14:00:39 <stgraber> #startmeeting Ubuntu 12.04.1 team meeting 14:00:39 <meetingology> Meeting started Thu Jun 28 14:00:39 2012 UTC. The chair is stgraber. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 14:00:39 <meetingology> 14:00:39 <meetingology> Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired 14:01:04 <stgraber> NCommander, stokachu, jibel, jamespage: ping 14:01:34 <stgraber> xnox: around by any chance? 14:02:16 <stgraber> #topic Action items review 14:02:27 <stgraber> arges to work on a 12.04.1 bug report, showing targeted bugs and information on status in development release, patches attached and branches linked 14:02:28 <xnox> stgraber: yeap 14:02:53 <arges> stgraber, i think the launchpad page is sufficient 14:03:11 <arges> stgraber, i wrote a script for our team to see which bugs we have targeted via arsenal 14:03:19 <stokachu> o/ 14:03:42 * xnox o/ 14:04:22 <stgraber> arges: ok, I don't particularly like sorting/filtering bugs with Launchpad but it's true we don't have so many that it's not doable 14:04:45 <arges> stgraber, i guess my other issue was not figuring out what exactly was needed 14:06:10 <stgraber> arges: I was mostly interested in having a way of finding low hanging fruits, that's bug targeted to the point release, already fixed in the dev release or with patches/branches attached for dev+point-release 14:06:41 <xnox> and or fixed in a linked debian bug... 14:06:44 * smoser mentions that jamespages is on holiday 14:06:49 <arges> stgraber, ah. this makes more sense. so in launchpad we can see the icons right? but it doesn't show us all the information 14:07:01 <arges> just patch/branch 14:07:56 <arges> stgraber, if this is still valuable, i will work on this and make sure I ask questions before the next meeting. ok? 14:08:14 <stgraber> arges: right, it doesn't tell us whether it's fixed in the dev release (good indication that the patches are good) 14:08:36 <stgraber> arges: sounds good 14:08:43 <stgraber> xnox: linked Debian bug sounds good too 14:08:54 <stgraber> xnox to liase with ballons, gema and jibel w.r.t. fs/storage testing 14:09:22 <xnox> stgraber: blocked/postpone, pending UTAH development subscribed to the mailing list 14:09:45 <stgraber> ok, will poke you again in a couple of weeks then ;) 14:09:52 <stgraber> #topic Review of upcoming deadlines 14:09:56 <stgraber> Not sure how relevant this topic actually is :) 14:09:57 <stgraber> As far as I know we don't have any deadlines beside 12.04.1 itself. If you're aware of any upstream point release that needs to get in 12.04.1 and hasn't been released yet, now is the time to speak! 14:11:18 <stgraber> moving on 14:11:25 <stgraber> #topic Quick look through the current bug lists 14:11:33 <stgraber> We're now up to 121 bugs targeted to 12.04.1. 14:11:33 <stgraber> A quick scan through the list shows almost 50% of them having a branch or a patch attached. 14:11:36 <stgraber> So please go through https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+bugs?field.milestone%3Alist=49926 for packages your team is responsible for and review/upload these fixes! 14:11:39 <stgraber> Out of these 121 bugs, 58 don't have an assignee. It'd be great if while reviewing the list, teams could assign these bugs to the team or to one of their team members. 14:12:21 <seb128> (good part of that list is fix commited as well) 14:13:31 <stgraber> right and that's pretty good to see :) 14:14:10 <skaet> :) 14:14:48 <stgraber> briefly went through pending-sru too, we don't seem to have a lot of old entries on there, so the verification work seems to be going quite well too 14:15:07 <stgraber> most of the oldest entries are universe or are packages that we can't easily test at the moment (ubiquity being one of them) 14:16:37 <stokachu> i got one that needs sponsorship 14:16:48 <stokachu> bug #977964 14:16:49 <seb128> stokachu, the libart-lgpl one? 14:16:50 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 