Revision 1 as of 2010-04-01 03:31:56

Clear message


Items we will be discussing:


Agree on next meeting date and time

Next meeting will be on Wednesday, April 7th at 14:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.


[15:02] <ttx> #startmeeting
[15:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:02. The chair is ttx.
[15:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:02] <ttx> Welcome to the Ubuntu Server team meeting
[15:02] <ttx> Agenda is: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Meeting
[15:02] <ttx> Today's scribe is: mathiaz !
[15:02] <ttx> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[15:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[15:03] <ttx> Only one action, mathiaz to discuss with cjwatson about ubuntu-server upload team
[15:03] <mathiaz> ttx: not done
[15:03] <mathiaz> ttx: replace cjwatson with persia
[15:03] <ttx> mathiaz: maybe we shouldn't have it as an ACTION todo before the next meeting ?
[15:03] <mathiaz> ttx: ok
[15:04] <ttx> if you think you won't have time to complete it by next week, I don't see the point :)
[15:04] <ttx> mathiaz: Keep it warm in your GTD ?
[15:04] <mathiaz> ttx: it is
[15:04] <mathiaz> ttx: just lots other stuff there as well
[15:04] <ttx> [TOPIC] Beta2 status
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Beta2 status
[15:05] <ttx> So tomorrow, Beta2Freeze will be upon us
[15:05] <ttx> which means today is probably the last moment to get your non-exceptional fixes in
[15:05] <ttx> Starting tomorrow, they will require a BetaFreezeException.
[15:06] <ttx> Remaining beta2-targeted bugs:
[15:06] <ttx> bug 292971 (mathiaz)
[15:06] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 292971 in libnss-ldap "nscd leaking memory using libnss-ldap" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/292971
[15:06] <mathiaz> ttx: that will probably require a BetaFreezeException
[15:06] <ttx> mathiaz: ack
[15:06] <mathiaz> ttx: as I don't plan to work on it before tomorrow
[15:07] <mathiaz> (tomorrow is the second MySQL bug zap day)
[15:07] <ttx> bug 493593 (zul)
[15:07] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 493593 in scgi "MIR for paste." [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/493593
[15:07] <mathiaz> arg - s/tomorrow/today/
[15:07] <ttx> and bug 408402 (zul)
[15:07] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 408402 in facter "Main Inclusion Report for facter." [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/408402
[15:07] <ttx> Those are MIR bugs that still need to progress on some deps
[15:08] <ttx> A recent search turned out a few bugs milestoned to beta2 but not targeted to lucid
[15:08] <ttx> LP downtime prevented me from triaging them
=== jamie is now known as JamieBennett
[15:09] <ttx> I think at least one of them will fall into our plate:
[15:09] <ttx> bug 532733 (kirkland)
[15:09] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 532733 in qemu-kvm "apt/dpkg in qemu-system-arm hangs if a big task is installed" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/532733
[15:09] <kirkland> ttx: that probably won't be mine
[15:09] <kirkland> ttx: that'll be lool or ogra
[15:09] <ttx> ah
[15:09] <ttx> ok
[15:09] <kirkland> ttx: i'm happy to help them
[15:09] <kirkland> ttx: but it's very specific to their use case
[15:10] <ttx> ok, I'll ping you if there is anything left on that list that we need to care for before Freeze or Release
[15:10] <ttx> Looking at Beta2-targeted work items
[15:10] <ttx> on http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/canonical-server-ubuntu-10.04-beta-2.html
[15:10] <ttx> I think all the work items that needed to be completed before the Freeze were done
[15:11] <ttx> with maybe the exception of:
[15:11] <ttx> puppet/uec-ec2: integrate upstream patches for testsuite
[15:11] <ttx> id-mgt-ref-env: apockage latest sssd
[15:11] <mathiaz> ttx: I may have time to do that
[15:11] <mathiaz> ttx: (ie puppet patches)
[15:12] <mathiaz> ttx: upstream closed all the bugs yesterday stating there is a patch available
[15:12] <ttx> mathiaz: ah, good news
[15:12] <mathiaz> ttx: if I don't get it done by beta2 freeze, I'll postpone it to final
[15:12] <ttx> mathiaz: package sssd -> postponed ?
[15:12] <mathiaz> ttx: as fixing the test suite is not beta2 critical
[15:13] <mathiaz> ttx: sssd yes - If I don't have the time to do it
[15:13] <mathiaz> ttx: today
[15:13] <ttx> ok
[15:13] <ttx> Otherwise I think we are on track for Beta2, if you think you aren't, please shout now.
[15:13] <ttx> kirkland: note that I added a libvirt 0.7.7 compatibility test work item to the euca spec
[15:13] <ttx> to reflect the ongoing discussion with jdstrand
[15:14] <kirkland> ttx: i'm meeting up with jdstrand on thursday to work on libvirt
[15:14] <ttx> (can be done post-Freeze)
[15:14] <ttx> kirkland: cool !
[15:14] <kirkland> ttx: yeah, planning on spending a full day on libvirt
[15:14] <ScottK> New for Beta 2 we now have RC2 of clamav 0.96.  Unless something major comes up this will be their last RC before they release, so if anyone cares about clamav, now's a good time for testing (packages for earlier releases in the ubuntu-clamav PPA).
[15:14] <kirkland> ttx: if anyone else wants to help with libvirt testing this week, sync up with me and jdstrand ;-)
[15:15] <ttx> ScottK: ack
[15:15] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[15:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[15:15] <ttx> hggdh: hi !
[15:15] <hggdh> hi, life is good. A question
[15:16] <hggdh> stress and stability tests for UEC -- mathiaz's tests are enough?
[15:16] <hggdh> If so, I am done with B1
[15:16] <mathiaz> hggdh: do you mean the multi_config tests?
[15:16] <hggdh> yes
[15:16] <ttx> hggdh: I think so... unless kirkland or mathiaz have hidden tests up their sleeves
[15:16] <mathiaz> hggdh: ie starting 20 instances and make sure they all work?
[15:17] <hggdh> mathiaz: I ran with 20, 40, 100, 300
[15:17]  * kirkland high fives hggdh 
[15:17]  * hggdh blushes
[15:17] <mathiaz> hggdh: great - that should do it for stress/scalability tests
[15:17] <nealmcb> :)
[15:17] <kirkland> hggdh: if you got 300 instances running, you've been me :-)
[15:17] <kirkland> beaten
[15:17] <mathiaz> hggdh: have you gone through all the topologies?
[15:17] <hggdh> 2 to go through
[15:18] <hggdh> so I am (yet) not done
[15:18] <ttx> Should we plan to run the multi-network topology by hand ?
[15:18] <mathiaz> hggdh: multi-network being one of them?
[15:18] <mathiaz> ttx: for the time being yes
[15:18] <ttx> ok
[15:19] <hggdh> mathiaz: yes. multi-network is higjly hand-driven
[15:19] <mathiaz> ttx: I may be able to deploy it on the UEC test rig
[15:19] <ttx> kirkland: you managed to run a CC with 2 NICs on your setup ?
[15:19] <kirkland> ttx: i have not
[15:20] <ttx> kirkland: I suggest you go and buy a USB Gb NIC
[15:20] <ttx> if that's the blocker
[15:20] <kirkland> ttx: okay, so I should focus on testing multi-network at this point?
[15:20] <ttx> kirkland: I wouldn't say "focus", but having the ability to run that test would be good
[15:21] <ttx> kirkland: otherwise it sounds like I'm the only one to test that.
[15:21] <kirkland> ttx: well, it's a time-consuming effort, so if it's something i need to work on, it will need to be my "focus"
[15:21] <ttx> kirkland: libvirt has more priority
[15:21] <kirkland> ttx: i have the hardware to do so, I believe
[15:21] <kirkland> ttx: okay, thanks, that's what I needed
[15:21] <ttx> hggdh: I had a question for you about Beta2 ISO testcases. Any way we can preview what you plan to have for beta2, so that we can fix testcases and report issues ?
[15:22] <ttx> hggdh: in particular, I mentioned having tests for UEC install topologies in the ISo tracker for amd64
[15:22] <ttx> hggdh: is that done, any way to preview it ?
[15:23] <hggdh> ttx, no changes from what is already there, no time
[15:23] <ttx> hggdh: is the plan to change those before beta2 ?
[15:23] <hggdh> got my hands full figuring out how uec runs
[15:23] <ttx> hggdh: do you need our help ?
[15:24] <ttx> hggdh: could someone else working on the tracker (ara ?) help ?
[15:24] <hggdh> right now I am finally -- I think -- getting it
[15:24] <ttx> hggdh: if the cases are created, I can certainly document them.
[15:24] <hggdh> ttx will do them today. This is why I also asked if the stress tests were done for B1
[15:24] <ttx> ok
[15:25] <ttx> hggdh: keep me posted...
[15:25] <ttx> anything else for QA ?
