Items we will be discussing:

  • Review ACTION points from previous meeting.
  • Spec status - ScottKitterman

  • Server survey status - MathiasGug

  • Open Discussion.
  • Agree on next meeting date and time.


MIR for Recommends

mathiaz followed up on ubuntu-devel about MIR for Recommends. ScottK asked if there was a script to check for missing recommends in Main. cjwatson said he had almost implemented Recommends support in germinate.

mathiaz asked whether writing MIR for these packages is an easy task and could be given to new contributors. The MIR template lays out the steps and some of its points require packaging knowledge. cjwatson also noted that not all the packages should have MIR written for as some of them should be moved to Suggests instead. The MIR written by non-developers should also be reviewed by a developer before subscribing ubuntu-mir in order to make sure that the report is well-formed and ease the load on the MIR team.

Spec status

Most of the MIR related to amavisd-dkim have been done. clamav-spamassassin-in-main has a stack of MIR that need to be written. ScottK agreed to be the reviewer for the MIR. Anyone interested in helping out should select a MIR from the list and ping ScottK for a quick review before subscribing ubuntu-mir.

nxvl has uploaded a new version of augeas to REVU. He already got an ACK from a MOTU and thus waits for a second one. Once the package is available in the archive, he will focus on writing lenses. He also added that the perl bindings had been released. foolano, an ebox developer, said he would look into using the newly released perl bindings to integrate it in ebox.

soren started a rewrite of ubuntu-vm-builder in python to make it easier to use from other applications. Although the code is already available in LP, it's alpha quality - expect things to change a bit in the coming weeks.

mathiaz reminded everyone about the FeatureFreeze deadline for the intrepid release cycle: August, 28th. Specs should have a working state by this date and uploaded in the archive.

ACTION: mathiaz to update the ServerTeam roadmap with the list of intrepid specs.

Server survey status

mathiaz asked about the status of the server survey. nijaba has been in contact with james who found some hardware to host the survey.

nijaba asked whether an analyst firm could join the survey. It would bring more coverage. That raised the question of who could get access to the anonymised raw data of the survey and draw their own conclusions. After some discussion it was decided that access to anonymized raw data would be given to members of both the ubuntu-server and ubuntumembers teams in LP (intersection of the 2 teams) and a potential analyst firm choosing to join the survey before publication.

Agree on next meeting date and time

Next meeting will be on Tuesday, July 8th at 15:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.


[16:02] <mathiaz> #startmeeting
[16:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:03. The chair is mathiaz.
[16:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:03] <mathiaz> Today's agenda: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[16:04] <mathiaz> Last meeting logs are available here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/Server/20080624
[16:04]  * nealmcb cheers for mootbot :)
[16:04] <mathiaz> I've followed up on ubuntu-devel about MIR for Recommends
[16:05] <mathiaz> there has been some discussion since then
[16:05] <ScottK> It seems pretty clear now.
[16:05] <NeilW> What's MIR
[16:05] <mathiaz> ScottK: so the outcome is that Recommends should either be MIRed or dropped Suggests
[16:05] <ScottK> Main Inclusion Report.
[16:05] <ScottK> NeilW: It's the process for getting stuff moved from Universe to Main.
[16:05] <mathiaz> ScottK: dropped to Suggests, correct ?
[16:06] <NeilW> ScottK: Ta
[16:06] <ScottK> I think policy defines what should be Recommeds/Suggests.
[16:06] <mathiaz> NeilW: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionProcess
[16:06] <ScottK> But yes, Recommends should get promoted.
[16:07] <ScottK> It would be very handy if someone could whip up a script to check for missing recommends in Main.
[16:07] <nxvl> we should revert the recomeds by default, it's a nightmare
[16:07] <mathiaz> ScottK: I think that will come out of the component mismatch list
[16:07] <nxvl> :D
[16:08] <nijaba> ScottK: I think germinate should take care of that, yes
[16:08] <ScottK> mathiaz: But not until germinate is updated.  It'd be nice to get a head start.
[16:08] <mathiaz> ScottK: IIRC cjwatson is adding support for recommends to germinate
[16:08] <ScottK> Yes, but when?
[16:08] <cjwatson> http://paste.ubuntu.com/24240/ work in progress, just needs to be tested
[16:08] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://paste.ubuntu.com/24240/ work in progress, just needs to be tested
[16:09] <ScottK> Ah.  Cool.
[16:09] <cjwatson> feel free to run that locally and look at the differences
[16:09] <nxvl> ScottK: in that case better to ping cjwatson and help him that wrote a new one and duplicate efforts
[16:10] <ScottK> Agreed.
[16:10] <mathiaz> allright - how hard do you think it is to write up a MIR ?
[16:10] <ScottK> I didn't know it was so close.
[16:10] <mathiaz> Is it something that should be given to new contributors ?
[16:10] <ScottK> mathiaz: Not very.  It's a bit tedious, but the template lays out the steps.
[16:10] <ScottK> mathiaz: Not new, but it's not just for developers.
[16:11] <mathiaz> ScottK: right - I don't think it requires a in-depth knowledge of packaging
[16:11] <ScottK> sommer did his first one over the weekend and I had only very minor comments.
[16:11] <mathiaz> right - so creating a list of MIR related to the ubuntu-server team could be a good option
[16:11] <ScottK> There are some FHS and packaging related questions.
[16:11] <ScottK> Yes.
[16:11] <cjwatson> (it's a while since I wrote the above patch; I'm slightly confused by some of it in retrospect, so I might fiddle with it some more)
[16:11] <mathiaz> and promote it as tasks for getting involved in the team
[16:12] <cjwatson> I'd rather we weren't flooded by MIRs from all and sundry, the way we're flooded by specifications
[16:12] <cjwatson> while it isn't technically restricted to developers, it should not be advertised as something that users or even bug triagers should do
[16:12] <ScottK> mathiaz: I think any MIR should be reviewed by experienced people before it gets to ubuntu-mir.
[16:12] <Koon> mathiaz: the "Standards Compliance" questions are the difficult ones, the others are quite straightforward
[16:13] <ScottK> mathiaz: I'd suggest as long as it's clear that non-developers should get them reviewed, it's good.  Even if someone can do part of a MIR it's a help.
[16:13] <mathiaz> cjwatson: re flooded - the  mir will have to be written anyway - are you more concerned about the quality of the report ?
[16:14] <nxvl> cjwatson: do you think we can work on the schema that contributor do the work, then server team reviews it and then it jumps to -mir team?
[16:14] <cjwatson> mathiaz: mistaken premise detected: "the MIR will have to be written anyway" - I'm talking about being flooded by ones that *aren't* necessary
[16:14] <cjwatson> nxvl: yes
[16:14] <ScottK> nxvl: I think you are a prime candidate for doing MIR.
[16:15] <nxvl> ScottK: if augeas is accepted today i will
[16:15] <ScottK> I've got plenty of others you can practice on.
[16:15] <nxvl> ScottK: until it still gets faling, i don't have much time
[16:15] <mathiaz> cjwatson: right - so once the list of component mismatch includes recommends, it should first be reviewed by a dev to figure out which should have MIR written for
[16:15] <cjwatson> yes
[16:16] <ScottK> We also have specs that are driving MIR requirements.
[16:16] <cjwatson> inexperienced people definitely shouldn't be pointed to the full list, since it often includes items that represent bugs in dependencies
[16:16]  * mathiaz nods
[16:16] <nxvl> yes
[16:17] <nxvl> so, if we want more people getting involved in this, we should review they work before it goes to -mir team
[16:17] <mathiaz> but once we have a list of packages that have to be MIRed, then we can ask people to write up the MIR and get them reviewed by a dev before subscribing ubuntu-mir
[16:18] <nxvl> or try to work on a 101 basis, that a member of the team suscribes to a MIR and always review it
[16:18] <ScottK> We have to know it exists first.
[16:19] <nxvl> well
[16:19] <nxvl> yes
[16:19] <soren> o/
[16:19] <mathiaz> ok - so we sort of have a plan for recommends and MIRs
[16:19] <nxvl> but i think that mathiaz mean
[16:19] <nxvl> to write a post saying "if you want to get involved take a llok at this MIRs"
[16:19] <nxvl> mathiaz: didn't you?
[16:19] <mathiaz> nxvl: yes that was my plan
[16:20] <mathiaz> I'll refine the process before writting up the post
[16:20] <nxvl> so i was thinking about that
[16:20] <mathiaz> and there needs to be some work done by a dev before that
[16:20] <nxvl> so i was thinking on mathiaz writing "here is a list of MIRs you can work on, if you want please contact us for guidance"
[16:20] <ScottK> For the ones that are spec'ed the pre-work is already done.
[16:21] <mathiaz> nxvl: yes - that's the last step of the plan
[16:21] <nxvl> :D
[16:21] <mathiaz> all right - let's move on
[16:22] <nxvl> we need to make a list of volunteers who want to review those MIRs also
[16:22] <mathiaz> that's all I have with regard to last meeting minutes
[16:23] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Spec status
[16:23] <MootBot> New Topic:  Spec status
[16:23] <ScottK> For my specs, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/amavisd-dkim is doing quite well.  All the MIRs are done and all but one got approved by doko.  I've addressed his comments on the one.
[16:23] <ScottK> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/server-flavors is deferred.  Too much work in to little time.
[16:23] <ScottK> Finally, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/clamav-spamassassin-in-main has a stack of MIR that need to be written.  Volunteers wanted.
[16:24] <ScottK> sommer: Thanks for the one you did.
[16:24] <sommer> np, should have time this week for some more
[16:24] <ScottK> If anyone wants mentoring on doing MIR, I'll do if for ones in that spec.
[16:24] <lukehasnoname> server flavors: Getting bumped to intrepid+1?
[16:24] <ScottK> Anyone else working on specs?
[16:24] <mathiaz> ScottK: did you review sommer MIR ?
[16:25] <ScottK> lukehasnoname: Yes, unless someone decides to sponsor me a bunch of time to do it.  I don't have the free time to get it for Intrepid.
[16:25] <ScottK> mathiaz: I did and only had some small comments.
[16:25] <nxvl> o/
[16:25] <mathiaz> ScottK: great - would you consider being the reviewer for all the other MIR related to clamav-spamassassing-in-main spec ?
[16:25] <ScottK> He checked with me before subscribing ubuntu-mir just as we've discussed today people should do.
[16:25] <ScottK> mathiaz: Yes.
[16:26] <nxvl> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator
[16:26] <ScottK> Note that the spec is marked mentoring offerred by me.
[16:26] <mathiaz> ScottK: ok
[16:26] <ScottK> lukehasnoname: Did you get my answer to your question.
[16:26] <mathiaz> I'm going to update the Roadmap with links to the current specs
[16:26] <ScottK> nxvl: How is it going?
[16:26] <lukehasnoname> ScottK: Yes
[16:26] <mathiaz> So that we can review them during this meeting
[16:26] <nxvl> ScottK: i think i have augeas done
[16:27] <nxvl> the mayor bug has been already fixed
[16:27] <nxvl> and i've got my 1st ack
[16:27] <ScottK> From who?
