Review ACTION points from previous meeting
The discussion about "Review ACTION points from previous meeting" started at 16:02.
The discussion about "Yakkety Development" started at 16:05.
Release Bugs (16:09)
Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou)
The discussion about "Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou)" started at 16:15.
Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team
The discussion about "Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team" started at 16:15.
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 16:18.
Upcoming Call For Papers
The discussion about "Upcoming Call For Papers" started at 16:20.
Ubuntu Server Team Events
The discussion about "Ubuntu Server Team Events" started at 16:22.
The discussion about "Open Discussion" started at 16:26.
Announce next meeting date, time and chair
The discussion about "Announce next meeting date, time and chair" started at 16:30.
Assigned merges/bugwork (rbasak)
The discussion about "Assigned merges/bugwork (rbasak)" started at 16:32.
LINK: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/logwatch is the list - I mean the "unmatched" and "not being reported" type bugs.
People present (lines said)
- coreycb (58)
- rbasak (56)
- magicalChicken (24)
- nacc (22)
- jgrimm (20)
- rharper (9)
- ubottu (7)
- smb (6)
- teward (5)
- powersj (3)
- arosales (3)
- meetingology (3)
- arges (1)
- gaughen (1)
16:00 <coreycb> #startmeeting ubuntu-server-team
16:00 <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
16:00 <teward> o/
16:00 <powersj> o/
16:00 <coreycb> Just going to hang tight for a few minutes and let people show up
16:01 <jgrimm> o/
16:01 <rbasak> o/
16:02 <smb> o/
16:02 <nacc> o/
16:02 <coreycb> alright looks like we have a decent number of folks so let's get started
16:02 <rharper> o/
16:02 <coreycb> #topic Review ACTION points from previous meeting
16:03 <nacc> sorry, i'm bad and haven't updated the wiki; i think there was just hte one for jgrimm to review the qemu bug(s)
16:03 <coreycb> nacc, ok jgrimm do you have status on that? 16:03 * jgrimm goes looking for the bug
16:04 <jgrimm> coreycb, ask me again during free discussion, i'll have looked up what the bug is by then
16:04 <coreycb> jgrimm, ok sounds good
16:05 <coreycb> #topic Yakkety Development
16:05 <coreycb> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/YakketyYak/ReleaseSchedule
16:05 <nacc> jgrimm: https://launchpad.net/bugs/1561019
16:05 <jgrimm> thanks nacc
16:05 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1561019 in libvirt (Ubuntu) "copied cpu flags don't match host cpu" [Medium,New]
16:05 <coreycb> Alpha 2 is in 9 days
16:05 <coreycb> And we're about a month away from Feature Freeze
16:07 <teward> nginx is probably going to get a merge for Yakkety, it'll include the dynamic modules that Debian adds. Test packages are being built on my side now, then in a PPA, and a call for testing install/upgrade will go out
16:07 <coreycb> keep feature freeze in mind as new features and new packages will need FFEs after that point
16:07 <teward> assuming I don't get another case of the lazies
16:07 <teward> that should land for Yakkety then before FeatureFreeze
16:07 <teward> ('tis all for me today)
16:07 <coreycb> thanks teward
16:08 <coreycb> anything else for yakkety development?
16:08 <jgrimm> otherwise, generally... merges and bugs have been making good forward progress
16:08 <coreycb> jgrimm, great
16:09 <coreycb> #subtopic Release Bugs
16:09 <coreycb> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-x-tracking-bug-tasks.html#ubuntu-server
16:09 <coreycb> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-y-tracking-bug-tasks.html#ubuntu-server
16:09 <jgrimm> coreycb, i'll jump in here with status on bug 1561019 action item
16:09 <ubottu> bug 1561019 in libvirt (Ubuntu) "copied cpu flags don't match host cpu" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1561019
16:10 <jgrimm> hallyn and smb seems to be making progress on that atm. my action was to find someone to work on it.. so done.
16:10 <coreycb> jgrimm,
16:11 <smb> yeah... ugly
16:11 <smb> jgrimm, thought that was actually worked around
16:12 <jgrimm> smb, fair enough
16:13 <jgrimm> smb, my response was about action item i took last week, to make sure someone took a look at it.
16:13 <smb> jgrimm, guess at some point I'd have to check whether this was actually pused anywhere
16:13 <jgrimm> smb, ack!
16:13 <coreycb> as for other bugs, based on a quick scan, it looks like all the high importance bugs have someone from the server team who's been working on them or communicating at least
16:14 <coreycb> and some triage is needed for others
16:14 <coreycb> does anyone have anything else for bugs?
16:15 <coreycb> #topic Server & Cloud Bugs (caribou)
16:15 <coreycb> hey caribou
16:15 <jgrimm> coreycb, unable to attend today
16:15 <rbasak> caribou sends his apologies
16:15 <coreycb> apology accepted
16:15 <coreycb> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team
16:16 <jgrimm> powersj,
16:16 <powersj> Working with IS to get Jenkins updated to latest LTS version due to a known Jenkins defect, cpaelzer and I are meeting re: 390, and pinged IS on getting torkoal (baremetal system) added and up to Jenkins.
16:16 <powersj> Turning focus back to Jenkins CI and integration jobs for cloud-init while waiting on Jenkins fix and slave additions.
16:17 <coreycb> powersj, thanks for the update. any questions for powersj?
16:18 <coreycb> alrighty, on we go
16:18 <coreycb> #topic Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb, sforshee, arges)
16:18 <smb> No news, sorry (at least no bad news).
16:19 <coreycb> smb, ok thanks
16:19 <coreycb> smb, same story for the other kernel folks?
16:19 <smb> likely
16:19 <arges> yup
16:20 <coreycb> alright thanks guys
16:20 <coreycb> #topic Upcoming Call For Papers
16:20 <coreycb> jumped the gun. any questions for kernel folks?
16:20 <rharper> well, not now
16:20 <rharper> =)
16:20 <coreycb> lol
16:20 <jgrimm> all good
16:21 <coreycb> any conferences coming up that have a call for papers?
16:21 <coreycb> I know openstack summit deadline was last week
16:22 <coreycb> #topic Ubuntu Server Team Events
16:23 <coreycb> any events coming up?
16:24 <rharper> http://containersummit.io/city-series/2016/austin
16:24 <rharper> tonight
16:24 <rharper> if you're in Austin
16:25 <coreycb> rharper, nice, and look at that mug shot!
16:25 <rharper> lol
16:25 <coreycb> rharper, what's your talk on?
16:25 <rharper> fire-side chatting about containers and lxd
16:26 <coreycb> rharper, awesome
16:26 <coreycb> #topic Open Discussion
16:27 <coreycb> jgrimm, did you want to discuss that libvirt bug?
16:27 <coreycb> or was it qemu bugs
16:28 <jgrimm> coreycb, we already covered it during release bugs
16:28 <jgrimm> alll good
16:28 <coreycb> jgrimm, ah, that was it. good so no actions to carry over as far as I can tell.
16:29 <jgrimm> agreed!
16:29 <coreycb> jgrimm, I still owe you a reply on your email about subscriptions to openstack packages
16:30 <coreycb> #topic Announce next meeting date, time and chair
16:30 <coreycb> the next meeting will be the same time next week
16:30 <jgrimm> coreycb: james took care of it
16:31 <coreycb> jgrimm, oh, great, thanks jamespage!
16:31 <coreycb> gaughen is up next week to chair
16:31 <jgrimm> coreycb, indeed.. i owe him (yet another) beer for his kindly assistance.
16:31 <gaughen> coreycb, I will be at the sprint
16:31 <coreycb> gaughen, ok
16:32 <coreycb> next in line is arosales, smoser, rbasak. any of you not at the sprint next week?
16:32 <jgrimm> smoser or rbasak should be around
16:32 <coreycb> jgrimm, alright, it'll be one of them
16:32 <coreycb> #topic Assigned merges/bugwork (rbasak)
16:32 <rbasak> o/
16:32 <coreycb> o/
16:33 <rbasak> I've been doing some catching up
16:33 <rbasak> I've mainly been focusing on unblocking existing assignments right now.
16:33 <rbasak> cpaelzer isn't here, but AFAICT he's mainly blocked on me reviewing his ntp and dovecot merges, so I'll get on with those ASAP.
16:33 <arosales> coreycb: I am at sprint next weeek
16:34 <rbasak> (I sponsored a ton of uploads today, more tomorrow)
16:34 <arosales> rbasak: or smoser could I trade with you?
16:34 <rbasak> jgrimm and rharper, I think you should be unblocked?
16:34 <jgrimm> rbasak, i am! thank you
16:34 <coreycb> arosales, yep it's going to be one of them. I'll nag them.
16:34 <rharper> rbasak: yes, just need to work the bugs you've assigned
16:34 <rbasak> nacc, your only assignment right now is the bacula thing according to my sheet. I think I'm waiting on you to tell me when you're ready for upload. Is that right?
