20101020
UDD stakeholders meeting 2010-10-20 2100 UTC
Meeting conducted on #ubuntu-meeting @freenode. Duration: 1 hour max.
Chair: Barry Warsaw
Agenda
- Action items
poolie to confirm charline to do user studies at UDS-N (done)
poolie to organize a foyer poster (ongoing)
barry to start some sphinx docs to be well-integrated w/ wiki.u.c (ongoing)
barry to talk to dholbach about making sure udd is well advertised in pkg guide (ongoing)
barry/poolie to write up job announcements; barry posts to python job board, james_w/slangasek posts to debian-jobs, ubuntu-devel (done)
- UDS prep
Top bug: watch file support - barry
- AOB
Summary
- UDS-N actions
- sit down with scottk and watch his diff/patch method for porting clamav updates to all releases and see if UDD can help.
- face-to-face feedback from mvo
- have complete end-to-end story, including reviewing merge proposals and landing new packages from branches
- top bugs
- bzr branches are too expensive to use for casual sponsoring, compared with downloading packages from my local mirror (slangasek)
(watch file support) - james_w and barry to sprint on that at uds-n
bzr commit in a heavyweight checkout does not propagate new tags
- changelog merge problem (probably caused by dpkg-mergechangelogs). need more investigation by barry
New action items
- poolie to start list thread to find problems which can be carried on at UDS
Meeting log
<barry> #startmeeting <MootBot> Meeting started at 16:00. The chair is barry. <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] * slangasek waves <barry> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/20101020 <barry> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/20101020 <MootBot> LINK received: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/20101020 <poolie> hi all [17:01] <barry> hi slangasek, poolie, jelmer, ajmitch <flacoste> hi <barry> hi flacoste <barry> james_w sends his apologies <flacoste> barry: thumper should join <barry> thumper: hi <jelmer> hi <thumper> hi <barry> the agenda link is: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/20101020 <barry> [TOPIC] action items [17:03] <MootBot> New Topic: action items <barry> * '''poolie to confirm charline to do user studies at UDS-N''' (ongoing) <barry> <poolie> done, i think <poolie> i see i have a new mail from her <poolie> very slow, nm [17:04] <poolie> let's say that's done <barry> poolie: thanks, i'm looking forward to that! <barry> * '''poolie to organize a foyer poster''' (ongoing) <barry> <poolie> not done yet, will do that today or tomorrow <barry> cool [17:05] <barry> * '''barry to start some sphinx docs to be well-integrated w/ wiki.u.c''' (ongoing) <barry> <barry> not done <barry> but... <barry> * '''barry to talk to dholbach about making sure udd is well advertised in pkg guide''' (ongoing) <barry> <barry> will do that at uds <barry> * '''barry/poolie to write up job announcements; barry posts to python job board, james_w/slangasek posts to debian-jobs, ubuntu-devel''' (ongoing) [17:06] <barry> <poolie> i know you've sent it to python because we got lots of applicants <barry> python jobs board post done. poolie tells me we have some interesting candidates already <poolie> i haven't seen any from debian so i suspect that wasn't done <poolie> however we probably have a selection, so no more advertisement is needed atm <barry> nice <poolie> incidentally, i'm told that we'll soon have better recruiting management software [17:07] <poolie> which should be nice for all involved <barry> indeed :) <poolie> (not hraspace :) <barry> i think we can mark this one done for now though, right? <poolie> yep <barry> thanks everyone <barry> [TOPIC] uds prep <MootBot> New Topic: uds prep <barry> i believe we have 3 sessions scheduled, so it probably makes sense to prep for them. i plan on at least looking at that over the next two days [17:08] <slangasek> poolie: do you prefer that I not post it to debian-jobs then, given the tardiness? <poolie> slangasek: yes, better not too [17:09] <slangasek> ok <poolie> feel free to post other job ads though :) <barry> probably the most work will be for the user session. i'll have to ping james_w about that tomorrow so we're on the same page. <barry> does anybody have any thoughts about prepping for the sessions? * ScottK reminds barry he's promised to sit down with me and watch my diff/patch method for porting clamav updates to all releases and see if UDD can help. [17:11] <barry> ScottK: right, thanks. we're also going to sit down with mvo for his feedback <barry> there is a "user feedback session" that this will probably be appropriate for, and i'll add action items to the blueprint for that [17:12] <barry> [ACTION] barry to add ScottK and mvo feedback to uds session <MootBot> ACTION received: barry to add ScottK and mvo feedback to uds session <ajmitch> you have a few usecases listed for the user feedback session? <barry> ajmitch: i was going to work off of the udd wiki page use cases <ScottK> Please don't distract ajmitch from fixing boost. ;-) [17:13] <barry> one thing i'd really like to address is getting more reviews and sponsor landings from merge proposals <poolie> i guess all interested parties need to to subscribe to the sessions <ajmitch> ScottK: I can sense your impatience :) <poolie> as in, how to get more reviews? <ScottK> Me? Impatient? <barry> poolie: well, right now mp's seem to be a black hole. i don't think sponsors are tuned to looking at mps yet <poolie> :/ ok, that's a good thing to think about <barry> and since i can't sponsor, it's unclear in my mind what *should* be the workflow <thumper> barry: when talking to people about this, can you try to gather work-flow information? [17:15] <thumper> barry: I'm keen to know how people do use MPs, and how they'd like to use them [17:16] <ajmitch> there are a few different workflows depending on what's being sponsored <slangasek> solve the "bzr branches are too expensive to use for casual sponsoring, compared with downloading packages from y local mirror" problem? <barry> thumper: sure. aren't you keen on hooking that up to build-from-branch? :) <slangasek> +m <poolie> so popping up one meta-level, we want <poolie> - to help people understand how to use what is there [17:17] <thumper> barry: I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting <poolie> - to make sure we have a good triaged list of what's inadequate - either technically failing, or failing as process <poolie> - to recruit some people willing to try our solutions to the previous point <poolie> heh, so as far as actions: <poolie> - do we need more sessions? <barry> right now, i think "no" [17:19] <poolie> - i propose we start a list thread to find problems and then carry that on at UDS <poolie> - if we want to go into them in detail i suggest we continue after the 'steering committee' bit of the meeting is over <poolie> therefore, done? <barry> poolie: i like your list. for me it really comes down to having a complete, end-to-end story for devs and sponsors <barry> poolie: thanks. would you like to kick off that thread? [17:20] <poolie> i will <barry> thanks! <barry> [ACTION] poolie to start list thread to find problems which can be carried on at UDS [17:21] <MootBot> ACTION received: poolie to start list thread to find problems which can be carried on at UDS <barry> any other uds related comments? <poolie> no [17:22] <barry> [TOPIC] top bug [17:23] <MootBot> New Topic: top bug <barry> bug 295274 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 295274 in bzr-builddeb "merge-upstream shouldn't require --version when debian/watch is present" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/295274 <poolie> nice agenda item! <barry> james_w: and i are going to sprint on that at uds <poolie> that would rock <poolie> current top udd bugs for us: andrew is working on bug 655307 [17:24] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 655307 in QBzr "using odt2txt to diff OOo documents" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/655307 <barry> indeed, both because i think it will eliminate a pain point (one which i witnessed first hand yesterday) and because it'll help get me acquainted with the code <poolie> or not <poolie> bug 653307 <slangasek> bug 603395 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 653307 in Ubuntu Distributed Development "Import fails with missing referenced chk root keys" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/653307 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 603395 in Bazaar "bzr commit in a heavyweight checkout does not propagate new tags" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/603395 <poolie> heaven help us when we get to 7 or 8 digit bugs <poolie> slangasek: that's your nomination, 603395? <barry> we'll have to start tinyurl'ing them <poolie> barry: you know about pad.lv, right? [17:25] <poolie> i guess it could fold them into base64 but .. shudder <slangasek> poolie: it's the one that breaks every UDD merge I do unless I remember it beforehand; maybe I'm the only one running into it? <barry> poolie: yeah, i was using the generic :) <slangasek> rather, it breaks the branches /after/ I've done a merge <lifeless> barry: hi <barry> lifeless: hi <lifeless> barry: I want you after this meeting :) <poolie> slangasek: i'll bump it up <ajmitch> most people probably use bzr branch instead of checkout? <barry> slangasek: i'll add it to "top bugs". i haven't hit it because i always branch [17:26] <barry> lifeless: ooooohhhh :) <slangasek> barry: am I wrong in thinking co is supposed to be cheaper than branch? maybe I should just be larting myself [17:27] <poolie> a heavy checkout won't be much cheaper <poolie> its main effect is that commits synchronously update the master branch <poolie> a light checkout will be cheap to set up, but it has no local history cache * slangasek nods [17:28] <slangasek> so maybe it's just a bad habit of mine; but it has taken its toll on a number of the UDD branches to date <barry> there is another problem that i always run into, but i haven't figured it out well enough to submit a bug report on. it seems i always get weird merges in debian/changelog <slangasek> that's the new dpkg-mergechangelogs, I think [17:29] <poolie> slangasek: it should be reasonably easy <barry> slangasek: hmm, it *seems* like when i merge a branch, i don't get conflicts, but i get some maintainer lines just getting overwritten and other changelog sections moved way down in the file. [17:30] <poolie> barry: i think bzr builddeb has a hook that tries a smart merge of debian/changelog <barry> but as i said, i need to find a good reproducible test case and understand what's happening better. i'm usually in yak shaving mode at that point so haven't stepped back to figure out what's going on <poolie> it may not be as smart as it thinks <slangasek> barry: bzr-bd calls dpkg-mergechangelogs, which is good, but doesn't mind when it rewrites the entire history of the changelog prior to the base revision, which is bad :) <barry> slangasek: ;) [17:31] <barry> poolie: gotcha <barry> next time it happens, i'll at least get a bug reported * ajmitch used to have the entire changelog appearing as a conflict, so it's improved :) <barry> any other top bugs that are buggin' ya? <slangasek> so I think this is just a bug in bzr-bd needing to be smarter about which changelog entries it passes to dpkg-mergechangelogs for merging <barry> slangasek: gotcha, thanks, that's definitely helpful [17:32] <poolie> on our side, the speedup to lp-serve, which should cut ~2 seconds off ssh connection time, is still winding its way through the lp development meatgrinder <slangasek> ajmitch: you'd think it's an improvement, until you notice in the conflict-free diff that it's reordered all your history back to 1998 :) <poolie> it may be live next week <barry> poolie: nice <poolie> our next devops-type change after that is to get the package-importer moved into being a LOSA-run and monitored service <poolie> i've seen people complaining about some particular package imports failing [17:33] <poolie> which is actually a great sign that they care <poolie> so i hope we will find some time to work on that <barry> yep. do you think it's possible to drive import failures to zero? <ajmitch> barry: not really a bug, but is working with a package that uses a patch system going to be talked about at UDS? <poolie> one question: we're getting many questions from non-ubuntu bzr users about memory usage and large file handling <poolie> does anyone notice this as an issue in udd? <barry> ajmitch: we can. it's definitely one on my list <slangasek> "large file handling" - er, in the working tree or in the repository? [17:34] <poolie> both <slangasek> to me "large file" means "> 2GB", I've yet to run into such a file in UDD * barry has not <poolie> the typical user complaint is "i'm doing game development and i have this multi-GB binary artwork asset" <slangasek> ah, heh <slangasek> ask the ubuntu-docs folks :) <poolie> k <poolie> i'm guessing the top performance thing for UDD would be network latency for branch/checkout/push? [17:35] <slangasek> I think so * barry too <ajmitch> those of us in NZ would readily agree :P <thumper> :) [17:36] <barry> tbh, i'm not really affected by it ;) <poolie> any more top bug nominations? <barry> 5 <barry> 4 <barry> 3 <barry> 2 [17:37] <barry> 1 <slangasek> no, not that one <barry> [TOPIC] aob <MootBot> New Topic: aob <poolie> i have one <jam> poolie: would that include wanting stacked branches/history horizons? <slangasek> bug 1 already gets enough attention ;) <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1 in Ubuntu "Microsoft has a majority market share" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1 <barry> slangasek: :) <poolie> jam, i think at the moment plain roundtrips would be an easier place to start [17:38] <poolie> eg the get_parent_map calls <poolie> but anything, really <barry> oh, looms push/pull! <jam> poolie: (I'm wondering if this is initial checkout, or ongoing updates) <poolie> so i'm applying for an Ubuntu developer membership <poolie> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinPool/DeveloperApplication <ajmitch> what's the state of working with debian packaging branches that are in git? <poolie> i should have done it ages ago, but here it is now <poolie> if people would like to endorse me i'd appreciate it [17:39] <poolie> and thanks to barry for already doing so <barry> np <barry> i'm confident you'll get ppu [17:40] <slangasek> I maintain that having a documented, promulgated solution for UDD branch mirroring, including partial mirrors, is a key to making the workflow viable; lots of devs have local mirrors, and even with decent bandwidth waiting for a fresh download is too much downtime <slangasek> local package mirrors, that is <jelmer> ajmitch: They can be used, but their history is diverged from the history of the package imports. <poolie> i think you're right <slangasek> poolie: I think it's great that you're applying for dev membership, but I'm crap at writing endorsements for these things so hopefully your application doesn't hinge on me doing so <ajmitch> I'd agree there, being reliant on getting branches from 1 location at the moment is just a bit painful <poolie> slangasek: mind if i paste that? <slangasek> poolie: uh... I don't mind :) <poolie> i think you've even sometimes handled my small patches to debian years ago [17:42] <barry> btw, jelmer perhaps: do you know, is there a lag between package upload and source package branch update? if so, what's the time frame? <slangasek> I can't recall but frankly am happy to assume that's the case :) <poolie> i wonder if we could have a eagerly caching proxy for connections to lp or something... <poolie> there may be something cheap we can do [17:43] <poolie> slangasek: do you recall if there's a bug for mirroring? <jelmer> barry: Sorry, I don't know how often the package importer runs. <barry> k, np [17:44] <slangasek> poolie: I haven't opened one, shall I do so? <poolie> i'll have a look, open one, and subscribe you <slangasek> ok, thanks <barry> anything else from the peanut gallery? [17:45] <barry> in that case... [17:46] <barry> #endmeeting
DistributedDevelopment/20101020 (last edited 2010-10-21 18:35:04 by mail)