2007-01-11 Meeting Log

[David Farning]

Hey guys,

It looks like my last couple of post hijacked the colorzilla thread.
opps.

To make a long story short --

I hope the Freddy got the word out that I had my gallbladder removed
last week.  It seems that I damaged it back at Ranger school in 1999 and
it finally gave out a few weeks ago.  It probably didn't help that I ate
like a glutton this holiday season.


In light of the above.  A.  If I'm not around I hope things continue and B.
I really dislike centralized decision making. Looks like we need make sure that we are decentralized.

First, anyone want to have their name added
to the Launchpad administrators list.

I'll go through the minutes and provide my thoughts. 

On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 18:23 +0000, Alex Latchford wrote:
> --> You are now talking on #ubuntu-mozillateam
> <Yawner> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Meetings
>  set up an agenda for today's meeting
> --> FreddyM (n=eddie at adsl-68-255-104-111.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net) has
> joined #ubuntu-mozillateam
> <FreddyM> hello everyone
> --- FreddyM is now known as Admiral_Chicago
> <Yawner> Howdy
>  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Meetings
>  I have set up the agenda here..
>  who is Adri2000?
>  we have a new friend?
> <Admiral_Chicago> apparently
>  what keeps happening to the topic?
> <Yawner> hmm dunno
>  set set it again?
>  you set it again after the channel was regsister?
>  registered even, typing today is appalling 
> --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Admiral_Chicago
>  Admiral_Chicago has changed the topic to: Home of the Ubuntu Mozilla
> Team | Meeting at 17 UTC, Agenda can be found here
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Meetings
> <Admiral_Chicago> going to make this channel +t etc
> <Yawner> i thought it was?
> <Admiral_Chicago> i think it goes away I quit
>  me too
> --- #ubuntu-mozillateam :You need to be a channel operator to do that
> <Admiral_Chicago> Yawner: try it now
> --- #ubuntu-mozillateam :You need to be a channel operator to do that
> <Yawner> setting the topic?
>  I couldnt do it before
> --- ChanServ removes channel operator status from Admiral_Chicago
> <Yawner> David is chairing tonights meeting tonight?
>  god, I need something today..
> <Admiral_Chicago> not sure, I haven't seen the agenda yet
> <Yawner> Anything to add to the agenda?
> <-- Admiral_Chicago has quit ("Lost terminal")
> --> Admiral_Chicago
> (n=eddie at adsl-68-255-104-111.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net) has joined
> #ubuntu-mozillateam
> <Yawner> Anyone about?
>  Meeting should be starting soon
> <Admiral_Chicago> yes
> <Yawner> gnomefreak?
> <Admiral_Chicago> Adri2000: pin
>  ping*
> <Yawner> David said he could make it today yes?
> <Admiral_Chicago> yes he did
> <Yawner> aha ok
>  well I am hanging about listening in on the Ubuntu Dev Meeting
>  so I dont mind waiting
> <gnomefreak> ok im here
> <Yawner> aha good
> <gnomefreak> sorry was smoking ;)
> <Yawner> fair enough
> <Admiral_Chicago> so should we start or wait for daniel
> <Yawner> give David 5 minutes, then start
> <Admiral_Chicago> can do
>  okay let's get started
>  https://launchpad.net/~freddymartinez9/+karma
>  haha, oops
>  hhtps://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Meeting
> <Yawner> lol yes
> <gnomefreak> htps://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Meeting
> <Yawner> lol
>  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Meetings
> <gnomefreak> damn
>  ty
> <Yawner> Ok, first on the agenda..
>  Getting the Mozilla Team approved.
> <Admiral_Chicago> okay, we are on Launchpad
>  we contacted bug squad
>  registed the channel
>  what else to we need?
> <Yawner> according to the disclaimer on..
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam we need to be approved by the CC
> and/or TB
> <Admiral_Chicago> hmm, gnomefreak how should we go about this
>  the way things works are official teams and "unofficial" teams
> <gnomefreak> we really dont
>  loco teams need to be
> <Admiral_Chicago> so something like MOTU is and official
>  approved loco teams get more benefits than non-approved locos etc.
> <Yawner> so this is not something we really to worry about?
>  guess not then..
> <Admiral_Chicago> no
> <gnomefreak> from what i gathered from last CC meeting yesterday only
> loco teams need to be approved since we are not loco teams we have
> nothing to worry about.
> <Yawner> Okay, works for me
> <gnomefreak> i will look into it alot furthere to find out other
> things but i have started 2 other teams

The team is fully approved!  We do not need to go through formal cc
aproval but I have contact all of the necessary folks and gotten their
blessing.

