Agenda

Minutes

Review ACTION points from previous meeting

Beta1 status review

ttx informed everyone that we are at the beginning of the beta1 subcycle... but not very far from the end of it. Thursday next week is Beta1Freeze, a hard freeze before the Beta1 release, so most uploads should be made before that date. For reference, the beta1-targeted blueprints are tracked at http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-server-ubuntu-10.04-beta-1.html

smoser reported that the EBS root support was on track, with all tools moved over to using the new api tools.

Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)

hggdh reported that the build in MySQL regression PPA was still failing, and zul confirmed that he was working on it. hggdh didn't have the time to look into the UEC test rig yet, but will do this week (the idea being that he should be able to run the post-A3, pre-beta1 UEC tests). hggdh also reported good progress on mastering the automated ISO testing framework soren was previously working on.

Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)

jjohansen reported bug 527208 outstanding, blocking boot on c1.xlarge type instances in EC2: it should hopefully be fixed this week. mathiaz brought his request for creating vlan modules for d-i (bug 530459) to the kernel team attention.

Server Papercuts (ttx)

14 bugs were targeted for the first papercuts fixing campaign, which will end on Beta1Freeze, Thursday next week. Everyone is welcome to assign themselves some of those bugs, which are usually easy to fix. ScottK offered support in helping fixing the amavisd-new bugs.

There is still some room in the second campaign (beta2), so people should keep on nominating their favorite annoyance as a bug also affecting the "Server papercuts" project. In the nomination list, bug 211915 was accepted and assigned to sommer for the beta2 campaign.

Bugzapping (kirkland)

kirkland reported good progress on the current kvm bugzapping effort, and now Lucid's kvm package appears to be in good shape. He might not have time to get around to libvirt, where there's a lot more open bugs, due to other pressing work. A eucalyptus bugzapping week is also already planned. Other bugzapping efforts will have to be organized by other people.

In order to encourage that, the bugzapping format will be slightly simplified to lower the barrier of entry: you should target as a group a single package and spend a minimum of 2 days on it (Triaging / Bugfixing), ideally 3 days. People interested in chairing such an effort should edit the ServerLucidBugZapping wikipage.

kirkland also mentioned that bugzapping was a great way for community members in companies that care about the shape of a particular package to get involved: you should consider asking your boss/work for 2-3 days to focus on Ubuntu XYZ package where XYZ is the key package that your company/business/IT-staff needs working better in Ubuntu.

On a related front, ScottK reported that someone should figure out why suddenly tons of people who have no idea how to configure postfix are installing it, which he traced back to some Google Chrome packages.

Update on Daily Bug triager: New,Undecided bugs (mathiaz)

mathiaz updated the daily query to be live ("New Bugs" link at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#triager). He wanted to remind everyone to triage all bugs on the list on their Triage day: starting at the top and processing one bug after the other at least until you reach one opened on today.

Open Discussion

Daviey asked if, as part of the ArchiveReorg that is being phased in, people should think about requesting ubuntu-server upload privileges. The team details need to be sorted out first, and we didn't feel the urgency of it since most interested people are already core-dev. However in order to lower the barrier of entry, it makes sense to set the team in place in all cases.

jmdault mentioned upcoming updates to Asterisk, due to two recent security fixes.

ACTION: mathiaz to sync up with cjwatson re: ubuntu-server upload team

Announce next meeting date and time

Next meeting will be on Wednesday, March 10th at 14:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.

Log

[14:00] <ttx> #startmeeting
[14:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 08:00. The chair is ttx.
[14:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[14:00] <mjeanson> o/
[14:00] <ttx> Our beloved leader is stuck in boring calls, so i'll chair
[14:00] <ttx> I'll also scribe today, lucky me.
[14:00] <ttx> Agenda is at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[14:01] <ttx> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[14:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[14:01]  * jjohansen1 waves
[14:01] <ttx> ACTION: kirkland to publish tentative bugzapping roadmap
[14:02] <kirkland`> ttx: done, though, i should probably update it
[14:02] <ttx> kirkland`: ack
[14:02] <ttx> [TOPIC] Beta1 status review (ttx)
[14:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Beta1 status review (ttx)
[14:02] <ttx> So we are at the beginning of the beta1 subcycle... but not very far from the end of it
[14:03] <ttx> Especially I wanted to bring your attention to Beta1Freeze, which is Thursday next week
[14:03] <ttx> It's a hard freeze this time... so better get your features in before that date
[14:03] <ttx> s/features/bugfixes/
[14:04] <ttx> smoser: how is EBS root coming along ?
[14:04] <smoser> i got all the tools (i think) moved over to using the new api tools
[14:04] <smoser> which is a requirement.
[14:04] <smoser> no ebs root volumes yet, but... crossing fingers, hopefully soon
[14:05] <ttx> smoser: maybe you should have a work item about that new API tool prerequisite, that you could mark done ?
[14:05] <smoser> i can... i left it in progress to see if todays builds fell all over the floor
[14:05] <ttx> smoser: ok
[14:05] <smoser> there is a item
[14:06] <ttx> smoser: ok, good then :)
[14:06] <ttx> No other questions, anyone wants to report blockage / issues ?
[14:06] <zul> nope
[14:06] <ttx> For reference, tracking is at http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-server-ubuntu-10.04-beta-1.html
[14:07] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[14:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[14:07] <ttx> hggdh: hi !
[14:07] <ttx> hggdh: how is it going so far ?
[14:07] <hggdh> nothing new on my front, except the MySQL FTBFS is still there
[14:07] <hggdh> (on the regression PPA)
[14:07] <zul> hggdh: working on it as we speak
[14:08] <ttx> hggdh: did you start looking into the UEC test rig ?
[14:08] <hggdh> and I am happy kirkland` has put up the qemu event... perhaps then I get get the bloody thing to work on my laptop ;-)
[14:08] <hggdh> ttx: no, did not have time. Today is a good day, though.
[14:09] <ttx> mathiaz: could you help hggdh on that matter ?
[14:09] <ttx> ideally, hggdh should be able to run the post-A3, pre-beta1 tests
[14:10] <ttx> hmm, looks like we don't have mathiaz today.
[14:11] <ttx> [ACTION] hggdh to ping mathiaz for access to the UEC test rig
[14:11] <MootBot> ACTION received:  hggdh to ping mathiaz for access to the UEC test rig
[14:11] <ttx> hggdh: anything else to report ?
[14:12] <hggdh> the automated ISO testing Soren was working on is starting to take shape for me
[14:12] <ttx> hggdh: good.
[14:12] <hggdh> apart for that, no, nothing new on the western front
[14:12] <ttx> Anyone with questions for QA ?
[14:12] <zul> nyet
[14:13] <ttx> mathiaz !
=== kirkland` is now known as kirkland
[14:13]  * mathiaz waves :)
[14:13] <ttx> mathiaz: <ttx> [ACTION] hggdh to ping mathiaz for access to the UEC test rig
[14:13] <ttx> (fyi)
[14:13] <ttx> <ttx> ideally, hggdh should be able to run the post-A3, pre-beta1 tests
[14:14] <ttx> mathiaz: questions on that ?
[14:14] <mathiaz> ttx: nope
[14:14] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[14:14] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[14:14] <mathiaz> ttx: on my TODO list
[14:14] <ttx> hggdh: thanks
[14:14] <ttx> jjohansen1: hi
