14:00:21 <licquia> #startmeeting LSB Bug Triage 2014 May 30 14:00:21 <lsbbot> Meeting started Fri May 30 14:00:21 2014 UTC. The chair is licquia. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:21 <lsbbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 14:01:55 <licquia> #info lsb: 1 reopened, 1 new, 1 needinfo 14:02:14 <licquia> #info fhs: 22 new 14:02:33 * licquia waves 14:03:15 <mwichmann> hey 14:03:39 <licquia> so on the wed call, we had talked about doing a voice channel to get done quicker 14:04:10 <licquia> we had also talked about looking at the "non-gtk" bugs for lsb 5.0 and estimating how long those would take 14:04:35 <mwichmann> okay with the latter, couldn't join on voice yet 14:05:16 <licquia> so far, then, it would be me talking to myself :-) 14:05:33 <mwichmann> less distractions that way 14:05:38 <licquia> heh 14:05:54 <licquia> so perhaps we'll pass on the voice bit 14:06:09 <mwichmann> kay seems ready to join (other channel) 14:06:26 <licquia> she had mentioned that 14:07:52 * licquia gets out his headset 14:07:57 <ktate> sorry, fat fingers this AM 14:08:16 <licquia> np 14:08:56 <licquia> so mwichmann can't do voice atm, and as orc_fedo seems to be silent, it would be just you and me on voice 14:09:32 <licquia> which isn't necessarily bad, but mwichmann being only on chat limits what we can do on voice 14:10:02 <ktate> I can watch chat instead. I'm into bugzilla so can follow along 14:10:12 <ktate> don't mind saving a shoulder here. :-) 14:10:19 <ktate> where phone rests when I'm upstairs 14:10:30 <licquia> ok 14:10:39 <ktate> so we'll wait until someone else wants to join on phone 14:11:02 <licquia> so, on typical triage stuff, all three lsb bugs are bugs we've discussed before 14:11:27 <licquia> and (despite their status) fhs bugs aren't new 14:11:32 <ktate> I searched on 5.0 for the bug list and got something useful looking back. other suggestions for this? 14:11:55 <ktate> search, that is? 14:12:08 <licquia> looking... 14:12:19 <licquia> !lsbbug 3164 14:12:21 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3164 blocker, P1, 5.0, licquia, ASSIGNED , LSB 5.0 Complete Release 14:12:25 <mwichmann> there's one bug, you can trace everything else from 14:12:31 <mwichmann> that one... I was already typing :) 14:12:38 <ktate> thx 14:12:53 <licquia> if you look at that bug, all the other lsb 5 bugs block it 14:13:22 <licquia> "show dependency tree" is typically what i use 14:13:43 <licquia> total of 131 open bugs, which also includes sub-rollups 14:14:08 <ktate> got it 14:14:31 <mwichmann> 125-ish bugs is a lot for something we're hoping to be done with. sigh. 14:14:36 <mwichmann> of course, a bunch will get kicked. 14:14:45 <licquia> then you can "view as bug list" and sort the bugs however you want 14:15:01 <ktate> well, we just gather up the specific list we need and see where it gets us 14:15:19 <licquia> sorting by priority, i get 6 priority 1 bugs that aren't rollups 14:15:34 <ktate> btw, today is the original deadline for getting notifications on what papers are accepted for LinuxCon, so we should know that answer soon also 14:15:48 <licquia> k 14:16:44 * licquia suspects a number of bugs aren't properly prioritized; the gtk+ 3 bug isn't in the list 14:16:53 <mwichmann> indeed 14:17:29 <licquia> !lsbbug 1716 14:17:32 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1716 normal, P1, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , lsbcc should not automatically add -lpthread 14:17:51 <licquia> this has been on our list for a while 14:18:14 <licquia> looking to see the lsb-5.0-specific bits 14:19:11 <mwichmann> I think we just never had confidence in