Started logging meeting in #ubuntu-meeting<br />
[10:00:50] &lt;skaet&gt; Happy New Year all!<br />
[10:00:50] &lt;skaet&gt; Not sure if we'll have quorum or not, but a quick run through of the agenda, so we know the questions to ask this week seems appropriate.<br />
[10:00:52] &lt;marjo&gt; happy new year to all!<br />
[10:01:25] &lt;skaet&gt; Agenda can be found: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseTeam/Meeting/StableReleaseAgenda<br />
[10:01:25] &lt;skaet&gt; Reminder, please follow the convention  of using ".." on a separate line when you've finished typing.    Also, If someone wants to comment on the last point, please "o/", so we know to wait.<br />
[10:02:10] &lt;skaet&gt; and with that probably a good idea to start off...<br />
[10:03:02] &lt;skaet&gt; [TOPIC] open action items<br />
<a name='0'></a>
[10:03:52] &lt;skaet&gt; marjo - any update on the SRU test reports being added into the agenda?<br />
[10:04:16] &lt;marjo&gt; skaet: please mark that one done; we'll include starting this week<br />
[10:04:33] &lt;skaet&gt; awesome!  thanks marjo.<br />
[10:04:55] &lt;skaet&gt; victorp,  how about the cert ones?<br />
[10:05:41] &lt;skaet&gt; hmm,  no victorp yet...<br />
[10:05:51] &lt;skaet&gt; any other updates to the open action items?<br />
[10:06:13] &lt;skaet&gt; ok, moving on<br />
[10:06:28] &lt;skaet&gt; [TOPIC] Bug updates<br />
<a name='1'></a>
[10:07:03] &lt;skaet&gt; since last month there's been about +37 bugs opened for maverick,   +24 on lucid.<br />
[10:07:24] &lt;pitti&gt; urgh; hopefully most of them as part of SRU uploads?<br />
[10:07:43] &lt;skaet&gt; not sure<br />
[10:08:03] &lt;skaet&gt; just started looking at the numbers this morning, and I think some serious triaging may be needed.<br />
[10:08:29] &lt;skaet&gt; esp. with 10.04.2 scheduled for next month the lucid ones are a bit of a concern.<br />
[10:08:33] &lt;marjo&gt; skaet: will follow up w/ bdmurray re: triaging<br />
[10:08:42] &lt;skaet&gt; thanks marjo.  :)<br />
[10:09:20] &lt;skaet&gt; pitti, where are things standing with karmic SRU release right now?  (did one go out?)<br />
[10:09:42] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - hi<br />
[10:09:56] &lt;pitti&gt; skaet: very few; basically the kernel churn, and there are two untested papyon/tomboy packages in -proposed<br />
[10:09:59] &lt;pitti&gt; ..<br />
[10:10:17] &lt;skaet&gt; thanks pitti.<br />
[10:10:36] &lt;sconklin&gt; What about the Karmic kernel still in -proposed?<br />
[10:11:22] &lt;pitti&gt; sconklin: untested, and -ec2 doesn't even have a tracking bug<br />
[10:11:34] &lt;pitti&gt; see bug 683474<br />
[10:11:36] &lt;ubottu&gt; Launchpad bug 683474 in linux (Ubuntu Karmic) "Karmic: 2.6.31-22.70 -proposed tracker" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683474<br />
[10:11:53] &lt;sconklin&gt; we're only testing maverick and lucid<br />
[10:12:05] &lt;sconklin&gt; Karmic falls back to the old "time in proposed"<br />
[10:12:44] &lt;skaet&gt; hmm,   this probably needs to be made clearer then in the process docs.<br />
[10:12:53] &lt;skaet&gt; if that's the concensus.<br />
[10:13:13] &lt;pitti&gt; so we still need someone in the community to install and test that kernel<br />
[10:13:40] &lt;marjo&gt; pitti, sconklin: pedro tested http://people.canonical.com/~pedro/kernel/kernel-2.6.31-22.70/<br />
[10:13:59] &lt;sconklin&gt; well, Ideally everything would get all testing, but we're resource-bound<br />
[10:14:20] &lt;skaet&gt; we schedule runs  (of earlier) in when there are gaps with maverick/lucid testing?<br />
[10:14:25] &lt;bjf&gt; marjo, that's the right kernel<br />
[10:14:28] &lt;pitti&gt; marjo: ah, nice! so we can consider this done<br />
[10:15:01] &lt;pitti&gt; sconklin: so that leaves the -ec2 one<br />
[10:15:04] &lt;pitti&gt; bug updated<br />
[10:15:15] &lt;marjo&gt; pitti: only if we agree that HW cert tests did not have to be run, see bug report please<br />
[10:15:29] &lt;pitti&gt; marjo: it was a security update only, so I think that's fine<br />
[10:15:38] &lt;marjo&gt; pitti: ack<br />
[10:15:40] &lt;sconklin&gt; marjo, victorp, skaet - I'm dependent on the people who do the testing to determine what's possible. We need to figure out what we're doing as a rule and document it<br />
