Ubuntu Wiki

LOG

TZ UTC-5

(03:04:16 PM) mdz_: #startmeeting
(03:04:17 PM) MootBot: Meeting started at 20:03. The chair is mdz_.
(03:04:17 PM) MootBot: Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
(03:04:23 PM) mdz_: [TOPIC] Martin Pitt's proposal for tightening the MOTU SRU process
(03:04:24 PM) MootBot: New Topic:  Martin Pitt's proposal for tightening the MOTU SRU process
(03:04:33 PM) mdz_: mjg59: have you had a look at this?
(03:06:05 PM) pitti_: hi
(03:06:12 PM) mdz_: it seems eminently sensible to me
(03:06:25 PM) pitti_ is now known as pitti
(03:07:07 PM) mdz_: (1) is a no-brainer
(03:07:28 PM) Keybuk: to me also
(03:07:30 PM) Keybuk: (hi, btw)
(03:07:31 PM) mdz_: we should start with the same policy as for main, and any divergence from that can be done later with appropriate justification
(03:07:49 PM) mjg59: Yes, it seems broadly sensible to me
(03:08:17 PM) mdz_: I think 2b is likely more effective than 2a
(03:08:31 PM) mdz_: any MOTU should be able to read an SRU request and confirm that it meets the documented policy
(03:08:55 PM) mdz_: particularly since the requestor must explain how it does
(03:08:55 PM) pitti: sorry, what's the topic?
(03:09:04 PM) mdz_: <MootBot> New Topic:  Martin Pitt's proposal for tightening the MOTU SRU process
(03:09:31 PM) mdz_: I'm referring to the numbered points in your email, which it seems was only sent to technical-board so far
(03:09:37 PM) pitti: ah, thanks
(03:10:10 PM) pitti: sistpoty told me that this will also be discussed on the next MOTU meeting, but that will be some days
(03:10:24 PM) mdz_: regarding point 3, rejecting uploads which don't have a bug reference is perfectly acceptable in my opinion
(03:11:01 PM) mdz_: even if the policy were broadened, there needs to be a bug report filed to correspond to the SRU and explain in more detail what it's about
(03:11:14 PM) mdz_: and referring to that in the changelog is just basic good practice
(03:11:19 PM) mdz_: that's a very low bar
(03:11:38 PM) mdz_: pitti: would you like to explain your preference for 2a over 2b?
(03:11:54 PM) mdz_: pitti: and may I paste your points in the channel for context?
(03:12:49 PM) ***pitti caught up on ubuntu-devel@ now, seems there is basically a consensus
(03:13:11 PM) pitti: mdz_: feel free to paste anything from my mail
(03:13:39 PM) mdz_: (1) Reintroduce a policy what kinds of bugs should be fixed in stable
(03:13:39 PM) pitti: mdz_: slight preference because this would mean that we have a team which gets experienced with the nature and handling of SRUs
(03:13:39 PM) mdz_:     releases. Ideally this should be identical to the one for main
(03:13:39 PM) mdz_:     [3].
(03:13:39 PM) mdz_: (2a) Reinstate the MOTU-SRU team and require an ack from a team member
(03:13:39 PM) mdz_:     before the upload is done.
(03:13:40 PM) mdz_:  or
(03:13:42 PM) mdz_: (2b) Require acks of at least two other MOTUs before a universe SRU bug
(03:13:44 PM) mdz_:      is considered approved and ready to upload.
(03:13:46 PM) mdz_: (3) The archive admins will reject any upload which does not fulfill
(03:13:48 PM) mdz_:     above criteria. They will reject uploads without any notice if the
(03:13:50 PM) mdz_:     changelog does not have a bug reference. (It takes much time to
(03:13:52 PM) mdz_:     find the corresponding bug report otherwise, or just to find that
(03:13:54 PM) mdz_:     there is none at all.)
(03:14:06 PM) mdz_: pitti: how would you define the role of the team?  to make a judgement about whether an SRU proposal meets the criteria?
(03:14:44 PM) pitti: right, pretty much what ubuntu-sru does for main ATM: approve/deny/discuss patches, mangle bug tasks, supervise and enforce policy
(03:14:49 PM) mdz_: if so, I that's not so specialized that I think we need a team to house that experience, but if it would make the process work more smoothly, I have no particular objection to it
(03:15:00 PM) mdz_: ok, there's a bit more to it then
(03:15:14 PM) mdz_: if they're expected to make judgements about the implementation and discuss patches
(03:15:14 PM) pitti: TBH I'd leave that decision between 2a) and 2b) to the MOTUs themselves
(03:15:36 PM) pitti: if they don't want such a team and think that manpower is an issue, let's try peer review first
(03:15:55 PM) pitti: that spreads the patch review and discussion about the necessity, which is a good thing
(03:16:10 PM) mdz_: I'm happy to delegate it to the MOTU council
(03:16:17 PM) mdz_: and let them decide
(03:16:39 PM) mdz_: mjg59,Keybuk: any other comments or questions for pitti?
(03:16:41 PM) pitti: (between 2a and 2b, right?)
(03:16:56 PM) Keybuk: nope, none from me
(03:16:58 PM) mjg59: I think I'm happy with that conclusion
(03:19:27 PM) mdz_: pitti: yes
(03:19:59 PM) mdz_: [VOTE] confirm approval for pitti's plan, delegating the decision between 2a and 2b to the MOTU Council
(03:19:59 PM) MootBot: Please vote on:  confirm approval for pitti's plan, delegating the decision between 2a and 2b to the MOTU Council.
(03:19:59 PM) MootBot: Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
(03:19:59 PM) MootBot: E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
(03:20:05 PM) mdz_: +1
(03:20:06 PM) MootBot: +1 received from mdz_. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
(03:20:13 PM) Keybuk: +1
(03:20:13 PM) MootBot: +1 received from Keybuk. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
(03:20:14 PM) mjg59: +1
(03:20:14 PM) MootBot: +1 received from mjg59. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
(03:20:18 PM) mdz_: #endvote
(03:20:46 PM) mdz_: MootBot: poke
(03:20:49 PM) mdz_: #endvote
(03:20:51 PM) pitti: thanks
(03:20:53 PM) mdz_: anyway
(03:21:08 PM) mdz_: pitti: will you communicate the decision to the council on our behalf?
(03:21:12 PM) pitti: mdz_: maybe you need to address it?
(03:21:27 PM) pitti: mdz_: yes, I'm happy to do that
(03:21:32 PM) mdz_: MootBot: #endvote
(03:21:36 PM) mdz_: pitti: ok, thanks
(03:21:48 PM) mdz_: [ACTION] pitti to liaise with MOTU Council to implement the plan
(03:21:48 PM) MootBot: ACTION received:  pitti to liaise with MOTU Council to implement the plan
(03:22:08 PM) mdz_: [TOPIC] Perl regular expressions in grep
(03:22:08 PM) MootBot: Vote is in progress. Finishing now.
(03:22:08 PM) MootBot: Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3
(03:22:08 PM) MootBot: New Topic:  Perl regular expressions in grep
(03:22:24 PM) mdz_: this was raised by Joe Terranova <joeterranova@ubuntu.com> via email
(03:22:42 PM) Keybuk: err, do you have the e-mail?
(03:22:46 PM) mdz_: the issue is that he wants grep linked with libpcre to provide perl-compatible regex support
(03:22:56 PM) mdz_: discussion is here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/15051
(03:22:58 PM) ubotu: Launchpad bug 15051 in grep "grep -P is not supported" [Medium,Confirmed]
(03:23:04 PM) mdz_: Keybuk: I've also forwarded the email to you
(03:23:06 PM) Keybuk: oh, yes, I saw that one
(03:23:45 PM) Keybuk: didn't libpcre just have a *major* security hole?
(03:24:01 PM) mjg59: grep is required - pcre is important
(03:24:20 PM) mjg59: (from a point of view of just worrying about priorities)
(03:24:39 PM) mdz_: I don't see the problem with pcregrep, to be honest
(03:24:45 PM) mdz_: it's not as if this is a standard grep feature
(03:25:36 PM) mdz_: Keybuk: I don't know, but it's already in main and used by gobs of stuff
(03:25:41 PM) Keybuk: isn't that basically just "perl -n" ?
(03:25:52 PM) mdz_: including network services
(03:26:11 PM) mdz_: Keybuk: no, not quite
(03:26:40 PM) mdz_: it provides grep-like command line options
(03:26:42 PM) mjg59: There was an issue with perl's regular expression library, but we didn't ship updates to libpcre
(03:26:53 PM) mdz_: it ships with pcre3
(03:28:02 PM) Keybuk: What's wrong with linking grep against pcre?
(03:29:36 PM) mdz_: the only point raised in the bug is that it's in /usr/lib
(03:29:40 PM) mdz_: and therefore would need to be moved to /lib
(03:29:53 PM) mjg59: Which is hardly an issue
(03:30:00 PM) mdz_: I have no particular objection to that, but it means maintaining that delta from Debian and doesn't buy us much
(03:30:13 PM) Keybuk: it's in /lib in Fedora
(03:30:16 PM) mdz_: the Debian bug is http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=350468
(03:30:18 PM) ubotu: Debian bug 350468 in libpcre3 "libpcre3: install libpcre.so* in /lib" [Wishlist,Open]
(03:30:23 PM) Keybuk: why won't Debian put it in /lib ?
(03:30:49 PM) ***ogra1 tries to find out what a gob is to determine hw much stuff in main uses it
(03:31:06 PM) mdz_: sounds like the Debian grep maintainers are on board with it
(03:31:09 PM) mdz_: but not the pcre3 maintainer(s)
(03:32:05 PM) mjg59: We'd need to maintain a small delta and we'd use up an extra 150K in /
(03:32:20 PM) mjg59: I don't think this is a compelling argument against doing it
(03:32:23 PM) mdz_: the other question is, who would do the work and look after it?
(03:32:37 PM) mdz_: there aren't any comments from core-devs in support
(03:33:24 PM) mdz_: I have no argument against the technical correctness of doing this, only practical questions
(03:33:47 PM) mjg59: I'm happy with us making the technical decision, and then leaving the practical ones up to someone who cares
(03:33:49 PM) mdz_: if someone in core-dev wants to do it, I'm not bothered
(03:33:56 PM) Keybuk: do we need to care?  if he's asked the TB for a decision, and we have consensus, then actually persuading someone to do it is his problem? :)
(03:34:19 PM) mdz_: I suppose not, but it's the obvious next question
(03:35:06 PM) mjg59: I don't think worrying about who's going to do something this trivial is our problem
(03:35:26 PM) mdz_: [VOTE] approve moving libpcre (~150k) from /usr/lib to /lib to accomodate grep -P
(03:35:26 PM) MootBot: Please vote on:  approve moving libpcre (~150k) from /usr/lib to /lib to accomodate grep -P.
(03:35:26 PM) MootBot: Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
(03:35:26 PM) MootBot: E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #ubuntu-meeting
(03:35:29 PM) mdz_: +1
(03:35:29 PM) MootBot: +1 received from mdz_. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
(03:35:31 PM) Keybuk: +1
(03:35:31 PM) MootBot: +1 received from Keybuk. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
(03:35:35 PM) mjg59: +1
(03:35:35 PM) MootBot: +1 received from mjg59. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
(03:35:39 PM) mdz_: #endvote
(03:35:45 PM) mdz_: MootBot: silly bot
(03:35:55 PM) mdz_: [TOPIC] AOB
(03:35:56 PM) MootBot: Vote is in progress. Finishing now.
(03:35:56 PM) MootBot: Final result is 3 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 3
(03:35:56 PM) MootBot: New Topic:  AOB
(03:36:17 PM) mdz_: any other business?
(03:36:42 PM) mdz_: [ACTION] mdz to communicate libpcre decision to the relevant Launchpad bug
(03:36:42 PM) MootBot: ACTION received:  mdz to communicate libpcre decision to the relevant Launchpad bug
(03:37:21 PM) mdz_: adjourned, thanks all
(03:37:23 PM) mdz_: #endmeeting
(03:37:23 PM) MootBot: Meeting finished at 20:36.