[15:25] <hggdh> no, not right now
[15:25] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[15:25] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[15:25] <ttx> hggdh: thanks
[15:25] <ttx> jjohansen: hi
[15:25] <jjohansen> hi
[15:26] <jjohansen> fixes for Bug #540378, Bug #527208 have gone into the beta2 kernel
[15:26] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 540378 in linux-ec2 "BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 66s! [swapper:0]" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/540378
[15:26] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 527208 in linux-ec2 "ec2 instance fails boot, no console output on c1.xlarge" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/527208
[15:27] <ttx> jjohansen: great ! any reason why the bugs are not marked fixed yet ? You need to upload them ?
[15:27] <jjohansen> no promise that it will fix all soft lockups as they are caused by a variety of things but they shouldn't happen near as often
[15:27] <jjohansen> ttx: hrrm, I have to check into that, they were just sucked in yesterday
[15:28] <leoquant> 2/part
[15:28] <ttx> jjohansen: if they are in the pipe, I'm happy with it
[15:28] <ttx> anything else from/to kernel ?
[15:29] <jjohansen> I can't think of anything on my end
[15:29] <ttx> ok, thanks !
[15:29] <ttx> [TOPIC] Server Papercuts status for beta2
[15:29] <MootBot> New Topic:  Server Papercuts status for beta2
[15:29] <ttx> So we are nearing the end of the Server papercuts effort
[15:29] <ttx> as a papercut is not a valid BetaFreezeException motivation
[15:30] <ttx> Status at: https://launchpad.net/server-papercuts/+milestone/lucid-beta-2
[15:30] <ttx> We have 8 bugs fixed (the inprogress one will move to fixreleased as soon as LP unfreezes)
[15:30] <ttx> 1 invalid, 2 left open
[15:31] <ttx> feel free to try to fix the 2 last "confirmed" ones if you have the time
[15:31] <ttx> We'll discuss at UDS-M how successful it was and if we should do it again, even on non-LTS cycles
[15:32] <ttx> I think it failed to motivate new contrributors, but still had a positive effect overrall
[15:32] <ttx> Comments on that ?
[15:33] <hggdh> ttx: we should discuss on UDS-M how to motivate them contributors
[15:33] <kirkland> ttx: +1 for another discussion at UDS
[15:33] <nijaba> ttx: I take it we don't accept new papercuts now?
[15:33] <ttx> hggdh: yes. it's a more global "server community" discussion, I suspect
[15:33] <kirkland> ttx: we clearly need to investigate how to motivate our community
[15:33] <ttx> nijaba: we won't consider any new ones
[15:34] <nijaba> ttx: thanks for confirming
[15:34] <ttx> nijaba: for lucid
[15:34] <kirkland> ttx: i have a similar feeling about the bug-zapping effort
[15:34] <ttx> nijaba: nominating them could be useful if we decide to pursue the effort for M
[15:34] <ttx> good transition !
[15:34] <ttx> [TOPIC] Bugzapping status (kirkland)
[15:34] <MootBot> New Topic:  Bugzapping status (kirkland)
[15:34] <kirkland> ttx: we really smoked eucalyptus, euca2ools, cloud-utils, and cloud-init bugs last week
[15:35] <kirkland> ttx: was a really successful, focused week of bug fixing
[15:35] <ttx> so it was a "cloud" smoke
[15:35] <kirkland> ttx: yeah, like Lost
[15:35]  * kirkland is going to shave his head like John Locke
[15:35] <kirkland> :-)
[15:35] <ttx> kirkland: did you have external contributors to this one ?
[15:35] <kirkland> ttx: this week, as I said, I'm planning on spending at least all day Thursday on Libvirt
[15:35] <kirkland> ttx: no :-(
[15:36] <kirkland> ttx: but we did focus on euca* cloud* and we do have a better UEC because of the intense focus, I believe
[15:36] <ttx> mathiaz: did you get some external help on the bugday portion of the mysql bugzap ?
[15:36] <mathiaz> ttx: pedro and zul helped in triagging bugs
[15:37]  * ttx remembers having two external people helping for the samba bugday part of the samba bugzapping
[15:38] <ttx> kirkland: do you plan to run something for week 23 ?
[15:38] <ttx> (next week)
[15:38] <kirkland> ttx: i don't think so
[15:39] <kirkland> ttx: unless you or someone else has a suggestion
[15:39] <ttx> kirkland: freezes are not the best moment to do so anyway
[15:39] <kirkland> ttx: i just don't think it's generated the participation that we're hoping
[15:39] <kirkland> ttx: though it has stabilized the packages we need to be stable
[15:39] <ttx> ok.
