2008/01/16/#launchpad-meeting.txt

=== jamesh_ is now known as jamesh
=== mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch
=== mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell
[15:00] <barry> #startmeeting
[15:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 15:00. The chair is barry.
[15:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:00] <gmb> Nice.
[15:00] <intellectronica> heh
[15:00] <salgado> look at that
[15:00] <barry> hi everyone and welcome to this week's am/eu reviewers meeting
[15:01] <barry> welcome mootbot (for summarizing these meetings)
[15:01] <barry> Rinchen: thanks for telling me about that!
[15:01] <barry> so, who's here today?
[15:01] <flacoste> me
[15:01] <intellectronica> me
[15:01] <bac> me
[15:01] <jtv> me
[15:01] <sinzu1> me
[15:01] <gmb> me
[15:01] <BjornT> me
=== sinzu1 is now known as sinzui
[15:02] <sinzui> me me me
[15:02] <salgado> me
[15:02] <barry> danilos: ping
[15:02] <barry> == Agenda ==
[15:02] <barry>  * Roll call
[15:02] <barry>  * Next meeting
[15:02] <barry>  * Action items
[15:02] <barry>  * Barry's participation in Asia``Pac meetings
[15:02] <barry>  * Queue status
[15:02] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[15:02] <barry>    * danilo mentored by intellectronica
[15:02] <barry>  * Review process changes
[15:02] <barry>    * Tool update
[15:03] <danilos> me
[15:03] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Next meeting
[15:03] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Next meeting
[15:03] <barry> week += 1.  anyone know they will not be here?
[15:03] <BjornT> i won't be there
[15:03] <barry> BjornT: cool, thanks
[15:04] <flacoste> hey danilo!
[15:04] <statik> me
[15:04] <flacoste> welcome aboard!
[15:04] <danilos> hi flacoste
[15:04] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Action items
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Action items
[15:04] <danilos> thanks
[15:04] <barry> i did edit a bunch of wiki pages to update some things based on our new process.  i'm sorry i don't remember which pages :/
[15:05] <barry> === Outstanding Actions ===
[15:05] <barry>  * intellectronica to work on a cover letter template
[15:05] <intellectronica> not done, but as we said last week it will anyway probably wait until mwh is back
[15:05] <barry> intellectronica: right, thanks
[15:05] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Barry's participation in Asia``Pac meetings
[15:05] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Barry's participation in Asia``Pac meetings
[15:06] <barry> so i chaired the asiapac meeting this week, and i think that's going to work out well
[15:06] <barry> i'm going to have to change the time after the florida sprint, but i think it will work out better for those folks anyway
[15:06]  * danilos takes a note to go through all the reviewers wiki pages to learn the important bits
[15:07] <barry> so not much else to say, except that i think we'll have better decision making between the two teams
[15:07] <barry> any thoughts?
[15:07] <barry> or questions?
[15:07] <barry> 5
[15:07] <barry> 4
[15:07] <barry> 3
[15:07] <barry> 2
[15:08] <barry> 1
[15:08] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Queue status
[15:08] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Queue status
[15:08] <barry> the queue doesn't really look too bad.  4 branches in needs-review over the sla
[15:08] <barry> jtv: any word on stub's branch?
[15:09] <jtv> barry: that's going to take a while.  It wasn't urgent.
[15:09] <jtv> I know, I know, we all _want_ it, but...
[15:09] <jtv> Rushing this one might be something we'd regret.
[15:10] <flacoste> jtv: can you nudge jamesh about curtis' branch that you reviewed?
[15:10] <jtv> flacoste: already had
[15:10] <barry> jtv: no worries, thanks for the status
[15:10] <flacoste> then nudge harder :-)
[15:10] <jtv> flacoste: ooh er missus
[15:10] <sinzui> jtv: please push him if he does not nudge
[15:10] <jtv> This is getting needlessly violent
[15:10] <jtv> nudge, budge, BOOM
[15:11] <barry> just don't poke him with a pointed stick
[15:11] <barry> btw, i am totally psyched that the general queue is clear.  i think this means we've fairly successfully cleared our backlog and can get back to on-calls handling most branches
[15:12] <barry> great job everyone!