16:34 <arosales> coreycb: smoser rbasak thanks
16:34 <nacc> rbasak: yep, i think we're pretty close
16:35 <nacc> rbasak: i need to verify the yakkety changes are good again (some stuff got sent to debian)
16:35 <rbasak> magicalChicken: around? I've been catching up on your bugs, I think some probably need unassigning perhaps.
16:35 <nacc> rbasak: did you get a chance to look at hte puppet bug?
16:35 <rbasak> nacc: OK, I'll wait for you, thanks.
16:35 <nacc> rbasak: LP: #1570472
16:35 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Yeah
16:35 <rbasak> nacc: not in detail, sorry I didn't reply to the puppet bug yet. I'm reluctant though. I don't understand why we can't invert the logic using existing functionality.
16:35 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1570472 in puppet (Ubuntu) "Set systemd as default service provider" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1570472
16:36 <rbasak> magicalChicken: where are we with bug 1394403 right now please?
16:36 <nacc> rbasak: oh we could; but upstream has already taken that change; it won't affect the SRU -- and upstream may chagne the logic altogether (they're working on adding a new extension that may allow for calling arbitrary conditional functions
16:36 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Still unable to reproduce with the first patch that went in
16:37 <nacc> rbasak: but if we change first, then we're diverging from upstream's change, which seems less than ideal
16:37 <nacc> rbasak: i agree with you for 16.10
16:37 <nacc> rbasak: i disagree with you for 16.04
16:37 <nacc> rbasak: if that makes sense
16:37 <magicalChicken> rbasak: I did LP: #1534538, but I need to redo it because a security update went into repos first
16:37 <rbasak> nacc: right, but we need to fix 16.10 first for the SRU. And I don't want to upload a change I know will be broken in three months.
16:38 <nacc> rbasak: ok, i'll work on upstream then
16:38 <rbasak> nacc: I'd be happy for us to fix Yakkety with a temporary delta that we know is right, even if that isn't upstream.
16:38 <rbasak> nacc: unless that's particularly awkward? Then that would unblock the SRU.
16:38 <nacc> rbasak: right, i was thinking the opposite direction, but the same result
16:38 <rbasak> nacc: otherwise we're defeating the object of fixing development rist.
16:38 <rbasak> first
16:39 <nacc> rbasak: in that, yakkety gets the current fix, and then i fix upstream and yakkety
16:39 <nacc> rbasak: fix the fix, i guess
16:39 <nacc> rbasak: either way, one delays the sru more
16:39 <nacc> rbasak: and takes more of my time :-P
16:39 <rbasak> I'm not sure I follow.
16:39 <nacc> rbasak: i have to learn ruby
16:39 <rbasak> What I'm asking for is to fix Yakkety and then to fix Xenial. The Xenial fix can be minimal.
16:39 <nacc> well, enough ruby
16:40 <rbasak> I'm sayingi that the Yakkety fix must not be known broken, but it can be a delta.
16:40 <rbasak> Is that OK?
16:41 <rbasak> If upstream are planning a big picture fix, then the Yakkety delta can also be minimal I think.
16:41 <rbasak> As long as it's not autombroken.
16:42 <nacc> rbasak: well, given that i'm the one who will probably have to fix upstream; that's what i was trying to say. I will work on fixing upstream and yakkety. But the fix we have now, which is minimal, works for both, right now. The future fix will just be future-proof (which doesn't matter for the current releases). But I will just work on it instead of yammering furhter
16:42 <rbasak> magicalChicken: for 4403, it's not clear to me that you can't reproduce from reading the bug.
16:42 <rbasak> magicalChicken: am I missing something, or else could you please update the bug?
16:42 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Sure, I'll redo the verification and post logs
16:43 <magicalChicken> I had been able to reproduce before the first patch I submitted, but after that patch the duplicate rewrite message isn't present in apache's log
16:43 <rbasak> magicalChicken: sorry, I don't follow. What do we need to do to resolve the bug?
16:44 <rbasak> Are we stuck because unreproducible?
16:44 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Yes. I had submitted a patch earlier that fixed it for me, but the user said that it did not fix it for them
16:44 <rbasak> magicalChicken: but the user has since provided a reproducer, right?
16:45 <magicalChicken> rbasak: I posted logs of me running the test case they provided with the patch in place, and the bug doesn't show up in them
16:45 <magicalChicken> rbasak: I haven't heard from the user since then
16:45 <rbasak> Sorry, I know I'm confused here.
