12:00:47 <atinmu> #startmeeting
12:00:47 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Jun  9 12:00:47 2015 UTC.  The chair is atinmu. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:00:47 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
12:00:55 <atinmu> who all do we have here today?
12:01:10 * rafi1 is here
12:01:25 <atinmu> #chair rafi1
12:01:25 <zodbot> Current chairs: atinmu rafi1
12:01:53 <atinmu> #info roll call
12:02:36 <atinmu> #topic Roll Call
12:02:49 <atinmu> #info Agenda https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-bug-triage
12:03:05 <atinmu> seems like apart from rafi1 no one is here
12:03:16 <atinmu> we will wait for another couple of minutes
12:03:42 * ndevos _o/
12:04:03 <atinmu> #topic Action Items from last week
12:04:24 <atinmu> #topic ndevos needs to look into building nightly debug rpms that can be used for testing
12:04:32 <atinmu> ndevos, I believe this is done right?
12:04:47 <atinmu> ndevos, I see that patch is merged
12:04:51 <ndevos> atinmu: not completely, lets keep it on the list to remind me :)
12:05:01 <atinmu> ndevos, ok :)
12:05:14 <ndevos> providing the ability to build with debug is one step, there are more coming
12:05:36 <atinmu> #action ndevos to still follow up on building nightly debug rpms
12:05:46 <atinmu> moving on
12:05:51 <atinmu> #topic Group Triage
12:06:34 <atinmu> #info 13 new bugs that have not been triaged yet : http://goo.gl/WuDQun
12:06:52 * atinmu locks 1228142
12:08:03 * ndevos locks 1229639
12:08:35 * rafi1 locks 1229331
12:08:45 * atinmu locks 1229139
12:09:14 * ndevos locks 1229422
12:10:08 * atinmu locks 1229226
12:10:58 * rafi1 locks 1229127
12:12:27 * atinmu locks 1228785
12:13:02 <rafi1> atinmu: ndevos : what about setting documentation flag for doc bugd (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1229127, ?
12:14:46 <ndevos> rafi1: we dont use that flag, it does not add any value
12:15:09 <rafi1> ndevos: Ok i will remove it
12:15:15 * ndevos locks 1228785
12:15:21 * ndevos fails
12:15:48 <ndevos> rafi1: yeah, dropping it is fine, keeping it does not matter either :)
12:15:59 <rafi1> ndevos: ok
12:16:18 * ndevos locks 1228696
12:16:39 * atinmu locks 1228111
12:17:13 * rafi1 locks 1228157
12:18:32 * rafi1 locks 1229228
12:18:50 * atinmu is left with 1226788, so locks it
12:19:50 <rafi1> ndevos: Do you know who is maintain Ubuntu packages ? (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1229228)
12:19:54 <atinmu> ndevos, 1226788 was triaged last week and was marked needinfo, Csaba didn't get back, so no action required
12:21:03 <ndevos> rafi1: assign it to kkeithle for now
12:21:25 <ndevos> atinmu: yeah, leave it that way
12:21:30 <rafi1> ndevos: sure I will do that
12:24:09 <atinmu> so we are done with the Group Triage
12:24:13 <atinmu> #topic Open Floor
12:24:46 <atinmu> #info just FYI, there are 47 bugs which are still in Needinfo and not closed
12:24:55 <rafi1> ndevos: what about automated handling of bug state ?
12:25:21 <rafi1> ndevos: we can include triage keyword also :D
12:25:23 <ndevos> rafi1: ah, yeah, we need to follow up on that, I did not get (or see) any responses to my email
12:25:24 <atinmu> #info https://goo.gl/08IHrT tracks all the bugs which are in needinfo
12:25:31 <ndevos> wait, atinmu responded
12:26:14 <rafi1> ndevos: atinmu : can we put a keyword "triaged" if someone sends a patch ?
12:26:17 <ndevos> yes, automatically move bugs from MODIFIED to ON_QA when there is a alpha/beta release, not nightly
12:26:21 <rafi1> atinmu: ndevos : for a bug
12:27:12 <atinmu> ndevos, my concern is we can not move bugs to ON_QA based on nightly builds, that looks incorrect to me
12:27:15 <ndevos> rafi1: actually, "Triaged" would not be needed to set, we would move the bug to POST - and our search queries only list "NEW && !Triaged"
12:27:38 <atinmu> ndevos, rest of the flow looks good to me
12:27:48 <rafi1> ndevos: ok then it is fine
12:27:58 <ndevos> atinmu: yeah, I understand, and am happy with only doing ON_QA for alpha/beta releases
12:28:23 <atinmu> ndevos, shyam had some concerns there where he opts to do it manually, but I have seen enough negligence on this flow
12:28:55 <ndevos> atinmu: yes, and we will have a way to opt-out :)
12:29:15 <atinmu> ndevos, so I would be happy if this gets automated even though I try to do it manually and achieve 100% success criteria :)
12:29:37 <rafi1> atinmu: +1
12:30:26 <ndevos> atinmu: even Shyam confessed he did not always update the status, you are on a 100% hitrate?
12:30:53 <atinmu> ndevos, I do not do well on Modified->ON_QA
12:31:08 <atinmu> ndevos, rest I do, probably 99% :D
12:31:26 <ndevos> atinmu: hehe, and MODIFIED -> ON_QA would be a release-maintainers task
12:31:59 <atinmu> ndevos, and I have a reputation of doing this thing for other's patches :)
12:32:38 <ndevos> I would like to see: 1. tag a release, 2. push to Gerrit, 3. Jenkins catches the new tag, 4. Jenkins builds tarball, 5. Jenkins modifies bugs (ON_QA or CLOSED)
12:33:53 <atinmu> ndevos, +1 for sure
12:35:30 <ndevos> I guess we need to start implementing the auto-bug-update?
12:35:31 <atinmu> so that's it, any thing else?
12:36:34 <ndevos> nothing from me :)
12:36:42 <atinmu> rafi1, how about you>
12:36:50 <rafi1> atinmu: nothing for me
12:36:59 <atinmu> so that brings an end to this meeting
12:37:07 <atinmu> thanks ndevos rafi1 for your help
12:37:15 <atinmu> ndevos++ rafi1++
12:37:23 <atinmu> #endmeeting