very important question since you stated that you live in the Schwäbische Alb: What is a Muggeseggele? [16:53] teward, bdrung, bdmurray? [16:53] i have no objection [16:53] ;-) [16:53] no objections [16:53] rbasak: but are you okay with cloud-init PPU? [16:53] oh, hey pleia2 ! [16:53] I'm OK if you'd like to continue anyway. If you can please ask the usual questions then I'll check back later and vote if needed. [16:54] On the matter of cloud-init PPU, I believe Chad already has PPU for cloud-init? [16:54] Chad and James have [16:54] i think he does [16:54] yes [16:54] @bdrung I'm living here, but didn't grew up here, but nevertheless it is a very small unit ;-) [16:55] I'd like to see that ML thread concluded with DMB consensus on the topic, but maybe it's best to follow existing precedent for cloud-init in the meantime [16:55] Seeing as aciba has already been let down [16:55] i don't understand what that means [16:55] And because it'd be a separate matter as to whether cloud-init is considered "core". [16:55] fheimes, I was born in Baden-Württemberg, but grew up in Berlin. [16:56] are you okay with us continuing? [16:56] I think it is probably "core", but cloud-init has been working well enough with PPU recently, especially as any changes have to effectively pass an SRU reviewer anyway. [16:56] are you okay with us continuing> yes [16:56] great! [16:57] #chair utkarsh2102 bdrung bdmurray teward [16:57] Current chairs: bdmurray, bdrung, rbasak, teward, utkarsh2102 [16:57] I need to step away imminently so someone else will need to take over chairing [16:57] bdrung: are you okay to chair? [16:58] okay [16:58] #subtopic PPU application for cloud-init by Alberto Contreras at DMB meeting 2024-09-16 (as 2024-09-02 did not happen). [16:58] \o/ [16:59] o/ [16:59] #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlbertoContreras/DeveloperPerPackageUploadApplication [16:59] aciba, do you quickly want to introduce yourself? [16:59] yes [16:59] I am Alberto Contreras, I have been working for Canonical during the last ~2.5 years as part of the Canonical Public Cloud (CPC) team focused on cloud-init on cloud-specific features / fixes. [17:00] I would like to apply to get upload permissions for cloud-init. [17:00] More about myself and the application: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlbertoContreras/DeveloperPerPackageUploadApplication [17:01] Thanks. Questions for aciba please. [17:04] aciba, you list LP #2045582 as first entry under areas of work. What went well there and what did you learn there? [17:04] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2045582 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Mantic) "sru cloud-init (23.4 update) Focal, Jammy, and Mantic" [Undecided, Fix Released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2045582 [17:05] aciba: question - after you answer the above, what happens if the verification of the SRU fails? what do we do then? [17:06] the sru process, having the package in -proposed allowed other developers to test that new version and detect a couple of bugs prior to releasing it, iirc [17:07] so we detected a couple of bugs and proposed a new version of the package with those bugs fixed to be SRUed [17:09] thanks. perfect transition to utkarsh2102's question [17:10] if the verification fails in a valid way, we need to hold that version and fix it [17:10] proposing a new version including the fix or fixes [17:10] as we did in #2045582 [17:10] we need to add the tags as verification failed to the lp bug [17:11] perfect, thanks [17:11] aciba: what freezes do you need to keep in mind before uploading? [17:12] feature freeze, documentation freeze, beta freeze, final freeze, they are doucmented here: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/oracular-oriole-release-schedule/36460 [17:12] great [17:12] aciba, when you upload a package to the archive, which steps are taken until the package hits the release pocket? [17:13] typically: unnapproved queue > -proposed > -updates [17:14] those steps are outlined here: https://canonical-sru-docs.readthedocs-hosted.com/en/latest/howto/standard/ [17:14] aciba, and in case of uploads to oracular? [17:15] it depends on the time of the release cycle we are at [17:16] prior to feature freeze, it goes directly to the release pockets [17:16] after feature freeze but prio to the release, it requires a ffe and goes directly to the release pocket after the ffe has cleared [17:17] before release it follows the normal SRU process [17:17] that is: unnapproved queue > -proposed > -updates [17:18] did you mean s/before release/after release/? [17:18] yes, sorry [17:19] aciba, there is a step in between the upload and release pocket on the development series. [17:20] it goes to the unpproved queue, but it gets automatically accepted under certain circumstances, [17:21] aciba, and what about autopkgtest? [17:21] they are run when the package hits -proposed, every reverse dependency's dep8 test on the package get executed [17:22] on can see the results in the update excuses page [17:22] and the SRU drive must monitor and take care of them [17:22] s/drive/driver/ [17:23] aciba, are autopkgtest only run for SRU uploads and not for development release uploads? [17:24] the rdeps ones yes, I belive