2010Feb10 - Ubuntu Wiki

Source: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Meetings/2010Feb10

2010Feb10

See UbuntuStudio/Meetings for other meetings.

Agenda and Minutes

Call to order in #ubuntustudio-devel at 7pm (19:00) UTC Feb 10 2010 stochastic, persia, abogani, scottl attended along with a few non-dev types to observe
Agenda amendments Persia suggested adding status check against Debian for syncs/merges
Jack into Main scottl noted that MIR has been filed - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionReportJACK persia reported that a MIR backlog existed stochastic agreed to preemptively prepare patches for packages that depend on libjack-dev to prepare getting packages in before the FF persia committed to follow up with a few MIR people to facilitate a review of the JACK MIR persia suggested designating an Active Release Delegate at which point stochastic toyed with the idea of volunteering as the delegate lastly under this point perisa noted that we had 8 days to get MIR approval and upload patches for packages with JACK support before the FF
RT or low-latency kernel plan abogani remarked that UKT apparently does not appear to be interested in a -lowlatency kernel and are releasing a -preempt instead abogani worried about communication deterioration and persia offered to continue discussions with technical assistance from abogani at this point abogani and persia appeared to speak in tongues using words as SLUB/SLAB, CONFIG_TREE_PREEEMPT_RCU=y, FTRACE and TICKLESS persia commented that he would reply to rtg about TICKLESS results (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2010-January/008570.html) abogani replied that rtg had already seen the results it was decided that abogani should place his -lowlatency kernel in the Ubuntu Studio ppa (https://launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-dev/+archive/ppa?field.series_filter=lucid) and apparently would keep his -rt kernel in his own ppa abogani stated that the only -rt kernel available is 2.6.31 since a patch for 2.6.32 is not available at this time (it should be noted that lucid will have 2.6.32 kernel) persia noted that Ubuntu Studio users prefer the -rt kernel to which stochastic replied that we can make adjustments based on user feedback and offer -rt in lieu of -lowlatency from the ppa
status check against Debian for syncs/merges persia noted a nifty website for Debian sync/merges - http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/multidistrotools/ubuntustudio.html scottl committed to talking to Debian Multimedia about merging/syncing Hydrogen-0.9.4 persia hopes to merge/sync hydrogen by Sunday but needs outcome of scottl's discussion with Debian Mulitmedia to know which version stochastic volunteered to handle the qjackctl merge scottl might try to use khashayar's hydrogen-0.9.4beta2 version to build the released version if he has time over the weekend (REVU comes first) persia stressed that we should double check all required LV2 syncs before FF per the UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion matrix stochastic agreed to double check
REVU process - which packages need attention? scottl pointed at UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion and noted that we have four packages currently in REVU persia agreed to look at them soon scottl will work on the zynjacku comments stochastic agreed to make any required changes for the remaining three packages built by falk-t-j persia mentioned that he would really like Ingen included and might try to package it stochastic commented that he was working on it
Website plan stochastic is to schedule a meeting for those interested parties in order to develop a unified direction and/or commitments persia favored leveraging as much shared stuff as we can without breaking things scottl to coordinate with jussi about having a dedicated forum (Multimedia -> Ubuntu Studio) at Ubuntu Forums (need to put in on the forum agenda for next meeting) as a forum moderator, stochastic offered to attend the forum meeting also the tentative date for the new website is set to coincide with lucid RC
Plymouth persia noted we should do a plymouth theme stochastic mentioned that he had looked into it before but nothing materialized perisa noted that the UIFreeze isn't until 4th March it was generally agreed to worry about it later (but not much later)

Call to order in #ubuntustudio-devel at 7pm (19:00) UTC Feb 10 2010

stochastic, persia, abogani, scottl attended along with a few non-dev types to observe
Persia suggested adding status check against Debian for syncs/merges
scottl noted that MIR has been filed - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionReportJACK
persia reported that a MIR backlog existed
stochastic agreed to preemptively prepare patches for packages that depend on libjack-dev to prepare getting packages in before the FF
persia committed to follow up with a few MIR people to facilitate a review of the JACK MIR
persia suggested designating an Active Release Delegate
at which point stochastic toyed with the idea of volunteering as the delegate
lastly under this point perisa noted that we had 8 days to get MIR approval and upload patches for packages with JACK support before the FF

scottl noted that MIR has been filed - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionReportJACK

abogani remarked that UKT apparently does not appear to be interested in a -lowlatency kernel and are releasing a -preempt instead
abogani worried about communication deterioration and persia offered to continue discussions with technical assistance from abogani
at this point abogani and persia appeared to speak in tongues using words as SLUB/SLAB, CONFIG_TREE_PREEEMPT_RCU=y, FTRACE and TICKLESS
persia commented that he would reply to rtg about TICKLESS results (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2010-January/008570.html)
abogani replied that rtg had already seen the results
it was decided that abogani should place his -lowlatency kernel in the Ubuntu Studio ppa (https://launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-dev/+archive/ppa?field.series_filter=lucid) and apparently would keep his -rt kernel in his own ppa
abogani stated that the only -rt kernel available is 2.6.31 since a patch for 2.6.32 is not available at this time (it should be noted that lucid will have 2.6.32 kernel)
persia noted that Ubuntu Studio users prefer the -rt kernel to which stochastic replied that we can make adjustments based on user feedback and offer -rt in lieu of -lowlatency from the ppa

persia commented that he would reply to rtg about TICKLESS results (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2010-January/008570.html)

it was decided that abogani should place his -lowlatency kernel in the Ubuntu Studio ppa (https://launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-dev/+archive/ppa?field.series_filter=lucid) and apparently would keep his -rt kernel in his own ppa

persia noted a nifty website for Debian sync/merges - http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/multidistrotools/ubuntustudio.html
scottl committed to talking to Debian Multimedia about merging/syncing Hydrogen-0.9.4
persia hopes to merge/sync hydrogen by Sunday but needs outcome of scottl's discussion with Debian Mulitmedia to know which version
stochastic volunteered to handle the qjackctl merge
scottl might try to use khashayar's hydrogen-0.9.4beta2 version to build the released version if he has time over the weekend (REVU comes first)
persia stressed that we should double check all required LV2 syncs before FF per the UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion matrix
stochastic agreed to double check

persia noted a nifty website for Debian sync/merges - http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/multidistrotools/ubuntustudio.html

persia stressed that we should double check all required LV2 syncs before FF per the UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion matrix

scottl pointed at UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion and noted that we have four packages currently in REVU
persia agreed to look at them soon
scottl will work on the zynjacku comments
stochastic agreed to make any required changes for the remaining three packages built by falk-t-j
persia mentioned that he would really like Ingen included and might try to package it
stochastic commented that he was working on it

scottl pointed at UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion and noted that we have four packages currently in REVU

stochastic is to schedule a meeting for those interested parties in order to develop a unified direction and/or commitments
persia favored leveraging as much shared stuff as we can without breaking things
scottl to coordinate with jussi about having a dedicated forum (Multimedia -> Ubuntu Studio) at Ubuntu Forums (need to put in on the forum agenda for next meeting)
as a forum moderator, stochastic offered to attend the forum meeting also
the tentative date for the new website is set to coincide with lucid RC

scottl to coordinate with jussi about having a dedicated forum (Multimedia -> Ubuntu Studio) at Ubuntu Forums (need to put in on the forum agenda for next meeting)

persia noted we should do a plymouth theme
stochastic mentioned that he had looked into it before but nothing materialized
perisa noted that the UIFreeze isn't until 4th March
it was generally agreed to worry about it later (but not much later)

Log

[19:02] Okay who all is here for the meeting?

[19:02] <ScottL_> here

[19:03] <ScottL_> but I'm at work so I'll be popping in and out as required

[19:03] abogani, persia, TheMuso, jussi01 ???

[19:04] im here for the meeting

[19:04] here

[19:04] * persia is about

[19:05] well the first order of business is adjustments to the meeting agenda UbuntuStudio/Meetings/2010Feb10 Take a look, what's missing or out of order?

[19:06] It is ok for me

[19:06] Missing is status check against Debian for syncs/merges.

[19:06] (probably should be before or after REVU item)

[19:06] I agree, seems very similar to REVU talk. Let's say before.

[19:08] If we need to amend as we go along, don't hesitate to shout.

[19:08] Jack into Main is the first real topic.

[19:08] Where do we stand? Are we just waiting for the MIR bug to get some attention?