977964 in libart-lgpl (Ubuntu Precise) "Please transition libart-lgpl to multi-arch" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/977964 14:16:55 <xnox> i got two that need to be accepted 14:17:04 <stokachu> seb128: ah yea 14:17:06 <seb128> stokachu, I saw that earlier, I will sponsor it 14:17:12 <stokachu> seb128: thanks :D 14:17:16 <seb128> yw 14:17:38 <stokachu> these next ones are ones on my todo list to get complete by next week 14:18:16 <stokachu> bug #977952, bug #977947, bug #32860 14:18:18 <seb128> I wanted to ask about the multiarch bugs progress ... but not sure, is there a "questions" part of the meeting I should wait for? 14:18:19 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 977952 in libbonoboui (Ubuntu Precise) "Please transition libbonoboui to multi-arch" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/977952 14:18:21 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 977947 in libbonobo (Ubuntu Quantal) "Please transition libbonobo to multi-arch" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/977947 14:18:21 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 10905 in unity (Ubuntu) "duplicate for #32860 Keyboard shortcuts, window management - Can't use any global keyboard shortcuts or hotkeys when applet/menu is open" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/10905 14:18:50 <seb128> stokachu, it's about time we land the multiarch stuff, those need some testing so it's getting late 14:18:55 <stgraber> there's a backlog of 30 packages in Unapproved at the moment, including xnox's packages. Hopefully that backlog will shrink post alpha-2 when people are a bit less busy releasing the alpha :) 14:19:08 <stokachu> the main scope of my multiarch bugs to get complete is heavily influenced by third party needs 14:19:19 <stokachu> but i am willing to work on others as well 14:19:26 <xnox> stgraber: I don't mind the backlog, as long as they get approved and not kicked out. 14:20:03 <seb128> I do mind the backlog, another issue I want to raise later ;-) 14:20:24 <xnox> stgraber: i did test cases / bug template for all of mine, but I hope it will not be kicked out on the grounds of 'too hard to review' 14:20:24 <seb128> the queue is stalling, 15 packages accept in a week is too low, it's impacting on our velocity... 14:21:11 <xnox> stgraber: 2 packages, 8 and 1 SRU bugs respectfully 14:21:23 <xnox> stgraber: 2 packages, 7 and 1 SRU bugs respectfully 14:21:47 <stgraber> well, if you did the documentation and the diff is readable, it should be fine :) 14:22:48 <stgraber> #topic Round table (status update from the various teams, what they're working on, where they need help, ...) 14:23:10 <stgraber> will go in wiki order this time ;) 14:23:23 <stgraber> didn't see NCommander being around, so will go directly with seb128 14:23:56 <seb128> ok 14:23:59 <seb128> great ;-) 14:24:03 <seb128> so to be short 14:24:13 <seb128> - desktop SRUs are going well (mostly) 14:24:29 <seb128> - we got a round of compiz,libunity,bamf SRU this week (still in proposed) 14:24:48 <seb128> - we should have an unity SRU in the next 2 weeks and probably another one toward the end of july 14:24:57 <seb128> some issues,concerns: 14:25:16 <seb128> - the multiarch changes are getting late, I saw very little activity on them 14:25:26 <seb128> that's the sort of things we want to give some testing time to 14:25:35 <seb128> - the SRU team is still lagging behind 14:25:53 <seb128> we have a queue near 30 items, some stuff takes 2 week to get reviewed when they are trivial 14:26:12 <seb128> that's impacting on velocity and blocking us to follow up with next rounds of fixes 14:26:13 <seb128> .. 14:26:56 * xnox has no clue who is next 14:27:09 <stgraber> me :) 14:27:36 <seb128> oh 14:27:40 <seb128> another issue raised: 14:28:46 <seb128> - users feedback points that the number of whoopsie dialogs displayed makes the product looks buggy over what it is (often those are triggered for harmless issues in services that get respawned for example) 14:29:03 <seb128> some people suggested we should consider turning off whoopsie with .1 14:29:06 <seb128> .. 14:29:09 <seb128> I'm done this time 14:29:21 <seb128> not sure if we do questions or just keeps going and discuss stuff at the end ;-) 14:29:28 <stgraber> skaet: I think you mentioned there was at least one SRU related meeting fairly recently, that's including re-staffing the SRU team right? (I seem to remember bdmurray and ScottK joining recently) 14:29:57 <skaet> stgraber, yes, there's a rotation been decided on for the SRU team 14:30:09 <seb128> skaet, is the rotation schedule displayed somewhere? 14:30:09 <stgraber> we can take questions as we go, so people don't have to keep lists ;) 14:30:16 <seb128> so we can ping people on duty ;-) 14:30:31 <seb128> displayed->published 14:30:32 <skaet> seb128, its in a google doc, but I'll make up a page this afternoon after A2 is out 14:30:42 <seb128> skaet, thanks 14:30:45 * skaet understands its needed. 14:31:04 <seb128> it's very frustrating to see so little movement on SRUs reviews :-( 14:31:07 <skaet> seb128, doesn't quite solve the validation problem though. So we need to figure that out. 14:31:36 <seb128> well stgraber stated earlier that we don't have a validation issue so far? 14:31:49 <seb128> ie by validation you mean verifying items in the queue 14:32:07 <stgraber> right, verification is going quite well, I usually spend half a day a week verifying stuff and looks like the other members have been doing that too 14:32:08 <skaet> we don't? 14:32:09 <seb128> I didn't see anything concerned backlog or things staying for too long 14:32:19 <skaet> ok. 14:32:31 <seb128> skaet, well at least from the desktop side everything get validated before the week delay so far 14:32:57 <skaet> seb128, ok. Will get that schedule of folks to ping posted. See if that sorts it. 14:33:05 <seb128> skaet, thanks 14:33:11 <stgraber> skaet: most old entries are universe SRUs pre-testcase-era that I can't easily verify. I can't remember the reason for the others, but usually I try to verify > 6days old entries once a week at least 14:33:34 <seb128> stokachu, reading your comment earlier the multiarch changes are being worked now right? 14:33:42 <seb128> stokachu, i.e we should see progress on there in the next week? 14:33:55 <stokachu> seb128: correct 14:34:06 <stokachu> ive got sru's written for the ones i know about 14:34:11 <stokachu> just need to finish the rest 14:34:15 <seb128> ok 14:34:20 <skaet> thank stgraber, maybe we should brainstorm with ScottK and see if he has some ideas on how to make progress on those. 14:35:06 <stgraber> skaet: I'm also wondering whether we should expire SRUs after a while, but that's a question for the SRU team really 14:35:37 <stgraber> anyway, moving on a bit, feel free to continue pasting questions ;) 14:35:40 <stgraber> stgraber: 14:35:47 <skaet> stgraber, ok, I'll carry it forward to them. 14:36:09 <stgraber> I haven't been doing a whole lot of 12.04.1 stuff lately but did spend a day or so doing sru verification and I'm preparing a batch of network related SRUs 14:36:27 <stgraber> there isn't anything critical in there but these are fixes I'm going to push to quantal so might as well SRU 14:37:07 <stgraber> bug 1004775 is probably one for seb128 as it's technically a desktop package, but I'm affected and happy to help test any fix for it 14:37:09 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1004775 in network-manager (Ubuntu Quantal) "NetworkManager restarts dnsmasq on every IPv6 route advertisement, thus very frequently" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1004775 14:37:14 <xnox> for me the mdadm & e2fsprogs SRUs should get a much validation as possible & as long in -proposed as possible 14:37:23 <xnox> as they are complex packages 14:37:42 <xnox> and the deadline for 12.04.1 is fast approaching 14:38:05 <seb128> stgraber, I will see if cyphermox can have a look 14:38:06 <stokachu> roughly a month right? 14:38:07 <stgraber> it's affecting everyone with an IPv6 network using NetworkManager in Automatic mode (default). It's not preventing people from working but it's spamming the syslog, seems to be spamming the routing table too and causes some DNS queries to fail 14:38:41 <cyphermox> I'm working on it already 14:39:09 <cyphermox> the routing table, I'm not sure it will change anything there. 14:39:10 <ScottK> FWIW, the KDE version for 12.04.1 is in proposed for testing now. 14:39:34 <seb128> cyphermox, thanks 14:39:40 <stgraber> cyphermox: cool, thanks. The dnsmasq is really the annoying one, the routing table caching is weird but doesn't seem harmful 14:39:52 <cyphermox> stgraber: right. 14:40:05 <stgraber> ScottK: good to hear, no problem so far with verification? 14:40:20 <ScottK> Not so far. I'm running it here. 14:40:38 <stgraber> cool 14:40:46 <stgraber> stokachu: 14:41:09 <stokachu> multiarch is the name of the game, continueing to get those bugs completed and sponsored 14:41:25 <stokachu> ... 14:41:39 <stgraber> arges: 14:42:28 <arges> worked on 12.04.1 bugs, worked on milestone scripts for our team 14:42:30 <arges> .. 14:43:19 <stgraber> jibel: 14:43:46 <jibel> automated testing reported broken oem installation 14:44:10 <jibel> that usually occurs when the version of ubiquity on the CD and in the squashfs are different 14:44:14 <jibel> will file a bug report 14:45:04 <jibel> post-upgrade tests fail the obosolete config file check for everything bug oenric server while they usually pass 14:45:26 <stgraber> oh, right, I have an AOB on that but might as well mention it now :) 14:45:31 <jibel> I'll investigate next week this it started after we upgraded the auto-upgrader to python3 14:45:36 <jibel> .. 14:45:53 <jibel> s/bug oenric/but oneiric/ 14:45:53 <stgraber> cjwatson has been working on enabling -proposed for all precise dailies 14:46:06 <stgraber> that's done for alternates but not working for live images 14:46:27 <cjwatson> Yeah, sorry about that, it came down to something I thought about a year ago and then forgot 14:46:28 <stgraber> which explain the out-of-sync issue you mentioned earlier 14:46:50 <cjwatson> jibel: Indeed, there's no need for a bug report for the broken OEM installation in this case 14:47:06 <jibel> cjwatson, ok, noted 14:47:37 <cjwatson> If it persists next week I'd like to know 14:47:38 <stgraber> jibel: I can't think of a reason why the python3 port would have broken th conffile check but let me know if you need some help there 14:48:01 <stgraber> skaet: 14:48:03 <jibel> stgraber, me neither but I don't like coincidences 14:48:23 <skaet> working through bugs and milestoning some that should be considered for 12.04.1 14:48:46 <skaet> from some of the ones that have come up from quantal mostly. 14:48:56 <skaet> discussions about 12.04.2 schedules have started up. 14:49:20 <skaet> but mostly working on quantal at the moment... 14:49:23 <skaet> ;) 14:49:34 <skaet> .. 14:50:05 <stgraber> smoser: 14:50:15 <smoser> - I'm not as current on our progress here as I need to be. we clearly have a lot more bugs on the lists than other teams do. I'll spend some time catching up 14:50:15 <smoser> with the teams and making sure we're getting some things done. 14:50:23 <smoser> - we did get a nova update into -proposed this week 14:51:08 <smoser> i'm somewhat concerned that our list is so long. 14:51:36 <smoser> but thats all. i'll poke around later today and we'll have more info next time. 14:52:32 <stgraber> #topic AOB 14:52:46 <stgraber> anything else people would like to mention/ask? 14:53:48 <stgraber> doesn't look like it :) 14:53:55 <skaet> :) 14:53:56 <stgraber> well, thanks everyone, talk to you in two weeks then! 14:54:15 <stokachu> thanks! 14:54:17 <jibel> thanks stgraber 14:54:21 <stgraber> #endmeeting