pushing this 14:19:17 <mwichmann> the code change is trivial 14:19:30 <licquia> we did push once, and had to pull back due to build issues 14:19:38 <mwichmann> that sounds right 14:19:45 <mwichmann> though I don't understand why it broke 14:20:21 <mwichmann> brief duck out, then I should be back with full attention, 11pm was apparently late enough for korea, the guy went home 14:20:34 <licquia> k 14:24:00 <mwichmann> back 14:24:06 <licquia> alright 14:24:32 <licquia> i'm going to propose that the pthreads bug not be p1, and that we indeed put it off 14:25:01 <mwichmann> I'm frustrated we can't get this right, but I'm more frustrated if we never ship 14:25:13 <licquia> yup 14:25:33 <mwichmann> doesn't have to be tied to an LSB release anyway 14:26:00 <licquia> true 14:26:14 * orc_fedo arrives late 14:26:47 <licquia> #agreed de-prioritize and put off 1716 14:26:53 * licquia waves to orc_fedo 14:27:40 * mwichmann decides not to vent that we can't fix a rather simple thing in seven years 14:27:45 <mwichmann> so that sentence was NOT venting 14:27:49 <orc_fedo> sound plan 14:27:49 <licquia> heh 14:27:56 <orc_fedo> no audio component? 14:28:10 <licquia> in fairness, we did fix it once, but found it was more complicated than we thought 14:28:20 <mwichmann> I could join now, if y'all want 14:28:27 <licquia> orc_fedo: mwichmann couldn't join via voice, so we stuck to chat 14:28:32 <licquia> but we could do something now 14:28:33 <orc_fedo> no need 14:28:42 <orc_fedo> whatever -0- I will linger 14:28:49 <licquia> k 14:28:58 <licquia> !lsbbug 2303 14:29:00 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2303 normal, P1, 4.1-errata, mats, ASSIGNED , PIE executables should be added to ELF 14:30:08 <licquia> think this is a spec and appchk thing 14:30:19 <mwichmann> yes 14:30:41 <licquia> basically, a certain combination of elf flags that we currently say is wrong should be allowed 14:30:47 <mwichmann> exactly 14:30:54 <licquia> marked as p1; should it be? 14:31:08 <ktate> is it used more than it was 'way back then? 14:31:26 <mwichmann> i think it is 14:31:30 <licquia> yes, more and more 14:31:37 <ktate> I would expect it to be with more dynamic stuff going on 14:31:45 * licquia notes that it also blocks this: 14:31:48 <mwichmann> we'd probably have more problem if anybody were actually checking LSB conforming apps 14:31:54 <licquia> !lsbbug 2857 14:31:56 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2857 normal, P2, 4.1, mats, ASSIGNED , pkgchk and appchk fooled by PIE binaries 14:32:07 <licquia> which, as noted, is p2 14:32:17 <ktate> well, we hope to be advertising more soon. 14:32:25 <licquia> and is actually part of the "to-do" for 2303 14:32:47 <ktate> so p1? 14:32:50 <orc_fedo> we may get to it by then 14:33:00 <orc_fedo> not bug 2303 but the year 14:33:09 <licquia> heh 14:33:22 <licquia> the two bugs should be the same priority, since they're essentially the same job 14:33:45 * licquia notes that 2857 blocks 5.0 appbat for some reason 14:34:04 <licquia> ah, because of samba 14:34:05 <mwichmann> that's because an appbat program is flagged as non-conforming 14:35:12 <licquia> so spec language and some tweaking of misc-test, right? 14:35:31 <licquia> once those are done, the appbat bit becomes irrelevant, as samba will pass 14:35:45 <mwichmann> right, no change needed in appbat 14:36:07 <licquia> maybe a few hours of work? 14:36:21 <licquia> also, are we agreed to keep it p1? 14:37:21 <mwichmann> make it p2 14:37:43 <licquia> k 14:37:48 <mwichmann> I look at p1 as "nobody can proceed without this", and this still is a somewhat limited reach 14:38:10 <ktate> yes, we need to. 14:38:24 <licquia> done 14:38:25 <ktate> restrict it to "essential" in my view 14:38:37 <licquia> and the other blocker is already p2, so that's done 14:38:45 <licquia> !lsbbug 2431 14:38:48 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2431 normal, P1, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , add proper c++ build support 14:39:46 <licquia> "proper throw semantics on standard c calls in c++" 14:40:11 <ktate> not going to happen for 5.0 either? 14:40:15 * licquia sees scary words, like "schema changes", but no real example case 14:40:24 <licquia> so, thinking this needs bumping down too 14:40:53 <licquia> objections? 14:41:01 <mwichmann> realistically, I can't see how we can do this 14:42:11 <licquia> bumped and moved 14:42:29 <licquia> skipping the rollups... 14:42:37 <licquia> !lsbbug 3470 14:42:40 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3470 enhancement, P1, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , RFE: uplift libc version in LSB 14:42:42 <mwichmann> part of the bigger question that we don't really handle c++, just kinda sqish it in 14:42:47 <licquia> right 14:43:10 <mwichmann> been too long, I think the tech work is done, but there are some t's to cross and such 14:43:12 <mwichmann> looking 14:43:27 <licquia> last comment is "fix the dependent bugs" 14:43:43 <licquia> which are: 14:43:49 <licquia> !lsbbug 2432 14:43:51 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2432 enhancement, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , add futimes, futimesat to LSB 14:44:03 <licquia> !lsbbug 3617 14:44:05 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3617 normal, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , RFE: Uplift pthread_attr_setstack version for ppc32/ppc64 14:44:29 <licquia> both being p2 :-) 14:44:58 <mwichmann> looks like 3617 is done, pending someone to verify 14:45:19 <mwichmann> and 2432 was waiting manpage, had a proposal, got some review, and then... ? 14:45:27 <mwichmann> guess I never swept back to it 14:45:43 <licquia> so these are just a matter of checking that the work already done is ok 14:46:03 <mwichmann> just a sec 14:46:07 <orc_fedo> so set as pleasetest and move on? 14:46:11 <licquia> alright 14:46:24 <licquia> orc_fedo: would also propose bumping to p1, since they block a p1 14:46:47 <mwichmann> this is in, so just a review: 14:46:48 <orc_fedo> functionally we do that anywy, but sure 14:46:48 <mwichmann> http://linuxbase.org/snapshotspecs/lsb/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/baselib-futimes.html 14:46:55 <ktate> and uplift -related items are always of interest to developers 14:46:56 <mwichmann> licquia already did, but asked a question 14:47:51 * licquia sees; is this a question we can answer quickly? 14:47:59 <licquia> could possibly close it out 14:49:11 <mwichmann> grrr, spec linkage is not right 14:49:30 * licquia proposes closing 3617 14:50:11 <licquia> if change is applied, and we don't see any problems, should be good 14:51:02 <mwichmann> someone can rootle around at snapshotspecs to check 14:51:02 * licquia takes silence as agreement :-) 14:51:37 <orc_fedo> licquia: no ojjection inf close of 3617 14:52:57 <licquia> yup, see change in navigator 14:52:59 <licquia> closing 14:53:41 <mwichmann> oh, I see, navigator is building a path to 4.1 refspec, so naturally it objects manpage does not say anything (there isn't one) 14:53:54 <mwichmann> that's not really useful, I need a "snapshotspec mode" 14:54:19 <licquia> sounds useful, new bug on navigator? 