[19:09] <ScottL_> MIR was filed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jack-audio-connection-kit/+bug/510481

[19:09] Ubuntu bug 510481 in jack-audio-connection-kit "[MIR] Jack-audio-connection-kit" [High,New]

[19:09] In the foundations meeting today there were reports that there was an MIR backlog.

[19:10] <ScottL_> since this will effect several other packages (i.e. building against JACK) can this possibly be rushed?

[19:10] persia, any idea how big that might be?

[19:10] * persia digs a bit

[19:11] ooh, looks like there's 44 bugs related to the approval team

[19:11] but a bunch have Fix Committed statuses

[19:11] I count 28 that need review.

[19:12] I guess the main question that we have to tackle is what can we do to further the situation

[19:13] Should we prepare patches for the pulse audio, alsa, xine, etc... packages that depend on libjack-dev?

[19:13] Do we have a delegate who attends the Release Meetings?

[19:13] stochastic: That's probably worthwhile, and attach the patches to the bugs listed in the MIR (but don't actually submit for sponsorship yet and clearly indicate they wait on the MIR)

[19:14] Okay, I can probably tackle that.

[19:14] <ScottL_> i can help also, we can do like we did on the lv2 apps

[19:14] Well, it's only 4 bugs Smile :)

[19:15] As far as I'm aware nobody attends Release Meetings, maybe TheMuso?

[19:15] It's unlikely, given that they are held at 15:00 or 16:00 UTC.

[19:15] ScottL_, I'd prefer you spend your energy on REVU items

[19:15] <ScottL_> stochastic: not a problem

[19:16] Getting an active release delegate would be good. Someone who idles in #ubuntu-release and attends the release meetings on Fridays.

[19:16] Raising that we needed the MIR reviewed as a blocker for FF may help.

[19:16] But whoever volunteered would have to have some time to spend making sure we're in good shape, etc.

[19:17] For now, I'll volunteer to poke a couple MIR folk and see if we can get a review.

[19:17] <ScottL_> FF = firefox ?

[19:17] FeatureFreeze

[19:17] The point after which we can't add new software, new upstream versions, etc.

[19:17] <ScottL_> lol, that makes more sense :P

[19:18] I'm considering volunteering persia, but I'm worried about the extra time commitment as I'm stretched pretty thin recently.

[19:18] persia, is there anything about Jack into main that will be blocked by FF?

[19:19] Yes. If it doesn't happen before FF, and the enablement patches aren't applied before FF, we'd need to get a freeze exception from the Release Managers.

[19:19] So we have about 8 days to complete this entirely, including all the uploads.

[19:19] fun.

[19:20] Alright, well I think that's all we can say about Jack into main for now. Agreed?

[19:20] I don't think a Release Delegate can integrate with the Release Team quickly enough to make a difference at this point (which is why I'm volunteering to hunt up an MIRer), but we ought have one anyway.

[19:21] stochastic: After the meeting, if you have time, let's chat about Release Team stuff.

[19:21] * stochastic joins #ubuntu-release

[19:21] Next agenda item: Kernel

[19:22] abogani, I've only heard good reviews regarding your low-latency kernel

[19:23] stochastic: Yes.

[19:23] has there been any talk from the kernel team regarding it?

[19:23] Unfortunately UKT don't have any interest in add these configuration settings (-lowlatency).

[19:23] So they release a -preempt.

[19:24] kernel but I don't if it is enough for us.

[19:24] I've been watching that thread, and I had the impression that there was still discussion open.

[19:25] persia: No it is close for me. That discussion will end up into a flames.

[19:25] abogani: I'm happy to continue it, if you can help me understand what I'm talking about Smile :)

[19:26] Seems to me that UKT have a commitment for their -preempt kernel n they want obey to it.

[19:26] s/n/and

[19:26] In any case their preempt could be enough for use.

[19:26] I think https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2010-February/008713.html is the last message in the thread.

[19:26] And I chatted with rtg about this last week.

[19:26] the -preempt kernel, I assume is better than vanilla for our purposes?

[19:27] I think we can get 32-bit support if we can make a strong case for 32-bit studio use.

[19:27] stochastic: Yes.

[19:27] I'm not sure we need ftrace. SLUB/SLAB requires strong argument

[19:28] I don't understand CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=y

[19:28] Tim said clearly that only developers use FTRACE. But they enable it into production kernels!

[19:28] And TICKLESS mostly just needs a testcase to demonstrate the issue.

[19:28] abogani: It's used for ureadahead tracking, which is the awkward bit.

[19:29] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2010-January/008570.html

[19:30] ureadahead?

[19:31] It's the bit that loads all the stuff needed to boot quickly into RAM to speed boot time.

[19:31] In any case we can select their -preempt flavour as default kernel for Studio (if they release the i386)

[19:31] okay, so as a tentative game plan, can we keep up the push for a -lowlatency kernel, but plan to include -preempt as an -rt replacement should that fall through, and in the release notes mention the -lowlatency PPA for those who need the better performance

[19:31] i would want release in PPA aslo -rt

[19:32] abogani: Thanks for the pointer to the results. I'll reply to rtg after the meeting about TICKLESS.

[19:32] I was under the impression there were no RT patches for 2.6.32?

[19:32] persia: He already see that results.

[19:32] I think the PPA should have both -rt and -lowlatency for now. If we can get -preempt close enough, we might be able to drop -lowlatency

[19:32] stochastic: Right not by upstream at least.

[19:32] okay

[19:32] persia: make sense

[19:33] <ScottL_> abogani: after the meeting can you point me in the direction of some information to understand the difference between -rt, -lowlatency and -preempt kernels? for laymen?

[19:33] ScottL_: quick summary: -rt is hard realtime, -lowlatency and -preempt are essentially similar flavours arguing about details in soft-realtime.

[19:33] I placed lowlatency into my PPA. Is it right? Do you prefer the UStudio's PPA?

[19:34] stochastic: Your call, since you're wearing the release hat Smile :)

[19:34] lol

[19:34] tickless is about physical interrupts of timer.

[19:34] Right.

[19:35] Why is there no -preempt 32 bit? What needs to be done to see that happen?

[19:35] stochastic: Sincerely I don't understand.

[19:35] <ScottL_> stochastic: we have time to think about it and talk to themuso don't we before committing -lowlatency to any particular ppa?

[19:35] Also, PPAs aren't limited by FeatureFreeze, so we have time to think about it.

[19:36] abogani, ScottL_, If we're going to use a PPA I'd like to see it be the Ubuntu Studio PPA simply because it will be seen as "official" by beginners

[19:36] even if it's the same code and same uploader

[19:36] Ok I move package from https://launchpad.net/~abogani/+archive/ppa to that PPA.

[19:36] thanks

[19:37] Do you want the same also for -rt?

[19:37] <ScottL_> abogani: i would like to note that your efforts are greatly appreciated

[19:37] what is the -rt patched version coming from? 2.6.31's patches?

[19:38] stochastic: Sorry?

[19:38] how did you make the -rt kernel?

[19:38] if there's no upstream patches available for 2.6.32?

[19:39] stochastic: Yes no patches for .32 at all

[19:39] <ScottL_> i think stochastic is asking if you used the patch from .31 and applied it to .32

[19:39] We'll release 31 for Lucid

[19:39] ScottL: No way.

[19:39] * stochastic really doesn't like that idea

[19:40] abogani: There's a couple things that needed to be backported to make the .31 armel kernels work with lucid. Have you been following that dicussion?

[19:40] I have already done this job in Intrepid and Jaunty with bad results.

[19:40] stochastic: And for reason I suggest to use PPA for rt too,.

[19:41] persia: Sorry no. Can you give me some URL?

[19:41] abogani: I only know a URL for a discussion page. I'll track something down and get it to you.

[19:41] persia: In any case I suspsect that it is specific issue with armel arch.

[19:42] abogani: Actually, no, it's stuff to work with the newest udev and usplash.

[19:42] abogani, I'd just stick to the -lowlatency version in the PPA simply because the -rt will likely be less stable than -lowlatency and people will likely try -rt over some new -lowlatency version, also reports are that -lowlatency is completely capable of the latency times needed

[19:42] persia: udev Uhhh

[19:42] <ScottL_> lol

[19:42] stochastic: We always end up with users complaining if we don't have -rt.

[19:43] stochastic: So -lowlatency and -rt in the same PPA (that is Ubuntu Studio), right?

[19:43] Anyway, I think we've covered the kernel as much as we can in the meeting. It needs work.

[19:43] I'm going to join the discussion with the kernel team, and get the .31 backporting hints to abogani.