[16:27] <mathiaz> [ACTION]: ScottK to be the reviewer for MIR related to clamav-spamassassin-in-main
[16:27] <MootBot> ACTION received: : ScottK to be the reviewer for MIR related to clamav-spamassassin-in-main
[16:27] <nxvl> but some things have just been comment, but i haven't check them
[16:27] <mathiaz> [ACTION] mathiaz to update the ServerTeam roadmap with the list of intrepid specs.
[16:27] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mathiaz to update the ServerTeam roadmap with the list of intrepid specs.
[16:27] <nxvl> they are just minor stuff that i think are good
[16:28] <nealmcb> ScottK: do we need a way to support longer term specs?  perhaps finish discussion and start the flavors one soon for intrepid+2?  Otherwise the answer may always bee "too much work in too little time"... perhaps some of the other related activities can bite off pieces of it?
[16:29] <ScottK> nealmcb: Agreed.  I plan to not forget about it.
[16:29] <mathiaz> As reminded wrt to the release schedule, the deadline to get specs into intrepid is FeatureFreeze, scheduled for August 28th
[16:30] <nealmcb> s/+2/+1....
[16:30] <nxvl> also for ucsa
[16:30] <ScottK> nxvl: norsetto's comments are good ones.
[16:30] <mathiaz> By that time, new features should be in intrepid and be working somehow
[16:30] <nxvl> i don't will have time to finish it for intrepid
[16:30] <nxvl> also in Prague we point it for next LTS
[16:31] <nxvl> ScottK: yes, i will review them after the meeting, i'm not sure about the licenses thing
[16:32] <mathiaz> all right -anything else related to specs ?
[16:32] <ScottK> nxvl: I think your spec is ambitious enough that aiming it two years out was a smart move.
[16:32] <nealmcb> I still haven't looked at it closely, but wonder if getting some frontend (eBox?) to use augeas by Intrepid would be a big step forward
[16:32] <nxvl> ScottK: yes, augeas has do a lot of work for me, and i won't use all that time, but yes
[16:33] <ScottK> IIRC nxvl discussed that with ebox.
[16:33] <mathiaz> nealmcb: that's quit ambitious - the ebox dev are looking into that
[16:33] <nxvl> yes
[16:33] <nxvl> mathiaz and me talked to the eBox developers
[16:33] <nealmcb> but e.g. if folks interested in the admin area were to help ebox, that might move everyone's agenda forward
[16:33] <nxvl> and augeas has some stoppers for it
[16:34] <nxvl> one of them being it lacks on a LOT of lenses
[16:34] <nxvl> so it doesn't support much services
[16:34] <nxvl> <- working on it
[16:34] <nxvl> and the other one is the perl support
[16:34] <nealmcb> should we have a spec for augeas for intrepid?
[16:34] <nxvl> but yesterday was released the perl binding, so it will be tested and used in some days
[16:34] <nijaba> nxvl: that one thing other can help on, right?
[16:35] <ScottK> nealmcb: We don't need to spec getting a package added to Universe.
[16:35] <ScottK> I think Main would be very premature for it.
[16:35] <nxvl> nijaba: writing lenses? yes of course
[16:35] <mathiaz> nealmcb: I think that nxvl is doing a good job
[16:35] <nxvl> nijaba: i'm waiting for augeas to reach the archives to make a call for lensers
[16:35] <mathiaz> nealmcb: we don't need to have spec written for everything
[16:35] <nijaba> nxvl: great
[16:35] <nealmcb> specs are about setting direction also and documenting it in a way that more casual observers can see and comment or help
[16:35] <nxvl> nijaba: they are not hard to write, and a new contributor is going to be able to do it
[16:35] <RoAkSoAx> nxvl, like me?? lol
[16:36] <mathiaz> nxvl: I think that once augeas is in the archive, we can think about the next step
[16:36] <mathiaz> nxvl: such as writing lenses
[16:36] <ScottK> nealmcb: I think that augeaus is an interesting idea, but it would be premature for Ubuntu to put an official stamp of approval on it.
[16:36] <nxvl> RoAkSoAx: yes, that will be your homework :D
[16:36] <mathiaz> nxvl: let's focus first on getting augeas uploaded in the archive
[16:36] <nxvl> mathiaz: yes, that's why i haven't make the call for lensers already
[16:37] <soren> Is anything in particular blocking it right now?
[16:37] <mathiaz> and start to play with it and see what can be done with it
[16:37] <nxvl> soren: augeas you mean? i fixed the blocker 2 hours ago
[16:37] <nxvl> (finally!)
[16:38] <soren> The rpath thing?
[16:38] <nxvl> yep
[16:39] <soren> Ok, cool.
