20091202

Agenda

Items we will be discussing:

Minutes

Review ACTION from previous meeting

ACTION: ttx to review status of bugs the following bugs for any missing info

  • 455625: lacking some reproduction, the Eucalyptus team marked it invalid
  • 460085: missing some feedback from the Eucalyptus team, basically the results of their long-standing rampart tests
  • 461156: fixed in Lucid, SRU pending

ACTION: mathiaz to compile a list of easy merges for publication

Check blueprint status and progress for the week (jib)

  • Feature Definition Freeze is this week.
    • All Alpha2-targed blueprints must be approved by then.

    • All non-Alpha2 blueprints will have at least summary, rationale & user story in the spec, and any notes taken from UDS

  • Non Alpha2, but ready for review:
    • other-cloud-providers
    • vmbuilder-multiple-outputs
  • To track progress during Alpha2, we will:

Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs: http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html (jib)

  • Nothing assigned to team

Weekly SRU review (mathiaz)

2009 Server Survey announce: http://nicolas.barcet.com/drupal/en/2009-server-survey-announce

Nick Barcet announced the 2009 Server Survey. To improve exposure, any of you that can republish the announce on a loco planet or some other means do relay the info in the next couple weeks. So far, the plan is to keep the survey up at least until mid-january. Nick will shortly send an email to the server ML with the same information.

Open discussion

  • Spamassassin - 3.3.0 will hit beta "soon", Daviey emailed the DM to ask if he wants to work together to get the package updated.

  • Mdz & sabdlf covered server specs for Lucid yesterday. Sabdfl was very pleased with the work that was put in.

Agree on next meeting date and time

  • Several people would prefer the meeting to be slightly later in the day. ACTION on jos to coordinate with Maria & Kirkland to find a more suitable hour if possible.

  • Util further notice, next meeting will be on Wednesday, December 9th at 14:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.

