21:01:31 #startmeeting 21:01:31 Meeting started Mon Nov 28 21:01:31 2011 UTC. The chair is kees. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot. 21:01:31 21:01:31 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 21:01:40 yeah, I guess having it on the agenda for our next meeting and making sure someone from the kernel team is here too would be best 21:01:48 https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda 21:01:58 mdz can't make it today 21:02:09 [topic] action review 21:02:18 it looks like everything from last time got done. 21:03:05 [topic] Opening backports pocket pre-release 21:03:29 broder said he couldn't make it this time. is there anything we need to cover here that we can do? 21:03:32 hm, I thought we pretty much discussed that last time 21:03:52 IIRC we +1ed this with a few modifications 21:04:04 That's how I remember it, too. 21:04:07 he'd sent an updated list of items https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-November/001137.html 21:04:09 agreed; broder's summary looks fine to me 21:04:33 kees: right, that was it, thanks for the link 21:04:37 okay, so the 001137 summary was good? did that already get voted on? 21:04:48 one thing I noticed, and it's not a blocker at all, if there are to be no source/binary copies through -backports when opening a new release, somebody should file an LP bug; however, I think it would be easier to just let things be copied and then upload rebuilds 21:04:52 (avoids NEW) 21:04:57 that's a minor wording tweak though 21:05:12 * kees nods 21:06:08 [topic] Edubuntu LTS Application 21:06:19 I didn't see email for this. I lack context ... 21:06:40 highvoltage: ^ 21:06:44 highvoltage: ah, this is yours? 21:06:50 just checked the wiki edit history... 21:06:56 right! 21:06:59 kees: for the backports, should we vote on the current proposal? 21:07:06 Hi! It's 23:00 so please forgive me if I'm a bit groggy. 21:07:06 The Edubuntu LTS proposal is currently really simple. 21:07:06 The Edubuntu team plans to: 21:07:07 * Supply security fixes to packages in the Edubuntu system that are not in the Desktop Ubuntu seeds 21:07:14 * Leverage the Kubuntu LTS release for our KDE packages 21:07:14 * Drop packages that are likely to be risky or difficult to support 21:07:14 * Release point releases along with all of Ubuntu's point releases 21:07:14 * Wiki Page where we're tracking this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Edubuntu/12.04/LTS-Proposal 21:07:22 stgraber and myself are here representing the Edubuntu team (even though stgraber is a TB member as well) 21:07:24 stgraber: i'll come back to that, sorry for jumping ahead. 21:07:26 If there's any questions, concerns or comments, please fire away. 21:08:09 how many developers does the Edubuntu team have 21:08:09 ? 21:08:11 "that are not in the Desktop Ubuntu seeds 21:08:11 stgraber: FWIW, we already voted on teh backports one 21:08:23 I assume that means "Desktop and Server" Ubuntu seeds actually? 21:08:43 cjwatson: very, very few. it's typically 2 people. 21:08:46 and what is the list of source packages that would be considered supported? 21:09:00 highvoltage: what's the order of packages that are affected by this, i. e. packages which are not already covered by u/k desktop? 21:09:06 I guess I'm worried about the bus factor over an LTS cycle length 21:09:06 or rather anything that's not in a supported seed (as edubunt inherits quite a bit from ubuntu and kubuntu) 21:09:41 pitti: I wish I had that for you already, it's on my to-do list, at an educated guess I'd say around 20 packages. 21:10:03 highvoltage: that's fine, I was just interested in the magnitue 21:10:13 only 20? that seems very small. 21:10:22 highvoltage: that's typically software for maintaining school schedules, and some educationary programs as well? (or is that just kdeedu) 21:10:38 in the past, there has been trouble keeping things like moodle up to date in edubuntu. what is different now? 21:10:54 I'm getting the list now (before filtering of what we want to drop) 21:10:57 highvoltage: local edu applications are probably "mostly harmless", I'm mostly worried about things like mediawiki and similar web/php stuff 21:11:09 pitti: it's a bit more than kde-edu, there's tux4kids, gcompris, there are things like arkose, ltsp-live (I really should put together that list) 21:11:18 kees: we dropped the server part of Edubuntu, the only thing we kept server-side is LTSP, that's already supported in Ubuntu 21:11:28 if you include kde-edu it does get quite a bit larger 21:11:34 stgraber: ah-ha 21:11:36 pitti: but yes, they are mostly harmless 21:11:39 oh, seems moodle isn't on the edubuntu DVD any more 21:11:52 with the exception of LTSP most of it's leaf packages, right? 21:12:06 pitti: yeah we don't support any php software at this time 21:12:23 my main concern is PHPish stuff and similar web apps 21:12:37 full list of binary packages: http://paste.ubuntu.com/752980/ 21:12:38 highvoltage: one thing I will say is that Kubuntu as LTS has not to my knowledge been finalised; it certainly hasn't come up to the TB for approval 21:12:38 highvoltage: ah, good 21:13:00 if your LTSness is effectively conditional on that, perhaps we should arrange to talk with the Kubuntu people first ... 21:13:06 we'd like to revive the edubuntu-server stuff for 12.10, but that's a whole nother kettle of fish, for now there's no web apps at all. 21:13:53 yeah, I'm not worried about things like gcompris 21:13:54 (full list of binary packages currently in universe, that's) 21:13:55 highvoltage: on Mono (in your wiki page): Mono isn't actually dropping out of main for 12.04 AFAI 21:13:55 cjwatson: indeed. we can wait on what happens with Kubuntu's application. Riddell has informed me that Darkwing is working on it 21:13:58 K 21:14:07 highvoltage: since it's needed for building bindings and the like 21:14:19 mono> not out of main, but dropping out of the LTS support 21:14:23 cjwatson: I just didn't want to wait too long before applying. If Kubuntu is only supported for 3 years then we'd want the same. 21:14:36 so it'll just get the standard 1.5 years; but that's mostly for commercial support 21:14:46 as it's in main, security updates are still covered 21:14:48 pitti: I was under the impression that anything required to build desktop/server got the same support lifetime 21:14:51 (not that there are many for mono) 21:15:15 cjwatson: ah, maybe; that line has never been very clear to me 21:15:22 the canonical support one, I mean 21:15:38 given that the server half is gone, I think the risk and work for supporting the client bits is likely low. I'd like to see it after Kubuntu's LTSness is finalized, as mentioned. 21:15:51 I guess it's also worth mentioning that we don't expect an answer from the TB right away, we just wanted to open op dialog so long and get some feedback 21:15:56 anyway, we had mono only for gbrainy, banshee and tomboy, same as Ubuntu, so we got the change automatically when pitti did it last week 21:16:10 gbrainy is quite a nice one indeed 21:16:14 * cjwatson checks LP code 21:16:25 I guess I'm mistaken, maintenance-check doesn't pull in build-deps 21:16:36 it is. gbrainy is awesome. at least we can encourage users to use software-center by telling them they can get it there :) 21:16:38 but if that will be the only thing for "mono in or out of LTS", it might be ok to drop from the DVD 21:16:54 highvoltage: yeah, I like it, too :) 21:17:14 (is mono security support a problem then? I never paid much attention to that, but I must say I'm a bit surprised) 21:17:34 but anyway, mono commercial support for LTS does sound like a problem ("need this on that new ARM arch"), but security support should be totally doable 21:18:05 mono authors in the past have been responsive about security updates. 21:18:11 cjwatson: I'm not sure of its security history, but it's something that neither myself or stgraber is much familiar with, or is particularly interested in besides gbrainy, so even just a little work on it would be costly for us if we'd have to do it 21:18:18 I think the current position of the edubuntu team is that we'd rather avoid being the ones with a programming language in their package set for an LTS release ;) 21:18:21 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=mono FYI 21:18:53 but anyway, it's still in main, and will be for the forseeable future, so I don't think we could get away with not security-supporting it 21:19:05 but I think we disgress a little 21:19:07 pitti: normally security support is for as long as the package is officially supported 21:19:15 so if we know we can ship gbrainy and we only commit to maintaing gbrainy for the length of the LTS, that's fine, having to deal with the language itself is a bit much for us :) 21:19:42 stgraber: personally I wouldn't mind having mono in if it means that we can keep gbrainy, it just depends on what kind of responsibility comes with it :) 21:20:44 alright, so, good start to discussion. is there something specific we should accomplish in the meeting today? 21:21:29 so yeah, to come back to the actual package list, it's mostly a few educational tools, fonts (not really risky), the gnome fallback session and a bunch of java stuff I'll try to get rid off 21:21:41 so my gut feeling is that aside from the mono/gbrainy question (which we should ask the security team about), is that IF kubuntu is LTS, then edubuntu LTS sounds doable 21:21:42 I guess we should see what Kubuntu does, it's probably not a bad idea to set some kind of date for making a final(ish) decision on it 21:22:26 sounds like two things for the next meeting, then: a list of the source packages to be security-supported, and an update on Kubuntu LTSness? 21:22:55 sounds good 21:23:09 yep 21:23:25 okay, excellent. thanks for bringing this up. 21:23:37 [topic] Opening backports pocket pre-release 21:23:38 if http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Langford#Basilisks ever happens then we might have to start worrying about font security 21:23:55 I may have left this one too soon. do we need to vote on broder's updated proposal? 21:24:10 21:08 stgraber: FWIW, we already voted on teh backports one 21:24:23 okay, moving on then. 21:24:31 [topic] Recurring: Brain storm review (Next due: December 2011) 21:24:49 is the output due in dec, or our discussion of assigning who will do output due by dec? 21:24:51 oh, that time of the year already 21:25:01 if the former, we need to assign something now. 21:25:11 kees: when I added that originally, I meant the "due date" as "topic for TB meeting" 21:25:32 pitti: okay, so we'll save this for the next meeting then? 21:25:35 but finding someone nowish does sound like a good idea either way, given that the next TB meeting will be well within holiday season 21:25:42 ah, fair enough. 