14:55:04 <mwichmann> yeah, which we won't fix :( 14:55:28 <mwichmann> okay, done research now 14:55:33 <mwichmann> licquia said: According to the glibc manpage, futimes can return EBADF, which makes sense for 14:55:33 <mwichmann> a function working with file descriptors. Should we cover that? 14:55:53 <mwichmann> futimes page references posix utimes, which includes: 14:56:32 <mwichmann> EBADF... but it lists it to a specific function, which is not the one futimes referenced 14:56:42 <mwichmann> do we care about that level of nitpickery? 14:57:00 <mwichmann> The futimens() function shall fail if: 14:57:00 <mwichmann> [EBADF] 14:57:00 <mwichmann> The fd argument is not a valid file descriptor. 14:57:52 * licquia doesn't, at this point 14:57:57 <mwichmann> I think I'm letting us get stalled 14:58:00 <mwichmann> let's call this one done too 14:58:03 <licquia> k 14:58:11 <licquia> then we can close the other one too 14:58:15 * licquia does the things 14:58:24 <mwichmann> if they guy coding the test gets confused, we can open a new bug 14:58:28 <mwichmann> uh, wait.... 14:59:26 <licquia> ok, then that means 3470 has no blockers, any objections to closing it as well? 14:59:48 <licquia> last comment sez to 14:59:52 <mwichmann> thwack it on the head 15:00:04 <mwichmann> probably I haven't got all the docs right to match, but.... 15:00:21 <licquia> ok, moving on 15:00:31 <licquia> !lsbbug 3827 15:00:33 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3827 normal, P1, 4.1-updates, licquia, ASSIGNED , libstdcpp-tests failing to build on some archs 15:01:16 <licquia> that's gotta stick, i think 15:01:29 <orc_fedo> yes 15:01:45 <orc_fedo> that is that wierd arch think on the s390{x} as I recall 15:02:14 <licquia> there are some other weird things; build fails on power under certain circumstances 15:02:28 <licquia> probably a new-gcc-ism 15:02:47 <mwichmann> seems likely 15:02:54 <licquia> more related to builds on f19 and later than the s390 bit 15:03:06 <licquia> anyway, that's a to-do 15:03:07 <orc_fedo> 13 ( 1%) tests FAIL 15:03:08 <orc_fedo> 198 ( 10%) tests UNTESTED 15:03:21 <licquia> orc_fedo: what's that? 15:03:25 <orc_fedo> and that stuppid looking buildroot path /opt/buildbot/tmp/rpm-build/BUILDROOT/lsb-test-libstdcpp-4.1.0-0.20140524.21.lsb1.%{_arch}/ 15:03:28 <orc_fedo> http://www.linuxbase.org/buildbot/builders/libstdcpp-test-s390/builds/22/steps/build/logs/stdio 15:03:45 <orc_fedo> didnt I provide the arch fix in IRC ? 15:03:45 <licquia> ah, the wonderful tet build system 15:04:15 <licquia> orc_fedo: not sure; if so, could you re-post to the bug? 15:04:24 <orc_fedo> will check my logs 15:04:29 <licquia> k 15:04:40 <licquia> !lsbbug 3931 15:04:42 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3931 normal, P1, 5.0, licquia, ASSIGNED , gtk3 gtk.h/gdk.h not buildable 15:04:52 <mwichmann> my attempts to apply that did not work, so I never pushed anything 15:05:02 <licquia> per ground rules from wed call, skipping this one 15:05:04 <mwichmann> still came out broken, but in a different way (of course) 15:05:45 <licquia> ok, that's the current set of p1 bugs 15:06:09 <licquia> skimming p2 bugs, because we know there are some that are probably too low... 15:06:19 <licquia> feel free to propose 5.0 blockers that should be p1 15:07:24 <licquia> !lsbbug 707 15:07:27 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=707 normal, P2, 4.1-errata, mats, ASSIGNED , Uplift OpenGL specs 15:07:49 <licquia> this is done, isn't it? looks like we were looking for feedback that never came 15:08:10 <licquia> propose we declare victory and let people file new bugs if opengl isn't up to snuff in some way 15:08:17 <orc_fedo> #info 3827 updated w pointer to fix in https://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3967 15:08:18 <mwichmann> +1 15:08:25 <licquia> orc_fedo: thx 15:10:12 <licquia> 707 is closed 15:10:16 <licquia> !lsbbug 1391 15:10:18 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1391 enhancement, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , add async I/O interfaces to LSB 15:11:03 <licquia> looks like there's still a problem here to check on; bump to p1? 