Log

[14:03] <ttx> #startmeeting
[14:03] <MootBot> Meeting started at 08:03. The chair is ttx.
[14:03] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[14:03] <mdz> ttx, hi
[14:04] <ttx> First of all, let me introduce you to Jos Boumans, the new server team engineering manager.
[14:04] <kane_> o/
[14:04] <nijaba> Welcome Jos!
[14:04]  * kirkland high fives kane_ 
[14:04] <Daviey> hey Jos!
[14:04] <ttx> kane_: you didn't force your IRC client to submission yet ?
[14:04] <zul> hey kane_
[14:04] <kane_> ttx: not yet. ran out of CFT my first day @canonical ;)
[14:04] <soren> CFT?
[14:05] <kane_> Copious Free Time
[14:05] <ttx> kane might become jib in the future on Freenode
[14:05] <kane_> nice to see some familiar faces here from UDS though :)
[14:05] <zul> kane_, get use to the lack of thereoff from here on out
[14:05]  * mdz hands jib some round tuits
[14:05] <mdz> s/jib/jane_/
[14:05] <mdz> kane_, rather
[14:05] <nijaba> no wonders nobody knows what CFT is around here
[14:05] <soren> Heheh :)
[14:06] <mathiaz> kane_: o^25
[14:06] <ttx> I'll chait this meeting so that Jos sees how it goes, but will gladly hand over the cross to Jos next week :)
[14:06] <ttx> chair, even
[14:06] <mdz> haha
[14:06] <kane_> i, in turn, am very happy for ttx to chair
[14:06] <ttx> next...
[14:06] <ttx> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[14:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[14:06] <ttx> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/Server/20091125
[14:07] <ttx> ACTION: ttx to review status of bugs 455625, 460085 and 461156 for any missing info
[14:07] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 455625 in eucalyptus "Eucalyptus Loses Public IP Address" [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/455625
[14:07] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 460085 in eucalyptus "memory leak; rampart_context not freed (memory leaked per connection)" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/460085
[14:07] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 461156 in eucalyptus "User data is not parsed correctly by Eucalyptus in some cases" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/461156
[14:07] <ttx> so I reviewed them... the first one is lacking some reproduction, the Eucalyptus team marked it invalid
[14:07] <ttx> the second one is missing some feedback from the Eucalyptus team, basically the results of their long-standing rampart tests
[14:08] <ttx> The third one is now fixed in Lucid, SRU pending
[14:08] <ttx> ACTION: mathiaz to compile a list of easy merges for publication
[14:08] <mathiaz> ttx: done - http://ubuntuserver.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/a-selection-of-easy-merges-from-the-ubuntu-server-team/
[14:08] <mdz> mathiaz, did that go out to the mailing list(s) as well?
[14:09] <ttx> arh
[14:09] <mathiaz> mdz: nope - I could send it there as well
[14:09] <mdz> mathiaz, I think it would be useful
[14:09] <ttx> mathiaz: I did a few days ago libcommons-attributes-java and libaopalliance-java
[14:09] <mdz> dholbach gave us some feedback that we should use the mailing lists more
[14:09] <ttx> mathiaz: and I wouldn't recommend the jruby1.2 one to the faint of heart
[14:09] <mathiaz> ttx: yeah - that's possible
[14:10] <mathiaz> ttx: I haven't looked at all the merge in details
[14:10] <ttx> Now on to this week's agenda
[14:10] <mathiaz> it's just a list  of suggestion - to get people started
[14:10] <ttx> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[14:10] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[14:10] <ttx> [TOPIC] Check blueprint status and progress for the week
[14:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Check blueprint status and progress for the week
[14:11] <ttx> kane_: ?
[14:11] <kane_> We covered most of them during the 1:1s we've had this week, and those that could be approved are.
[14:11] <kane_> There are some that aren't on the alpha2 milestone, and it's on me to have those reviewed by next meeting (before featured definition freeze)
[14:11] <mdz> ttx, other-cloud-providers and vmbuilder-multiple-outputs are awaiting review
[14:12] <ttx> kane_: what about Feature definition freeze, and the remaining non-lucid-accepted-yet blueprints ?
[14:12] <ttx> mdz: Will look into it
[14:13] <kane_> mdz: the other cloud & vmbuilder aren't for alpha2 though, so we should have those done by next week
[14:14] <kane_> the minimum we do for non-alpha2 specs BEFORE feature definition freeze is to make sure we have the summary, rationale & user story in the spec, and any notes we took from UDS
[14:14] <kane_> that way we know what we're comitting to if/when we persue them in the next milestones
[14:14] <ttx> kane_: the minimum to make sure we don't lose the results of the UDS session
[14:14] <kane_> ttx: exactly
[14:15] <ttx> kane_: ok, what about "Discuss process for ongoing progress tracking" ?
[14:16] <kane_> feel free to summarize that one ttx
[14:16] <ttx> We'll use http://www.piware.de/workitems/server/lucid-alpha2/report.html for global tracking
[14:17] <ttx> Then for each alpha2 spec do a quick summary of status here ?
[14:17] <ttx> We'll skip for this week, unless someone wants to mention they are already raising flags on their assignments
[14:17] <kane_> yeah; there's a few easy ways to do this. I hope to cargo-cult on the other teams starting the next meeting.
[14:18] <nijaba> I don't see any of the community BP on this. Normal?
[14:18] <nijaba> I think ScottK and ivoks had some
[14:18] <ttx> nijaba: They appear on http://www.piware.de/workitems/server/lucid/report.html
[14:19] <ttx> they are not specifically targeted to alpha2 (good for them)
[14:19] <mathiaz> nijaba: they may not have been targeted for alpha2 though
[14:19] <nijaba> ah, ok, sorry
