FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Masters Of The Universe

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-01-2008, 09:56 PM
"Richard A. Johnson"
 
Default MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

Hey everyone!

Here is a briefing of today's MOTU meeting:
---------------------------------------------------------------
RENAME MOTU-UVF
The motu-uvf team will now look at taking on the name of motu-release from this
point forward.

SWITCH FROM INTERDIFF TO .DIFF.GZ
The preferred process, which is not a policy, will be to create and link to
a .diff.gz for new upstream releases which are not yet in Debian.

NEW MEETING TIMES ROTATION
The new meeting rotation for MOTU meetings will be 04:00 UTC, 12:00 UTC, and
20:00 UTC.

NEXT MEETING
February 15, 2008 at 04:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting on Freenode.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Full meeting minutes can be reviewed at
https://wiki.kubuntu.org/MOTU/Meetings/2008-02-01

Thanks to everyone who showed up!

--
Richard A. Johnson
nixternal@kubuntu.org
GPG Key: 0x2E2C0124
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 02-04-2008, 06:57 AM
Daniel Holbach
 
Default MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Richard A. Johnson schrieb:
> RENAME MOTU-UVF
> The motu-uvf team will now look at taking on the name of motu-release from this
> point forward.

I haven't been able to attend the meeting, but I mentioned in two
mailing list threads that the term "MOTU Release team" might raise
expectations beyond approving Feature Freeze requests and that having a
MOTU Release Team would be great but required more thinking in advance.
Was there any discussion about that specific concern?

Have a nice day,
Daniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHpsVdRjrlnQWd1esRAhYjAJ4uq6RDO7oD1IsMqRdbtR V+nC3dGgCdFbpF
KH+zqaw6nRudpMV9YuIIxSQ=
=WuPr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 02-04-2008, 02:10 PM
Stefan Potyra
 
Default MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

Hi,

Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 08:57 schrieb Daniel Holbach:
> Richard A. Johnson schrieb:
> > RENAME MOTU-UVF
> > The motu-uvf team will now look at taking on the name of motu-release
> > from this point forward.
>
> I haven't been able to attend the meeting, but I mentioned in two
> mailing list threads that the term "MOTU Release team" might raise
> expectations beyond approving Feature Freeze requests and that having a
> MOTU Release Team would be great but required more thinking in advance.
> Was there any discussion about that specific concern?

yes, there was a short discussion about it, see [1], 20.05-20.11h.

Cheers,
Stefan.
--
[1]: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2008/02/01/%23ubuntu-meeting.html
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 02-04-2008, 02:35 PM
Daniel Holbach
 
Default MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stefan Potyra schrieb:
> yes, there was a short discussion about it, see [1], 20.05-20.11h.

Relevant part of the log:

geser but wouldn't people expect from motu-release more than it really is?
ScottK For Gutsy, motu-uvf was active helping manage things up through
release.
ScottK No one complained and I think it helped a lot with a good end
game for Universe.
ScottK I'm good with either motu-freeze or motu-release.
ScottK FF is the first step in release management for Universe.
sistpoty ScottK: so you think that (the team formerly known as) motu-uvf
should in fact care with release matters?
ScottK sistpoty: I do.
ScottK sistpoty: We did it for Gutsy and it worked well.
sistpoty hm... I guess the goals are quite similar in fact
sistpoty (for a release team and handling uvf-requests)
ScottK It's really the same kind of risk/benifit tradeoff, just with
different focus as the release gets closer.
nixternal or what was formally called uvf-requests I guess
sistpoty so I don't have any objections to motu-release

I don't think there's anything wrong with having a MOTU Release Team,
here's what I think such a team might deal with:

- Freeze decisions (UVF, Final Freeze, NEW packages, etc)
- Planning of transitions
- Liaison with the QA team in regards of getting people involved in
fixing certain kinds of bugs
- Liaise with Release Team (ubuntu-release)
- Setting Release 'Goals'

You see what I mean: the agenda spans not only the last eleven weeks of
the release but much more than that. In addition to approving all kinds
of requests, there'd be more general planning and talking to others
involved.

I absolutely believe we can lift this weight in an organised effort.
Especially with Hardy being an LTS and more people getting involved,
it'd be important to have somebody in the position of identifying what
needs fixing and coordinating the whole lot of us. :-)

If it should be the 5 people in the re-dubbed ~motu-release team, I
don't know. Let me know what you think.

Have a nice day,
Daniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHpzCwRjrlnQWd1esRAqriAJ9rxZbimouwdtwzceP+U+ Nq7WRsdwCbBj+j
5mYKv9JoisuKyPhWNkN2Q50=
=xyvB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 02-04-2008, 07:19 PM
Scott Kitterman
 
Default MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

On Monday 04 February 2008 10:35, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Stefan Potyra schrieb:
> > yes, there was a short discussion about it, see [1], 20.05-20.11h.
>
> Relevant part of the log:
>
> geser but wouldn't people expect from motu-release more than it really is?
> ScottK For Gutsy, motu-uvf was active helping manage things up through
> release.
> ScottK No one complained and I think it helped a lot with a good end
> game for Universe.
> ScottK I'm good with either motu-freeze or motu-release.
> ScottK FF is the first step in release management for Universe.
> sistpoty ScottK: so you think that (the team formerly known as) motu-uvf
> should in fact care with release matters?
> ScottK sistpoty: I do.
> ScottK sistpoty: We did it for Gutsy and it worked well.
> sistpoty hm... I guess the goals are quite similar in fact
> sistpoty (for a release team and handling uvf-requests)
> ScottK It's really the same kind of risk/benifit tradeoff, just with
> different focus as the release gets closer.
> nixternal or what was formally called uvf-requests I guess
> sistpoty so I don't have any objections to motu-release
>
> I don't think there's anything wrong with having a MOTU Release Team,
> here's what I think such a team might deal with:
>
> - Freeze decisions (UVF, Final Freeze, NEW packages, etc)
> - Planning of transitions
> - Liaison with the QA team in regards of getting people involved in
> fixing certain kinds of bugs
> - Liaise with Release Team (ubuntu-release)
> - Setting Release 'Goals'
>
> You see what I mean: the agenda spans not only the last eleven weeks of
> the release but much more than that. In addition to approving all kinds
> of requests, there'd be more general planning and talking to others
> involved.

Given that this is motu-release for Hardy, the last 11 weeks is pretty much
all it CAN cover at this point. I think this is a good list for Hardy +1
planning that we ought to pick up (maybe have a motu-release for Hardy +1
appointed before the next UDS).

> I absolutely believe we can lift this weight in an organised effort.
> Especially with Hardy being an LTS and more people getting involved,
> it'd be important to have somebody in the position of identifying what
> needs fixing and coordinating the whole lot of us. :-)

The discussion at the meeting was mostly about the enhanced role in the
release endgame that we did in Gutsy and wanting to do that again.

> If it should be the 5 people in the re-dubbed ~motu-release team, I
> don't know. Let me know what you think.

For what we discussed, I think 5 is fine. For Hardy +1 if we expand even more
to earlier in the process then we should discuss it. I'd say we ought to
figure out what we're going to do and then decide how many people we need to
do it.

Scott K

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 02-04-2008, 10:10 PM
"Emmet Hikory"
 
Default MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

On Feb 5, 2008 5:19 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday 04 February 2008 10:35, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > I don't think there's anything wrong with having a MOTU Release Team,
> > here's what I think such a team might deal with:
> >
> > - Freeze decisions (UVF, Final Freeze, NEW packages, etc)
> > - Planning of transitions
> > - Liaison with the QA team in regards of getting people involved in
> > fixing certain kinds of bugs
> > - Liaise with Release Team (ubuntu-release)
> > - Setting Release 'Goals'
> >
> > You see what I mean: the agenda spans not only the last eleven weeks of
> > the release but much more than that. In addition to approving all kinds
> > of requests, there'd be more general planning and talking to others
> > involved.
>
> Given that this is motu-release for Hardy, the last 11 weeks is pretty much
> all it CAN cover at this point. I think this is a good list for Hardy +1
> planning that we ought to pick up (maybe have a motu-release for Hardy +1
> appointed before the next UDS).

While I agree entirely that motu-release should have a larger role
than handling freeze exceptions, I'm inclined to agree with Scott that
for hardy, this team is best positioned to handle the necessary
approvals to meet the release goals.

Discussion should continue about what is expected from a MOTU
Release team, and interested parties should be involved for hardy+1
starting much earlier. pre-summit would be good, but even pre-DIF
would be acceptable, assuming that interested parties had already been
preparing their agendas.

--
Emmet HIKORY

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:00 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org