19:13 #startmeeting DMB meeting 19:13 Meeting started Mon Jan 30 19:13:59 2017 UTC. The chair is sil2100. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 19:13 19:13 Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 19:14 #topic Review of previous action items 19:14 rbasak to get mapreri's PPU additions done by the TB (carried over) <- is it still in progress? 19:15 I've not managed to address anything for the DMB yet this year - sorry. I believe it's still in progress. 19:15 IIRC, the TB did do something for us. I need to find out where it is. 19:16 Ok, so I guess the other one is carried over as well 19:16 Let's skip to the next point then 19:16 #topic Package Set/Per Package Uploader Applications 19:16 I see we still have David's application on the agenda 19:17 Does anyone know if the vote for that got finalized on the ML? 19:17 I at least don't remember getting the rest of the votes for that one 19:17 I don't remember seeing any further votes on that. 19:18 Yeah, no replies AFAICS. 19:18 rbasak, sil2100: ISTR my PPU addition also required voting. 19:18 when did those happen? 19:19 I don't think single additions require a vote, right? 19:19 Just one DMB member, if he decides it's fitting, can do the permission changes - or am I wrong? 19:19 I think (and said) otherwise. 19:20 AFAIK, a packageset addition can be done by one DMB member verifying that the proposed new package meets the packageset criteria in the description. 19:20 But I'm not aware of anything like that for PPU. 19:20 Ah, indeed 19:20 You might be right 19:20 Yeah, I'm reporting due to what rbasak told me privately, given that I completely fail at finding a through description of DMB workflows :) 19:20 There may be a policy I don't recall or never read about. 19:20 All I know is https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperMembershipBoard/KnowledgeBase 19:21 But, I think a vote for mapreri should be straightforward. 19:21 oh, consider that I'm DD requiring PPU for a package I maintain, that might streamline the process for this particular case. 19:22 Should we vote? We don't have a quorrum so it'd have to go through the ML as well 19:22 if only I had a vote I'd vote for you mapreri.\ 19:22 Do we have a list of what mapreri can already upload? 19:23 rbasak: pbuilder and libreoffice-dictionaries are in my PPU list from main; then I'm also MOTU. 19:23 chiluk: :) 19:23 mapreri: how long have you had those? 19:23 rbasak: iirc early December 2016 19:24 Ah, OK. 19:24 Indeed: 19:24 Archive Upload Rights for mapreri: archive 'primary', source package 'pbuilder' 19:24 Archive Upload Rights for mapreri: archive 'primary', source package 'libreoffice-dictionaries'Archive Upload Rights for mapreri: archive 'primary', source package 'pbuilder' 19:24 mapreri: how long have you been maintaining inkscape in Debian? 19:24 rbasak: yeah, recently. 19:24 Uh, double-paste I guess 19:24 uh 19:24 some time 2015 i think 19:24 2015? 19:24 OK 19:25 my first thing in the changelog is 2014 19:25 I'm ready to vote then. Shame we don't have quorum :-/ 19:25 (but we can do a partial vote now and try to finish it on the ML later) 19:25 Yeah, let's vote, I'll push the rest to the ML 19:25 rbasak: (if it's still interesting) [ Mattia Rizzolo ]\n * debian/control: add myself to Uploaders => Apr 2015 19:25 #vote for mapreri to gain additional PPU rights for inkscape 19:25 Please vote on: for mapreri to gain additional PPU rights for inkscape 19:25 Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1/-1/+0 #channelname) 19:26 +1 19:26 +1 received from sil2100 19:26 +1 19:26 +1 received from rbasak 19:26 cyphermox: you still around? 19:28 sil2100: rbasak from KB "DDs who are PPU through the normal process can apply by email to have their access extended to further packages they (or a team they are a member of) maintain. This only requires one DMB member to agree in order to pass." 19:28 Ah 19:28 Oh 19:28 #endvote 19:28 Voting ended on: for mapreri to gain additional PPU rights for inkscape 19:28 Votes for:3 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0 19:28 Motion carried 19:28 sounds like it's a pass mapreri 19:28 OK, done then. Sorry mapreri, I could have just done it when you first asked. 