15:12:01 <ktate> too bad Linux is so dominant in the supercomputer arena. 15:12:44 <ktate> makes getting this one in interesting. 15:12:45 <mwichmann> I don't remember what was up here, hold on 15:13:30 <mwichmann> okay, db problem 15:13:40 <mwichmann> array types are a pain 15:13:45 <licquia> yup 15:15:00 <licquia> so bump? thinking this is probably going to bite us 15:15:43 <mwichmann> might as well 15:15:47 <licquia> k 15:15:59 <licquia> !lsbbug 1761 15:16:02 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1761 enhancement, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , add libncursesw to the LSB 15:16:46 <licquia> basically, this is waiting on a pkg-config program 15:17:02 <mwichmann> summary: it's added, I'm suspicious it's broken, and yes it needs the build-support bits 15:17:12 <licquia> shouldn't be too hard, and makes libncursesw usable from the sdk 15:17:44 <licquia> bump to p1? 15:17:50 <mwichmann> it's another one of a bunch that have "little details" to go (was talking with Kay about this a while back), 15:18:16 <mwichmann> but I don't really get the chance to sweep through these any more, and seemingly neither does anyone else 15:18:29 <mwichmann> I have to take off in a little bit, sadly 15:18:41 <mwichmann> trip prep (leaving tomorrow for SFO) 15:18:49 <licquia> k; i'll keep reviewing here for a bit 15:18:58 <orc_fedo> licquia: I would defer P1 bump as we need to ship and can supplement later 15:19:03 <ktate> sorry, back from real time interrupt 15:19:19 <licquia> might bump some other things, but basically the current p1 list is the "to-do" list 15:19:47 <licquia> leaving 1761 15:19:56 <licquia> !lsbbug 2199 15:19:58 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2199 enhancement, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , RFE: Include libsane interfaces in LSB 15:20:24 <licquia> "we can close this, assuming... no outstanding issue with spec documentation" 15:22:34 <licquia> it's generally a p1 to fix spec issues, so... 15:22:48 <orc_fedo> licquia: may we pause here a moment and have you look in at a pastebin issue from yesterday in main channel ? 15:22:58 <licquia> sure 15:29:58 <licquia> ok, went ahead and bumped that one' 15:30:12 <licquia> looking for more candidates to bump... 15:31:56 <licquia> !lsbbug 3508 15:31:58 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3508 normal, P2, 5.0, dsilakov, ASSIGNED , Implement modularization in LSB 5.0 15:32:27 <orc_fedo> not P1 ... nove on 15:32:49 <ktate> *sigh* 15:33:03 <licquia> !lsbbug 3951 15:33:05 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3951 normal, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , uplift FHS reference to 3.0 15:33:36 <licquia> bumping this one; plan is for fhs 3.0 to go out at the same time 15:34:13 <mwichmann> wait, 3508 is not P1? 15:34:31 <mwichmann> it was pretty much *the* design goal of 5.0 15:34:45 <ktate> that was what the sigh was about. 15:35:03 <ktate> I think it would be extremely helpful to have this in with the mobile guys running around looking at things. 15:35:27 <licquia> thought so too; don't think it's so much "do the thing" as "make sure it's finished" 15:36:11 <mwichmann> yes... it did get turned into a rollup 15:36:21 <ktate> yes, my next topic after this discussion was going to be something like "and now is P2 the 'we still need to do this, even if we're quiet?'" 