[16:39] <nxvl> i have had nightmares with rpath and autotools for the last 2 weeks
[16:39] <foolano> nxvl: i'll take care of creating the perl bindings for augeas in order to start playing with it in eBox
[16:39] <nxvl> foolano: i have just fwd a mail to the ebox-devel list
[16:40] <nxvl> foolano: there is a perl binding for augeas, released yesterday, better take a look at it and help on it's development
[16:40] <mathiaz> allright - let's move on
[16:40] <foolano> nxvl: oh that's cool
[16:40] <ScottK> Any other specs people are working on?
[16:41] <soren> VM builder stuff.
[16:41] <ScottK> How's it going?
[16:42] <soren> I'm rewriting the whole thing in Python to make it easier to use from other applications.
[16:42] <mathiaz> soren: would you consider doing a blog post about it ?
[16:42] <nealmcb> !
[16:42] <nijaba> soren: do you need help or should we let you work on it for the time beig?
[16:42]  * lukehasnoname concurs with nealmcb
[16:42] <nijaba> being, even
[16:42] <soren> Pretty well considering.. It currently bootstraps a kvm hardy guest just fine. I'm still working some stuff out about the structure, bu pretty soon it should be ready for use and peopel can start writing plugins.
[16:43] <soren> mathiaz: Already in the works :)
[16:43] <nealmcb> that is the same rationale I had in mind - sweet
[16:43] <soren> nijaba: I'll let you know. Very soon now. :)
[16:43]  * nijaba can't wait
[16:43] <nijaba> soren: is it ready yet?
[16:43] <soren> nijaba: It works.
[16:43] <lukehasnoname> is vm builder a spec?
[16:43] <lukehasnoname> where can I keep updated about it?
[16:44] <soren> nijaba: ...but it's not complete compared to the old vm-builder.
[16:44] <nealmcb> lukehasnoname: not just a spec - a whole religion, with a creation myth etc
[16:44] <soren> nijaba: At all.
[16:44] <nxvl> what we will need are documenters for vm builder
[16:44] <soren> That too.
[16:44] <nxvl> cause soren is a good developer, but lazy on documentation
[16:44] <nijaba> soren: yep, I looked at your first upload
[16:44] <nxvl> soren: didn't you?
[16:44] <mathiaz> soren: especially that you mentionned plugins ...
[16:44] <soren> nxvl: I'm actually documenting stuff this time :)
[16:45] <mathiaz> soren: anyway - it seems that we should wait for your first code drop
[16:45] <soren> mathiaz: The first code drop is on launchpad already.
[16:45] <nxvl> \o/
[16:45] <mathiaz> soren: and then we can start poking at it
[16:45] <nijaba> mathiaz: it is, indeed
[16:45]  * nxvl waves on soren 
[16:45] <mathiaz> soren: right - but is it ready for other's consumption ?
[16:45] <nealmcb> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/VMBuilderSpec
[16:45] <nxvl> * evoryone start downloading
[16:46] <mathiaz> soren: ^^ that's my point
[16:46] <mathiaz> soren: if it's not ready and you'll only get flooded by bugs that you know of
[16:46] <mathiaz> soren: there isn't much to gain to ask others for testing
[16:46] <soren> mathiaz: I wouldn't recommend submitting patches right now, as things are still getting moved around a lot.
[16:47] <soren> mathiaz: ...but if people are curious, or want to give ffedback on the design, that's cool.
[16:47] <mathiaz> soren: so this is alpha code - expect things to break and not work
[16:47] <nijaba> soren: so we wait until it is "structure" complete, and then start breaking everything ;)
[16:47] <soren> Oh, yes. Very much.
[16:48] <nxvl> i don't find it on LP
[16:48] <lukehasnoname> where is it on launchpad?
[16:48] <lukehasnoname> nxvl: heh
[16:48] <soren> Under ubuntu-jeos somewhere. Hang on.
[16:48] <nxvl> https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-virt/ubuntu-jeos/python-rewrite
[16:48] <nxvl> this one?
[16:49] <soren> Yup
[16:49] <mathiaz> ok - let's move on now
[16:49] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Server survey status
[16:49] <MootBot> New Topic:  Server survey status
[16:49] <mathiaz> owh asked me about an update on the server survey
[16:50] <nijaba> so as I am in london today and tomorrow
[16:50] <mathiaz> nijaba: any news on this front ?
[16:50] <nijaba> I just talked with elmo about it
[16:50] <nijaba> he now has found some hw for it
[16:50] <nijaba> and should set it up real soon now
[16:50]  * nijaba waiting on this...
[16:50] <lukehasnoname> server survey: Talkin about that goofy german one, or an Ubuntu sponsored one?
[16:51] <nxvl> lukehasnoname: goofy german one?
[16:51] <nijaba> what goofy german one?
