== Meeting information ==
 * #ubuntu-meeting-2 Meeting, 14 Apr at 16:09 — 16:26 UTC
 * Full logs at [[http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting-2/2015/ubuntu-meeting-2.2015-04-14-16.09.log.html]]



== Meeting summary ==

=== Apologies ===
The discussion about "Apologies" started at 16:09.


=== Action review ===
The discussion about "Action review" started at 16:09.


=== Mailing list archive ===
The discussion about "Mailing list archive" started at 16:10.


=== Community bugs ===
The discussion about "Community bugs" started at 16:24.


=== Next chair ===
The discussion about "Next chair" started at 16:24.




== Vote results ==




== Done items ==

 * (none)



== People present (lines said) ==

 * mdeslaur (25)
 * caribou (24)
 * pitti (21)
 * slangasek (9)
 * infinity (5)
 * meetingology (3)



== Full Log ==


 16:09 <mdeslaur> #startmeeting

 16:09 <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Apr 14 16:09:24 2015 UTC.  The chair is mdeslaur. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.

 16:09 <meetingology> 

 16:09 <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick

 16:09 <mdeslaur> [topic] Apologies

 16:09 <mdeslaur> nobody

 16:09 <mdeslaur> [topic] Action review

 16:09 <mdeslaur> nothing

 16:10 <mdeslaur> [topic] Mailing list archive

 16:10 <mdeslaur> so it looks like we've responded on-list to MAAS

 16:10 <mdeslaur> whoops

 16:10 <mdeslaur> to docker

 16:10 <mdeslaur> does anyone have anything else they'd like to say about the new docker proposal?

 16:10 <pitti> +1 on that, LGTM now

 16:11 <pitti> the previous per-series packaging was scary, but that's gone now

 16:11 <mdeslaur> yeah, +1 from me as well.

 16:12 <pitti> caribou: *prod*

 16:12 <caribou> yes, just want to have TB's opinion on an MRE for sosreport

 16:13 <caribou> it is a fast moving project with many new inclusions

 16:13 <caribou> and not possible to adhere to SRU rules when adding new plugins

 16:13 <infinity> caribou: That description is exactly the opposite of what MREs are (usuaully) for.

 16:13 <pitti> what does that do, roughly?

 16:13 <caribou> so I think that it would be beneficial to have the current upstream version on Ubuntu for all stable rel

 16:14 <caribou> collect configuration & logs on running systems for offline analtysis

 16:14 <pitti> i. e. a program which shows and manually sends data, or automatic in the background, etc?

 16:14 <mdeslaur> it seems to be pretty self-contained and nothing seems to depend on it, so at least there's that

 16:15 <caribou> for instance, a new plugin was added for cloud-init which will not be available to any of the stable release

 16:15 <caribou> since it is not part of any stable release and will only make it to "W"

 16:15 <pitti> it sends it to a location you configure, or to canoincal?

 16:15 <caribou> so the possibility to have the same 'recent' version on stable release would be a bonus

 16:15 <slangasek> manual

 16:15 <pitti> i. e. with SRUs is there a chance that we'd suddenly leak private data which it didn't before on that release?

 16:15 <caribou> infinity: I was told  that MRE would be a solution for that

 16:15 <slangasek> it's not really an MRE

 16:15 <caribou> pitti: manual

 16:15 <slangasek> but that's a nomenclature question

 16:16 <pitti> TBH I think I need some more details of what that does, how new versions impact stable releases, etc.

 16:16 <slangasek> conceptually, as a tool that's used by support to gather information from a customer's system, I think it makes sense to allow it to be updated

 16:17 <slangasek> because the extent of the interface from the user is "run this command, get results back from the Canonical support team"

 16:17 <caribou> pitti: there is confidential data scrubbing built in, but there is always a chance of bugs around this

 16:17 <pitti> caribou: if that's manual configurations, how do me make sure that newer upstream releases work with older configs, and don't suddenly drop config options/information that's sent, or change their format?

 16:17 <slangasek> so it seems analogous to me to other exceptions we've made for software where the server interface has changed

 16:17 <slangasek> just that in this case the "server interface" is the support team

 16:18 <caribou> pitti: but this would affect the dev release in the same way

 16:18 <pitti> ah, so it does send data to Caonical, not to the admin's servers

 16:18 <caribou> pitti: the tool doesn't send anything

 16:19 <caribou> pitti: it produces a tarball to be uploaded "somewhere" by the user

 16:19 <pitti> ah, ok

 16:19 <caribou> pitti: the only output is a tarball in /tmlp

 16:19 <caribou> s/tmlp/tmp

 16:19 <infinity> I'm not against it conceptually.

 16:19 <pitti> so it's intended for e. g. the Canoincal support team, so it's ok if the format/content changes?

 16:19 <infinity> As Martin says, though, are there config files, is migration guaranteed to be sane, etc?

 16:20 <pitti> yeah, I'm mostly interested in what this does structurally, and what's the worst thing that can happen

 16:20 <pitti> .. if a new upstream version changes format or drops files, etc.

 16:20 <caribou> pitti: worst thing is that some collection would be missing (which is the case in the current situation)

 16:20 <mdeslaur> perhaps we could better decide if you sent an email to the list with a description of what the tool does, who uses it, what config is uses, what it produces, and the types of changes that have happened in the past?

 16:20 <caribou> pitti: this is the current situation with SRU

 16:21 <caribou> mdeslaur: that was my intent, but I wanted a first feeling for it

 16:21 <caribou> mdeslaur: no point in formally proposing it if the first reaction is totally negative

 16:21 <pitti> I'm generally not opposed to SRU exceptions as long as they are done in a safe and sane way

 16:22 <mdeslaur> I'm open to the idea, I think this type of tool is something that is definitely worth considering for an exception

 16:22 <caribou> pitti: I think that regression issues would be restricted to the output content

 16:22 <pitti> ^ agreed; I woudl just like to understand what exactly it is and what the impact is :)

 16:22 <pitti> caribou: right, understood

 16:22 <caribou> mdeslaur: pitti: Fine, I will send an email with all the details requested

 16:23 <pitti> caribou: so I'm trying to find out whether that would break automatic evaluation of the content

 16:23 <mdeslaur> caribou: ok, I think we're all open to the idea, and we'll await your post

 16:23 <caribou> thanks to the TB, this will help in writing the email

 16:23 <caribou> this is all I had

 16:23 <pitti> caribou: thanks

 16:23 <mdeslaur> thanks caribou

 16:24 <mdeslaur> doesn't look like there was anything else to discuss on the list

 16:24 <mdeslaur> [topic] Community bugs

 16:24 <mdeslaur> None

 16:24 <mdeslaur> [topic] Next chair

 16:25 <mdeslaur> looks like it's pitti?

 16:25 <infinity> or kees. :P

 16:25 <pitti> ack

 16:25 <slangasek> ;)

 16:25 <mdeslaur> ok, so kees if he's still alive, then pitti

 16:25 <infinity> Yes, that.

 16:25 <mdeslaur> Does anyone have anything else they would like to discuss?

 16:26 <pitti> nothing from me

 16:26 <slangasek> not I

 16:26 <mdeslaur> ok, that's it for today folks

 16:26 <mdeslaur> #endmeeting



Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology)