15:01:24 #startmeeting 15:01:24 Meeting started Mon Oct 3 15:01:24 2011 UTC. The chair is ara. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot. 15:01:24 15:01:24 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 15:01:46 The agenda today looks like this: 15:01:47 * Testing Checkbox 0.12.8 and cleaning up results -- ara 15:01:47 * AOB 15:02:04 As usual, I would encourage anyone to add topics to the main meeting wiki page: 15:02:16 #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFriendly/Meetings 15:02:29 #topic Testing Checkbox 0.12.8 and cleaning up results -- ara 15:02:43 Most of what we were able to do for the client for Ubuntu Friendly is now done and uploaded to Ubuntu as Checkbox 0.12.8. Now is time to test it as much as possible and start tweaking the server based on the results that we get. 15:03:00 o/ 15:03:03 What I think that we need to do: 15:03:03 * Clean up UF old results (they were made with versions of Checkbox that had too many bugs) 15:03:03 * Everybody with an Oneiric system, please, use Checkbox 0.12.8 (not the PPA), and run the tests required for Ubuntu Friendly 15:03:03 The idea is to see what numbers are we getting and to see if we need to make changes to the server side. 15:03:03 o/ 15:03:14 Any comments? 15:03:16 .. 15:03:22 cr3, go ahead, please 15:03:34 Should we have an objective to get X number of systems with more than one star for the next meeting, where we could agree on X during this meeting? 15:03:38 .. 15:03:51 jedimike, your turn 15:03:53 o/ 15:03:56 o/ 15:04:20 I was just going to ask how to make sure I'm running the latest checkbox, as I've been using the ppa in the past 15:04:21 .. 15:05:19 OK, to cr3 question, I think we should try to get X number of submissions made with 0.12.8, we cannot guarantee the stars they will get :) 15:05:45 jedimike, if you are running Oneiric, apt-get install checkbox version=0.12.8 should do the trick 15:05:46 .. 15:05:53 cr3, go ahead 15:05:57 We should probably not be considering any Oneiric results before at least RC, I don't think a development release should be considered friendly.. because they're mostly unfriendly anyways :) 15:06:01 .. 15:06:08 o/ 15:06:12 o/ 15:06:15 ara, go ahead :) 15:06:47 o/ 15:06:50 agree, but I think that we need newer data (and cleaning up old one) so we make sure that 0.12.8 will give good results once 11.10 gets released 15:06:51 .. 15:07:00 roadmr, sir 15:07:06 o/ 15:07:27 um, at the *very* least everyone here should be able to submit a more-than-one-star result, all our laptops should work fine by now 15:07:37 if not, we'd have to look at why :) 15:07:38 .. 15:07:54 jedimike, your turn 15:08:08 o/ 15:08:27 o/ 15:08:28 the reason I'm asking during this meeting is to that it's on record and everyone can be sure they're running the right version of checkbox 15:08:43 so, I'm *not* using the ppa, just the default oneiric sources 15:08:52 and I've done a full apt-get update and upgrade 15:09:11 and apt-get install checkbox version=0.12.8 complains that it can't find that version 15:09:45 so I want to make sure the instructions we give here work for people following along :) 15:09:46 ... 15:10:04 cr3, I think it is your turn 15:10:06 ara, I don't understand the purpose of cleaning up the old data, is it to verify that the star systems works? that could be useful for testing purposes, but I think data prior to RC should be removed. 15:10:10 . 15:10:13 . 15:10:44 cr3, cleaning up = remove 15:10:54 ara: ah! thanks for the clarification :) 15:11:05 sorry for the confusion :) 15:11:09 brendand, your turn 15:11:53 for jedimike, and others listening - one thing you can do is 'dpkg -l | grep checkbox'. The PPA version will have 'bzr' in its version number 15:13:07 i guess if you've been using the PPA you might need to 'apt-get remove checkbox', then 'apt-get install' again 15:13:09 .. 15:13:20 bladernr, all yours 15:13:24 So assuming that I'm running 0.12.8 (apt-cache on my x201 says I am) and I run the tests and submit, is there anyting I need to do to get my results to appear in UF (and I'm assuming that is the bit.ly link) I've run checkbox and submitted several times but I've never seen my system appear in the UF listings. 15:13:29 .. 15:14:11 bladernr, when was the last time you run it? 15:14:13 bladernr: results tracker updates from launchpad every hour, ubuntu friendly updates from results tracker every hour too, so it should appear within two hours 15:14:29 or wherever the site is currently sitting... since the bit.ly link is dead ;-) 15:14:45 ara: it's been a week or two by now... got busy with other things 15:14:59 crap, I wish the results tracker would show the systems per user: http://107.20.153.224/~bladernr 15:15:11 cr3: that's what I thought, but i never saw it show up in either place... Oh well, I'll try again today and see what happens. 15:15:14 who the heck wrote that piece of crap :( 15:15:23 bladernr, is not here: http://107.20.216.30/?desktops=on&laptops=on&stars=1&release=4&popularity=any&term=lenovo ? 15:15:57 o/ 15:16:03 jedimike, go ahead 15:16:05 ara: oh what do you know... it DID show up 15:16:07 ara: action item? jedimike, bladernr and I to look into his system? 15:16:50 ok... forget what I said, it DID end up in there. It just wasn't there previously... I swear! :-) 15:17:00 I now have checkbox 0.12.8, hurrah! For people who've been using the PPA - you must move it from your sources, apt-get remove checkbox; (this will also uninstall ubuntu-desktop, so don't be surprized by that) and then apt-get install checkbox 15:17:02 .. 15:17:10 o/ 15:17:36 OK, so couple of action items if you guys agree 15:18:13 #action cr3, jedimike: to remove results, as they are not useful and it is making it impossible to see what's still failing 15:18:13 * meetingology` cr3, jedimike: to remove results, as they are not useful and it is making it impossible to see what's still failing 15:18:38 #action All to submit at least 1 system using checkbox 0.12.8 by next meeting 15:18:38 * meetingology` All to submit at least 1 system using checkbox 0.12.8 by next meeting 15:18:44 .. 15:18:51 o/ 15:18:55 cr3, go ahead 15:19:14 just to be clear, results will not be removed from the results tracker :) 15:19:39 .. 15:19:50 cr3, cool, thanks for the clarification 15:20:02 o/ 15:20:02 everybody agrees on the action items, otherwise? 15:20:04 0/ 15:20:07 jedimike, go ahead 15:20:45 so, the action is for me to remove the current 1-star results from the results tracker, and only import results submitted from current time onwards? 15:21:20 .. 15:21:22 jedimike, also the 4.5 one ;-) as brendand cheated a bit on that one :P 15:21:28 heh ok 15:21:40 bladernr, your turn 15:21:42 could cr3 or jedimike send an e-mail out to the UF list when the purge is complete so we'll know when to start sending (hopefully) legitimate test results in? 15:21:44 .. 15:22:01 bladernr, good idea, I guess they could :) 15:22:02 bladernr: I think legitimate results should happen when we consider oneiric to be legitimate 15:22:13 cr3: semi-legitimate then 15:22:17 cr3, legitimate results as in legitimate for the action item :) 15:22:17 or... faux-legitimate 15:22:40 ok, my brain just leaked 15:22:53 o/ 15:22:58 ara: go ahead 15:23:02 o/ 15:23:05 o/ 15:23:18 cr3, is it possible to discard submissions that are being done by checkbox < 0.12.8 ? 15:23:22 .. 15:23:49 ara: nope, client information is not recorded 15:23:51 .. 15:23:53 cr3, thanks 15:23:55 brendand, your turn 15:24:54 i'll answer 'no' to bluetooth/file-transfer next time (if it hasn't been removed?) 15:24:56 .. 15:25:06 o/ 15:25:12 brendand, it was removed 15:25:15 jedimike, your turn 15:25:27 o/ 15:25:30 there's still a problem with the bluetooth/detect test 15:25:40 it fails, and checkbox asks you to submit a bug 15:25:52 o/ 15:25:58 looks like the reason it fails is that the bluez-hcidump package isn't installed 15:26:25 that shouldn't not be installed if we're running checkbox, surely? 15:26:33 I'm submitting a bug report 15:26:34 .. 15:26:46 Amoz, your turn 15:27:14 shouldn't it save the client and ubuntu versions (beta, RC etc.) so we can look at the actual progress for a new release in terms of UF:ness? 15:27:19 .. 15:27:45 brendand, your turn 15:28:00 o/ 15:28:50 the bluetooth/detect test is just the output of 'hcitool dev'. it doesn't depend on bluez-hcidump. it fails if there is no bluetooth device on the system, which makes sense 15:28:54 ... 15:29:19 o/ 15:29:38 o/ 15:29:40 cr3, go ahead 15:30:12 Amoz: UF'ness is a good point but rather complicated to scale for the ubuntu community because it would require recording all the packages installed in order to detect things like packages installed from PPA, etc. 15:30:16 .. 15:30:51 my turn, I guess 15:31:30 so, to Amoz, that'd be useful but as cr3, it is very difficult to implement. But we might consider it for future versions 15:31:39 ara: blueprint? 15:31:40 to brendand, jedimike on the detect one 15:31:58 o/ 15:32:39 brendand: I appreciate the test doesn't need hcidump, and when the test fails and it asks me if I want to submit a bug, it asks me to run that command, which isn't installed. It's just confusing that the test is meant to fail if I have no bluetooth hardware, and yet it asks me if I want to submit a bug... 15:32:55 Being a fan of ubuntu and wanting to improve it, of course I want to submit a bug 15:33:09 brendand, the test is not meant to be run if the system does not have bluetooth 15:33:26 Ah, then that might be the problem, I have no bluetooth hardware and yet the test is running 15:33:28 .. 15:33:34 brendand, or if it is meant to be run, then it shouldn't count as failure in UF 15:33:43 brendand, jedimike: let's take this offline 15:33:53 Amoz, your turn, agian 15:34:07 to clarify, if checkbox is able to send the info about whether it's beta1/rc/alpha the UF site could just ignore all the versions except the stable ones. 15:34:38 o/ 15:34:39 this way everyone can see the big picture, but not cluttering the UF site with development releases 15:34:47 .. 15:34:53 cr3, yes, sir 15:35:45 Amoz: accurately detecting beta1, etc. is very complicated. it can only be determined reliably by comparing the set of packages and their versions to the state of the archive within the delta of the release you're interested in... pain! :) 15:36:18 ah, of course. thanks for clarifying that 15:36:47 OK 15:36:52 anything else on this topic? 15:36:57 Amoz: the best that can accomplished, with meh accuracy, is checking the output of lsb-release for development vs stable or the kernel version... but, as I said, that's "meh" at best 15:37:01 .. 15:37:42 Amoz: fyi, that was considered pretty important at some point, so likely to be worked on eventually 15:38:30 cr3, Amoz: the blueprint that might cover those topics is: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/certify-planning/+spec/hardware-p-cert-selftest 15:38:56 ara: thanks! 15:39:14 anything else on this topic, or shall we move on? 15:39:51 #topic Any Other Business? 15:40:02 Any last minute topic? 15:40:50 OK, let's wrap up then 15:40:52 #endmeeting