[15:12] <barry> any other thoughts or comments on the queue status?
[15:12] <intellectronica> ehm
[15:12] <sinzui> I think we have some delinquencies still
[15:12] <intellectronica> i started the day with a branch on my queue which wasn't, in fact finished
[15:13] <sinzui> We have some old branches assigned to reviewer.
[15:13] <intellectronica> not so terrible, but we could maybe think of a way to avoid this, in the future
[15:13] <barry> intellectronica: you mean you started to review it but couldn't finish it, or didn't get to it at all?
[15:13] <bac> intellectronica: i dropped that on you at the end of the day yesterday when i finished on-call.  was that not correct?
[15:13] <barry> sinzui: you mean the 4 branches in needs-review that are old?
[15:13] <intellectronica> i started reviewing it, and when i finished the reviewee told me that actually the branch wasn't finished
[15:14] <sinzui> I mean that looking at jamesh's page, I see many old branches in needs-review
[15:14] <barry> bac: yes, that's correct.  remember a reviewer can always put it back on the rejected queue
[15:14] <intellectronica> bac: it was, but because it missed the on call review yesterday, gavin thought the he can go on working on that branch
[15:14] <barry> intellectronica: oh, that's bad.
[15:14] <bac> intellectronica:  oh...
[15:15] <intellectronica> so maybe we should find a way to get around that. an honest mistake, after all...
[15:15] <gmb> Well, isn't it as much an education issue as anything else.
[15:15] <barry> intellectronica: was the branch big?
[15:15] <intellectronica> gmb: education doesn't work. i mean, look at me :)
[15:15] <gmb> I mean, we know that we pass branches on to the next on-call guy but have we actually told the other developers?
[15:15] <gmb> :)
[15:15] <intellectronica> barry: no, it wasn't terribly big.
[15:16] <bac> i have gotten several comments about "i don't understand this on-call process".  so perhaps some general education is needed.
[15:16] <barry> i feel fairly strongly that we shouldn't pass on branches that are in the middle of a review.  if you're on-call and accept a branch, you're committing to finishing the review.  but it's okay if near the end of your shift you don't take another branch because it's bigger than you'll have time for
[15:17] <intellectronica> maybe if instead of putting it on the next on-caller's queue we put it in the general queue, there's a better chance the submitter will go and check?
[15:17] <barry> [ACTION] barry will communicate the on-call process to launchpad developers
[15:17] <MootBot> ACTION received:  barry will communicate the on-call process to launchpad developers
[15:17] <bac> the branch in question was never given to me as the on-call reviewer.  it went directly to the general queue and i then assigned it, per our agreement last week.
[15:18] <salgado> maybe it went to the general queue by mistake?
[15:18] <intellectronica> bac: oh, in that case, it's simply a mistake the submitter did. and that can always happen
[15:18] <bac> intellectronica: yes, that is the case.
[15:19] <barry> intellectronica: so the problem was that a dev had put a branch on the general queue but continued to work on it?
[15:19] <intellectronica> barry: yes, but i think the reason he did that was because he was confused about the on-call review process
[15:20] <intellectronica> but that's just my guess, i'm not sure if that's really what happened. mistakes do happen regardless of process we use
[15:20] <barry> yep, they do
[15:21] <intellectronica> one thing we did in the past is the "in progress" section, but that's _more_ wiki editing, which nobody likes
[15:22] <barry> intellectronica: yep.  <obdesire>kill PendingReviews</obdesire>
[15:22] <barry> okay, i'll send a message to the list and we'll keep an eye on things
[15:22] <barry> any other queue or on-call issues?