16:45 <rbasak> Ah, OK.
16:45 <rbasak> I think I follow. I didn't read your comment as there being a problem.
16:45 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Right yeah, I need to rewrite that to clarify
16:45 <rbasak> OK, thanks.
16:45 <magicalChicken> I'll go ahead and try to reproduce 1 more time too
16:46 <rbasak> I saw the security team trump your progress in 538.
16:46 <rbasak> Can I leave that to you to redo, please?
16:46 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Sure, it shouldn't take long, it was a simple patch
16:47 <rbasak> OK, thanks!
16:47 <rbasak> magicalChicken: next, in bug 1511222, it looks like the reporter hasn't replied.
16:47 <ubottu> bug 1511222 in apache2 (Ubuntu Trusty) "Incorrect trusted proxy match test in mod_remoteip" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1511222
16:47 <rbasak> magicalChicken: would you prefer to drive it anyway and SRU verify yourself, or drop it?
16:48 <rbasak> It looks like only one person has reported affected since October.
16:48 <rbasak> So I don't mind which you prefer - depends on your confidence in the fix and your view on the impact of the bug on other users.
16:48 <magicalChicken> rbasak: I had tested out the patch and it worked okay for me. I can go ahead and rerun that test and post the logs. I don't think the user is going to reply
16:48 <rbasak> magicalChicken: OK, so would you like to continue with landing the fix, or forget about it until someone replies?
16:49 <magicalChicken> rbasak: It might be good to wait for someone to reply, since I may have been wrong about a patch working on the RewriteRule bug earlier
16:50 <magicalChicken> rbasak: If anyone else reports they're affected, I can ask them to test out the patched version and see if it fixes it for them
16:50 <rbasak> OK, that's fine. Please could you note this in a comment on the bug, and then I'll treat it as unassigned? If you could stay subscribed in case the user does reply, that would be helpful.
16:50 <magicalChicken> Sure, thanks
16:50 <magicalChicken> Yeah, I'll pick it up again if anyone replies to it
16:51 <rbasak> magicalChicken: OK great! Next, bug 1296835 needs SRU verification. Are you planning on doing that, or is the bug stalled because you're waiting on a reporter to do it?
16:51 <ubottu> bug 1296835 in pptpd (Ubuntu Trusty) "status_of_proc lacks a "-p" in /etc/init.d/pptpd" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1296835
16:52 <magicalChicken> rbasak: I can go ahead and do the verifiction for that
16:52 <rbasak> OK great. Thanks!
16:52 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Thanks
16:53 <rbasak> Almost there
16:53 <magicalChicken> haha
16:53 <rbasak> Just one more - any progress on the logwatch bugs please?
16:53 <rbasak> I realise this is quite a few bugs you have on at once, so no worries if not. Just trying to update my spreadsheet
16:54 <magicalChicken> I hadn't been aware of a logwatch bug
16:54 <magicalChicken> I can handle that this week, it just had slipped my mind, sorry
16:55 <rbasak> No worries. It's a whole collection of bugs - various messages. Looks like mostly regexp updates needed, each small individually.
16:55 <magicalChicken> rbasak: Cool, shouldn't be too hard to get fixed then
16:55 <rbasak> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/logwatch is the list - I mean the "unmatched" and "not being reported" type bugs.
16:55 <rbasak> Great. Thank you!
16:55 <magicalChicken> Thanks
16:56 <rbasak> magicalChicken: and thank you for your patience. I'm focusing on getting rid of the bugs from my spreadsheet - it's fine if they aren't making progress because of reporter silence - as long as we communicate what they need to do, I'm happy to drop them from my tracking. As long as I can forget about them
16:57 <magicalChicken> rbasak: No problem, I'll stay subscribed to the ones we're waiting on so that I can pick them up again when the reporter replies
16:57 <rbasak> I'm done for today, thanks all. I think everyone has something to get on with, possibly with the exception of cpaelzer until I unblock him.
16:57 <rbasak> I intend to triage more this week and get a backlog of assignments again.
16:57 <rbasak> Any other comments or questions?
16:58 <nacc> rbasak: feel free to put more on my plate again, i'm mostly caught up now that you've sponsored stuff
16:58 <rbasak> nacc: thanks. And thank you for all the uploads! I need to do that endorsement
16:58 <rbasak> coreycb: #endmeeting please
16:58 <coreycb> #endmeeting