20100831

Agenda

  • Review ACTION points from previous meeting
    • SpamapS to submit rubygems change proposal as Important bug in Debian and CC ubuntu-devel
    • jjohansen to review bug 493156
    • zul to review papercut status of bug 582963
    • ttx to make burnup charts available to people who want them
  • Maverick development (jib)
  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)

  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)

    • pv-ops kernel status update
  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)

  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)

  • Papercuts Maverick retrospective (ttx)
  • Open Discussion
  • Announce next meeting date and time
    • Tuesday 2010-09-07 at 1800 UTC - #ubuntu-meeting

Minutes

Meeting Actions

  • jjohansen to provide tests for bug 582963 and request SRU

ACTIONS from previous meeting

  • SpamapS to submit rubygems change proposal as Important bug in Debian and CC ubuntu-devel
    • submitted, discussion had, consensus reached...
    • rubygems 1.9.1 to be merged into ruby 1.9, and gems to be placed in /usr/local/bin
    • copious congratulations and kudos from all around to Spamaps
  • jjohansen to review bug 493156 ("Please enable CONFIG_TASK_DELAY_ACCT")
    • test kernel built, but not yet submitted for SRU
  • zul to review papercut status of bug 582963
    • Done, in apache now
    • side effect in the form of a new SSl bug
    • zul may revert
  • ttx to make burnup charts available to people who want them

Maverick development (jib)

  • beta cycle is winding down (ends this thursday)
    • we are mostly on track
  • iso testing coming up soon
  • jib and ttx finalizing RC plan on friday
  • ttx described in detail how to prioritize work
  • ttx points out that week between Beta release and FinalFreeze is time to fix seemingly basic bugs

Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)

  • QA team changing the way regression tags are used - RFC out soon
  • mathiaz announces that he has automated all of the iso testing

Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)

  • Bug #606373 - sporadic console output - looking for a race
  • Bug #620994 (xen kernel BUG) - after extensive testing doesn't affect, Maverick or Lucid
  • Bug #614853 (kernel panic divide error) - could not replicate
  • Bug 621175 (virtual kernel contains too many modules) - will have to be fixed post-beta

Papercuts Maverick retrospective (ttx)

  • 48 targets; 25 bugs fixed; 8 invalidated; 3 waiting on upstream; 12 postponed
  • ttx frets that the effort failed in bringing in new contributors
  • kirkland asks how many users were made happier with Ubuntu Server
    • tough to quantify
  • kirkland and mathiaz agree that it is nice dedicating time to fix small bugs
  • hallyn and Spamaps concur that it was a useful exercise for learning about packaging
  • We will further discuss at UDS-N

Agree on next meeting date and time

Next meeting will be on Tuesday, September 7th at 18:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.