Daniel Hobach  -- He is the official Ubuntu teams coordinator.
Simon Law -- Official Ubuntu bug Guy.
Jono Bacon -- official ubuntu Community Guy.
Ian Jackson -- former Firefox maintainer.
Kees Cook -- current Firefox uploader.

Even have heard back from

Mark Shuttleworth - The boss
Matt Zimmerman - CEO

all have offered their support and approval.

My biggest concern is that what we do will be received by the outside
community as Ubuntu policy.  So we will really have to tread lightly as
we set our policies.  

> <Admiral_Chicago> btw, is anyone logging this?
> <gnomefreak> no
> <Yawner> no
> <gnomefreak> we can try to get a log bot in here to log it but again
> it will be a few days
> <Yawner> yes, thats next on the agenda
> <Admiral_Chicago> I'll keep the log
> <Yawner> ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> who should we talk to about the bot. I assume
> Seveas, is that correct?
> <Yawner> Yes, I would assume
> <gnomefreak> no
>  sehas one the official log bot is ubuntulog ran by fabio
> <Admiral_Chicago> okay, so he would be our contact
> <Yawner> ok, noted
>  Freddy if you want to chair I will minute
> <Admiral_Chicago> minute?
>  sure I'll chair.
> <gnomefreak> i will get up with him after the meeting
> <Admiral_Chicago> sounds good, so John will talk to fabio about the
> bot.
> <Yawner> ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> about the Wiki now. what do you see some of the
> problems
>  personally, I think we have too much information spread out
>  for example, I always have problems finding common responses to bug
> reports

Any luck figuring out how the bots works?
> <gnomefreak> asking him now meeting just adjorned
> <Admiral_Chicago> personally, I think we should have a Mozilla Team
> page, for helping people like us, then a page for other users.
>  take a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam

I agree completely.  The pages started somewhere between a personal
braindump, scraps of information that I have gather as tomboy notes, and
a copy of the desktop bugs pages.

> <Yawner> I agree, I am not a big fan of the Quick Links section
> <Admiral_Chicago> i don't think me neither. We need to look at this
> like a new user / person interested in the team
> <Yawner> yes, I think the links to upstream should be hidden in
> another page further back
>  perhaps through a swimming upstream page
> <Admiral_Chicago> yes. a MozillaTeam/TeamResources page
> <Yawner> yes, I feel that there should be all the links you really
> need to triage reports quickly from /MozillaTeam directly
> <Admiral_Chicago> no, that's what I mean. We should do a BugResources
> type page that will help users triage bugs
> <gnomefreak> +1 on that
> <Yawner> +1

I am starting to think of three distinct sections growing from the home
page: Users, triagers, and Developer resources.

>  Adri2000 Admiral_Chicago
>  if you put out the layout then Freddy then we can all can write it
> when we can the time
> <Admiral_Chicago> this is where we would include
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Bugs
> <Yawner> ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> also, we need to break up pages by Fx, TB etc
>  i think you started that Alex, but we need to push that further
> <Yawner> Hmm. I would also have to with that
> <Admiral_Chicago> I'll make a guide line and email it to the team.
>  Then we can start merging / changing things.



>  okay, this is the part that I wanted to get to: Rejecting Bug Reports
> <Yawner> ok
> <gnomefreak> we also need a NewThunderBird wiki
> <Admiral_Chicago> it seems we have 600+ bugs open against Mozilla
> products
>  gnomefreak: ? what do you mean
> <gnomefreak> the one we had was taken out for some damn resaon
>  Admiral_Chicago: like to install tb 2.0 on edgy
> <Admiral_Chicago> oh like the page Fx page I rewrote: Gotcha
> <gnomefreak> simular to
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FirefoxNewVersion
> <Admiral_Chicago> I'll put that in the minutes
> <-- Admiral_Chicago has quit ("Lost terminal")
> --> eddie (n=eddie at adsl-68-255-104-111.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net) has
> joined #ubuntu-mozillateam

I would like to start move the mozilla stuff that is spread out (and
sometimes outdated) from around the wiki and forums under the mozilla
team umbrella.