21:26:02 I'd be happy to take it if I could have the requirements a little more well defined. 21:26:12 do we have any kind of documentation on how to do the review? 21:26:28 we have some by way of cargo-culting from the previous ones 21:26:37 mdz sent me links when I did it 21:26:40 pitti: not to be too picky (because I'm +1 on that plan anyway), can you point me to where we actually voted on that? I just found a +1 from you in the last meeting log but can't find anyone else's vote 21:26:48 kees: what I did is take the top 10 brainstorm items (with a little common sense adjustment), find some people who could give a good reply/action/answer to this, and ask them whether they are willing to do them 21:27:28 stgraber: perhaps I misremember then; if there's doubt, let's just re-vote, should be quick 21:27:35 pitti: can you dump the links and that short summary into something like TechnicalBoard/BrainStormReview ? 21:27:48 kees: I can forward you my mails from back then 21:27:49 and then I'll go through it for next meeting and try to get comments 21:27:51 or that 21:28:44 pitti: I'm looking at http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/11/17/%23ubuntu-meeting.html I think it sounds like we all agree in the log but we were only barely quorate, so can't hurt having something a bit better documented :) 21:28:44 [action] pitti: document brainstorm review activity 21:28:44 * meetingology pitti: document brainstorm review activity 21:28:55 [action] kees: perform brainstorm review 21:28:55 * meetingology kees: perform brainstorm review 21:29:04 stgraber: ah, that was it, the quorum, yes 21:30:06 let's just do another vote? 21:30:10 soren: still with us? 21:30:13 Sure. 21:31:02 [vote] approve opening backports pre-release proposal as updated in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-November/001137.html 21:31:02 Please vote on: approve opening backports pre-release proposal as updated in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-November/001137.html 21:31:02 Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (private votes don't work yet, but when they do it will be by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to me) 21:31:22 +1 21:31:22 +1 received from pitti 21:31:28 +1 21:31:28 +1 received from kees 21:31:29 +1 21:31:29 +1 received from stgraber 21:31:30 Er.. 21:31:37 +1 21:31:37 +1 received from soren 21:31:47 +1 21:31:47 +1 received from cjwatson 21:31:59 #endvote 21:31:59 Voting ended on: approve opening backports pre-release proposal as updated in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-November/001137.html 21:31:59 Votes for:5 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 21:31:59 Motion carried 21:32:08 Man, that was confusing. I thought we were still talking about the brainstorm review :) 21:32:11 okay, officially documented. :) 21:32:20 soren: sorry, we switched back. :) 21:32:29 [topic] Scan the mailing list archive for anything we missed (standing item) 21:32:38 I don't see anything we missed in the archives. 21:32:54 kees: thanks, sorry for being a bit picky but I like being able to grep through meeting logs and having it properly documented makes it much easier :) 21:33:17 stgraber: yeah, no, that's fine. I missed the last meeting, so I don't have all the context for what happened. :) 21:33:34 [topic] Check up on community bugs (standing item) 21:34:16 I'm not sure what's needed in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/174375 21:34:18 Launchpad bug 174375 in Launchpad itself "Distribution drivers permissions may need redesign" [Low,Triaged] 21:34:19 I forget where these would be filed? 21:34:20 Oh. 21:35:07 soren: giant URL linked from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda 21:35:33 kees: You've been so good at copying agenda items from there that I haven't even looked at it this meeting :) 21:35:49 hehe 21:36:32 and I don't see what actions TB need to take on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/252368 either 21:36:34 Launchpad bug 252368 in Launchpad itself "Automatically associate DD and DM accounts with GPG keys in keyring packages to allow DDs to use the Launchpad Email interface" [Low,Triaged] 21:36:55 I'll move ahead unless someone has something to add to these. 21:38:21 those two are longish-term tracking bugs, I don't think there's anything to add right now 21:38:43 [topic] additional topics? 21:38:52 okay, anything else to bring up for this meeting? 21:38:54 nothing from me 21:39:10 just making sure we have PAE on the agenda for our next meeting 21:39:13 other than that, nothing else for me 21:39:57 I'd like to find someone to drive that topic. I'll see if either jdstrand or slangasek are interested. 21:40:09 [topic] Select a chair for the next meeting 21:40:43 I think mdz would be alpha-next. who did the last meeting? 21:40:57 I did but that was because you weren't around at the time 21:41:07 next one should be pitti 21:41:11 * kees shakes his fist at DST 21:41:15 not mdz? 21:41:23 (alphabetical order from https://launchpad.net/~techboard/+members) 21:41:32 Oh, real names? 21:41:41 How.... analog. 21:41:44 Ok. :) 21:41:46 let's stick with irc nicks :) 21:41:48 that's what I've been using so far, maybe it conventiently matched to IRC nicks :) 21:41:59 I can chair, no problem 21:42:38 well, since mdz isn't here to accept/decline, let's go with pitti. 21:42:39 thanks! 21:43:41 #endmeeting