[14:14] <jjohansen1> hi
[14:14] <jjohansen1> we have bug 527208 outstanding
[14:14] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 527208 in linux-ec2 "ec2 instance fails boot, no console output on c1.xlarge" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/527208
[14:14] <jjohansen1> hope to fix that this week
[14:15] <jjohansen1> it doesn't look like we are getting a pv-ops kernel for EC2
[14:15] <mathiaz> jjohansen1: I've sent a request for creating vlan modules
[14:15] <mathiaz> jjohansen1: for d-i
[14:15] <jjohansen1> mathiaz: oh, I had missed that
[14:15] <mathiaz> jjohansen1: is there a chance that it will make it time for lucid?
[14:15] <zul> jjohansen1: is that with a pv-ops kernel?
[14:16] <jjohansen1> mathiaz: yeah, that should be possible
[14:16] <jjohansen1> zul?
[14:16] <mathiaz> jjohansen1: bug 530459
[14:16] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 530459 in linux "[FFE] Include 8021q module in the installer for VLAN support" [Wishlist,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/530459
[14:16] <zul> jjohansen1: the c1.xlarge bug
[14:16] <jjohansen1> zul: no that is with the xen kernel
[14:16] <zul> jjohansen1: oh suck..
[14:16] <jjohansen1> yeah
[14:17] <jjohansen1> mathiaz: thanks
[14:17] <ttx> Anything else for kernel ?
[14:17] <jjohansen1> I think that is it
[14:17] <mathiaz> jjohansen1: I've sent a patch request on kerne-team@
[14:17] <mathiaz> jjohansen1: I don't know if my message has been approved
[14:17] <jjohansen1> mathiaz: okay
[14:18] <ttx> [TOPIC] Server Papercuts (ttx)
[14:18] <MootBot> New Topic:  Server Papercuts (ttx)
[14:18] <ttx> So I identified 14 targets for beta1, see https://launchpad.net/server-papercuts/+milestone/lucid-beta-1
[14:19] <ttx> with a few already fixed, that leaves 10 papercuts to fix before Beta1Freeze
[14:19] <ttx> That also leaves room for extra papercuts on the beta2 cycle
[14:19] <ttx> so please continue to nominate them
[14:19] <ttx> Please have a look at the beta1 targets and assign yourselves the one you can/want fix
[14:20] <ttx> I'l ltry to get ivoks assigned to the bacula ones, since he has fixes in his PPA ready apparently
[14:20] <ttx> the rest is free game
[14:20] <ttx> Questions on that ?
[14:21] <ttx> Only one bug in todays nomination review: https://bugs.launchpad.net/server-papercuts/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New
[14:21] <ttx> bug 211915
[14:21] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 211915 in amavisd-new "Insecure dependency when using sql for Log Reporting" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/211915
[14:21] <ScottK> ttx: There are a couple of amavisd-new bugs.  I'll be glad to give people advice on them.
[14:21] <ttx> ScottK: noted, thanks for your help !
[14:21] <ScottK> I don't have a time to really work on them though.
[14:22] <ttx> I discussed bug 211915 with sommer, and he agrees it's a papercut and should be assigned to him
[14:22] <ttx> So I'll accept it on those grounds, for beta2
[14:22] <ttx> (a doc papercut)
[14:22] <ttx> Questions on papercuts ?
[14:23] <ttx> I migth bother you during the week to get all those assigned to someone :)
[14:23] <ttx> [TOPIC] Bugzapping (kirkland)
[14:23] <MootBot> New Topic:  Bugzapping (kirkland)
[14:23] <ttx> kirkland: could you give us a quick update ?
[14:24] <kirkland> ttx: sure
[14:25] <kirkland> ttx: spent a lot of time on Monday triaging kvm, and a bit of time with upstream yesterday
[14:25] <kirkland> ttx: actually, Lucid's kvm package is in *really* good shape
[14:25] <ttx> kirkland: good to hear :)
[14:25] <kirkland> ttx: there's a few packaging bugs, and one or two upstream bugs that i think we can fix this week
[14:25] <kirkland> ttx: other than that, it's really smoking
[14:25] <kirkland> ttx: i don't think i'm going to get around to libvirt, unfortunately
[14:26] <kirkland> ttx: where there's a *lot* more open bugs
[14:26] <kirkland> ttx: just not enough time
[14:26] <kirkland> ttx: perhaps should tackle libvirt another week
[14:26] <kirkland> ttx: besides that, i have a eucalyptus week planned
[14:26] <kirkland> ttx: and outside of those 2-3 weeks, i'm going to need someone else (canonical or community) to step up and help out
[14:27] <ttx> kirkland: should other bugzapping sessions be more loosely organized, to lower the barrier of entry ? i.e. not necessarily be a full week ?
[14:27] <ttx> I mean, I can commit to a couple of days on a given package and try to gather momentum around it
[14:27] <ttx> but not a full week
[14:27] <ttx> would that be acceptable ?
[14:28] <kirkland> ttx: honestly, i think the process is well designed for function/effect as is;  perhaps impractical though with the limited resources willing/able to contribute
[14:28] <mathiaz> ttx: 3 days instead of a full week seems like a good option for lucid
[14:28] <mathiaz> 1 day of bug triaging and 2 days of bug fixing
[14:28] <kirkland> ttx: agreed, 2-3 days at least (per week) would be better than nothing
[14:28] <kirkland> ttx: less than 2 days and I don't think we're actually doing anything different than normal bug triage
[14:28] <ttx> kirkland: yes, should be >=2 days
[14:29] <ttx> and >= 2 people :)
[14:29] <kirkland> ttx: right, in that case, i think we can improve some packages and our bug list targets of opportunity
[14:29] <ttx> kirkland: is there a wikipage where we can schedule future efforts ?
[14:30] <kirkland> ttx: yes, the spec
[14:30] <ttx> kirkland: shorter slots actually allow to target a single package rather than trying to group them
[14:30] <kirkland> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/server-lucid-bug-zapping and http://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerLucidBugZapping
[14:30] <kirkland> ttx: agreed
[14:30] <kirkland> ttx: let me say one more thing ...
[14:30] <kirkland> ttx: to our community ;-)
[14:31] <ScottK> It'd be nice if someone would figure out why suddenly tons of people who have no idea how to configure postfix are installing it.
[14:31] <ScottK> It seems tied to the Google Chrome packages somehow.
[14:31] <kirkland> community: many of you work at places that use Ubuntu servers for production reasons, probably 8.04 LTS, and hopefully one day 10.04 ....
[14:31] <ScottK> That's generating lots of noise in the bug tracker.
[14:32] <kirkland> community: consider asking your boss/work for 2-3 days to focus on Ubuntu XYZ package where XYZ is the key package that your company/business/IT-staff needs working better in Ubuntu
[14:32] <kirkland> ttx: </end message>
[14:32] <ttx> kirkland: amen
[14:32] <ttx> Any questions on bugzapping
[14:32] <ttx> ?
[14:32] <mathiaz> ScottK: yeah - seems related to google chrome beta packages
[14:33] <ScottK> It'd be nice to get that cleared up so we can focus on any real bugs that might be there.
[14:33] <ttx> [TOPIC] Update on Daily Bug triager: New,Undecided bugs (mathiaz)
[14:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  Update on Daily Bug triager: New,Undecided bugs (mathiaz)
[14:33] <ttx> mathiaz: o/
[14:33] <mathiaz> I've update the daily query to be live
[14:34] <ttx> mathiaz: link?
[14:34] <mathiaz> and I just wanted to remind every one to spend triaging all bugs on the list once a day
[14:34] <ttx> mathiaz: as opposed to the bugs opened the day before ?
[14:34] <kirkland> mathiaz: can you remind us of the link?
[14:34] <mathiaz> ttx: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#triager
[14:35] <mathiaz> ttx: yes - basically there aren't so many bugs
[14:35] <mathiaz> so yes - focus on getting the list to zero any time of the day
[14:35] <ttx> mathiaz: if everyone triages, yes
[14:35] <mathiaz> that should cover all days opened the day before plus a few others