Log

[19:01] <hallyn> #startmeeting
[19:01] <MootBot> Meeting started at 13:01. The chair is hallyn.
[19:01] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[19:01] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[19:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[19:01] <hallyn> SpamapS to submit rubygems change proposal as Important bug in Debian and CC ubuntu-devel
[19:02] <hallyn> done, right?
[19:02] <SpamapS> submitted, discussion had, concensus reached...
[19:02] <SpamapS> rubygems 1.8 will not be changed
[19:02] <SpamapS> 1.9.1 is being merged into ruby 1.9
[19:02] <SpamapS> and will put gems in...... drum roll please
[19:02] <SpamapS> /usr/local/bin!
[19:02] <jiboumans> w00tz
[19:02] <SpamapS> this is huge
[19:03] <jiboumans> <------------ this big ------------>
[19:03] <SpamapS> ^^ indeed
[19:03] <smoser> hooray.
[19:03] <ttx> Congrats to SpamapS for passing his first consensus
[19:03] <hallyn> that was on the order of years right?
[19:03] <Daviey> three cheers for awesomeness
[19:03]  * SpamapS will learn to spell it next. :)
[19:03] <ttx> I'd be so happy if only I didn't hate Ruby.
[19:03] <Daviey> hurding cats deserves praise :)
[19:03] <SpamapS> I cann't take credit here hto..
[19:04] <SpamapS> Lucas Nussbaum was huge in this
[19:04] <hallyn> cool.  moving on
[19:04] <SpamapS> I think we just brought the sway of the ruby community at the right time.
[19:04] <hallyn> jjohansen to review bug 493156
[19:04] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 493156 in iotop (Ubuntu) "Please enable CONFIG_TASK_DELAY_ACCT" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/493156
[19:04] <hallyn> (sorry, didn't mean to interrupt any revelry)
[19:05] <jjohansen> hrmm, I built test kernels with that but haven't submitted for sru yet
[19:05] <SpamapS> hallyn: no we're done. :)
[19:05] <jiboumans> jjohansen: sweet.. i've actually run into a problem last week where exactly that would have let me diagnose it
[19:05] <hallyn> is there any controversy over enabling them?  or is simply asking for sru the next step?
[19:06] <jjohansen> It simply asking for SRU and providing tests, showing that it works
[19:06] <jjohansen> I need to attach the test kernels so we can get some people to pile on and claim it works for them ...
[19:07] <hallyn> [ACTION] jjohansen to provide tests for bug 582963 and request SRU
[19:07] <hallyn> then?
[19:07] <MootBot> ACTION received:  jjohansen to provide tests for bug 582963 and request SRU
[19:07] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 582963 in Ubuntu Server papercuts "SSL pass phrase dialog can't read input" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/582963
[19:07] <hallyn> jjohansen: ^  is that ok?
[19:08] <hallyn> (mootbot keeps PMing me, i think it's stalking me)
[19:08] <jjohansen> yep,
[19:08] <hallyn> moving on then
[19:08] <hallyn> zul to review papercut status of bug 582963
[19:08] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 582963 in Ubuntu Server papercuts "SSL pass phrase dialog can't read input" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/582963
[19:08] <zul> done...
[19:08] <hallyn> zul: and it's not a papercut?
[19:08] <zul> hallyn: its in apache right now
[19:09] <hallyn> k
[19:09] <hallyn> ttx to make burnup charts available to people who want them
[19:09] <ttx> Done @ http://people.canonical.com/~ttx/current-milestone-progress.svg & refreshed hourly
[19:09] <hggdh> zul: there is a side effect of the SSL bug: bug 627142
[19:09] <jiboumans> ttx++
[19:09] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 627142 in apache2 (Ubuntu) "Apache2 init.d script runs 'stty sane', which will fail on script runs" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/627142
[19:10] <zul> hggdh: yeah im thinking of reverting it
[19:10] <hallyn> hm, what do you do with the papercut if you revert the fix?
[19:11] <ttx> hallyn: the papercut cycle is over anyway
[19:11] <hallyn> ok :)
[19:11] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Maverick development (jib)
[19:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Maverick development (jib)
[19:11] <jiboumans> beta cycle is winding down (ends this thursday)
[19:11] <jiboumans> we're mostly on track with our blueprints; small postpones are expected, but nothing major
[19:12] <jiboumans> please note that iso testing is coming up soon!
[19:12] <jiboumans> ttx and I will be prepping the RC plan this week and finalizing it this friday
[19:12] <ttx> I can add a few details on the beta milestone remaining work
[19:12] <jiboumans> if there's anything you feel should be on our radars for RC, feel free to bring it up of course
[19:13] <jiboumans> so far, nothing alarming is on my radar, so it'll be mostly business as usual, with extra time for testing of course
[19:13] <jiboumans> ttx: please go ahead
=== Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha
[19:13] <ttx> We've looked into the beta-milestoned bugs with the assignees today
[19:13] <ttx> and we don't expect to respin for any of them
[19:13] <ttx> we might have a new eucalyptus that would go in *if* the beta is respinned for any other reason
[19:14] <ttx> otherwise it will just be committed when the archive thaws
[19:14] <ttx> So ISO testing can start today if you have spare cycles
[19:14] <mathiaz> ttx:  bug 621175
[19:14] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 621175 in linux (Ubuntu Maverick) "-virtual kernel contains too many modules" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/621175
[19:14] <ttx> otherwise we'll cover it tomorrow.
[19:15] <mathiaz> ttx: ^^ this one makes the minimal virtual test case fail
[19:15] <mathiaz> ttx: not beta critical though
[19:15]  * SpamapS hopes and prays that ceph doesn't get disabled again.
[19:15] <hallyn> ttx: would you say that should be an action item?
[19:15] <ttx> mathiaz: rigth, I don't expect the kernel to be reuploaded now -- good one to bring to jjohansen though
[19:15] <jiboumans> hallyn: iso testing is part of our work item blueprints
[19:16] <ttx> hallyn: ISO testing ? No, that would be redundant with the work items :)
[19:16]  * mathiaz keeps it for later on
=== Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk
[19:16] <hallyn> ok
[19:16] <ttx> jiboumans: I've a few notes on the post-beta work as well
[19:16] <jiboumans> ttx: please, go ahead
[19:16] <ttx> some of you will still have some spec work
[19:16] <ttx> but otherwise the focus is on Maverick bugs @
[19:16] <ttx> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/maverick/+bugs
[19:17] <ttx> Unfortunately you can't filter that list of ubuntu-server things
[19:17] <ttx> (LP bug)
[19:17] <ttx> So I publish an outofsync version @ https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/MaverickReleaseStatus
[19:17] <jiboumans> ttx++
[19:17] <ttx> If you look at that last one you'll see three levels of bugs
[19:18] <jiboumans> ttx: would tagging be helpful for us there?
[19:18] <ttx> Milestoned bugs -- those have high priority
[19:18] <ttx> jiboumans: I've to look into automating the generation of this one, yes. tagging is one solution
[19:18] <ttx> high priority meaning, spec work is even secondary
[19:19] <ttx> then you have "High, release targeted bugs"
[19:19] <ttx> those are priority targets, but come after High priority spec work, if you follow me :)
[19:19] <ttx> and finally "Other release-targeted bugs"
[19:19] <ttx> which are targts of opportunity
[19:19] <ttx> The first two categories have assignees
[19:19] <mathiaz> ttx: could you publish a prioritize list of things to do?
[19:19] <ttx> the last one is free game
[19:20] <mathiaz> ttx: 1. work on bugs from this list
[19:20] <mathiaz> ttx: 2. work on high priority specs
[19:20] <mathiaz> ttx: 3. ...
[19:20] <ttx> mathiaz: I'll discuss it with you on 1:1s when I know your spec load
[19:20] <mathiaz> ttx: and so on
[19:20] <ttx> because some specs have higher prio than some bugs etc
[19:21] <ttx> But the general idea is:
[19:21] <ttx> 1. Milestoned bugs (if any assiged to you)
[19:21] <ttx> 2. Spec work
[19:21] <ttx> 3. High, release targeted bugs (if any assigned to you)
[19:21] <ttx> 4. "Low" spec work
[19:21] <ttx> 5. Other release-targeted bugs (free game)
[19:22] <ttx> mathiaz: if that answers your question
[19:22] <mathiaz> ttx: is this list specific to the RC cycle, or should it also be used during the other iterations?
[19:22] <mathiaz> ttx: yes - that is very useful information
[19:23] <ttx> mathiaz: actually, it can be used for all
[19:23] <mathiaz> ttx: to help figure out in which order things should be worked on
[19:23] <ttx> it's just that we don't expect so much free time to do (5) in non-RC cycles
[19:23] <ttx> beta and Rc cycles provision /some/ time to do RC bugfixing
[19:23] <mathiaz> ttx: agreed - still it's useful information to help figure out what to work on :)
[19:24] <hallyn> so milestoned bugs always are highest prio?  that actually is (refreshing) news to me, neat.
[19:24] <ttx> if you see anything missing from those lists, please let me know
[19:24] <mathiaz> ttx: this should probably be included in the personal view of the WI somehow
[19:24] <ttx> hallyn: yes, those are "must fix"
[19:24] <jiboumans> mathiaz: yup, agreed.. i think SpamapS is hacking on that actually
[19:25] <SpamapS> Yeah I've been working on getting bug lists into those pages
[19:25] <ttx> I'm done, unless there are other questions
[19:26] <SpamapS> At this point the limitation is people.canonical.com's lack of server side scripting (otherwise we have to pull down all of the bugs in maverick into sqlite)
[19:26] <jiboumans> spamaps: iframe, hoooo?
[19:26] <jiboumans> ttx, thanks for that
[19:26] <SpamapS> jiboumans: http://spamaps.org/files/test.html
[19:26]  * mathiaz is a fan of couchdb - everything should be in there
[19:26] <SpamapS> that about as good as I can do w/ iframes. But we can continue that discussion later.
[19:27] <lifeless> mathiaz: as long as you have TB of disk
[19:27] <SpamapS> thats... ugh my typing is awful today.
[19:27] <hallyn> jiboumans: did you have any more on the topic?
[19:27] <jiboumans> hallyn: nope, all done thanks
[19:27] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[19:27] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[19:27] <hggdh> hi
[19:27] <SpamapS> lifeless: who doesn't have TB of disk these days? ;-)
[19:27] <lifeless> SpamapS: you'd be surprised.
[19:27] <mathiaz> SpamapS: android phones?
[19:28] <hallyn> howdie
[19:28] <hggdh> this week I am pretty much dedicated to my other QA blueprints -- given that Eucalyptus has gone stable(r)
[19:28] <zul> SpamapS: i dont
[19:28] <hallyn> any questions for hggdh in that case?
[19:28] <zul> noep
[19:28] <lifeless> SpamapS: after this meeting, please pop into #launhcpad-dev and chat about the bug lists you want, may be simpler to spit it straight of LP
[19:28] <hggdh> on the Qa front we are considering changing a bit the way the regression tags are used, and should have something soon for comments
[19:29] <mathiaz> hggdh: I've (finally!!) written scripts for most of the -server iso test cases
[19:29] <SpamapS> lifeless: yes, I have some ideas for that as well for sure.
[19:29] <hggdh> apart from that... enjoying *not* running tests on euca, for a change ;-)
[19:29] <mathiaz> hggdh: I've talked with cr3 to get them included in checkbox at some point
[19:29] <hallyn> <chuckle>
[19:29] <hggdh> mathiaz: cool!
[19:30] <hggdh> but that's it, unless there is a question for me
[19:30] <mathiaz> hggdh: I've also automated all the iso testing now
[19:30] <hggdh> mathiaz: wow! on VMs?
[19:30] <SpamapS> hggdh: I've tagged a bug recently as regression-release .. would that mean it gets a long hard look from your team?
[19:30] <mathiaz> hggdh: it may be usefull to share my setup with the QA team
[19:30] <mathiaz> hggdh: yes
[19:30] <hggdh> mathiaz: yes, we would love to see (and use) it
[19:30] <mathiaz> hggdh: and all the tests results are stored in couchdb
[19:30] <hggdh> SpamapS: actually, in this case you probably did the Right Thing
[19:31] <hggdh> mathiaz: I love you :-)
[19:31] <hallyn> on that amicable note,
[19:31] <mathiaz> hggdh: I'm in touch with cr3 on a regular basis as he works on something similar for LP
[19:31] <mathiaz> I'm done now :)
[19:31] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[19:31] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (jjohansen)
[19:32] <hallyn> pv-ops kernel status update
[19:33] <jjohansen> Bug #606373 - I have gotten working console output but its sparadic, it comes and goes so I am looking for a race
[19:33] <hallyn> jjohansen: ^
[19:33] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 606373 in cloud-init (Ubuntu) "cloud-init output does not get to console when booted with pv-grub and ramdisk" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/606373
[19:33] <hallyn> oops
[19:33] <jjohansen> :)
[19:34] <jjohansen> Bug #620994 - after extensive testing doesn't affect, Maverick or Lucid
[19:34] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 620994 in linux (Ubuntu Hardy) "linux 2.6.24-28.75 breaks xen flavours (xen kernel bug: 'kernel BUG at /build/buildd/linux-2.6.24/debian/build/custom-source-xen/mm/memory.c:2704')" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/620994
[19:34] <jjohansen> We originally believed it would be problematic for Lucid
[19:35] <jjohansen> Bug #614853 - can not replicate
[19:35] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 614853 in linux-ec2 (Ubuntu) "kernel panic divide error: 0000 [#1] SMP" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/614853
[19:35] <ttx> jjohansen: about bug 621175
[19:35] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 621175 in linux (Ubuntu Maverick) "-virtual kernel contains too many modules" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/621175
[19:36] <ttx> is that something we can fix postbeta ?
[19:36] <jjohansen> ttx - we will have to, its just a matter of packaging.  The kernel froze last week so no changes could be made since last wednesday
[19:36] <jjohansen> it opens up again with beta release
[19:37] <ttx> jjohansen: ack
[19:38] <hallyn> more questions?
[19:38] <hallyn> thanks, jjohansen
[19:38] <hallyn> moving on,
[19:38] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[19:38] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[19:39] <jiboumans> no sommer it seems
[19:39] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[19:39] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[19:39] <hallyn> no kim0 either, though, i think
[19:40] <hallyn> going once