[14:19] <ScottK> Still working on drafting.
[14:19] <ScottK> Hope to finish shortly.
[14:19] <ttx> Anyone has questions on this topic ?
[14:19] <mathiaz> ttx: can we add WI to the whiteboard?
[14:19] <mathiaz> ttx: what happens if the content of a WI changes?
[14:20] <zul> for the canonical-application-support spec what if the packages are not approiate what should i put next to the TODO
[14:20] <ttx> mathiaz: you mean if you add new ones, it will look like feature creep on the burndown chart ?
[14:20] <mathiaz> ttx: yes
[14:20] <mathiaz> ttx: and IIUC this looks bad
[14:20] <smoser> good questions mathiaz
[14:20] <ttx> mathiaz: the chart will be reset at an arbitrary point in time
[14:20] <ttx> i'd suggest FeatureDefinitionFreeze
[14:21] <ttx> after that, added items will *really* be feature creep.
[14:21] <ttx> kane_, mdz: ^ ?
[14:21] <mathiaz> ttx: it seems that the list of WI should not be touched after Feature Definition
[14:21] <mdz> I believe pitti planned to reset the chart today-ish
[14:21] <ttx> mathiaz: well, it can, but then it really is considered feature creep.
[14:21] <kane_> the WI is a reflection of reality
[14:21] <mdz> but of course we can ask him to do it whenever it is appropriate for us
[14:21] <mdz> I would say no later than tomorrow
[14:22] <mathiaz> ttx: also I'm still tracking next things to do (may be the granularity is too small)
[14:22] <kane_> the tool is there to give us insight, not something that restricts us from planning
[14:22] <kane_> but ttx is right; if there's new (unforeseen) work popping up, that may be feature creep
[14:22] <mdz> zul, when you review the package, you should change the "review" work item to "DONE"
[14:22] <mdz> zul, if, once you have done that, it turns out there is nothing more to do, you should *delete* the other work items associated with that package
[14:23] <mdz> this will reduce the total number of work items in the chart
[14:23] <zul> mdz: gotcha
[14:23] <ttx> mathiaz: you mean work items are too small ?
[14:23] <ttx> mathiaz: not sure I get you
[14:24] <mathiaz> ttx: well - I guess I'm using Work Items and Next Action (in GTD) as the same thing
[14:24] <mathiaz> ttx: I think I understand myself - and we can move on
[14:24] <ttx> I've been translating my work items into GTD next actions
[14:24] <ttx> (manually, shame on me)
[14:24] <ttx> moving on
[14:24] <mathiaz> ttx: same here - but we can discuss this offline
[14:24] <ttx> [TOPIC] Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs
[14:24] <MootBot> New Topic:  Assigned and to-be-assigned bugs
[14:24] <ttx> [LINK] http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html
[14:24] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/team-assigned/canonical-server-assigned-bug-tasks.html
[14:25] <ttx> kane_: ?
[14:25] <ttx> nothing assigned to team
[14:26] <ttx> too many old bugs in that list to my taste, I think we should review what we should assign ourselves to
[14:26] <ttx> but we'll let it be for the moment
[14:26] <kirkland> ttx: +1
[14:26] <ttx> shouldn't be the list of things you might work on someday
[14:26] <ttx> but rather work in progress and what comes immediately after
[14:27] <ttx> but I'm open to discussion
[14:27] <ttx> it's just that the list as it stands is not very useful to review
[14:27] <kane_> i have an action point on me to pick this up with marjo; there's an expectation that comes with bug list and i need to be brought up to speed with it
[14:27] <zul> it isnt
[14:27] <ttx> anyone has comments on the bugs they are assigned to on this list ? Anything blocking ?
[14:27] <mathiaz> ttx: the date the bug was assigned is probably useful
[14:28] <mathiaz> ttx: to make sure bugs are not aging
[14:28] <ttx> We already discussed bug 460085, pending some eucalyptus upstream info
[14:28] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 460085 in eucalyptus "memory leak; rampart_context not freed (memory leaked per connection)" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/460085
[14:28] <ttx> Nothing else ? OK, let's move on then...
[14:29] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly SRU review
[14:29] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly SRU review
[14:29] <Daviey> \o/
[14:29]  * ttx leaves the driver seat to mathiaz
[14:29] <ttx> (while the car is still running)
[14:29] <mathiaz> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[14:29] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[14:30] <mathiaz> ^^ any bugs SRU worthy on this list?
=== robbiew-afk is now known as robbiew
[14:30] <ttx> only high thing on the list id bug 454405, which is a karmic SRU already
[14:30] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 454405 in eucalyptus "the CC is returning incorrect networkIndex values on describeInstances" [Critical,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/454405
[14:31] <zul> mathiaz: bug 485760
[14:31] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 485760 in php5 "Need to upgrade integrated zip module" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/485760
[14:31] <kirkland> ttx: what's the plan for rolling/uploading a new SRU candidate of eucalyptus to karmic-proposed?
[14:31] <mathiaz> no bugs nominated for dapper, hardy, intrepid, jaunty, karmic
[14:31] <ttx> kirkland: we need to get around the CLEAN=1 thing, then upload
[14:32] <ttx> kirkland: please see my comments on the related bugs and let me know what you think
[14:32] <kirkland> ttx: i think we should upload, and then get around to the CLEAN=1 thing
[14:32] <kirkland> ttx: yes, I'm on top of those
[14:32] <mathiaz> hm - there should be bug 489418
[14:32] <kirkland> ttx: i think it's better to have something in -proposed, and work on that incrementally
[14:32] <ttx> kirkland: I'm ok for release, I committed to the ubuntu-karmic branch already.
[14:32] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 489418 in krb5 "Strange behavior of libkrb5 since karmic ..." [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/489418
[14:33] <zul> mathiaz:i just nominated 485760
[14:33] <ttx> kirkland: and wrote the SRU report
[14:33] <mathiaz> which means that list of nominated bugs is not accurate :/
[14:33] <kirkland> ttx: okay
[14:33] <ttx> kirkland: I wanted to get the feedback on rampart first though
[14:33] <ttx> kirkland: but I'm ok either way
[14:33] <kirkland> ttx: okay
[14:34] <smoser> query ttx
[14:34] <ttx> smoser: that's me
[14:34] <kirkland> ttx: so the SRU is blocking on the CLEAN=1 bits, and rampart feedback?
[14:34] <smoser> yeah, i'm a dolt
[14:34] <czajkowski>  
[14:34] <mathiaz> let's move on
[14:34] <mathiaz> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/acceptedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[14:34] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/acceptedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[14:35] <ttx> kirkland: yes, but that doesn't prevent us from going to -proposed.
[14:35] <kirkland> ttx: absolutely agree
[14:35] <mathiaz> most of the SRU are related to eucalyptus
[14:36] <mathiaz> zul: how are other SRU's going?
[14:36] <mathiaz> And the list of bzr branch to review is empty for the server team
[14:36] <zul> mathiaz: i havent had a chance to look at them due to spec writing
[14:36] <mathiaz> https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-server/+activereviews
[14:37] <mathiaz> Anything else on the SRU front?
[14:37] <ttx> moving on...
[14:38] <ttx> [TOPIC] 2009 Server Survey announce
[14:38] <MootBot> New Topic:  2009 Server Survey announce
[14:38] <ttx> nijaba: ^
[14:38] <nijaba> I have just announced on Planet Ubuntu the release or the 2009 Server survey http://nicolas.barcet.com/drupal/en/2009-server-survey-announce
[14:38] <nijaba> Call for action:
[14:38] <nijaba> Last year this survey received a little bit less than 7000 full response and we hope to have at least that many this year.
[14:38] <nijaba> In order to do so, it would be very nice that, in addition to the announce I made and the banner that Matt Nuzum is about to put on http://ubuntu.com/server, any of you that can republish the announce on a loco planet or some other means do relay the info in the next couple weeks.  So far, the plan is to keep the survey up at least until mid-january.
[14:38] <nijaba> I will shortly send an email to the server ML with the same information.
[14:39] <nijaba> questions?
[14:39] <nijaba> suggestions?
[14:39] <ttx> nijaba: any major change in the questions asked ?
[14:40] <nijaba> quite a few changes, yes
[14:40]  * ttx admits not having completed the survey yet
[14:40] <nijaba> details on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Survey
[14:40] <ttx> ok
[14:40] <ttx> next is...
[14:40] <mathiaz> nijaba: have you send an email to ubuntu-server@?
[14:41] <ttx> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[14:41] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[14:41] <nijaba> mathiaz: as I just said, I will shortly send an email to the server ML with the same information.
[14:41] <mdz> I believe there is still an open issue regarding the meeting time?
[14:41] <ttx> mdz: yes, problematic for kirkland, impossible for nurmi
[14:41] <mdz> who has the ball?
[14:41] <nijaba> ivoks is complaining that he cannot attend during his work hours
[14:41] <ttx> mdz: kirkland hasd to ping maria, I think
[14:42] <kirkland> mdz: ttx: yes, I need to talk to maria
[14:42] <mdz> maybe jos has some bandwidth to help, and he's in a nearby time zone to maria
[14:42] <ttx> mdz: ball is in kirkland side of the field, offense team is up.
[14:42] <kirkland> mdz: actually, I was sort of waiting on Jos to come on board, to make sure his availability was taken into account
[14:42] <mdz> kirkland also has blueprints to worry about ;-)
[14:43] <kane_> mdz: luckily i don't ;)
[14:43] <kane_> i'm happy to take this on -- i'll talk with kirkland seperately, figure out where it hurts and get a resolution
[14:43] <kirkland> kane_: one our later would suffice for both nurmi and i
[14:43] <kirkland> s/ our / hour /
[14:44] <kane_> kirkland: understood. that may bite with other calls though, so let's sort it seperately if you don't mind
[14:44] <kirkland> kane_: sure thing
[14:44] <ttx> Anything else anyone wants to bring up ?
[14:44] <Daviey> Spamassassin - 3.3.0 will hit beta "soon", i've emailed the DM to ask if he wants to work together to get the package updated.
[14:45] <mathiaz> Daviey: how stable is spamassassin 3.3.0 for an LTS?
[14:45] <ttx> mathiaz: kane_ volunteered to write the meeting minutes (since he will write them all soon) so could you get him up to date with the minutes publication process ?
[14:45] <mathiaz> ttx: sure
[14:46]  * kane_ thinks ttx may be taking this chairing thing very serious ;)
[14:46] <Daviey> mathiaz: well it's still not even beta :).. But for *supporting* the released version - upstream would likely be more receptive for the LTS period.
[14:46] <ttx> kane_: let me enjoy that position for the last time :P
[14:47] <ttx> [TOPIC] Agree on next meeting date and time
[14:47] <MootBot> New Topic:  Agree on next meeting date and time
[14:47] <ttx> Unless something else is announced, same time, same place, next week.
[14:47] <mdz> [action] jos?
[14:48] <ttx> [ACTION] jos to find out the best time for the meeting
[14:48] <MootBot> ACTION received:  jos to find out the best time for the meeting
[14:48] <Daviey> (if it is changed, update the fridge)
[14:48] <ttx> thanks everyone !
[14:48] <ttx> #endmeeting

MeetingLogs/Server/20091202 (last edited 2009-12-03 21:15:07 by c161-174)