[10:15:41] &lt;pitti&gt; we just need to guard against misbuilds and grave errors here<br />
[10:15:48] &lt;smb`&gt; pitti, sconklin I guess i can try to get some generic boot/regression testing done for ec2 either today or tomorrow<br />
[10:15:54] &lt;sconklin&gt; pitti: agreed<br />
[10:16:04] &lt;sconklin&gt; smb`: thanks<br />
[10:16:04] &lt;pitti&gt; smb`: that sounds fine<br />
[10:16:07] &lt;skaet&gt; sconklin, pitti,  agreed.<br />
[10:16:15] &lt;pitti&gt; ec2 is basically just on kvm, isn't it? so that shouldn't be too hard to test<br />
[10:16:19] &lt;victorp&gt; sconklin - agreed , I am happy to document the hwcert part , let me know where<br />
[10:16:29] &lt;skaet&gt; smb thanks.<br />
[10:17:00] &lt;skaet&gt; ok,  moving on...<br />
[10:17:07] &lt;skaet&gt; [TOPIC] 10.04.2<br />
<a name='2'></a>
[10:17:36] &lt;skaet&gt; sconklin, any update on the kernel milestoned bugs?<br />
[10:18:08] &lt;sconklin&gt; There was one bug milestoned, and I just chatted with Robbie - it's probably going to be rescheduled<br />
[10:18:53] &lt;skaet&gt; thanks sconklin.  :)<br />
[10:19:13] &lt;skaet&gt; any one around from foundations today?  (cjwatson's on holiday)<br />
[10:19:46] &lt;skaet&gt; hmm,  no bugs tagged against server at the moment so we're good there.<br />
[10:19:59] &lt;skaet&gt; pitti,  any update on the desktop milestoned ones?<br />
[10:20:07] &lt;pitti&gt; skaet: I updated the wiki page<br />
[10:20:18] &lt;skaet&gt; pitti,  thanks!  :)<br />
[10:20:19] &lt;pitti&gt; the summary is that none of them are currently being worked on<br />
[10:20:36] &lt;pitti&gt; one is just a "do it" thing (geode), the other two are pretty much "won'tfix"<br />
[10:20:59] &lt;pitti&gt; we don't currently have active work on 10.04.2 in teh desktop team<br />
[10:21:04] &lt;pitti&gt; is there something we should focus on?<br />
[10:21:06] &lt;pitti&gt; ..<br />
[10:21:34] &lt;skaet&gt; any chance we'll get someone to work on OOo?<br />
[10:21:48] &lt;skaet&gt; between now and Feb?<br />
[10:21:51] &lt;ogra&gt; skaet, see the ML, doko already did it seems<br />
[10:22:14] &lt;pitti&gt; skaet: question for Jason, I don't have an update since december<br />
[10:22:17] &lt;pitti&gt; holidays..<br />
[10:22:30] &lt;pitti&gt; doko heroically packaged LibO for natty, though<br />
[10:22:38] &lt;pitti&gt; (not finished yet)<br />
[10:22:39] &lt;skaet&gt; ogra, cool.   will look into it a bit more.  was just looking at top level status this morning.<br />
[10:23:10] &lt;skaet&gt; pitti,  fair 'nuf.   will follow up with jason, and keep fingers crossed on the rest.<br />
[10:24:14] &lt;skaet&gt; will dig into the 10.04.2 bugs in more detail this week and next.   release is 2/17, so there's still time.<br />
[10:24:26] &lt;skaet&gt; any questions/comments?<br />
[10:24:47] &lt;micahg&gt; about 10.04.2 in general?<br />
[10:24:53] &lt;skaet&gt; [TOPIC] Stable Release Updates<br />
<a name='3'></a>
[10:25:03] &lt;skaet&gt; micahg, yup sorry...<br />
[10:25:22] &lt;micahg&gt; yes, I was wondering about the release timeline WRT freezes<br />
[10:25:47] * micahg apologizes for not raising a hand<br />
[10:26:30] &lt;skaet&gt; micahg, no worries.   will take an action to set the date, and broadcast.<br />
[10:26:53] * skaet will go back into the precedent emails :)<br />
[10:27:15] &lt;skaet&gt; anyone else?<br />
[10:27:42] &lt;skaet&gt; ok,  back to Stable Release<br />
[10:28:01] &lt;skaet&gt; sconklin,  know you're just back, but anything on the hot plate?<br />
[10:28:20] &lt;sconklin&gt; Not that I'm aware of, but I haven't even cleared email yet<br />
[10:28:26] &lt;ogra&gt; same here<br />
[10:28:34] &lt;doko&gt; skaet: what di you to know about foundations?<br />
[10:28:43] &lt;skaet&gt; thanks sconklin, ogra<br />
[10:29:09] &lt;skaet&gt; doko,  just wondering if any updates on the 10.04.2 milestoned bugs from foundations team.<br />
[10:29:49] &lt;doko&gt; sorry, don't know<br />
[10:30:01] &lt;skaet&gt; no worries.<br />
[10:30:37] &lt;skaet&gt; pitti, sconklin - so I'm guessing no need for a hw cert run, or regression runs this week?<br />
[10:30:53] &lt;pitti&gt; skaet: not that I can see<br />
[10:31:11] &lt;rtg__&gt; if there are resources, then how about testing karmic?<br />
[10:31:13] &lt;sconklin&gt; skaet: we're going to discuss today whether we can upload a new cycle start by Friday.<br />
[10:31:26] &lt;skaet&gt; victorp, marjo ^^<br />
[10:31:33] &lt;marjo&gt; skaet: ack<br />
[10:31:48] &lt;skaet&gt; sconklin, ack<br />
[10:32:11] &lt;bjf&gt; rtg__, discussed and someone is on it<br />
[10:32:16] &lt;skaet&gt; rtg__, see earlier in log.<br />
[10:32:54] &lt;skaet&gt; sconklin, victorp, marjo,  when is the next reasonable date to aim for lucid/maverick then?<br />
[10:32:56] &lt;victorp&gt; rtg_ we would like to focus this week on natty<br />
[10:33:03] &lt;rtg__&gt; sorry, my machine wedged and I must have missed it<br />
[10:33:29] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - date to start or to release?<br />
[10:33:34] &lt;sconklin&gt; skaet: we'd really like to hit Friday upload but don't know if we can make it<br />
[10:33:48] &lt;bjf&gt; victorp, what's natty? :-)<br />
[10:33:52] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - I would like to avoid a "2nd week" during the rally<br />
[10:34:05] &lt;sconklin&gt; We'll let everyone know by tomorrow morning<br />
[10:34:08] &lt;skaet&gt; victorp, sconklin - how about aim for testing cycle, week after rally then, and release that thursday?<br />
[10:34:08] &lt;victorp&gt; bjf - dont know anymore :)<br />
[10:34:17] &lt;sconklin&gt; That would put first week during the rally<br />
[10:34:41] &lt;sconklin&gt; "Verification Phase"<br />
[10:34:45] &lt;marjo&gt; skaet: two possible conflicts: 1) rally 2) US holiday 17 January<br />
[10:35:03] &lt;skaet&gt; marjo, sconklin - true<br />
[10:35:06] &lt;marjo&gt; skaet: more concerned about rally conflict<br />
[10:35:20] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - I wanted to clarify one thing - if we call it a "regression week" and we release on thursday, that means that the proposed kernels for regression have to be made available the thursday before, right?<br />
[10:35:22] &lt;marjo&gt; but should be manageable<br />
[10:36:06] &lt;victorp&gt; marjo - not for hw cert as laptops need to be rebooted manually and might not have anyone in the lab<br />
[10:36:10] &lt;skaet&gt; victorp, yes,  kernels should be avail week before.<br />
[10:36:23] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - thanks<br />
[10:36:25] &lt;marjo&gt; victorp: ack<br />
[10:36:46] &lt;sconklin&gt; let's please try to use the names "verification phase" and "testing phase"<br />
[10:36:47] &lt;skaet&gt; so,  should we just aim for releasing on Jan 20,  or  Jan 27?<br />
[10:37:06] &lt;skaet&gt; sconklin,  I'll go mark up the interlock that way if it will help.<br />
[10:37:46] &lt;sconklin&gt; skaet: yeah, naming was not handled well by me at the outset, and I'm trying to unify everything now<br />
[10:37:50] &lt;sconklin&gt; thanks<br />
[10:38:01] &lt;skaet&gt; ok - will do.<br />
[10:38:06] &lt;victorp&gt; sconklin ack<br />
[10:38:56] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - I vote for the 27th<br />
[10:39:01] &lt;skaet&gt; right now shedule has 1/6 and 1/27 as release dates for SRU targets.    Does it make sense to drop 1/27 and just go with 1/20?<br />
[10:39:03] &lt;skaet&gt; heh<br />
[10:39:24] * skaet types too slow for victorp<br />
[10:40:00] &lt;skaet&gt; if there's nothing on the hot burner, some focus on natty and the lucid 10.04.2 bugs makes sense.<br />
[10:40:07] &lt;victorp&gt; skaet - 1/20 means the verification phase is during the rally, is that ok?<br />
[10:40:30] &lt;skaet&gt; victorp,  good point.<br />
[10:40:35] &lt;marjo&gt; skaet: if we're voting, then i vote for release on 1/27<br />
[10:40:39] &lt;skaet&gt; ok, 1/27 it is.<br />
[10:41:21] &lt;skaet&gt; any other topics to discuss today on the SRU side?<br />
[10:41:49] &lt;skaet&gt; going once?<br />
[10:42:01] &lt;skaet&gt; twice?<br />
[10:42:08] &lt;skaet&gt; ok, probably time to end the meeting.<br />
[10:42:16] &lt;ogra&gt; \o/<br />
[10:42:16] &lt;skaet&gt; thanks everyone for participating.  :)<br />
[10:42:21] &lt;skaet&gt; #endmeeting<br />
Meeting ended.<br />