[19:43] abogani, let's stick to the -lowlatency one in the Ubuntu Studio PPA

[19:43] abogani is going to push stuff to tht Ubuntu Studio PPA.

[19:43] and put the -rt one in a different PPA

[19:43] for now

[19:44] stochastic: Ok.

[19:44] We can always adjust that based on user reports/requests.

[19:44] yes

[19:44] PPAs are not bound by FF

[19:44] but merging items from Debian is

[19:44] <ScottL_> we might send out a preemptive email also to the users mail list about kernels and such, just so they know what to expect

[19:44] ScottL: Could you give me the URL of Ubuntu Studio PPA, please?

[19:45] Can we move onto status check against Debian for syncs/merges now?

[19:45] <ScottL_> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-dev/+archive/ppa

[19:45] <ScottL_> abogani: ^

[19:46] http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/multidistrotools/ubuntustudio.html is the current state.

[19:46] For FeatureFreeze, we need to make sure we merge anything that has a new upstream in Debian (or take a decision that we're not going to do that).

[19:47] * abogani started to transfer lowlatency into UStudio PPA...

[19:47] Looks like that means work for csound, gimp-plugin-registry, qjackctl

[19:48] Who wants those?

[19:48] * stochastic can't believe hydrogen got updated to 0.9.3-7 rather than 0.9.4

[19:49] <ScottL_> persia: how soon does this need to be done?

[19:49] stochastic: Well, we can update to 0.9.4 if we want. Just coordinate with Debian Multimedia like always.

[19:49] I can probably push gimp-plugin-registry

[19:49] ScottL_: By Tuesday ideally, to give a couple days slack for sponsor review (but bug me about them)

[19:50] csound isn't essential

[19:50] <ScottL_> persia: sigh, i want to help but I can't commit to that timeframe

[19:50] <ScottL_> persia: stochastic: I could contact debian multimedia though about hydrogen

[19:51] ScottL_: OK. I can probably do the hydrogen merge, but I'll wait on that outcome to determine which version to merge.

[19:51] Ideally, I'd merge on Sunday, but I'm not sure if that will be able to happen Smile :)

[19:51] Worst case, we can request a freeze exception for that.

[19:51] ScottL_ there has been no git work by debian multimedia for hydrogen yet, so it's probably not going to get done by Tuesday

[19:53] I guess because nobody else volunteered I'll take on the qjackctl merge too.

[19:53] Cool.

[19:53] That's it for merges/syncs: looks like we're in fairly good shape.

[19:53] persia, all that needs to be done is a merege request bug opened and subscribe the uploaders?

[19:54] any essential details needed in those bugs?

[19:54] Yeah, and ping me to remind me to be the uploader Smile :)

[19:54] debdiff against Debian, new changelog from Debian. That's about it.

[19:55] okay, onto items awaiting REVU

[19:55] <ScottL_> side note about hydrogen: he's got a /linux/debian directory under the source code directory and it doesn't play well will pbuilder, or buildd - I emailed Allessio (i think that's his name) but he hasn't responded

[19:55] <ScottL_> REVU - UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion

[19:56] <ScottL_> we have four packages in REVU and the only activity has been on zynjacku which I need to work on

[19:56] I can definitely hit all those again soon. Maybe not until Sunday (depends on my schedule), but no later than that.

[19:56] <ScottL_> stochastic: do you know if faltx will be responsive if I bug #ubuntu-motu about checking other packages

[19:57] I'd also really like to see ingen: and will take a swing at it if I have more time.

[19:57] ScottL_ if you get a MOTU to review one of Falktx's packages I'll happily make the changes and re-upload

[19:57] poke me

[19:57] <ScottL_> i will definitively get the first comments for zyjacku resolved this weekend

[19:57] <ScottL_> stochastic: i will

[19:58] persia, I was working on ingen so I can try to push it for FF

[19:58] stochastic: OK.

[19:58] I've been swamped lately, but things will clear up by this Friday, so the weekend can be Ubuntu madness for me

[19:59] though that's just when the olympic party starts outside my doorstep, so I may do the odd drunken coding night next week ;P

[19:59] heh

[20:00] last item on the agenda is the website plan

[20:00] I have one more question regarding TaskLV2Inclusion : did we get everything from Squeeze we wanted?

[20:00] this is on my shoulders, but it's has no hard deadline

[20:01] Do any of those need syncs?