[14:36] <ttx> mathiaz: ok
[14:36] <mathiaz> there is a bit of backlog  - yesterday there were ten bugs left
[14:36] <ttx> I just completed the ones opened yesterday
[14:36] <ttx> but there was some backlog I didn't get at
[14:37] <mathiaz> basically now there query is a live one
[14:37] <mathiaz> so no stale data
[14:37] <ttx> mathiaz: is it the one under "new bug" on the link you provided ?
[14:37] <mathiaz> OTOH you some of the bugs opened the day
[14:37] <mathiaz> ttx: yes
[14:38] <ttx> ok, it's not the list I've been using today
[14:38] <ttx> that list doesn't have the "date opened" column
[14:38] <mathiaz> ttx: right - the previous list that were generated an daily basis
[14:38] <mathiaz> ttx: right - the query is from LP
[14:39] <mathiaz> ttx: the other page was a custom generated one, which means stale data
[14:39] <ttx> mathiaz: ok
[14:39] <mathiaz> ttx: the bugs on the new list are actually sorted by oldest to newest
[14:39] <mathiaz> ttx: so start at the top and process one bug after the other
[14:39] <mathiaz> if you notice that one of the bugs has been opened today, you can stop
[14:40] <mathiaz> other wise you can just triage all of the remaining 4/5 bugs
[14:40] <ttx> that leans the burden of clearing the backlog is onto the one that follows the slacker (or the absent guy)
[14:40] <ttx> means
[14:40] <mathiaz> IMO there aren't so many bugs and the most important thing is to set the importance
[14:40] <ttx> mathiaz: that doesn't seem... right
[14:41] <mathiaz> ttx: yeah - well - we're a team... we should work together
[14:41]  * hggdh blushes, and begs pardon
[14:41] <mathiaz> ttx: TBH there aren't so many bugs once the backlog is cleared
[14:41] <mathiaz> ttx: so I don't think it will be huge concern
[14:42] <ttx> mathiaz: ok, let's test that
[14:42]  * kirkland agrees with mathiaz 
[14:42] <mathiaz> ttx: if the number of bugs rises we can revisit the process
[14:42] <mathiaz> that's all I had to say
[14:42] <ttx> ok, other question son that process ?
[14:43] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly SRU review: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review  (mathiaz)
[14:43] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly SRU review: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review  (mathiaz)
[14:43] <ttx> mathiaz: hi again
[14:43] <mathiaz> just make sure you have a look a the bug list on your respective day :)
[14:43] <mathiaz> ttx: oh hi!
[14:44]  * mathiaz opens the lists to check the accurancy of them
[14:44] <mathiaz> the intrepid bug lists has bunch of nominations
[14:45] <mathiaz> I think we can decline all of them, given that intrepid will be EOL soon and there aren't high priority bugs in there
[14:45] <ttx> yes
[14:45] <mathiaz> same goes for the jaunty list
[14:45] <mathiaz> for karmic there is bug 276606
[14:45] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 276606 in openldap "package update-manager 1:0.93.18 failed to install/upgrade: ErrorMessage: SystemError in cache.commit(): E:Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/276606
[14:47] <ttx> mathiaz: that's only on -> karmic upgrades ?
[14:47] <mathiaz> ttx: apparently
[14:47] <mathiaz> ttx: I'd suggest to decline as well
[14:47] <ttx> yes, looks like the bulk of people would already be affected by it
[14:47] <mathiaz> any bugs worth accepting on the karmic nomination list?
[14:48] <mathiaz> (the links for each list is on the Knowledge base wiki page)
[14:48] <ttx> mathiaz: nothing from me
[14:48] <mathiaz> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20resources
[14:48] <mathiaz> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[14:48] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[14:48] <ttx> nothing stands out as High Impact
[14:48] <mathiaz> anythins worth SRU for bugs fixed last week^^?
[14:49] <mathiaz> zul: bug 515740?
[14:49] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 515740 in php5 "Crash on using unitialized vals and __get/__set" [Low,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/515740
[14:49] <ttx> bug 521085, but it's already accepted
[14:50] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 521085 in samba "Samba 3.4.0 denies access to Roaming Profiles for XP Clients" [Low,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/521085
[14:50] <mathiaz> that's all for SRU worth bugs
[14:50] <mathiaz> from me
[14:50] <zul> mathiaz: yeah
[14:50] <mathiaz> anything else to add?
[14:50] <zul> mathiaz: i agreee that should be added
[14:51] <mathiaz> zul: bug nominated/accepted in karmic
[14:51] <ttx> OK, anything else on the SRU side ?
[14:51] <mathiaz> zul: hm well - should this be for hardy instead?
[14:51] <zul> mathiaz: for hardy definently
[14:52] <mathiaz> that's all for the sRU review
[14:52] <ttx> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[14:52] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[14:52] <ttx> Anything, anyone ?
[14:52] <Daviey> As part of the ArchiveReorg that is being phased in, should we think about requesting ubuntu-server upload privileges?
[14:53] <Daviey> (i intended to add this to the agenda, but didn't)
[14:53] <jmdault> Asterisk again
[14:53] <ttx> Daviey: that sounds like a laudable goal, yes
[14:53] <jmdault> There has been two security updates since
[14:54] <ttx> jmdault: planning an update ?
[14:54] <mathiaz> Daviey: IIRC there is already a set of packages available for ubuntu-server
[14:54] <Daviey> mathiaz: hmm, are you sure?
[14:54] <mathiaz> Daviey: well - there is a server something defined somewhere
[14:54] <jmdault> ttx: yes. testing at the moment
[14:55] <ttx> jmdault: is it just security fixes or part of a more featureful update ?
[14:55] <mathiaz> Daviey: the reason why we haven't looked at upload privileges for a specific ubuntu-server-* team is that most of the candidates were already core-dev
[14:55] <jmdault> ttx just fixes.
[14:55] <ttx> jmdault: ok, cool
[14:55] <Daviey> ttx: the releases that are being tracked are only security or bug fixes, no new features.
[14:56] <mathiaz> Daviey: in the long term there should be a specific -server-* team with upload priviliges
[14:56] <Daviey> mathiaz: yeah, but it doesn't fit the new world order :)
[14:57] <mathiaz> Daviey: right - there will a time where we'll have to come up with an -server-* team that has upload privileges
[14:57] <mathiaz> Daviey: for now there isn't a pressing need for it AFAICT
[14:57] <ttx> it's true we don't sponsor so many packages
[14:58] <mathiaz> Daviey: I can sync up with cjwatson and report back for the next meeting
[14:58] <Daviey> mathiaz: sounds good..
[14:58] <ttx> Daviey: could you add it to next week agenda ?
[14:58] <Daviey> i'm not saying the time is now that it is required, but certainly something that should be considered
[14:58] <mathiaz> Daviey: I'm sure we'll hear from the spec in due time
[14:58] <Daviey> cjwatson would be a good person to seek advice :)
[14:58] <Daviey> ttx: will do
[14:58] <ttx> [ACTION] mathiaz to sync up with cjwatson re: ubuntu-server upload team
[14:58] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mathiaz to sync up with cjwatson re: ubuntu-server upload team
[14:58] <mathiaz> Daviey: agreed - I've already had a a look at the set of packages in the server package set and they look sensible
[14:59] <Daviey> it's just the seed, isn'tit?
[14:59] <Daviey> anyway, /me defers.
[14:59] <ttx> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[14:59] <MootBot> New Topic:  Announce next meeting date and time
[15:00] <ttx> Next week, same time, same place
[15:00] <ttx> #endmeeting

MeetingLogs/Server/20100303 (last edited 2010-03-03 16:28:03 by lns-bzn-48f-81-56-218-246)