[19:40] <hallyn> going twice,
[19:40] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Papercuts Maverick retrospective (ttx)
[19:40] <MootBot> New Topic:  Papercuts Maverick retrospective (ttx)
[19:40] <ttx> Quick retrospective on the Maverick papercuts effort
[19:40] <ttx> Total of 48 targets
[19:41] <ttx> 25 bugs fixed
[19:41] <ttx> 8 invalidated
[19:41] <ttx> 3 waiting on upstream
[19:41] <ttx> 12 postponed
[19:41] <ttx> I think it was not successful in bringing in new contributors
[19:41] <kirkland> how many users did we make "happier" with Ubuntu Server?
[19:41] <ttx> so I'd rethink it completely
[19:41] <kirkland> (that's perhaps a hypothetical question)
[19:42] <mathiaz> ttx: well - I think it may not have reached the initial objectives
[19:42] <ttx> something like a list of bitesize server bugs
[19:42] <hallyn> kirkland: well, unmeasurable perhaps
[19:42] <Daviey> am i still here?
[19:42] <mathiaz> ttx: however I think we're still fixed bugs
[19:42] <ttx> that we can point contributors to
[19:42] <kirkland> Daviey: ack
[19:42] <Daviey> ta
[19:42] <mathiaz> ttx: and we were able to measure it
[19:42] <SpamapS> ttx: I think some blogging effort and scheduled "learn how to fix a bug in ubuntu" IRC classes would help with that.
[19:42] <mathiaz> ttx: IMO it was a successfull format
[19:43] <kirkland> ttx: i really, really, really like the idea of DEDICATING time to fixing bugs in random (or not so random) server packages
[19:43] <ttx> that's a discussion for UDS, I suspect
[19:43] <SpamapS> Agreed
[19:43] <mathiaz> kirkland: agreed
[19:43] <ttx> kirkland: but a "fix bugs" spec would cover for that
[19:43] <hallyn> ttx: also i found it useful as a beginner for learning about debian packaging a bit
[19:43] <hallyn> not your target goal, but...
[19:43] <mathiaz> kirkland: IMO the papercuts project was successfull in that area
[19:43] <SpamapS> hallyn: I second that. It was helpful to be exposed to packages done different ways.
=== head_v is now known as head_victim
[19:44] <ttx> I'd have the bitesize list on one side, and a "fix bugs" generic blueprint to assign time to... fix bugs
[19:44] <kirkland> ttx: maybe ... i filed a bug-zapping spec for Lucid, which failed miserably, in my opinion
[19:45] <ttx> try to think about it a bit, and we'll rediscuss it at UDS-N
[19:45] <ttx> (done)
[19:45] <mathiaz> may be we could discuss something in between bug-zapping and -papercuts
[19:45] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[19:45] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[19:45] <ttx> small remark I forgot to make about postbeta work
[19:45] <ttx> there is just one week between Beta release and FinalFreeze
[19:46] <ttx> so that's when you can fix seemingly basic bugs
[19:46] <ttx> after FinalFreeze it gets harder to push small fixes in
[19:46] <hallyn> and that'd next week?
[19:47] <ttx> yes :)
[19:47] <hallyn> sweet
[19:47] <hallyn> more open discussion?
[19:47] <ttx> hallyn: welcome to the mad release schedule !
[19:47]  * Daviey isn't convinced there were enough left over for drive by contributors.
[19:47] <ttx> Daviey: in papercuts ?
[19:47] <hallyn> Daviey: didn't see anyone coming around asking though
[19:47] <mathiaz> ttx: so there are 2 weeks for preparation of RC?
[19:48] <SpamapS> So for sponsors, please be ready next wed. Unless WI improvements overload me, I plan to go on a "basic bug fixing" spree. ;)
[19:48] <ttx> mathiaz: there are three weeks
[19:48] <ttx> but FinalFreeze is at RC-2
[19:48] <hallyn> poor sponsors
[19:48] <zul> yes pitty us
[19:48] <hallyn> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[19:48] <MootBot> New Topic:  Announce next meeting date and time
[19:48]  * ttx looks at other cycles to compare
[19:48] <hallyn> Tuesday 2010-09-07 at 1800 UTC - #ubuntu-meeting
[19:49]  * hallyn waits to end meeting ...
[19:49] <mathiaz> ttx: I thought we had 2 weeks between beta release and final freeze
[19:49] <ttx> ah!
[19:50] <ttx> How did I misread that
[19:50] <hallyn> cool, 2 weeks to bomb the sponsors
[19:50] <ttx> mathiaz: you're right, thanks
[19:50] <mathiaz> ttx: hm - I don't think so
[19:51] <mathiaz> ttx: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickReleaseSchedule
[19:51] <mathiaz> ttx: ^^ week 21 is empty
[19:51] <hallyn> shortened cycle this time right?
[19:51] <ttx> 2 weeks between beta release and final freeze
[19:51] <mathiaz> ttx: ah.. right
[19:51] <ttx> 2 weeks between FinalFreeze and RC
[19:51] <mathiaz> ttx: I was reading from RC
[19:52] <hallyn> thanks, everyone
[19:52] <hallyn> #endmeeting
[19:52] <ttx> My Firefox is not drawing a line between week 21 and 22
[19:52] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 13:52.
[19:52] <mathiaz> anyway - indeed - there are two weeks between beta and final freeze
[19:52] <ttx> good :)

MeetingLogs/Server/20100831 (last edited 2010-09-02 17:07:11 by serge-hallyn)