Also like to start working with the forum ambassadors to start merging
some of the knowledge in the forums into some user wiki pages.  

> <eddie> sorry closed oout
> <Yawner> Hello
> --- eddie is now known as Admiral_Chicago
> <Yawner> I am making up the minutes as we go along
> <Admiral_Chicago> Thanks Yawner
> * gnomefreak doing a bunch of thigns i shouldnt be :(
> <Admiral_Chicago> do you have the log before I closed out? If so, mail
> that to me after the meeting
>  okay, what the hell do we do with all these crash reports
>  I really think we should close all these 30 day old bugs, that would
> first

I think the 30 days is a a reasonable amount of time to wait before
closing bug that the reporter has not responded to requests for
additional information.  Generally responses come back in the first days
or so if they are going to.  But let's wait 30 days to be polite.
Almost no responses came in after 30 day.  

>  secondly, crash reports aren't really bug reports
> <Yawner> I disagree with that, we still need to keep bugs open
> relating to Dapper LTS
> <Admiral_Chicago> no I mean that are requested more information that
> aren't responded to
> <Yawner> aha ok
>  I think that we need to close all of the 1 time crash reports, ones
> that are not reproducible, as they are not bugs.
>  But reoccuring crashes we should keep open obviously.
>  so this should be one of the first questions we should ask to
> crashers
> <Admiral_Chicago> I've been going through the old bugs and closing
> them that aren't responding as you may have seen
> <Yawner> yes

Crash reports are different beasts because we should be able to recreate
stack traces which will tell us exactly where the problem is.  The crash
report tools are really new so don't always work as advertised.

I'll follow up with a more through blurb on crash report in the next few
days.

> <Admiral_Chicago> In the future, we may need to just have people doing
> certain bugs, I'm better with Fx bugs so I can do more
>  but I don't want to do that yet.
> <Yawner> I would like to see that in the future
> <Admiral_Chicago> https://bugs.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+packagebugs
>  as we can see, we have a lot. Firefox has the number of the Beast and
> everything
> <Yawner> I think we need to work on expanding the team a little
> <Admiral_Chicago> i'll get to that in a but
>  bit*
> <Yawner> and also perhaps see if a BugDay can concentrate on FF
> <gnomefreak> i wouldnt split jobs
> <Admiral_Chicago> as a general if your team member asks for more
> information and it doesn't get meet, please close the bug report. I've
> seen that not happen on a few, probably because we weren't formed yet
>  no spliting jobs? okay. perhaps we can come back to the idea when we
> have more members
> <gnomefreak> that depends on the info given and time
>  Admiral_Chicago: yes

I am think that some degree of specialization/splitting of
responsibility will be necessary in the long run.  Firefox is evil.  The
browsing experience requires interaction with many subsystem to work
correctly.  Nextworking, desktop intergration, localization, flash,
gnash, ..., audio, video, jvm...

We will need people with knowledge in all of the above areas.