19:29 Oh. Well, guess all learned something today :) 19:29 Should I add an action item for each of us to look through the KB again? ;) 19:30 it's all the way at the bottom.. no one reads that far. 19:30 Anyway, let's continue 19:30 Thank you, anyway! 19:30 mapreri: you're welcome! 19:30 rbasak: will you handle that? 19:30 Does someone want to take an action to sort that with the TB? 19:30 Sure. 19:30 Thanks :) 19:30 #topic Ubuntu Core Developer Applications 19:31 sorry, i was on the phone 19:31 #subtopic Dave Chiluk 19:31 chiluk: could you introduce yourself? 19:31 https://wiki.ubuntu.com/chiluk/CoreDevApplication 19:31 I've been working for Canonical as a Sustaining engineer for the last 4 years fixing Ubuntu advantage customer issues. 19:32 many of which don't result in uploads. 19:32 I've had a LP id since 2008, and I think I started with Ubuntu in 06.. 19:32 so it's been a while. 19:32 I mostly fix packages in main, hence the Coredev app instead of MOTU. 19:33 and I also mostly do SRU's and not development uploads. 19:33 actually probably 80% of my uploads are SRUs. 19:33 which makes getting fixes out a real bear.. 19:34 since I currently need two other devs to approve any of my fixes. 19:34 I think that's most of it. 19:34 Two questions: 1) what are your goals with respect to upload rights; and 2) is not having core dev blocking you at the moment, apart from uploading SRUs, and if so, how? 19:35 IOW, are you asking for core dev just to fix the SRU problem? 19:35 rbasak: 1) I'd like upload rights so I no longer have to harass existing core devs. 19:36 2.) it is blocking me at the moment. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qemu/+bug/1655225 19:36 Launchpad bug 1655225 in qemu (Ubuntu) "Under heavy load qemu hits bdrv_error_action: Assertion `error >= 0' failed" [Medium,New] 19:36 is a good example 19:36 mostly I feel that me not having core dev puts an undo burden on the other core devs in the U.S. Timezones. 19:37 as I'm part of a larger team with few core devs. 19:37 Are you familiar with the conversation with - slashd I think? 19:37 rbasak I am. 19:38 and rbasak I'm not sure if that would be useful. 19:38 I'm sorry I haven't addressed that yet. 19:38 But I am interested in your opinion. Please go on. 19:38 rbasak, I'm also TIL on a few packages .. 19:38 (I'm sorry I have to run in 20 minutes, otherwise I'd chat for longer right now) 19:38 rbasak, also I'm not sure if having SRU only upload is even possible given the structure of teams in LP. 19:39 I do like the general idea, but I don't think it's doable given the current structure of development in Ubuntu. 19:39 unless there's something that LP can do that I'm not aware of. 19:40 My concern is that based on your application I feel that your experience is quite narrow. I would like to hear what others think of this kind of case. I appreciate the pain and I want to fix that. But does that mean it's appropriate to change ACLs bits to wide open? 19:41 chiluk: I have a question regarding a recent discussion I saw on #ubuntu-devel - it seems one of your merges didn't have a correct changelog, right? 19:41 I'm really quite torn, and I think the answer to that question is bigger than just me or a few people on the DMB. 19:41 sil2100: yes that is correct. 19:41 chiluk: why was that? Did you put non-remaining changes into the 'remaining changes' part by mistake? 19:41 And I'm interested to hear what some really-long-time Ubuntu devs think. 19:41 (like, new changes) 19:42 sil2100: it was a merge I did this morning that I was TIL on. and yes it was a mistake... the change still existed, but it had been merged into debian.. 19:42 Ah, ok 19:43 sil2100: I also do my best to get the corresponding dd or previous UCD to do the upload... which is part of the reason slangasek caught that one. 19:44 rbasak what other things do you think I need to broaden my experience? 19:45 I guess another reason I'd like to get coredev is so that I can manage series tracks in bugs. 19:46 I think there's another team for that, but coredev is definitely included in that group. 