[15:39] <kirkland> ttx: i think my time will be better spent crushing beta2 blockers
[15:39] <kirkland> ttx: okay by you?
[15:40] <ttx> kirkland: yes, and catching the overlooked critical bug in a sea of bug reports
[15:40] <ttx> [TOPIC] Weekly SRU review (mathiaz)
[15:40] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly SRU review (mathiaz)
[15:40] <ttx> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/KnowledgeBase#SRU%20weekly%20review
[15:41] <mathiaz> http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[15:41] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server-team/fixedbugs.ubuntu-server.latest.html
[15:41] <mathiaz> ^^ anything SRU worth on this list?
[15:42]  * ttx wonders why the openldap upgrade bugs don't show up in the list
[15:42] <mathiaz> ttx: the list is generated on Sunday night IIRC
[15:42] <ttx> ah
[15:42] <ttx> that will be next week topic, then :)
[15:43] <mathiaz> ttx: yes
[15:43] <ttx> nothing from me, then ;)
[15:43] <mathiaz> there are two bugs nominated for karmic:
[15:43] <mathiaz> bug 392190
[15:43] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 392190 in vm-builder "vmbuilder fails silently when providing invalid hostname" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/392190
[15:43] <mathiaz> bug 502490
[15:43] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 502490 in vm-builder "ec2-init overwrites user/vmbuilder provided /etc/apt/sources.list" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/502490
[15:44] <ttx> first one needs to be fixed in Lucid first
[15:44] <ttx> smoser: what's your opinion on the second one, any value in backporting as a karmic SRU ?
[15:45] <smoser> hmm....
[15:45] <smoser> i could go either way.
[15:45] <smoser> i dont think its terribly, terribly important.
[15:45] <smoser> as there are many work arounds, like using sources.list.d
[15:45] <mathiaz> ok - I'll decline both bugs then
[15:46] <ttx> mathiaz: you're done ?
[15:46] <mathiaz> yes
[15:46] <ttx> [TOPIC] Information about server survey (nijaba)
[15:46] <MootBot> New Topic:  Information about server survey (nijaba)
[15:46] <ttx> nijaba: o/
[15:46] <nijaba> ttx: that was for the meeting that was cancelled
[15:47] <ttx> and it doesn't make sense anymore ?
[15:47] <nijaba> since that I guess you've seen my email in the ml
[15:47] <ttx> ok :)
[15:47] <ttx> nijaba: so we rock more, right ?
[15:47] <nijaba> it was juste to annoucne that the full results are available to anyone in the community that might need it
[15:47] <nijaba> ttx: we rock HARD
[15:47] <nijaba> :)
[15:48] <ttx> ok, let's rock even harder
[15:49] <ttx> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[15:49] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[15:49] <hggdh> ttx: question: should I keep on testing UEC on daily?
[15:49] <ttx> hggdh: if that can be done at a lesser cost, that would be great to spot regressions
[15:50] <ttx> hggdh: if it's fully automated and doesn't require your constant attention, I'd say yes
[15:50] <ScottK> ttx: I think we should have a session at UDS on what we want 12.04 to look like, so we have an idea of longer term stuff we need to start on now.
[15:50] <hggdh> I think *now* it is less cost, the most difficult was to understand the setup and UEC itself
[15:50] <ttx> ScottK: that's a very good point.
[15:50] <mathiaz> hggdh: note that daily are not always functional
[15:51] <ttx> Discuss anything that would span multiple releases, as well as what needs to be done for the next 6 months
[15:52] <ttx> hggdh: what needs to be done is the post-milestone validation and the pre-milestone candidate testing. Anything else (like testing all dailies) is bonus points
[15:52] <ttx> (what needs to be done is tracked in the spec)
[15:53] <ttx> ok, let's wrap up, if nobody else has any comment
[15:54] <ttx> Announce next meeting date and time : same time, same place, next week.
[15:54] <ttx> I gather DST makes this time slightly more convenient ?
[15:54] <Daviey> (less)
[15:54] <ttx> (equal)
[15:54] <kirkland> ttx: more!
[15:55] <mathiaz> more would even be better
[15:55] <ttx> mathiaz: sleepy head
[15:55] <Daviey> 15:00 UTC ++
[15:56] <ttx> Try to pay lots of beers to jib at UDS to make him change time
[15:56] <ttx> Daviey: ^
[15:56] <ttx> #endmeeting