the ones associated with the package itself do run on every build [17:27] package uploads to the development release and up in -proposed first. [17:28] s/and/end/ [17:28] then yes, autopkgtest run for development release uploads [17:29] Do you need a FFe for every upload after the feature freeze (and before the release)? [17:30] no, for example, if there is a new upstream version that contains only bug fixes, then a new upload containing that does not require and ffe [17:30] before the release, the SRU process holds [17:30] s/before/after/? [17:30] s/after/before/ again [17:31] sorry I am a bit nervous [17:31] thanks for being honest here (written text does not convey things like that) [17:32] exceptions to the FFe process can be found here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeatureFreeze and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess [17:33] Any questions from my DMB fellows? [17:35] not from me [17:35] none here [17:35] aciba, You list https://github.com/canonical/cloud-init/commit/57bb32388 as one example. Anything one should be aware of when (re)moving files in /etc? [17:35] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Commit 57bb323 in canonical/cloud-init "d/cloud-init.postinst: change priority of hotplug rules" [17:38] it should not changer behavior, it should not remove config files created by the user [17:39] it should aviod user intervention [17:39] s/aviod/avoid [17:41] does that satisfy your question? [17:41] aciba, if upstream decides to drop a file in /etc can the package just remove the file in /etc on upgrade? [17:43] drop the file how? [17:43] at runtime? [17:44] bdrung [17:44] drop = delete / not ship it in the file in the release tarball [17:44] yes, the package maint scripts can delete a config file when it is not need anymore [17:45] but it depends in a case by case basis I think [17:45] aciba, and in case the file was modified by the user? [17:45] we should minimize user disruption [17:46] and if the user modified the file, the maint scripts shouldn't remove the file [17:46] perfect thanks. i was aiming for the helpers from https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/noble/en/man1/dpkg-maintscript-helper.1.html to be used to handle that. [17:47] I am done with my questions. [17:47] Everyone ready for voting? [17:47] yes [17:47] teward, bdmurray? [17:47] I have no questions. [17:48] bdrung: i think we should proceed [17:48] it's wayyyyy over time [17:49] teward will follow up [17:49] no questions [17:49] there :) [17:49] #vote Grant Alberto Contreras (aciba) PPU for cloud-init [17:49] Please vote on: Grant Alberto Contreras (aciba) PPU for cloud-init [17:49] Public votes can be registered by saying +1, -1 or +0 in channel (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1|-1|+0 #channelname') [17:49] (you already asked if we had more questions and I didn't) [17:51] writing a review.. [17:53] +1; I think Alberto has quite a lot of experience with cloud-init & its internals. I think they'd be a great addition as an uploader of the package. Yes, there were some answers which weren't completely clear but that's okay, I think those are smaller and can be learned on the fly. Alberto, I'd ask you to exercise your upload rights with caution & [17:53] +1; I think Alberto has quite a lot of experience with cloud-init & its internals. I think they'd be a great addition as an uploader of the package. Yes, there were some answers which weren't completely clear but that's okay, I think those are smaller and can be learned on the fly. Alberto, I'd ask you to exercise your upload rights with caution & received from utkarsh2102 [17:53] please don't hesitate to ask before uploading or whenever in doubt. More reviews, better the upload is. So please keep in mind all those things when you upload. ;) [17:54] bdrung, bdmurray, teward? [17:55] +1 I concur what utkarsh2102 wrote [17:55] +1 I concur what utkarsh2102 wrote received from bdrung [17:55] +! [17:55] oops [17:55] +1 [17:55] +1 received from teward [17:55] +1 [17:55] +1 received from bdmurray [17:56] #endvote [17:56] Voting ended on: Grant Alberto Contreras (aciba) PPU for cloud-init [17:56] Votes for: 4, Votes against: 0, Abstentions: 0 [17:56] Motion carried [17:56] yay! [17:56] aciba: congratulations! <3 [17:56] wow, many thanks, I will take care and ask when in doubt [17:56] aciba: super! thank you! [17:57] aciba, congrats. asking when in doubt is the correct mindset. nobody knows everything. [17:57] #action rbasak to add aciba to the right place & utkarsh2102 to announce the successful application [17:57] ACTION: rbasak to add aciba to the right place & utkarsh2102 to announce the successful application [17:57] ok, I'm going to call if off. It was a pretty long meeting :) [17:57] thank you so much for chairing, bdrung. [17:57] much appreciated, have a good day o/ [17:57] exactly [17:57] you were great! o/ [17:58] #endmeeting [17:58] Meeting ended at 17:58:05 UTC. Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2024/ubuntu-meeting.2024-09-16-16.27.moin.txt [17:59] now I have to recharge after 360 and this meeting. [18:35] now for late lunch === not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy === arif-ali_ is now known as arif-ali === lucyllewy_ is now known as lucyllewy