[15:23] <barry> 5
[15:23] <barry> 4
[15:23] <barry> 3
[15:23] <barry> 2
[15:23] <barry> 1
[15:23] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Mentoring update
[15:23] <barry>    * danilo mentored by intellectronica
[15:23] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Mentoring update
[15:23] <danilos> hi all, as said, I'll be mentored by intellectronica, and I was thinking on starting with on-call reviewing next week (so I've got time to read up on all the review related stuff); unfortunately, intellectronica might be busy next week, so any other EU-timezone mentor for the first session would be welcome :)
[15:24] <barry> danilos: welcome!  really glad to have you on-board
[15:24] <danilos> if no mentor comes up, I'll probably take a general queue item and process it by email with intellectronica
[15:24] <danilos> barry: thanks
[15:24] <gmb> I think I'm the only other EU on-caller atm, but I'm still a mentee.
[15:24] <intellectronica> on that note: please don't put anything on my queue - i won't be able to do both mentoring and independent reviews
[15:24] <intellectronica> (i'll put a /!\ in the wiki too)
[15:24] <flacoste> intellectronica: you should add a warning to your queue
[15:24] <danilos> any suggestions on how to proceed are more than welcome
[15:24] <flacoste> good
[15:24] <flacoste> BjornT: is a EU reviewer
[15:25] <danilos> intellectronica: thanks again for agreeing to be my mentor
[15:25] <flacoste> but he doesn't do on-call
[15:25] <barry> danilos: you might want to chat with gmb to see how his on-call is working with his mentor
[15:25] <intellectronica> and he's also busy
[15:25] <flacoste> so the number of reviews for an on-call might be too much
[15:25] <danilos> barry: sure, will do, thanks for the poitner
[15:25] <BjornT> flacoste: and in addition, i'll be in london for most of next week, so i won't be much help.
[15:26] <flacoste> i guess this means no on-call for danilos next week
[15:26] <barry> danilos: i'd say just do a few regular reviews one day next week so you'd be only semi-on-call (i.e. doing reviews, but not bothering with #launchpad-reviews)
[15:26] <danilos> yeah, I guess so
[15:26] <danilos> barry: agreed
[15:27] <flacoste> barry: on-call will need to assign him some reviews then
[15:27] <barry> flacoste: your fingers are faster than mine :)
[15:27]  * sinzui will give danilos all cprov's branches to review
[15:27] <barry> yep, if you're clearing out the queue at the end of your shift, remember danilos :)
[15:28] <gmb> sinzui: Harsh.
[15:28] <danilos> sinzui: yay, toss me all the easy ones :)
[15:28] <barry> sinzui: don't hurt him though, we want him to stick around :)
[15:28] <flacoste> sinzui: that's baptism by fire!
[15:28] <barry> that /is/ our hazing ritual after all!
[15:28] <gmb> danilos: cprov branch and easy are antithetical.
[15:28] <danilos> ok, sounds good, I'll be there
[15:28] <barry> it's like the reason you have interns.  someone's gotta do all the work
[15:28] <danilos> gmb: I know that much about soyuz ;)
[15:28] <flacoste> gmb, sinzui: don't blame cprov, blame soyuz
[15:29] <gmb> Sounds like a t-shirt line.
[15:29] <barry> <kirk voice>soooyyy  uuuuuuzzzzzz!</kirk voice>
[15:29] <sinzui> flacoste: I'm not blaming cprov...he is just the messager
[15:29] <barry> btw, has anybody else been approach by a dev looking for a mentor?
[15:30]  * barry is actually surprised more devs haven't come forward
[15:30] <jtv> Nobody covets the power of a Reviewer?
[15:30] <barry> jtv: they don't know what they're missing
[15:31] <barry> [ACTION] barry will contact the devs who previously expressed interest
[15:31] <MootBot> ACTION received:  barry will contact the devs who previously expressed interest
[15:31] <jtv> barry: they do.  They're under the Reviewer's heel.
[15:31] <danilos> yeah, I am here for the weekly chats about pr0n
[15:31] <barry> danilos: i haven't gotten to that item yet
[15:31] <barry> okay, moving on...