15:36:34 * licquia bumps it 15:36:39 <ktate> but that's a later discussion 15:37:01 <licquia> ktate: the idea, i think, is "p2 gets pushed off, p1 becomes the task list for 5.0" 15:37:21 <licquia> with the observations re: gtk 3.0 that were discussed on the call 15:38:07 <ktate> licquia: I get it. we just need to talk sometime about what "p2" means and whether they ever get looked at again more or less after 5.0 is out 15:38:38 <licquia> i think they get moved to "5.1"; then the discussion is what happens to 5.1 15:38:51 * licquia does not plan a mass closing at this time 15:39:53 <ktate> yes, too early for any of that discussion. 15:40:54 <licquia> ok, looking at rest, looking for others 15:41:47 <licquia> !lsbbug 3697 15:41:49 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3697 normal, P2, 5.0, licquia, ASSIGNED , need mechanism for lsbcc to include proper headers for uplifted libs 15:42:08 <licquia> this is a mechanical bit in lsbcc that's needed for a few interesting cases 15:42:27 <mwichmann> not happy with the way it happens now 15:42:40 <licquia> proposing it be a p1 15:42:59 <mwichmann> char *lsb30_version_include_paths[] = { NULL }; 15:42:59 <mwichmann> char *lsb31_version_include_paths[] = { BASE_PATH "/include/libpng12", NULL }; 15:42:59 <mwichmann> char *lsb32_version_include_paths[] = { BASE_PATH "/include/libpng12", NULL }; 15:42:59 <mwichmann> char *lsb40_version_include_paths[] = { BASE_PATH "/include/libpng12", NULL }; 15:42:59 <mwichmann> char *lsb41_version_include_paths[] = { BASE_PATH "/include/libpng12", NULL }; 15:43:00 <mwichmann> char *lsb50_version_include_paths[] = { BASE_PATH "/include/libpng15", NULL }; 15:43:29 <mwichmann> it works I guess... 15:43:48 <licquia> sort of; there's no way to build for lsb 5.0 and png12, which is technically allowed 15:44:01 <licquia> maybe this becomes a "post 5.0 update" 15:44:08 <licquia> so, rethinking the priority bump 15:44:23 <licquia> since it's not strictly speaking a specification-related issue 15:44:31 <mwichmann> that's true 15:44:34 <mwichmann> it's an SDK issue 15:45:27 <licquia> !lsbbug 3754 15:45:30 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3754 blocker, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , missing interface definitions 15:45:36 <licquia> think that's clearly a p1 15:46:42 <mwichmann> last event was a downgrade :) 15:46:55 <licquia> and it's bumped 15:47:01 * licquia wonders why 15:47:14 <licquia> ah, "not an issue for the first beta" 15:47:32 <mwichmann> and eight months have passed.... 15:49:30 <licquia> !lsbbug 3724 15:49:33 <lsbbot> licquia: 04Bug http://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3724 normal, P2, 5.0, mats, ASSIGNED , httpConnect() deprecated upstream 15:49:38 <licquia> closing that one 15:50:04 <licquia> it's in; there's a problem with the printing tests, but it's in its own bug, and not release critical 15:51:38 <licquia> ok, think we have a rough work list that doesn't include gtk3 issues 15:52:02 <ktate> so if we pull the p1's we have it. 15:52:10 <orc_fedo> nice -- add a note to mention during next wek's call 15:52:27 <ktate> what do we do about sizing on them? or staging? 15:52:35 <licquia> going to take one more look, but yeah, think so 15:53:13 <licquia> 7 bugs total that aren't rollups 15:53:42 <licquia> ktate: topic for next wed? 15:53:57 * licquia looks at mwichmann, who is turning into a pumpkin as we speak 15:54:09 <licquia> and whose input on the time question is probably vital 15:54:17 <mwichmann> umpf 15:54:22 <mwichmann> which ones again? 