[16:51] <nxvl> lukehasnoname: we try not to talk about people that way
[16:51] <nxvl> please don't
[16:51] <nijaba> lukehasnoname: we are talking about a survey that we developped 3 mo ago
[16:52] <nxvl> or more
[16:52] <nxvl> :P
[16:52] <nijaba> but have not published yet
[16:52] <lukehasnoname> nxvl: the survey was goofy, not the germans. Anyway, there was an odd link in the server ML
[16:52] <lukehasnoname> nevermind, that's obviously not what we're talking about
[16:52] <soren> lukehasnoname: It's called "tact". Look it up.
[16:53] <nxvl> oh! ok
[16:53] <mathiaz> nijaba: ok - so we're waiting on deployment
[16:53] <nxvl> sorry about that
[16:53] <nxvl> :P
[16:53] <nijaba> mathiaz: yep
[16:53] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Open Discussion.
[16:53] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion.
[16:53] <lukehasnoname> nxvl: Thank YOU for understanding.
[16:53] <soren> I mean... The survey is not called "tact".
[16:53] <mathiaz> anyone wants to add anything ?
[16:53] <lukehasnoname> Has anyone had personal experience with NetDirector?
[16:53] <nijaba> also, what would you say if some analyst firm joined the survey?
[16:53] <nxvl> well
[16:53]  * ogra wants to add beer in lexington 
[16:54] <nxvl> i wanted to talk about it
[16:54] <ogra> (lots of it)
[16:54] <nxvl> lukehasnoname: i wont
[16:54] <mathiaz> ogra: we'll get to that point soon
[16:54] <ogra> heh
[16:54] <soren> ogra: I think beer is implied in sprinting.
[16:54] <nxvl> it's exactly what i talked in Prague i don't want
[16:54] <soren> Otherwise you're doing it wrong.
[16:54] <nealmcb> what sprint in lexington?
[16:54] <nxvl> just another tool that make me open more ports
[16:55] <nijaba> soren: is diet coke ok for sprinting?
[16:55] <lukehasnoname> nxvl: I believe the #openbsd channel is that way ---->
[16:55] <soren> nijaba: Add some rum, andyou're good.
[16:55] <nijaba> soren: good, I'll do that :)
[16:55] <nxvl> lukehasnoname: ?
[16:55]  * nealmcb . o O ("Open Discussion"  you got it!)
[16:56] <mathiaz> so it seems that these topics are not really related to the server team
[16:56] <mathiaz> so I'll close the meeting with the last topic
[16:56] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] #
[16:56] <mathiaz> Agree on next meeting date and time.
[16:56] <MootBot> New Topic:  #
[16:56] <mathiaz> [TOPIC] Agree on next meeting date and time.
[16:56] <MootBot> New Topic:  Agree on next meeting date and time.
[16:56] <mathiaz> same place, same time, next week ?
[16:56] <soren> wfm
[16:56]  * nijaba repeats: what would you say if some analyst firm joined the survey?
[16:57] <nxvl> yes
[16:57] <soren> nijaba: I'm not sure I know what that means?
[16:57] <mathiaz> nijaba: what would they do ?
[16:57] <nxvl> some topics get lost thanks to ogra :D
[16:57] <nealmcb> who is going to oscon?  Besides the folks I see on the program :)
[16:57] <nijaba> endorse it, get to use the raw results
[16:57] <nijaba> (anonymous)
[16:57] <nijaba> marketing is suggesting it
[16:57] <mathiaz> nijaba: endorse -> wider coverage ?
[16:57] <soren> The raw results are not going to be public?
[16:57] <nijaba> mathiaz: yep...
[16:58] <nijaba> soren: yes, but only what we choose to present, not the actual individual answers
[16:58] <soren> Hm. Ok.
[16:58] <mathiaz> nijaba: I don't have a problem if they can get us more people to take the survey
[16:59] <mathiaz> nijaba: as long as there isn't any restrictions on the usage of the results
[16:59] <nealmcb> does the server team get to see the raw results?
[16:59] <mathiaz> nijaba: ie anyone could ask for the raw results and do whatever they want with it
[16:59] <nijaba> mathiaz: there will not be.  it IS a community survey, I have made that clear
[16:59] <sommer> nijaba: seems like a good idea to me
[16:59] <nijaba> the server team, yes
[17:00] <mathiaz> @schedule
[17:00] <ubottu> mathiaz: Schedule for Etc/UTC: Current meeting: Server Team | 01 Jul 21:00: Community Council | 02 Jul 12:00: Bugs for Hugs Day | 02 Jul 17:00: QA Team | 02 Jul 22:00: Platform Team | 03 Jul 00:00: Maryland LoCo IRC
[17:00] <lukehasnoname> Goodbye, gentlemen.
[17:00] <mathiaz> nijaba: well - that seems a reasonable idea then
[17:01] <nijaba> ok, so I'll transmit to marketing, see what they come up with.  thanks
[17:01] <mathiaz> nijaba: just making clear that the results are "GPLed"
[17:02] <nealmcb> still seems a bit unclear to me - is raw being used in two different ways?
[17:03] <nijaba> raw: individual answers (the survey database) is what I call the raw data
[17:03] <nijaba> this should not be made public
[17:03] <mathiaz> nijaba: for privacy reason
[17:03] <nijaba> as it would be against the privacy statement
[17:03] <mathiaz> nijaba: but what about anonymising the results ?
[17:04] <nijaba> the graph, or whatever analysis of the data we produce: this WILL be public
[17:04] <nealmcb> correlations of answers are often of great interest, and using translucent database techniques can be useful, but still tricky
[17:04] <nijaba> mathiaz: even that is very dangerous.  I would be ok for anonymized data to be used within our team
[17:05] <nealmcb> mathiaz: right - anonymising == translucency
[17:05] <nijaba> but publishing them can lead to other issues
[17:05] <ScottK> They critical thing is to make sure however it is used is clearly disclosed in advance.
[17:05] <ScottK> They/The
[17:06]  * nealmcb nods
[17:06] <mathiaz> nijaba: so would you like anyone to make their own intrepretation of the survey results ?
[17:06] <nijaba> mathiaz: outside of our team, I would not
[17:06] <mathiaz> nijaba: or would you stop at releasing the data analysis but restrict access to the raw data to ubuntu-server members ?
[17:07] <nijaba> mathiaz: exactly
[17:07] <mathiaz> nijaba: is being part of ubuntu-server team LP enough to get  access to the raw data ?
[17:07] <nijaba> mathiaz: I would say so, what other criteria would you add?
[17:08] <mathiaz> nijaba: I don't know - I'm just trying to figure out which criteria should be used
[17:08] <mathiaz> nijaba: so that we're clear upfront
[17:08] <mathiaz> nijaba: FYI being part of ubuntu-server LP requires being subscribed to ubuntu-server@l.u.c - that's all.
[17:09] <ScottK> I'd like to see signing code of conduct as a minimum requirement.
[17:09] <nealmcb> Would those "raw" results be anonymized?  I would think that no one without some real need to know should be able to dig for ip addrs etc
[17:09] <nijaba> mathiaz: isn't there an approval process?
[17:09] <mathiaz> nijaba: IOW, only a subscribtion to ubuntu-server@l.u.c is needed to get access to the raw data of the survey
[17:10] <mathiaz> nijaba: that's the only approval process that I make
[17:10] <nijaba> nealmcb: of course we are talking about anonimized raw data
[17:10] <mathiaz> nijaba: that's why I ask if that's enough to get access to the raw data
[17:10] <nijaba> mathiaz: ok, good to know
[17:11] <mathiaz> nijaba: I'd add that being an ubuntu member would raise the barrier a little bit
[17:11] <nealmcb> nijaba: good.
[17:11] <nijaba> mathiaz: good idea
[17:11] <mathiaz> nijaba: at least people should be involved in the ubuntu community
[17:11] <nijaba> mathiaz: I fully agree
[17:13] <mathiaz> ok - so access to anonimized raw data will be given to members of the ubuntu-server team and ubuntumembers team.
[17:14] <nijaba> (intersection of the 2, right)
[17:14] <nijaba> ?
[17:14] <mathiaz> hm - yes - I need to rephrase that
[17:14] <nealmcb> and maybe a sponsor/analysis company?
[17:14] <mathiaz> ok - so access to anonimized raw data will be given to members of both the ubuntu-server team and ubuntumembers team in LP.
[17:15] <nijaba> mathiaz: yep, sounds good
[17:15] <nealmcb> ...to the intersection of the two teams...
[17:15] <nealmcb> (?)
[17:16] <mathiaz> nijaba: if we can get a data analysis team onboard, that's ok too
[17:16] <nijaba> ss to anonimized raw data will be given to members of both the ubuntu-server team and ubuntumembers team in LP (intersection of the 2 teams) and eventual analyst firm choosing to join the survey before publication.
[17:16] <mathiaz> nijaba: in exchange of broader coverage they get access to the anonymised raw data
[17:18] <nealmcb> just one analyst firm that we choose based on some criteria?  or anyone who helps?
[17:19] <nijaba> nealmcb: if we get one, that we be good AND enough
[17:19]  * nealmcb nods
[17:19] <mathiaz> allright - seems good to me
[17:19]  * nijaba nods
[17:20] <mathiaz> so for the next meeting
[17:20] <mathiaz> same time, same place, next week ?
[17:20] <nijaba> good for me
[17:20] <sommer> sure
[17:23] <mathiaz> great - so see ya all next week, same time, same place
[17:23] <mathiaz> #endmeeting

MeetingLogs/Server/20080701 (last edited 2008-08-06 17:00:29 by localhost)