[15:31] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Review process changes
[15:31] <barry>    * Tool update
[15:32] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Review process changes
[15:32] <danilos> ugh, a beginners mistake, jumping the gun
[15:32] <sinzui> danilos: you will get to review my XXX branch when it is ready.
[15:32]  * flacoste finds it interesting that danilos mention pr0n just after jtv mentions "under... heel"
[15:32] <barry> i think there's not much to say about the tools.  bzr review-submit rocks and mwh is still away
[15:32] <gmb> barry: I'm going to work on the web-side next week.
[15:32] <gmb> Assuming nothing else gets in my way.
[15:33] <flacoste> promises, promises, promises
[15:33] <flacoste> just do it ;-)
[15:33] <gmb> flacoste: kiko's already getting all excited, so I've got to follow through at some point.
[15:33] <barry> gmb: well, week 4 == free hacking time :)
[15:33] <danilos> sinzui: thanks (though, as flacoste just said on another topic: "promises, promises" :)
[15:33] <gmb> :)
[15:33] <sinzui> danilos: I really do have an XXX branch.
[15:34] <barry> boy, you /all/ are jumping the gun.  i really don't know what to say about that, but you can use your own imagination
[15:34] <barry> anything else on the tools or process?
[15:34] <barry> 5
[15:34] <barry> 4
[15:34] <barry> 3
[15:34] <barry> 2
[15:34] <barry> 1
[15:34] <sinzui> I was think about checking make lint
[15:35] <sinzui> before review-submit actually submits
[15:35] <barry> sinzui: elaborate?
[15:35] <sinzui> the command checks that the branch is committed and pushed, but not that lint is clean
[15:35] <barry> sinzui: we can't prevent submission though because we still have too many false positives
[15:36] <bac> perhaps a --force switch to override lint false positives and submit anyway
[15:36] <barry> but it would be good to warn the users
[15:36] <sinzui> barry: fair enough
[15:36] <bigjools> +1 to sinzui's suggestion, I always forget to run it
[15:36] <barry> bac: i think that's not a bad idea.  i've had a number of devs respond that they forgot to run it
[15:37] <bac> be sure it runs before i'm asked to write a cover letter, though!
[15:37] <sinzui> My review script pulls, builds, diffs and make lint. I'm shown a report before I start my review. I think the sender should at least see the same report.
[15:37] <bac> review-submit is great and getting better.  is it time we require its use?
[15:38] <barry> bac: maybe when the web-side is working?
[15:38] <BjornT> we could at least include the lint output in the review request mail.
[15:38] <bac> i was asked to do a review yesterday that a) has no cover letter and b) was not pushed to devpad.  review-submit would've caught both of those problems
[15:39] <barry> BjornT: +1
[15:40] <barry> bac: good point.  you don't think it's too much of a pita to do that and edit PR?
[15:40] <barry> maybe we should enable that PR stanza output by default?
[15:41] <barry> sinzui: take these ideas and run with it
[15:41]  * sinzui looks to the weekend
[15:41] <bac> barry: i think it is useful as is, so the PR part doesn't make it any harder.
[15:42] <barry> [VOTE] who wants to require use of bzr review-submit?  say +1 if yes, -1 if no
[15:42] <MootBot> Please vote on:  who wants to require use of bzr review-submit?  say +1 if yes, -1 if no.
[15:42] <MootBot> Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0  to MootBot
[15:42] <MootBot> E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #launchpad-meeting
[15:42] <sinzui> +1
[15:42] <MootBot> +1 received from sinzui. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1
[15:42] <flacoste> barry: we need an exception
[15:42] <danilos> +1
[15:42] <MootBot> +1 received from danilos. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2
[15:42] <barry> flacoste: go ahead
[15:42] <flacoste> it's not uncommon to review a pastebin diff
[15:42] <flacoste> for trivial fix and other such niceties
[15:43] <barry> flacoste: yes definitely, that should still be fine
[15:43] <flacoste> ok, then if that's still fine i'm
[15:43] <barry> but require the tool for "normal" branches
[15:43] <flacoste> +1
[15:43] <MootBot> +1 received from flacoste. 3 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 3
[15:43] <barry> +1
[15:43] <MootBot> +1 received from barry. 4 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 4
[15:43] <bac> +1
[15:43] <MootBot> +1 received from bac. 5 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 5
[15:43] <BjornT> +1 (give that it's possible to have exceptions as flacoste mentioned)
[15:43] <MootBot> +1 received from BjornT. 6 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 6
[15:43] <danilos> flacoste: could we not make it easier to use review-submit than use pastebin too?
[15:43] <salgado> +1
[15:43] <MootBot> +1 received from salgado. 7 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 7
[15:43] <jtv> +1
[15:44] <MootBot> +1 received from jtv. 8 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 8
[15:44] <flacoste> danilos: i don't think review-submit handles that nicely
[15:44] <barry> it'd be cool if review-submit could interact w/pastebin for simple changes
[15:44] <flacoste> e.g. no need for a cover letter, scrap make lint, etc.
[15:44] <danilos> (even for trivial stuff, you must have it in a branch someplace, so it's almost ready)
[15:44] <danilos> barry: yeah, just occurred to me as well :)
[15:44] <flacoste> bzr diff |utilities/paste is simpler
[15:44] <danilos> bzr review-pastebin ;)
[15:44] <barry> bzr review-submit --paste :)
[15:45] <barry> #endvote
[15:45] <barry> uh mootbot
[15:45] <BjornT> danilos: think of, for example, the case where you want part of a branch reviewed. i.e., get it reviewed while you prepare a branch to contain the given revisions.
[15:45] <barry> #endvote
[15:45] <barry> okay, so end vote doesn't work ;)
[15:45] <barry> but i think we're unanimous
[15:46] <barry> [ACTION] barry will require bzr review-submit w/exceptions
[15:46] <MootBot> ACTION received:  barry will require bzr review-submit w/exceptions
[15:46] <barry> we're one minute over so unless there's anything else i'll turn mootbot off and we can have our off-the-record discussion led by danilos :)
[15:46] <barry> 5
[15:46]  * flacoste kicks MootBot
[15:46] <barry> 4
[15:46] <barry> 3
[15:46] <barry> 2
[15:46] <barry> 1
[15:46] <barry> #endmeeting
[15:46] <MootBot> Vote is in progress. Finishing now.
[15:46] <MootBot> Final result is 8 for, 0 against. 0 abstained. Total: 8
[15:46] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 15:46.
[15:47] <barry> thanks everyone!
[15:47] <flacoste> thanks barry
[15:47] <barry> danilos: the floor is yours, jtv the heel is yours
[15:47] <danilos> thanks all, especially barry :)
[15:47] <bac> thanks barry.  thanks mootbot
[15:47] <danilos> I don't like this mootbot guy, when was he hired? :)
[15:47] <jtv> squish
[15:47] <barry> danilos: c'mon get to the pr0n already!
[15:48] <danilos> anyway, back to work (someone's got to make the pr0n! :)
[15:48] <jtv> and for me, dinner!
[15:48] <cprov> sinzui: why are you talking like that ... I thought you liked soyuz branches.
[15:48] <danilos> barry: emailing you the details :)
[15:48] <barry> <kirk voice>pr00000000000000000nnnnnnnn</kirk voice>
[15:48] <barry> danilos: :-D
[15:48] <barry> okay guys, gotta run...
[15:49] <sinzui> cprov: soyuz is both foreign to me, and has some of the oldest code
[15:49] <sinzui> cprov: I find your and bigjools's branches hard to review
[15:50] <sinzui> cprov: I'll l get my reply about your branch in a few hours. I started reviewing it before the meeting
[15:51] <cprov> sinzui: we are trying to get code in better shape, but as you can see, we are failing ;) it's not getting any easier.
[15:51] <cprov> sinzui: ok, thanks
=== salgado is now known as salgado-lunch
=== salgado-lunch is now known as salgado
=== EdwinGrubb is now known as EdwinGrubbs
=== cprov is now known as cprov-out