Meeting opened by jibel at 17:00
<jibel> * review previous action items (all)
<jibel> * SRU Report -- jibel
<jibel> * Bugday -- pedro_
<jibel> * Blueprints review -- marjo
<jibel> * Reconsider meeting times again -- jibel
<jibel> * Selection of new chair -- jibel
<jibel> * Update list of people who can edit the channel topic -- fader
<jibel> [TOPIC] review previous action items
review previous action items
<jibel> one of the action was "Discuss meeting times"
<jibel> today we have alternatively 1 meeting as 1700UTC and another at 1900UTC
<devildante> we have 2 meetings!?
<ara> devildante, every other week we change the time
<jibel> thanks ara
<jibel> 1900UTC is not really convenient in Europe to get a wide audience and I asked if we could move it.
<charlie-tca> The proposal was to meet an hour earlier each time?
<jibel> earlier or later
<jibel> but yes the proposal was to move it 1 hour later.
<jibel> hm, earlier
<devildante> make up your mind :p
<ara> I love these groucho-marx-kind conversations
<marjo> ara: who's on first?
<jibel> the proposal was 1 hour earlier
<marjo> jibel: ack
<skaet> this time works well for me. +1 leave it here.
<charlie-tca> Are both times bad for europe?
<devildante> I kind of like 19:00UTC
<jibel> no, only 1900UTC, its 2000 in Europe and many people are busy on other things than the qa meeting.
<devildante> cause my timezone is UTC
<devildante> jibel: yeah, you're probably right
<jibel> ara, what do you think ?
<ara> jibel, I'm easy
<ara> jibel, of course it is more likely for me to attend the meeting if it is earlier
<ara> jibel, but having the two times was more like a solution for other parts of the world to be able to attend
<marjo> jibel: propose 1800 UTC, so we can vote
<ara> understanding that, maybe, not everybody can attend all the meetings
<hggdh> this was/is expected
<jibel> Lets vote then for 1800UTC
<charlie-tca> Is this to move only the 19:00 to 18:00?
<jibel> charlie-tca, yes.
<jibel> charlie-tca, we dont want you to wake up at 0500
<devildante> I did it before ara! Mootbot-UK is a cheater :p
Results: 4 in favour, 0 against, 3 abstained.
Deadlock. If someone has a casting vote now is the time to use it
<charlie-tca> I don't care either way. I will make at least one meeting time
<jibel> Thanks all for voting.
<jibel> Next meeting will be at 1800UTC.
<devildante> make it an ACTION, please
<jibel> [ACTION] Next meeting will be at 1800UTC.
Next meeting will be at 1800UTC.
<devildante> (if I understood the point of meeting bots :p)
<devildante> oh well, thanks jibel
<hggdh> the calendar will have to be updated
<jibel> hggdh, again, I won't do it again in 6months I promise
<jibel> No other action from previous meeting ?
<jibel> moving on
<jibel> [TOPIC] SRU Report
<jibel> me again.
<jibel> Over me the past weeks 51 packages have been published to stable releases
<jibel> The complete list is available at
<jibel> [LINK] http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/sru/latest.html
<jibel> Note the new address ^
<devildante> why does langpacks still get updated in dapper?
<jibel> there is now the bug numbers and the verification status of the report too.
<bdmurray> by the way why is it reports.../reports/ ?
<devildante> after all, there is only server support
<devildante> oh get it
<jibel> devildante, dapper is still supported
<skaet> thanks for adding the bug numbers, btw - much appreciated.
<marjo> skaet: how do you like the new format?
<jibel> thanks skaet
<skaet> it makes me ask questions, so yes, much more useful.
<devildante> jibel: no I was just wondering why langpacks were updated - it's a server environement after all... but I wasn't thinking about locales
<devildante> sorry about that
<jibel> devildante, and those who are wondering, the list of supported release with EOL is there https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
<jibel> devildante, np
<jibel> skaet, and answers ?
<skaet> jibel, gives me a place to start looking for them at least
<ara> jibel, nice job
<jibel> ara, thanks
<jibel> Here is the now traditional list of publications over the last week:
<jibel> * A total of 21 packages have been published to maverick
<jibel> * 3 packages published to maverick-updates: plymouth, tzdata, xserver-xorg-video-intel
<jibel> * 4 packages published to maverick-security: chromium-browser, libvpx, libxml2, mysql-5.1
<jibel> * 14 packages published to maverick-proposed: gimp, gnome-settings-daemon, gwibber, ibus, indicator-sound, linaro-image-tools, lubuntu-default-settings, packagekit, squid-deb-proxy, tzdata, ubuntu-sso-client, udev, update-manager, x264
<jibel> * A total of 18 packages have been published to lucid
<jibel> * 3 packages published to lucid-updates: debootstrap, plymouth, tzdata
<jibel> * 4 packages published to lucid-security: chromium-browser, libvpx, libxml2, mysql-dfsg-5.1
<jibel> * 11 packages published to lucid-proposed: consolekit, fuse, grub-installer, gwibber, indicator-sound, linux-ec2, linux-meta-ec2, thaifonts-scalable, tzdata, udev, xorg-server
<jibel> * A total of 4 packages have been published to karmic
<jibel> * 1 package published to karmic-updates: tzdata
<jibel> * 2 packages published to karmic-security: libxml2, mysql-dfsg-5.1
<jibel> * 1 package published to karmic-proposed: tzdata
<jibel> * A total of 4 packages have been published to hardy
<jibel> * 1 package published to hardy-updates: tzdata
<jibel> * 2 packages published to hardy-security: libxml2, mysql-dfsg-5.0
<jibel> * 1 package published to hardy-proposed: tzdata
<jibel> * A total of 4 packages have been published to dapper
<jibel> * 1 package published to dapper-updates: langpack-locales
<jibel> * 2 packages published to dapper-security: libxml2, mysql-dfsg-5.0
<jibel> * 1 package published to dapper-proposed: langpack-locales
<jibel> Thanks to Akkana Peck (akk), Anders Kaseorg (andersk), Andrey Nauman, bbordwell (bbordwell), laptop battery, Evan Broder (ebroder), cablop (cablop), chrone, Pablo Antonio, Eugene Crosser, Damian Only, darolu (darolu), David Tombs (cyan-spam), David Kaplan, Dan Jones, Luca Ferretti (elleuca), eballetbo, Xandros Pilosa, Doron Gutman, Haggai Eran, Ikuya Awashiro, jaganz, kfalconer, Torez Smith, Oliver Joos, Omer Akram (om26
<jibel> er), Peter Maydell (pm215), Richard Postlewait, Dirk Schedler, Schmankerl (schmankerl), Stephan Hermann, steba, Yavor Stoychev, Vsevolod Velichko, Victor Zamanian (zamanian) and vovkkk for testing packages in -proposed.
<jibel> As always, you can see the current set of packages needing testing in the -proposed queue at http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html . Your assistance in testing is always appreciated!
<jibel> Any question/comment ?
<jibel> devildante, please do
<devildante> jibel: oops nvm that
<pedro_> If you use Maverick and Gwibber, please help us testing the package on proposed
<pedro_> just look at the page jibel pointed out and you'll see the list of bugs that need to be verified
<jibel> You can also look at the kernel bugs, they often address specific hardware issue, so if you have that hardware, please give it a try.
<devildante> thanks for the insight, jibel
<jibel> another question/comment ?
<jibel> devildante, no question ?
<devildante> jibel: no, sorry again for disturbing
<skaet> There are some very old (>60 days) in proposed. Is there any plan for getting some focus on them. ie. asterisk?
<pedro_> perhaps make a call for testing on the planet ?
<pedro_> or ML
<jibel> skaet, there are bugs which needs really specific setup/environment/hardware to reproduce and test. So if the reporter doesn't test it its unlikely that it will be ever tested.
<pedro_> there's already two comments (last ones) on the report asking for testers and no further comments so far
<jibel> we let them for 6 months then it will be removed from -proposed.
<jibel> We usually do a call for testing after 30 days and another one 30 days later.
<skaet> fair 'nuf. thanks.
<marjo> skaet: this is one of the general validation problems we've discussed with the SRU process; no easy way out
<jibel> skaet, before accepting the SRU and working on it we need a commitment from the reporter to ensure that he will test it
<jibel> another example is that one https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/585885
<ubot4> Launchpad bug 585885 in sssd (Ubuntu Lucid) (and 1 other project) "a serious bug in enumerate=false mode (affects: 1) (heat: 20)" [High,Fix committed]
<hggdh> which may be difficult -- the reporter might not have a test system
<jibel> we SRUed it, published the patch from upstream, but there is no testcase and requires a very specific setup.
<jibel> hggdh, when a reporter ask for a specific fix, he must test it.
<skaet> understood. but in the case of #605358, looks like Daviey was the reporter, and the fixer, so how do we get independent test?
<marjo> jibel, hggdh: that's why we "strongly encourage" that the reporter include a test case and a commitment to test the patch
<hggdh> marjo: thank you, I just wanted it out clearly
<jibel> Daviey, :-D
<jibel> Daviey, you know what you have to do now
<Daviey> well i know it does fix the issue, as i've been using that package for months :_)
<marjo> skaet: another way out is to trust the reporter & fixer (Daviey) and in some specific cases, go without the independent validation (risk of regression increases)
<Daviey> annoyingly, that verification got lost during a sprint
<devildante> marjo: the risk is small in that case, since if the bug was nasty enough, it would receive more attention, imo
<marjo> devildante: ack
<Daviey> marjo: I agree the ideal situation would be independent verification.. when the patch is cherry picked from upstream, i'm slightly more trusting
<marjo> Daviey: that's kinda the approach the kernel folks take (more trusting)
<jibel> marjo, no we cant trust the provider of the fix.
<skaet> marjo: yup, but a pass through the specifics and a bit of flagging outside the bugs themselves may help with the backlog. Will add to the agenda for SRU biweekly, and let things move on here.
<marjo> jibel: then, we're stuck; we'll continue to require independent validation (and some patches don't get released)
<marjo> skaet: thx much
<Daviey> jibel: for the bug that skaet picked on me for... :).... That would require 2 servers, and the ability to add multiple SRV records.... which is somewhat painful for others to test
<pedro_> well if there's no testers it is probably because the fix isn't that important as we thought...
<jibel> marjo, thats why I think that we need a better qualification of the patch before working on it.
<ara> I think that this conversation should be addressed in another meeting. and/or by email with the needed stakeholders
<marjo> pedro_ that's in line w/ what devildante was saying (risk management)
<jibel> devildante, no theres no small risk. Major regression have been seen with the smallest changes, sometimes no change even just a rebuild of the package.
<jibel> ok, no more comment on SRU ?
<devildante> what's the definition of "major" regression in this case? and, won't that regression be caught by the fixer himself if it's major?
<devildante> (it sounds like I'm writing an essay :p)
<charlie-tca> devildante: what if the change fixes the fixers system and breaks everybody else?
<marjo> jibel, devildante: i suggest we take ara's and skaet's suggestions and take this up as a future agenda item
<skaet> one quick comment - we'll be starting off a biweekly SRU call next week to talk about this sort of thing, and the LTS releases. Look for the fridge entry - likely to be on Monday, but still gelling. Send me email offline if you want to be on the invite directly.
<devildante> charlie-tca: doesn't that occur only in hardware-specific changes, which can't be small?
<jibel> marjo, agree, we have 15 minutes left.
<jibel> devildante, charlie-tca, sorry, moving on
<devildante> 'kay, np
<jibel> [TOPIC] Bugday
<jibel> pedro_, the floor is yours
<pedro_> thanks jibel
<pedro_> Last Thursday we had a bug day for Bugs without a package, the participation was really great, we had to add a second round of bugs
<pedro_> if you look there you'll see two lists of bugs now
<pedro_> ~120 bugs were triaged during the bug day
<pedro_> Thanks a lot to our rocking contributors: kamusin, komputes, charlie-tca, hernejj, mistrynitesh and yofel
<pedro_> If you're wondering about this week bug day, we're having one for GNOME Power Manager
<komputes> pedro_: you're the best!
<pedro_> there is plenty of bugs waiting to be triaged so if you have some time and want to learn more about bug triage and GPM, please join us tomorrow at #ubuntu-bugs
pedro_ hugs komputes
<pedro_> jibel, that's all from here, unless there's a question/comment
<jibel> thank you pedro_
<jibel> [TOPIC] Blueprints review - marjo
Blueprints review - marjo
<marjo> hi folks
<marjo> Natty blueprints are mostly finalized, except for the following:
<marjo> other-qa-n-testing-code-coverage ameetp
<marjo> other-qa-n-launch-control-for-ubuntu zyga
<marjo> other-qa-n-testing-different-architectures jibel
<marjo> other-qa-n-testplan jibel
<marjo> ameetp, zyga: please take care of getting those blueprints approved
<marjo> am working w/ jibel to finalize the other two
<marjo> deadline is tomorrow, better to finish them today
<marjo> jibel: that's it from me
<jibel> thank you marjo
<jibel> [TOPIC] Open mic
<jibel> We have on topic from fader_
<jibel> Update list of people who can edit the channel topic
<devildante> 1, 2, 3, test...
<fader_> Just a thought that we should update who can change the channel topic, as it has been getting stale of late
<fader_> I'd say we should have a few folks with that permission, but I abdicate any choice of who they are and I have no idea who to talk to to make it happen
<charlie-tca> According to the IRC pages, heno is the approving authority for it
<fader_> That should probably change to marjo
<marjo> fader_ agree
<fader_> marjo: Is that something we could make an action for you?
fader_ whistles innocently.
<marjo> fader_ sure
<marjo> any other folks we should give that permission to?
<fader_> I'd guess there should be a few folks able to do that, just for backup
<hggdh> IIRC this will need the folks with some ops power on the channel
<marjo> i propose someone NOT in the Americas
<marjo> so, we can have some overlap
<hggdh> well, Texas is *not* America
<marjo> well known fact
<marjo> ok, folks, we can defer the backup issue
<hggdh> we should have a few people with this authority, as much as possible covering the TZs
<marjo> jibel: i propose we move on
<jibel> marjo, ok.
<jibel> time's up. any other topic ?
<marjo> next chair
<devildante> everyone's quiet all of a sudden :p
<jibel> [TOPIC] Selection of new chair
Selection of new chair
<jibel> hggdh, come here, don't hide behind you desk
<charlie-tca> That's always a quiet discussion
<hggdh> darn, found!
hggdh slightly raises a hand
<devildante> I would volunteer if I known what I'm supposed to do :p
<charlie-tca> Good way to learn. Ara has a nice wiki page about it, too.
<charlie-tca> What was the page?
<jibel> devildante, wants to give it a try, thanks
<ara> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Meetings/Chairing
<charlie-tca> That's it. Thanks, ara
<jibel> [ACTION] devildante to chair next meeting.
devildante to chair next meeting.
devildante is sure to have regrets later :p
<jibel> hggdh, next time will be yours
<charlie-tca> Thanks for volunteering, devildante
<jibel> Thanks all for attending!
Meeting closed at 18:04
- Next meeting will be at 1800UTC.
- devildante to chair next meeting.