== Meeting information == * #ubuntu-meeting-2: Technical Board meeting, 30 Sep at 16:07 — 16:40 UTC * Full logs at [[http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting-2/2014/ubuntu-meeting-2.2014-09-30-16.07.log.html]] == Meeting summary == === Action review === The discussion about "Action review" started at 16:07. === Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item) === The discussion about "Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item)" started at 16:08. === Check up on community bugs (standing item) === The discussion about "Check up on community bugs (standing item)" started at 16:11. === Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members) === The discussion about "Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members)" started at 16:11. === AOB === The discussion about "AOB" started at 16:12. * ''LINK:'' https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/psycopg2/+bug/1366104 == Vote results == == Done items == * (none) == People present (lines said) == * pitti (34) * ScottK (23) * mdeslaur (18) * stgraber (16) * meetingology (3) * kees (2) == Full Log == 16:07 #startmeeting Technical Board meeting 16:07 Meeting started Tue Sep 30 16:07:08 2014 UTC. The chair is stgraber. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 16:07 16:07 Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 16:07 #topic Action review 16:07 infinity to review and respond to MAAS SRU thread 16:07 well, infinity isn't around so I guess we'll just carry that one over 16:08 #topic Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item) 16:08 mdeslaur got a response to the MAAS thread 16:08 or two in fact 16:08 do we really need to wait for infinity on that one? 16:08 but at this point I feel like we don't get any more useful answers 16:09 I still don't have the feeling that I know how they ensure backwards compatibility, but I could just be overly paranoid 16:10 mdeslaur: "legally" we don't, a single +1 is enough for an MRE, but some consensus is certainly prudent 16:10 they claim the API with the nodes will be stable, but don't mention how they plan on making sure of that 16:10 actually, I think I'll ask that as a follow up question 16:11 ok, so back to the ML for that one 16:11 that's the only thing I see in the ML history for September so I guess we didn't miss anything :) 16:11 #topic Check up on community bugs (standing item) 16:11 still nothing 16:11 #topic Select a chair for the next meeting (next from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members) 16:12 that'd be infinity 16:12 #topic AOB 16:12 anything anyone? 16:12 nothing from me. 16:12 nothing from me either 16:13 nope 16:14 Re MAAS, they are currently pushing for invasive changes in psycopg. 16:14 It makes me wonder how they expect to support trusty. 16:15 well, if they only make that to trunk, not to the stable branches, that'd be ok? 16:15 ScottK: oh? do you know what changes those are, or where they've been discussed? 16:15 I'm not sure whether we are still talking about microreleases only, or new major releases; but I expect the latter (yay terminology) 16:16 Looking for the bug. 16:16 indeed, sorry, it explicitly said "new releases" 16:16 * pitti confused, sorry 16:16 anyway, there's precedent; newer python modules could be bundled into the new release 16:16 (which is fairly simple with python) 16:17 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/psycopg2/+bug/1366104 16:17 thanks ScottK 16:19 hrm, interesting 16:19 pitti: though psycopg2 contains a C extension module, so still possible but not nearly as clean :) 16:19 but it uses a libpq 9.3 only api 16:20 I'm not sure how much pressure there is to also put new maas releases to 12.04 16:20 the effort/gain ratio seems too big for me (but that's just gut feeling) 16:20 Which is why it's a much more invasive change than the sloc count indicates. 16:21 I'm assuming they decided not to care about 12.04 anymore. 16:22 their request to the tech board was for "latest LTSes" 16:22 Upstream pretty much said "you're on your own" re backport the change. 16:23 Then at least the libpq is there. 16:23 latest LTS seems reasonable 16:23 Agreed. 16:23 if you want changes in other packages, that's up to the SRU to decide whether they are acceptable or not 16:23 s/you/they/ 16:23 yeah, fixes are certainly okay 16:24 In this case I'll say not. 16:24 if they can't get the fixes they require, then it's up to them to work around them 16:24 like, fixing psycopg to get along with large files smells like a bug fix worth having in an LTS 16:24 The psycopg2 change is way more than a fix. 16:24 I didn't look into it in detail, just the description and some comments 16:25 but https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/pull/259/files looks reasonable at first sight 16:25 I'd say changing the libpq API you're using post-release is crazy. 16:25 (not sure if that's an ABI break due to teh changed types) 16:25 well, the code is condition and checks the version 16:25 conditional 16:26 Who knows what latent bugs exist in the new api. 16:26 anyway, putting that detail aside, if changes to other packages are not applicable as an SRU, there's always the bundling option, or working around it in another way 16:26 right 16:27 We'd get the new api on 14.04 since we'd build against 9.3. 16:27 right, and 14.04 is all we talk about, isn't it? 16:27 Yes. 16:28 Which is why backporting that patch concerns me. 16:28 'Works with MAAS' doesn't really help. 16:28 It's everyone else I worry about. 16:29 yes, that's what I mean -- if that change is too intrusive for an SRU, there's other ways to get this for maas 16:29 (I didn't claim that the psycopg fix was fine for an SRU, just that it looks reasonable at first sight) 16:29 if the change gets NACKed by the SRU team, it's up to them to work around it somehow 16:29 So it'd be nice to consider the possibility they have to bundle stuff in any MRE approval. 16:30 yes, I think for some bits that's quite unavoidable 16:30 To bring us back to the topic. 16:30 e. g. if there's a new dependency which is in trusty universe we don't want to promote it post-release 16:30 (or binNEW it, etc.) 16:31 at least then both the effort and the impact of bundled stuff is restricted to maas itself and its devs 16:31 (or add a patch that's not SRU suitable) 16:31 and the latter will make sure that it doesn't happen too often 16:31 Yes. 16:31 ScottK: yeah, obviously 16:33 so, are we done for today then? 16:33 * pitti smells dinner, yummy :) 16:33 * kees waves 16:34 I think we are 16:34 * pitti waves good bye then, see you! 16:34 stgraber: *nudge* 16:34 * ScottK waves. 16:34 thanks! 16:40 oops :) 16:40 #endmeeting Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology)