Ubuntu Wiki

Agenda

Items we will be discussing:

• Review ACTION points from previous meeting.
• Review high priority bugs related to the Server Team.

• It has been suggested that a more concise [:ServerTeam/ReportingPage: Server Team Report] would help the readability of the monthly TeamReports. I would like to discuss paraphrasing, or only using the highlights for the Server Team portion of the report. -- ["Asommer"].

• Review ["ServerTeam/Roadmap"] and ["ServerTeam/ReportingPage"].

• Agree on next meeting date and time.

Minutes

Agree on next meeting date and time

Next meeting will be on Wednesday, April 9th at 21:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.

Log

{{{Started logging meeting in #ubuntu-meeting [23:00:45] <mathiaz> Welcome to the last meeting of the Ubuntu Server Team [23:00:56] <jdstrand> \o [23:00:58] * faulkes- raises an eyebrow [23:01:01] <mathiaz> for the Hardy Release cycle [23:01:07] <sommer> heheh [23:01:08] <jdstrand> oh [23:01:10] <jdstrand> *phew* [23:01:18] <nxvl> i'm going for a quick smoke and brb [23:01:27] <soren> dendrobates sends his apologies. [23:01:34] <soren> He's on a road trip. [23:01:57] <mathiaz> Unless you've dropped off the Ubuntu planet, you know that we're releasing hardy tomorrow [23:02:00] * kirkland recommends UpIRC PalmOS application for IRC connectivity in the car [23:02:36] <nijaba> kirkland: this is an add free channel [23:02:37] <mathiaz> so testing testing and testing are the magic words these days [23:02:43] * owh recommends mIRGGI for an N95 [23:03:05] <mathiaz> Today's agenda: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting [23:03:44] <mathiaz> Last meeting note (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/Server/20080416) lists no ACTION [23:04:24] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Review release-blocker/criticial bugs related to the Server Team. [23:04:51] <mathiaz> Anyone knows about such a bug ? [23:05:16] <zul> I hope not [23:05:25] <nxvl> nop [23:05:29] * nijaba shivers [23:05:30] <nxvl> i haven't find any [23:06:14] <mathiaz> we've been chasing some kvm bugs [23:06:27] <mathiaz> but it was solved for hardy [23:06:46] <soren> Yeah. They've been popping up like crazy for the last 5-6 days. [23:07:08] <nijaba> soren: that's because we all did the iso testing using it, I guess [23:07:16] <jdstrand> I don't know that kvm has ever seen such a workout [23:07:17] <mathiaz> soren: for my understanding, you've disable virtio-blk in hardy ? [23:07:24] <soren> nijaba: Oh, yeah. Sure. [23:07:26] <soren> mathiaz: That's right. [23:07:31] <soren> mathiaz: Well... [23:07:55] <soren> mathiaz: The kernel supports it, and kvm has the code, too, but virtinst (and hence virt-manager) doesn't enable it for hardy guests. [23:08:06] <soren> We still have virtio-net, which by far was the most important one. [23:08:09] <kirkland> mathiaz: worth noting that jdstrand uploaded a fix for the nss/ldap login hang bug that's been around for a long while [23:08:48] <mathiaz> soren: so if I use virsh and an xml file to define my guest, I still have access to virtio-blk ? [23:08:54] <nijaba> a brillant fix by kirkland! [23:09:10] <jdstrand> soren: you did remove a troublesome patch for virtio-blk that makes it really not very good for normal uses though [23:09:14] <jdstrand> soren: correct? [23:09:28] <soren> mathiaz: Right. [23:09:38] <soren> jdstrand: Right. [23:09:52] <soren> For rather extreme valus of "not very good" even. [23:09:54] <soren> [23:10:01] <jdstrand> heh [23:10:04] <nealmcb> I had an odd postgres install problem on an ubuntu-vm-builder vm last night - I should try it again.... https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/postgresql-common/+bug/193696 [23:10:07] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 193696 in postgresql-common "Postgresql 8.3 not responding" [Low,Fix released] [23:10:26] <mathiaz> nealmcb: I've commented on that bug - it's probably related to ubuntu-vm-builder [23:10:36] <nxvl> soren: did you see the shotdown botton bug i reported? [23:10:45] <nxvl> shutdown* [23:10:45] <nealmcb> mathiaz: I saw that, but the postgres was installed via apt-get, not in the original build [23:10:47] <mathiaz> nealmcb: postgresql works correctly in a guest [23:11:23] <mathiaz> nxvl: bug number ? [23:11:26] <soren> nxvl: I've not seen it, but I'm almost sure I know what it is [23:11:34] * nxvl searches [23:11:34] <soren> nxvl: ...and it's not a bug [23:11:50] * nijaba bets for acpi [23:11:58] <jdstrand> the libnss-ldap bug was tough to triage, but once it was triaged things fell into place. kirkland did most of the fix and it is working great. thanks kirkland! [23:11:58] <kirkland> nxvl: soren: I reported one too, a kvm segfault, acpi related? [23:12:08] <nxvl> Bug #190886 [23:12:12] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 190886 in virt-manager "virt-manager: pause/break key does not work" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/190886 [23:12:16] <soren> kirkland: I haven't seen it. I'm not really caught up on launchpad mail. [23:12:42] <soren> nxvl: They're different issues. [23:12:44] <jdstrand> still, all these kvm issues aren't release critical [23:12:54] <soren> nxvl: Your problem is that you have nothing that's responding to the acpi events the shutdown button sends. [23:13:00] <soren> nxvl: solution: Install acpid in the guest. [23:13:10] * nxvl tries [23:13:15] <kirkland> soren: yeah, i haven't noticed any ill effects, besides the segfault message on /var/log/messages [23:13:16] * jdstrand likes to 'Destroy' things [23:13:41] <jdstrand> (in virt-manager that is) [23:14:23] <mathiaz> so it seems like we're on track for hardy release [23:14:27] <mathiaz> let's move on [23:14:44] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] ServerTeam report and the monthly report [23:15:10] <mathiaz> sommer: you've been told we should have shorter reports ? [23:15:26] <sommer> mathiaz: ya, that was the gist of things [23:15:40] <mathiaz> sommer: right - I agree with that [23:16:02] <nijaba> does this mean we work too hard? [23:16:05] <mathiaz> I'm still working out the whole status reporting thing [23:16:20] <sommer> nijaba: heh, I think it means we report too hard [23:16:23] <owh> nijaba: No, it means we talk too much. [23:16:26] <kirkland> nijaba: nah, just talk too much [23:16:26] <mathiaz> nijaba: it means we should edit the monthly report a little bit more [23:17:17] <mathiaz> for now, I just take the meeting minutes and shove them in the monthly report with some light editing [23:17:33] <owh> Is there a specified format that we need to adhere to? [23:17:45] <mathiaz> So I'd like to know if the format of the Weekly meeting minutes is good ? [23:18:05] <mathiaz> Are the minutes too short, too long or verbose ? [23:18:22] <nxvl> mathiaz: i found them good [23:18:25] <faulkes-> I find them concise and to the point [23:18:28] <sommer> mathiaz: I think they are too long and verbose [23:18:28] <nxvl> mathiaz: they have all the information needed [23:18:52] <owh> The current format shows what people would need if they were not at the meeting. Isn't that the whole point? [23:18:57] <sommer> mathiaz: it was mentioned that we don't have to report on the "ideas" that people are working on [23:18:58] <mathiaz> sommer: they == the minutes sent each week or the content of the monthly report ? [23:19:06] <nxvl> so anyone can understand what has been talked if they weren't present [23:19:13] <sommer> mathiaz: sorry, the monthly report... I think the minutes are fine [23:19:33] <mathiaz> sommer: ok - I aggree with you that the monthly report is about what has been done [23:19:50] <owh> But reporting on ideas is where progress comes from - it sparks something with someone and magic happens. [23:19:56] <mathiaz> sommer: I've tried to edit out the section about what people are working on [23:20:03] <mathiaz> sommer: may it's just too verbose [23:20:22] <mathiaz> owh: right - but I think the monthly report is about the past [23:20:25] <nealmcb> mathiaz: I think the minutes are great. the reports could just be a shorter list with references to the minutes [23:20:35] <sommer> mathiaz: I think that's what they were getting at [23:20:49] <owh> mathiaz: But the monthly report is visible to more people, so the ideas spread wider. [23:21:22] <mathiaz> ok - so I'll try to make the monthly report less