 
> <Admiral_Chicago> Yawner: there is a HugDay coming up, we can use to
> triage like mad.
> <gnomefreak> Admiral_Chicago: right now we dont have enough memebers
> to split jobs. we would also need a link for each job
> <Admiral_Chicago> also, new members that are helping triage are
> recruitable
> <Yawner> yes
>  so we are agreeing we need more members
>  no spliting of jobs
> <gnomefreak> yes and i might have a way to get some
> <Admiral_Chicago> gnomefreak: i know that, I wasn't saying immidietly
> after the meeting, however I know we have different experience with
> apps, so are better at triaging some packages
>  how is that
> <gnomefreak> email to ubuntu-users kubuntu-users bugmail adn devel
> <Admiral_Chicago> there was an email to buglist already
>  i can mail kubuntu-users
> <gnomefreak> inly bug list
>  lol
>  only.
> <Admiral_Chicago> oh that's true
>  I can put it in UWN 28
> <gnomefreak> Admiral_Chicago: i did it to those lists for the -xgl
> team :)
> <Admiral_Chicago> so it worked?
> <gnomefreak> its now well over 100 memebers within 2 weeks we had 100
> <Admiral_Chicago> nice
> <gnomefreak> it worked for that team yes
>  hasnt worked that well for -ase
> <Admiral_Chicago> ase?
> <gnomefreak> but i have alot of work to do there
> <Yawner> ok
> <gnomefreak> american south east
> <Yawner> so what should I minute for this?
> <gnomefreak> send emails to Ml about the team with some links
> <Admiral_Chicago> team members are lists: kubuntu users, ubuntu users,
> devl, bugmail for more members
> <gnomefreak> yay my sound works :)
> <Yawner> okay
> <gnomefreak> Admiral_Chicago: you gonna do the -usr lists?
>  i will take the rest if you want. just paste on pastebin your speech
> so i can keep it alike
>  most things that i have to do has to be today :)
> <Admiral_Chicago> yes I'll so the user lists.
> <gnomefreak> ok i am gona file bug in LP later today for the bit
> <Yawner> Hey guys can we step back a bit
> <gnomefreak> bot
> <gnomefreak> Yawner: yes
> <Yawner> go over 'When and why should we reject reports'
>  exactly
> <gnomefreak> anything without details after 30-60 days
> <Yawner> ok
> <gnomefreak> if the user attaches crash report leave it open
> <Admiral_Chicago> non-reproduceable, in-responsive, non-enough
> information (after asking for more of course) but that goes into the
> previous one
>  1 time crashes

I would suggest even leaving one time crash report open until we learn
how to deal with crash report... if they have good, complete crash
reports.


> <Yawner> ok.
> <gnomefreak> Yawner: example you file bug i ask for backtrace within
> 30 days if you havent posted it i close it
> <Yawner> ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> also i almost forgot one
>  webpages: Fx looking "bad" on one webpage isn't really a bug against
> all of FX
> <gnomefreak> no???

We need to be careful with 'looking bad' issues because there are
specific ways that Debian/Ubuntu can screw up a page.  Often this is
related to the ubuntu font libraries used.   When triaging I run a
windows session in a vm and a debian session in a second vm to idenitify
Ubuntu specific issues. and issues that need to be pushed upstream.


> <Admiral_Chicago> it may be a problem with the webpage code, it may be
> a problem with the plugins etc
> <Yawner> agreed
> <gnomefreak> font remdering issue is normally in ubuntu build of ff
>  its happened a few times thats one i can pull off top of head
> <Admiral_Chicago> right, but I don't mean that, it's usally something
> about the web page
> <Yawner> yes
>  like 'The colours hurt my eyes'
> <gnomefreak> ah ok
> <Yawner> thats not a FF bug I dont think
> <Admiral_Chicago> i don't doubt that there are issoues with Fx
> redering Somolian fonts or something like that, but rendering a box in
> one webpage with JS or flash isn't a bug

We also need to be careful here because a legal yet obscure js or flash
widget can cause Fx to crash.  These show up most often that I have seen
when the js of flash tries to interact with an audio or video subsystem
in an advanced yet seldom used manner.  

> <gnomefreak> if it only happens on one page yes i agree
> <Yawner> Aha going to add something onto the agenda
> <Admiral_Chicago> okay i'll check it
> <Admiral_Chicago> Yawner: is that enough for your minutes?
> <gnomefreak> ok contiune i will catch up i have to leave room for a
> few
> <Yawner> yes
>  continue
>  Artwork I think is up next
> <Admiral_Chicago> I have an idea for a logo, the Fx logo with the
> ubuntu logo merged
>  http://www.chrismclaren.com/blog/wp-content/images/2006/07/ubuntu.jpg
>  the fox inside of the circle
> <Yawner> yeah, sounds good
>  perhaps draw up a spec for this?
>  who would we need to talk to?
> <Admiral_Chicago> yes, I'll play around with gimp and mail it out to
> the tam
>  team
> <Yawner> Thing is that we are the Mozilla Team
>  not the Firefox Team
>  maybe something with the Dinosaur?
> <Admiral_Chicago> lol, okay
>  i'll take ths dino from mozilla foundation
>  err
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation
>  and mess around with it
> <Yawner> ok
> <gnomefreak> do you plan on using logo for LP too?
> <Admiral_Chicago> we can do many types of logos and play with them
>  we can take a poll or something
>  for LP, I think David is the one that can change that
> <gnomefreak> yep

Sorry, using gimp to turn the firefox icon into a 24X24 PNG was my
artistic limit. 