[20:01] persia, yeah, I think everything got synced

[20:01] OK. Someone ought just double-confirm before FF.

[20:01] sure, I'll take that on

[20:01] <ScottL_> lv2 related: I'd really like to get lv2vocoder done also this weekend and submitted to REVU

[20:02] <ScottL_> i had really hoped to get more done but my ignorance hampered me...but I'm getting better, therefore quicker next time

[20:03] stochastic: Do you need any input on the website, or is anything blocking you?

[20:03] ScottL_: lv2vocoder would be nifty, but only if there is extra time Smile :)

[20:03] For the website, I'd like to get a meeting organized specifically to discuss it. As there seems to be conflicting ideas of what direction it should take (i.e. use our own hosting, create forums, etc...) and I don't want to arbitrarily push my opinions

[20:04] ScottL_, I'd push what's in REVU first.

[20:04] I'm generally in favour of leveraging as much shared stuff as we can without breaking things.

[20:04] <ScottL_> yes, REVU first then lv2vocoder

[20:05] Managing our own forums is probably especially expensive. Hosting is a bit more complex, because of the limitations of our current hosting.

[20:05] I too think that our team is stretched thin enough without worrying about extra web maintenance, but it comes at an administrative cost.

[20:06] Agreed.

[20:06] So I think the hosting decision should depend on the total time requirement to deal with the website.

[20:06] <ScottL_> if we can get a dedicated forum (saying Ubuntu Studio rather than Multimedia) at Ubuntu Forums would be great (it's all about branding and identity)

[20:06] And be decided by those that maintain the website.

[20:06] there are also some people that wanted to help with the site (like detrate) that I'd like input from

[20:07] <ScottL_> if we can't use the currently available hosting and include our own modules (drupal) then we should host our own

[20:07] ScottL_: It's very likely we can get that sort of branding: just add it to the agenda for the next forums meeting, and talk to them about it.

[20:08] jussi was talking about how he'd be able to do that, so ScottL_ you should probably co-ordinate that with him

[20:08] I'm also a moderator of the Multimedia Production section so I can attend that meeting to talk about it

[20:09] <ScottL_> persia: stochastic: I can do those items

[20:09] Just to make sure, please correct me if the conclusions below are not correct:

[20:09] 1) stochastic to organise a meeting specifically about website hosting, to include those who have expressed willingness to work on the website to take a decision on hosting

[20:10] 2) ScottL_ to coordinate with jussi01 and the forums teams to get branding support, and stochastic to provide support in the meeting based on current forum role

[20:10] Did I miss anything?

[20:10] I believe that's correct.

[20:10] <ScottL_> sounds like a plan

[20:11] OK. Any other business?

[20:11] I'd also just like to quickly state that the website redesign release date goal should probably be the same as Lucid's release date, but we'll see how that goes at the meeting.

[20:11] I think that's all for the meeting.

[20:12] I'd like to see the new website when lucid RC releases.

[20:13] Just because there's always last-minute things that go wrong.

[20:13] okay

[20:13] oh, one item that just popped into my head: Plymouth

[20:14] We probably want to do a plymouth theme.

[20:14] a while back I was looking into it, but it didn't materialize into anything

[20:14] I assume that can be pushed after FF with an exemption request?

[20:15] I think it falls under a separate deadline

[20:15] * persia checks

[20:15] it's also not a dire thing if we can't get a theme together

[20:16] UIFreeze is 4th March, so we have a bit of time (but not much)

[20:16] Getting the FF exception for a new package that is only UI prior to UIFreeze oughn't be hard.

[20:16] okay

[20:17] I'll look into it again, but I don't think it's a high priority

[20:17] On a fast modern machine with Intel graphics, plymouth shows for about 1 second.

[20:17] Maybe 2 on a bad day.

[20:17] <ScottL_> is it worth summarizing Actions Required from the meeting and who is repsonsible and posting to the dev mailing list?

[20:18] ScottL_ sure. Do you also want to tackle posting the meeting minutes to the wiki?

[20:18] Yes, along with brief paragraphs on each discussion item as minutes.

[20:18] err logs/minutes

[20:18] <ScottL_> I will handle the minutes as well as the required action list

[20:18] * persia generally prefers minutes. Logs are available through ubuntulog

UbuntuStudio/Meetings/2010Feb10 (last edited 2010-02-11 12:27:17 by conr-adsl-209-169-122-85)