verbose on focus on what has been achieved [23:21:31] <sommer> we could always link the team report to the more detailed server report [23:21:44] <mathiaz> owh: agreed - I'm not sure that the monthly report is the correct way to do it [23:21:45] <owh> That sounds like a good idea. [23:22:09] <mathiaz> owh: I'd like to have a way to advertise what we're working on now (ie - the present and the futur) [23:22:19] <mathiaz> owh: but the monthly report seems to be about the past [23:22:44] <owh> mathiaz: But if that is the only such forum, then there is no real alternative location. [23:22:46] <mathiaz> sommer: that means we'd have three documents to maintain [23:22:48] <nealmcb> mathiaz: I also would like to see ideas for the future out there, and don't want another report series.... [23:23:00] <nealmcb> so put ideas for the future in the reports, but just in more summarized form? [23:23:04] <mathiaz> sommer: the weekly minutes, the monthly server report and the server section of the monthly report [23:23:23] <sommer> mathiaz: heh, and there's also the blog idea [23:23:23] <faulkes-> if I have a list of current in-progress projects, I am happy to update the forum sticky on a regular basis [23:23:38] <owh> Where there *specific* objections to the monthly report? [23:23:42] <mathiaz> sommer: right - that's why I've tossed the idea of a blog [23:23:50] <mathiaz> owh: too verbose I think [23:23:58] <sommer> owh: ^ yes [23:24:13] <nealmcb> I recall noticing that there are also some differences e.g. in formatting - lots of subheadings in our report and that is rare in others [23:24:43] <nealmcb> so the table of contents looks like it is all server, all the time [23:24:59] <owh> Excellent [23:25:00] <mathiaz> nealmcb: true - I'll try to fix that [23:25:08] <sommer> nealmcb: it's pretty much a pay per view channel [23:25:21] <owh> nealmcb: That's how it should be right [23:25:35] <nealmcb> cool - we can even monetize it!! [23:25:45] <mathiaz> [ACTION] mathiaz to make the server section of the monthly report less verbose [23:25:58] <owh> I've just looked at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/ReportingPage/2008-04, that's a single screen. Is that too verbose? [23:26:05] <mathiaz> I'd add that I've asked for a session at UDS about this [23:26:28] <mathiaz> I've got a couple of other ideas on improving the server team community and how to attract new contributors [23:26:45] <mathiaz> we should get a session at UDS about this to discuss all of that [23:27:40] <mathiaz> If you have ideas, add them to the IdeaPool page [23:27:40] <nealmcb> mathiaz: a session on reporting for all teams, or just server? [23:27:42] <mathiaz> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/IdeaPool [23:28:17] <mathiaz> nealmcb: just server - and it wouldn't be just about reporting [23:28:31] <mathiaz> nealmcb: I'd also get the input from the community team [23:28:41] <mathiaz> UDS will be a good place to discuss that [23:29:20] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] VMware release times in the partner repository. [23:29:34] <mathiaz> owh: ?? [23:29:39] <owh> Yup [23:29:55] <owh> I deploy servers with clients and rely on vmware-server. [23:30:07] <owh> The challenge is that the release dates are not synchronised. [23:30:22] <owh> This means that I cannot deploy a current release if it's recent. [23:30:35] <owh> Are there things we can do as a server team to mitigate this? [23:30:42] <soren> Not really. [23:30:57] <owh> Other than migrate to a different solution [23:31:01] <soren> It's in the hands of the partner repository people and VMWare. [23:31:22] <owh> There seems to be a disconnect there. [23:31:31] <owh> That is, release === release. [23:31:33] <faulkes-> ok, is it possible to speak to them about it or is this a one off issue? [23:32:04] <owh> faulkes-: Well it has happened two releases running and it seems it will happen again with Hardy. [23:32:39] <owh> I understand that we don't control our partners. [23:32:54] <owh> But if they purchase the right to be one, that comes with responsibilities. [23:32:59] <faulkes-> owh: will you send me a description of the issue/problem and I will see who we can approach @ vmware to discuss it? [23:33:00] <owh> IMHO [23:33:25] * faulkes- doesn't know but they do have offices just down the road from here [23:33:38] <nealmcb> how long was the delay in previous releases? [23:33:38] <nijaba> point is that vmware does not want to build the tools until we release. that will not change until they complete the floss version of their tool [23:33:38] <owh> faulkes-: There was an email to U-D-D IRC about it for hardy where a developer was discussing it with them, [23:33:47] <nijaba> we talk with them bi-weekly [23:34:04] <owh> nijaba: But isn't that why we freeze stuff? [23:34:14] <zul> faulkes-: burlington? [23:34:25] <owh> nealmcb: I recall one delay of at least a month or more. [23:34:30] <nijaba> owh: they don't care, that's there rule... [23:34:44] <nijaba> their, even [23:34:49] <owh> nealmcb: I think it may have been at least 2 months, but my memory is hazy. [23:34:59] <faulkes-> zul: yes [23:35:08] <owh> nijaba: Well, that shouldn't be how it works. If you are a partner then you have a commitment. [23:35:09] <nijaba> owh: it should not be that long this time (I hope) [23:35:16] <faulkes-> zul: well, oakville, just near the border, they are about 5 min away [23:35:47] <owh> So, what is the process to raise this kind of issue? [23:36:16] <owh> Other than faulkes- knocking on their door. [23:36:55] <ivoks> sounds like politics [23:37:11] <owh> Am I under the misunderstanding that deploying a server with a partner repository is not meant for mission critical deployment? [23:37:30] <nijaba> owh: what do you mean exactly? [23:37:41] <faulkes-> owh: I think you have made your point [23:38:00] <faulkes-> nijaba: that if they commit to a partnership there is an inherent obligation to meet certain timeframes/responsibilities [23:38:08] <nijaba> owh: show me one os that has certified partner tools the day of release and I'll start to understand [23:38:09] <owh> faulkes-: Yes. [23:38:25] <owh> nijaba: That's not my point. [23:38:27] <faulkes-> nijaba: point [23:38:46] <owh> nijaba: It should be that way. If we cannot work towards that, then why are we partnering at all? [23:38:47] <faulkes-> however, the question remains, if we want to solve the issue, is there a way we can easily do so? [23:39:08] * owh hunts for the email thread. [23:39:27] <faulkes-> I'm happy to show up at there door with a case of beer to discuss it but thats a bit extreme [23:39:32] <nijaba> faulkes-: the only real solution is for vmware to complete their oss implementation of their tool so that WE can compile them when needed [23:39:51] <nijaba> faulkes-: and that's the plan we've been following for a while now [23:40:03] <faulkes-> ok [23:40:05] * faulkes- nods [23:40:11] <nijaba> faulkes-: unfortunately they did not complte it in time for hardy as we would have hoped. [23:40:24] <owh> Hold on, I'm not talking about vmware-tools. [23:40:25] <jdstrand> I am not speaking authoritatively here, but I always just figured they were going to do all their regression testing, etc when they knew things weren't going to change-- which means release [23:40:34] <owh> I'm talking about vmware-server [23:41:05] <nijaba> owh: vmware server is another story, as they do not even support the thing [23:41:58] <owh> nijaba: So, if it's not supported, why is it in the partner repository at all? [23:42:20] <nealmcb> I hear there's this kvm/libvirt/ubuntu-vm-builder suite that is sweet and open-source and could use some polish [23:42:56] <nijaba> owh: partner repo does not equates to vendor supported, but to vendor provided, I gues [23:42:57] <owh> nealmcb: As soon as I can run that on hardware that runs vmware, I'm in. [23:43:27] <mathiaz> it seems that owh highlighted a misconception about the partner repository [23:43:36] <owh> nealmcb: And as you well know, I've been putting my oar in there [23:43:50] <nealmcb> I see value with folks providing stuff on ubuntu and figure it is up to them how and when they do so [23:43:54] <mathiaz> This may need to be clarified by Canonical [23:43:55] <owh> mathiaz: At least a non-shared understanding. [23:44:02] <nealmcb> owh: right on - just didn't want that to get lost in the conversation [23:44:17] <mathiaz> Let's move on [23:44:23] <owh> nealmcb: Ah, the soren-pay-tv-channel [23:44:30] * faulkes- has to head out [23:44:44] <owh> Right, so what is the action for this? [23:44:47] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Other Business [23:44:58] <owh> Who can talk to someone about the issue? [23:44:59] <mathiaz> owh: there isn't much we can do unfortunately [23:45:12] <owh> mathiaz: Well we identified several issues. [23:45:15] <mathiaz> owh: it's up to vmware to figure it out [23:45:42] <owh> mathiaz: But it's up to us to point issues out to the partner team and Canonical. [23:45:44] <mathiaz> owh: I think that nijaba heard your concern and knows about it - it may take more time that expected to come to an proper solution [23:46:01] <soren> owh: "soren-pay-tv-channel"? [23:46:06] <nijaba> mathiaz: I did, indeed... [23:46:25] <owh> mathiaz: nijaba: Thanks, all good. [23:46:27] <mathiaz> owh: right - nijaba knows about it now - I think we cannot do much more [23:46:51] <owh> soren: Just a weird reference to all ubuntu-server all the time, pay-tv and you being mr virtual [23:47:18] <soren> owh: ok [23:48:06] <mathiaz> As you may know, there will be an Ubuntu OpenWeek next week [23:48:13] <mathiaz> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOpenWeek/ [23:48:42] <mathiaz> I'll give an intro about the Server Team on Tuesday [23:49:08] <mathiaz> and soren will lead a session on virtualization [23:49:22] <mathiaz> there are a lot more sessions scheduled [23:49:28] <mathiaz> check the wiki page: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOpenWeek/ [23:50:16] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] # [23:50:16] <mathiaz> Agree on next meeting date and time. [23:50:23] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Agree on next meeting date and time. [23:50:38] <mathiaz> Same place, same time, next week ? [23:50:38] <owh> Can I observe that the times associated with those sessions are heavily weighted to being while I'm asleep? [23:50:51] <nxvl> mathiaz: next week do we need to have a weekind, or it will be "vacations" until ibex repositories are up? [23:51:08] <mathiaz> owh: true - but there will be irc logs [23:51:39] <mathiaz> nxvl: repositories for intrepid may open next week [23:51:39] <owh> I'm just thinking, we've sort of gone global a while ago [23:51:50] <nxvl> woohooo, merge time [23:51:55] <mathiaz> nxvl: there is also UDS to prepare [23:52:08] * nijaba won't be around next week [23:52:14] <nxvl> btw, is it a good idea to start merging now? or do i want until the repositories are up? [23:52:18] <mathiaz> nxvl: so if you wanna discuss something, it's also a good time to do some reasearch and get prepared [23:52:30] <nxvl> mathiaz: yep, i was forgeting that [23:52:31] <nxvl> [23:52:35] <owh> mathiaz: Is there going to be a way for the team to contribute to UDS even if they cannot physically attend? [23:52:35] <nxvl> mathiaz: you are right [23:52:43] <nxvl> next week, same time, same place [23:52:50] <owh> WFM [23:52:56] <ivoks> owh: yes, irc, and voip [23:52:56] <mathiaz> owh: yes - there are VOIP sessions [23:53:01] <mathiaz> owh: you can dial in [23:53:08] <mathiaz> owh: OTOH UDS is in Prague [23:53:12] <owh> Hmm, VoIP across satellite, yum. [23:53:22] <mathiaz> owh: so there may be some time zone issue for you [23:53:26] <sommer> is there going to be icecast as well? [23:53:45] <mathiaz> sommer: icecast -> voip IIRC [23:53:48] <owh> mathiaz: Time I can fix, distance not so much. [23:54:02] <mathiaz> people will be able to hear the discussions in the rooms [23:54:04] <sommer> mathiaz: ah, gotcha [23:54:08] * owh observes satellites in a geostationary orbit [23:54:38] <owh> Right, so meeting time then [23:54:51] <owh> Same bat channel works for me. [23:55:15] <mathiaz> Allright - so next week, same time same place [23:55:21] <nijaba> thanks mathiaz [23:55:25] <nealmcb> [23:55:29] <mathiaz> thanks all for your participation [23:55:33] <kirkland> adios [23:55:37] <owh> mathiaz: Merci Beaucoup [23:55:39] <mathiaz> and we've done some great work for hardy [23:55:39] <sommer> thanks mathiaz, later on all [23:55:39] <jdstrand> thanks mathiaz! [23:55:55] <mathiaz> #endmeeting }}}