> <Admiral_Chicago> Yawner: put that in the minutes, to ask him about it
> <Yawner> ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> okay, lastly, the high priority bug list

I was just approved on the QA team so I can set priorities.  We will
need to get others approved as soon as possible.  

> <Admiral_Chicago> Yawner: maybe you want to explain what that means
> <Yawner> well, I get annoyed by bugs that have been there for years
>  14911 for example
>  has about 40 duplicates, keeps on cropping up and it would make our
> life easier to hound the upstream developers to try and get it fixed
>  A list of bugs that are to be fixed with x days/weeks/months etc..

I too am interest in developing upstream relationships to help sort out
these issues.

Over the years, debian/Ubuntu Fx has deviated greatly from upstream.
This has cause a good deal of stress and burnout in the past.  Both the
Debian and Ubuntu patch sets are huge and unwieldy.  Now there is the
firefox/iceweasle issue to wrestle with.

> <gnomefreak> 14911 is upstream isnt it
> <Yawner> within
>  I believe so
>  ARGB visuals with Flash
> <Admiral_Chicago> give me a sec
> <gnomefreak> ah yes that one
> <Admiral_Chicago>
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/14911
> <gnomefreak> that is stricly a flash bug i believe
> <Yawner> I haven't gone through it as such, but I feel we should have
> a list of bugs that have high numbers of duplicates
>  so they can be fixed quickly
> <gnomefreak> flash 9 fixes the issue it looks like and flash 9 was
> backported to edgy iirc
> <Admiral_Chicago> keep a list of "often reported / dupicated / needs
> error"
>  gnomefreak: it was i think
>  Adri2000 Admiral_Chicago
> <Yawner> Admiral_Chicago: Yes that is what I meant
> <gnomefreak> why that is still open i dont know
> <Yawner> if flash 9 fixes the issue then thats ok
>  but we need to write a reponse for Flash 7 users who still get the
> issue, telling them to update to Flash 9
> <gnomefreak> it really should be filed against flash no ff

I am hoping that mozillateam will deal with all of the packages
necessary for a good browser experience.  So I would like to catogorize
issues as ff, flash, jvm what ever and deal with them all. 

> <gnomefreak> Yawner: we cant do that really
> <Yawner> well when Flash 9 goes gold?

> <gnomefreak> flash9 is in backports and backports are not supported
> <Yawner> hmm ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> should be in the next few weeks that beta 3 comes
> out btw. offtopic
> <gnomefreak> and ther eis no way it will make it into supported repo
> for edgy/dapper
> <Admiral_Chicago> we could point it out and say "it's not supported
> but many users say it helps them
> <Yawner> hmm, so we are stuck with bugs like that until the user
> updates the OS?

Versions are going to be a pain in the butt.

> <Admiral_Chicago> use at your own risk type thing on the wiki
> <gnomefreak> checking on flash right now see what we can do with that
> bug
>  now unless upstream flash adds the fix into flash 7 we might beablet
> o close that issue but still waiting for the person working on flash
> <Yawner> Do we agree that a list like this would be useful?
> <Admiral_Chicago> Yawner: do you want to do the page? Not now, after
> we restructure the wiki
> <Admiral_Chicago> yes i think so
> <Yawner> yes ok
>  Next?
> <Admiral_Chicago> i think thats all
> <Yawner> Ok, meeting closed?
>  gnomefreak: ?
>  Any other business?
> <gnomefreak> no im ok with how it went. im setting up the email as we
> speak and im trying to think of the mail lists that should get the
> info
> <Yawner> aha ok
> <Admiral_Chicago> I'm done.
> <Yawner> going to smarten up the minutes, I will send you the logs in
> a sec Freddy
> 

Thanks
again
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mozillateam/attachments/20070117/9c3042a0/attachment.pgp