19:47 exuse me for a sec, but I need to make sure my dog is not being eaten by a coyote. 19:47 well, everyone makes mistakes in changelogs every once in a while, or in merging anyway. I usually first go through making changelog and then ripping things out if it shows that they are in fact merged or no longer require 19:48 chiluk: during your work on packages, did you have a lot experience with dealing with autopkgtests, proposed migration and the like? 19:48 chiluk: I think if I were to filter SRUs out of your endorsements and your sponsored uploads, it would be a bit thin. I'm not sure we'd give core dev to a hypothetical applicant with that application. 19:48 Now, it may be that Ubuntu devs say "yes but that's fine", and that's an open question that I'm not sure about. 19:48 I intend to prioritise getting that thread started about this. 19:50 sil2100: I did have to deal with autopkgtest failures with my core-utils upload, and possibly a few others. 19:50 but there are only a few. 19:50 chiluk: did you always make sure that the packages that were sponsored for you made it to the release pocket? 19:51 always.. 19:51 that's part of our teams process. 19:51 I need to run very soon. 19:51 we don't close our customer cases, until our package uploads hit the -udates archives. 19:51 Ok, I had one more question, but rbasak maybe you want me to start the vote now? 19:51 rbasak, additionally we are usually the first to do verification on the uploads as well.. 19:52 I would like to defer my vote for now, pending any outcome of the thread. I'm sorry I have not followed up on that yet. I will prioritise doing that. 19:52 Ok 19:52 Especially now that there are two blocked on it. 19:52 I'm sorry for the pain and I really want to unblock you, but I also feel that it's a bigger issue that we should resolve, and that it's important for us to be consistent. 19:52 In this case what I would propose is to take the vote to the mailing list in that case 19:52 rbasak: completely understood. 19:53 I just feel this is the next logical step for me to become more efficient.. and for the rest of the team to be more efficient by not having to micro-manage my uploads. 19:53 There everyone will be able to think his decision though 19:53 chiluk: ok, one semi-technical question - let's say you work on a package (or maybe sponsor some upload for someone) where you add a new binary dependency to a package 19:53 chiluk: to be clear, I'd be happy with you uploading SRUs without a sponsor. 19:54 Based on your application. 19:54 I'm just not sure that core dev is the right step, and that's what I'd like wider opinion on. 19:54 thanks rbasak 19:54 chiluk: what would be the first few things you'd need to check in such a case? 19:54 I'm going to run as I need to be somewhere. 19:54 rbasak: see you o/ 19:54 Sorry I couldn't help more today. 19:54 o/ 19:55 sil2100: add to debian/control, check for additional dependencies, then check for other packages that depend on the package I changed... 19:55 manifest for iso's may need to change as well. 19:55 also rebuilding may be necessary for all related packages 19:55 depending on the change. 19:55 chiluk: ok, now let's say the package you work on is in main - does that opt for some additional change? 19:55 I mean, additional check? 19:56 yes.. if the dependency is in universe 19:56 That's what I wanted to hear 19:56 that universe package may have to be pulled into main as well... 19:56 I haven't had to do that yet. 19:56 but I'm aware of the restrictions related to it. 19:56 It very frequently happens with packages that Canonical is upstream for 19:56 Anyway 19:57 fortunately I will rarely be the uploader for those. 19:57 Ok, those are all questions from me 19:57 cyphermox: any questions? 19:57 If not, I guess let's move this to a mailing thread and do the vote there 19:57 I'm ok with that. 19:57 infinity can reject me there. 19:58 because infinity. 19:58 Noo, Adam's not like that! 19:58 He's a good guy, really 19:58 For realz 19:58 Anyway, thanks for showing up and sorry for not being able to sort it out here 19:58 sil2100: i know... I just like to give him crap. 19:58 ;) 19:59 #endmeeting