== Meeting information == * #ubuntu-meeting Meeting, 19 Jan at 16:01 — 16:36 UTC * Full logs at [[http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2016/ubuntu-meeting.2016-01-19-16.01.log.html]] == Meeting summary == ''ACTION:'' Review ACTION points from previous meeting === Xenial Development === The discussion about "Xenial Development" started at 16:04. === Assigned bugwork (rbasak) === The discussion about "Assigned bugwork (rbasak)" started at 16:06. * ''LINK:'' https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-x-server-core === Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou) === The discussion about "Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou)" started at 16:10. === Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (matsubara) === The discussion about "Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (matsubara)" started at 16:18. * ''LINK:'' https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Trusty/view/Smoke%20Testing/ * ''ACTION:'' : Matsubara to research and answer whether we want to resume manual testing for i386 === Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb, sforshee, arges) === The discussion about "Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb, sforshee, arges)" started at 16:32. === Upcoming Call For Papers === The discussion about "Upcoming Call For Papers" started at 16:34. === Ubuntu Server Team Events === The discussion about "Ubuntu Server Team Events" started at 16:35. === Open Discussion === The discussion about "Open Discussion" started at 16:36. == Vote results == == Done items == * (none) == People present (lines said) == * zul (42) * rbasak (19) * teward (17) * caribou (17) * jgrimm (15) * matsubara (14) * arges (9) * hggdh (9) * meetingology (5) * phillw (4) * kickinz1 (4) * cpaelzer (2) * ubottu (1) == Full Log == 16:01 <zul> #startmeeting 16:01 <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Jan 19 16:01:11 2016 UTC. The chair is zul. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 16:01 <meetingology> 16:01 <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 16:01 <zul> #action Review ACTION points from previous meeting 16:01 * meetingology Review ACTION points from previous meeting 16:02 <zul> was there any action points from the previous meeting 16:02 <cpaelzer> late o/ 16:02 <teward> thought there wasn't a previous meeting? 16:02 <teward> (one was missed, I think) 16:02 <zul> ok then 16:03 <zul> action: Xenial Development 16:03 <zul> jgrim: do you want to take this one 16:04 <zul> jgrimm: ^^^ 16:04 <zul> #topic Xenial Development 16:04 * jgrimm notices 16:05 <zul> smoser: ^^^ 16:05 <jgrimm> feature freeze on its way Feb 18 16:05 <jgrimm> mad scramble for merges, would love more help. most important packages for merge being tracked in blueprint. 16:06 <jgrimm> but as this is an LTS release ideally would get currency across as much as feasibly possible 16:06 <zul> cool anything else? 16:06 <jgrimm> that's abou tit 16:06 <jgrimm> about it. eek 16:06 <teward> just for FYI awareness... 16:06 <zul> #topic Assigned bugwork (rbasak) 16:07 <zul> teward: go ahead 16:07 <teward> nginx 1.9.9-1ubuntu1 merged in on the 16th, after a -0ubuntu1 direct upload due to Debian being months behind 16:07 <teward> (from the 6th) 16:07 <rbasak> I've deferred bug work in favour of focusing on merges from the blueprint for now. 16:07 <teward> just wanted to give that as an awareness / FYI, with no additional action items there :) 16:07 <rbasak> Thanks teward! 16:07 <jgrimm> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-x-server-core 16:07 <rbasak> teward is so on the ball with nginx, I didn't think it necessary to create a blueprint item to track it. 16:08 <teward> rbasak: may wish to for the post-FF ones, though I have to add to my workflow to poke the Release team for FF review, with each new version made available 16:08 <teward> (especially with SRU post-release, for 1.10.x) 16:08 <rbasak> Understood, thanks. 16:08 <rbasak> Shall I add a work item for 1.10.x? 16:09 <teward> that's the ultimate goal, but that's something to look for in March/April 16:09 <teward> since nginx upstream won't be releasing 1.10.x until around that time, most likely after Xenial is released 16:09 <teward> (so that would be a post-Xenial SRU as soon as that's available) 16:09 <teward> rbasak: up to you whether you want the 1.9.x tasks added, for keeping it up to date with upstream/Debian 16:10 <zul> anything else? 16:10 <rbasak> OK, I've added a task for 1.10.x, marked as blocked. It may well be that we release without it, in which case we can translate that to an SRU bug. 16:10 <zul> #topic Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou) 16:10 <zul> caribou: anything? 16:10 <caribou> o/ 16:10 <rbasak> caribou: congratulations! 16:10 <caribou> I'm almost done with the nut merge 16:10 <caribou> rbasak: thanks! 16:11 <jgrimm> caribou, nice! 16:11 * caribou got voted as Core Dev for those following on TV 16:11 <rbasak> caribou is our newest core dev, as of yesterday. 16:11 <zul> sweet 16:11 <jgrimm> caribou, congratulations!!!! 16:11 <cpaelzer> gz caribou! 16:11 <kickinz1> caribou, \o/ 16:11 <caribou> thanks everyone ! I'll be more effective to help out 16:11 <jgrimm> indeed 16:12 <arges> woo hoo 16:12 <caribou> I have a question to bring up regarding HA support (clvm + dlm) 16:12 <caribou> maybe a good time now or later during AOB 16:12 <caribou> ? 16:13 <caribou> want to discuss it now ? 16:13 * rbasak looks at zul 16:14 <zul> up to you 16:14 <zul> im double booked right now 16:14 <caribou> right now, clvm is in main but dlm is in Universe 16:14 <caribou> libdlm3 in main though. We have people who want a supported solution to implement shared storage 16:15 <caribou> jgrimm: it would be important for our next LTS to have a clear statement on how we support shared storage access with clvm 16:15 <zul> agreed 16:16 <rbasak> So this is a question of what we want in main? 16:16 <caribou> at the same time, the dlm package has been uninstallable for two years with only one people complaining 16:16 <rbasak> That's a question for Canonical I guess, so between jgrimm and kirkland. 16:16 <caribou> rbasak: yes, what we want to offer in main (not only Canonical; do we want to demote clvm out of main ?) 16:17 <caribou> rbasak: but I agree, I can take it with jgrimm & Dustin 16:17 <jgrimm> caribou, yes please. 16:18 <caribou> other than that I'm good, nothing else 16:18 <caribou> thanks again ! 16:18 <zul> ok moving on 16:18 <zul> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (matsubara) 16:19 <zul> he aint here... 16:19 <zul> anyone have anything? 16:19 <teward> there's one action item on there 16:19 <teward> underneath there, though if matsubara's not here maybe it needs to be delayed to next meeting? 16:19 <zul> fine with me :) 16:19 <teward> thoughts from the others on the team, whether we push the QA issue to next meeting, due to Matsubara's absense? 16:19 <teward> absence* 16:20 <teward> oop there's matsubara, maybe 16:20 <matsubara> sorry, ISP issues 16:20 <rbasak> Did Phill's subsequent email to the ML retract this agenda point? That wasn't clear to me. Is he here? 16:20 <phillw> o/ 16:20 <matsubara> I was trying to connect back to join the meeting 16:21 <rbasak> phillw: o/ 16:21 <matsubara> just to clarify the issue further, we do have smoke tests (automated) for i386 running. I think phillw concerns were about the iso tracker manual tests (that's from what I understand about the issue) 16:21 <rbasak> phillw: did you still want to raise this with matsubara? 16:21 <matsubara> not sure at what point we are at the meeting 16:22 <phillw> yeah, I can arrange for the manual tests on the iso tracker to be arried out periodically if the team maintains that version. 