15:54:34 <ktate> Mats: how long are you going to be gone? vacation? business? 15:54:47 <licquia> mwichmann: just mentioning that getting a time estimate on p1 bugs probably needs you 15:55:17 <mwichmann> back at my desk thursday 15:55:30 <mwichmann> of course I'm not utterly off internet in the meantime 15:56:00 <ktate> guess the question is how intrusive is looking at the bugs. 15:56:25 <ktate> and then our realizing that an estimate will be the floor. 15:56:32 <mwichmann> the rollup bug number is off my traceback :) 15:56:39 <ktate> as we all know, things can always be worse than they look. 15:56:44 <ktate> 7 total, not all yours 15:56:53 <mwichmann> the modularization bug needs some thought 15:57:06 <licquia> maybe the answer is "pause gtk3, do the other things, then regroup" 15:57:39 <ktate> or take checkpoint on list and sizing next week and see if we have direction yet. 15:58:13 <mwichmann> 3951 is easy unless there's a knock-on effect 15:58:14 <ktate> for other team members who may not have seen the item, LinuxCon call for papers is supposed to have selections made and notifications by today. 15:58:16 * licquia figures doing the things that need doing first shouldn't be a bad thing regardless 15:58:42 <mwichmann> namely if fhs change affects something in the section that references FHS-y things 15:58:54 <licquia> right 15:59:22 <mwichmann> 3754 will come down to decisions what we can leave out (this is the interface doc bug), it's a lot of manpages 15:59:42 <licquia> so, potentially big job 16:00:16 <mwichmann> "forking" the png12 manpages to png15 gets us close there, but then are we going to write the rest? 16:00:39 <mwichmann> what about other things that don't seem to be well documented in upstreams? 16:00:46 <mwichmann> are ALL of those release blockers? 16:01:06 <ktate> or are key ones new issues ;-) 16:01:11 <mwichmann> occurs to me, the go/nogo decisions on some of the dicey libraries need to be p1 16:01:22 <licquia> i think it's a release blocker to decide which ones are release blockers :-) 16:01:37 <ktate> heh heh 16:01:42 <mwichmann> we always said we can defer until last minute, but hopefully we're somewhere in the neighborhood of that now 16:01:48 <licquia> mwichmann: noted, will promote some of the "add foo to lsb" bugs 16:02:06 <mwichmann> I forget, it was png, and ... ? 16:02:27 <licquia> png, tiff, sane, ncursesw, etc. 16:02:38 <licquia> most will be no-brainers 16:02:41 <mwichmann> right 16:02:49 <licquia> png being one of the "brainers" :-) 16:02:54 <mwichmann> I mainly meant the ones giving problems - right 16:03:11 <mwichmann> some don't have png15, some don't have png12 any more, there's no right answer there 16:03:12 <licquia> i'll promote all the open ones 16:03:41 <mwichmann> sane and curses should be okay to include, right? 16:03:41 <ktate> should we have them in a list for next week's call maybe before adding a lot to the list? 16:03:51 <ktate> sanes notes looked like it 16:03:52 <orc_fedo> * nod * 16:04:15 <mwichmann> now I gotta go 16:04:25 <ktate> thx for sticking with us 16:04:34 <mwichmann> trying to get the tape off now 16:04:35 * licquia waves 16:04:48 <mwichmann> maybe rubbing alcohol? 16:04:56 <ktate> or hair dryer 16:04:58 <licquia> can do the list; maybe create a new rollup for "go/no-go" decisions 16:05:05 <ktate> sounds good 16:05:06 <orc_fedo> goo gone 16:05:34 <licquia> ok, anything else? otherwise, i'm going to call the meeting done 16:05:48 <ktate> thx, all for your patience. 16:06:23 <ktate> oh, btw, I will be a part time SUSE employee starting mid-next week 16:06:38 <ktate> but I'll still have some LSB-specific time. 16:06:40 <licquia> excellent 16:06:50 <licquia> #endmeeting