16:22 <rbasak> " 32-bit QA and Support Discussion (phillw) " is where I think we are. 16:22 <phillw> *carried 16:22 <matsubara> https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Trusty/view/Smoke%20Testing/ 16:23 <matsubara> that shows that we do have i386 automated tests for trusty isos 16:23 <matsubara> and it's in my todo list to move those to our https://server-team-jenkins.canonical.com/ instance and of course update them to include xenial tests as well 16:24 <hggdh> just a question: we have not been smoke-testing Xenial on i386? 16:26 <matsubara> hggdh, for some reason they haven't run for a long time, I'll look into it. I've been bad at monitoring those tests runs 16:26 <zul> anything else? 16:26 <hggdh> one more pont 16:26 <hggdh> point* 16:27 <hggdh> I ould like to know if we are going to keep on doing i386 tests; also, are we going to re-introduce manual testing, or is the team's opinion that the automated smoke tests are enough? 16:29 <matsubara> I think the automated tests we have are enough and cover the main workflows with server installs 16:29 <jgrimm> matsubara, i'd like to understand what the differences are tho 16:30 <rbasak> Shall we defer this, and then matsubara can maybe give us a full answer next week? 16:30 <jgrimm> between automated smoke vs manual tests, and where/when the manual tests have historically been run. seems like we need to come back next week with a bit more data and opinion. 16:30 <jgrimm> rbasak, agreed 16:30 <rbasak> zul: an action for matsubara please? 16:30 <zul> rbasak: for? 16:31 <rbasak> matsubara to research and answer whether we want to resume manual testing for i386 16:31 <hggdh> a more knowledge-based response to jgrimm's points 16:31 <zul> action: Matsubara to research and answer whether we want to resume manual testing for i386 16:31 <matsubara> jgrimm, I think mainly process wise but I might be wrong. the only mandatory ones in the ISO tracker http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/351/builds/110651/testcases/1403/results are basically covered by the https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Trusty/view/Smoke%20Testing/job/trusty-server-amd64-smoke-lvm/ for example 16:31 <zul> #action: Matsubara to research and answer whether we want to resume manual testing for i386 16:31 * meetingology : Matsubara to research and answer whether we want to resume manual testing for i386 16:31 <rbasak> Thanks! 16:31 <matsubara> but that's fine I can take that action and explaing further 16:31 <zul> anything else? 16:31 <jgrimm> thank you matsubara 16:32 <matsubara> thanks zul, rbasak, jgrimm, teward and phillw 16:32 <hggdh> phillw: this was your point. No comments? 16:32 <matsubara> oh and hggdh too 16:32 <hggdh> heh 16:32 <zul> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb, sforshee, arges) 16:32 <hggdh> matsubara: I am still alive :-) 16:32 <matsubara> nice to see you around hggdh, long time, no talk! 16:32 <zul> arges: i know you are around 16:32 <phillw> i will put in diary to be here next meeting, Thanks, 16:32 <arges> zul: nothing here 16:32 <arges> .. 16:32 <arges> oh 16:33 <arges> doing the libvirt merge 16:33 <arges> . 16:33 <hggdh> matsubara: indeed 16:33 <kickinz1> arges, I had some kernel traces when running schroot on top of btrfs with a bcache backend. Di you see the bug? 16:33 <zul> arges: ok cool 16:33 <arges> kickinz1: nope whats the bug#? 16:33 <zul> anything for arges? 16:34 <kickinz1> arge https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1532145 16:34 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1532145 in linux (Ubuntu) "Kernel Panic wrt btrfs while sbuild/schroot" [High,Confirmed] 16:34 <arges> kickinz1: ok i'll tag it so we work on it 16:34 <arges> thanks 16:34 <kickinz1> arges, np 16:34 <zul> #topic Upcoming Call For Papers 16:35 <zul> #topic Ubuntu Server Team Events 16:35 <zul> there is something in california this week and fossdem is next week (ill be there) 16:35 <zul> anyting else? 16:36 <zul> if not 16:36 <zul> #topic Open Discussion 16:36 <zul> anything to bring up 16:36 <zul> if not 16:36 <zul> #endmeeting Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology)