User1: Launchpad Reviewers meeting now at 1500UTC -- one hour later
User2: apologies, bac, at sprint
User2: or training, or whatever it is
User1: #startmeeting
User3: bac, I am only going to lurk, sorry
User4: bac, There is already a meeting in progress.
User1: gah
 * gary_poster chuckles
User1: Who is here today at our new Bat Time?
User5: me
User6: me
User7: me
User8: me
User9: me
User10: me
User11: I
User12: me
User13: me, but I'm also browsing through my dictionary to find out what "Bat Time" means :-)
User10: User13 Reference to 60's batman show.
User14: me
User11: User13 http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=same%20bat-time%2C%20same%20bat-channel
User1: :)
User13: abentley, User10 ah, heh :-) Thanks
 * deryck sings nah nah nah nah Bat----man!
User11: User8 ha!
User1: topic - Agenda
User14: The Green Hornet was cooler
User1: * Roll call
User1: * Agenda
User1: * Outstanding actions
User1: * Mentat update.
User1: * Salgado (ui)
User1: * StevenK (code)
User1: * New items
User1: * Benji joins code review team mentored by EdwinGrubbs.
User1: * jcsackett becomes a mentat (sinzui)
User1: * Peanut gallery
User1: *  Sinzui to investigate making lint check for the Storm 'in' gotcha
User1: User14 progress?
User14: No, fix, but I did make progress. I removed two of the false reports in our code
User1: cool
User14: oh, pocket-lint will be in natty
User15: me
User1: that's good sinzui
User1: * bac to work with mars regarding a slow introduction of new reviewer points regarding the ArchitectureGuide. (undone)
User1: as it says, i've not done this.  i'll try to get up with mars and get action on that one.
User1: topic - time change
User16: me
User1: glad everyone got the email.  i hope this time works.  i heard no complaints.
User1: * Mentat update.
User1: * Salgado (ui)
User1: * StevenK (code)
User17: me
User1: how's it going salgado?
User12: after some time without any UI reviews, last week I did some
User12: it's going fine with me
User1: the last time i checked with stevenk he was still having a hard time getting enough reviews to do.  i'll find out later if that is still the case.
User1: New items
User1: * Benji joins code review team mentored by EdwinGrubbs.
User1: thanks for starting the process benji.  and thanks EdwinGrubbs for mentoring
User1: * jcsackett becomes a mentat (sinzui)
User1: User6 do you have a mentor?
User6: sinzui, i believe.
User14: I will mentor
User1: yay
User1: so when these guys finish up we'll have all canonical lp devs as mentors again
User1: er, reviewers
User14: no
User14: well
User14: I think mister wgrant could start reviewer training when he starts
User15: +1
User18: me
User1: perhaps we should give him a week to get settled
User14: Then I will have some small satisfaction that my nomination was accepted, though it took almost a year
User13: he's already been doing some very good post-merge reviews :-)
User14: User1 why? he already has rf setup
User1: topic - other stuff.  anyone have anything?
User14: I have an apology to make to the bugs team
 * allenap is puzzled
User14: I thought the death to all doctests mantra at Prague was crazy, but I just read the bug stories and doctests yesterday I now understand you need to kill kill kill
User8: heh
User15: and theirs are even better than soyuz... go figure
User8: thanks for saying so sinzui!  I've felt I must be crazy that no one sees the insanity I see.
User18: Yeah, don't read those doctests.
 * jtv reviewed doctest changes today and is still trying to stem the bleeding
User14: bigjools, soyuz has lots of unittests I can extend. I just delete the contradicting doctest.
User8: we've made some good progress in the last few months converting to unit tests, but it's taking some time.
User8: still much to do
User15: but the hideousness runs deep
User15: I did get rid of my most hated doctest recently.  It felt reeeeeal good.
User14: If I report 50 bugs about doctests, do we get to close them during the bugjam
User1: anything else but kvetching about doctests (which is a fine thing to do)?
User17: Well one thing here
User1: the chair recognizes the gentleman from BKK
User17: I see lots and lots of code slip by reviewers that shouldn't.
User17: Are we still instilling and reinforcing the habits that we expect everyone to stick to by themselves?
User17: Coding standards mostly.  Today I saw an import in the wrong place for no reason, an empty docstring, etc.âand that's without looking at very much.
User10: User17 I am close to being able to track a line of code back to the review where it was approved.
User17: Well I'm not _really_ looking to hunt down & beat up the reviewers; I just say that.
User17: Although that is a cool capability, I must say.
User1: User17 you found these problems in the tree or in a review?
User17: Both, for today's cases.
User17: Of course there were dozens of other little gotchas in the tree.
User14: I think automated changes cause these issues. I have seen a lot bad style in our modules that I attribute to changes made after the review, such as requests to clean up a name in the whole tree.
User17: What stings is that most of them are recent.
User17: Some of that, too, yes.
User17: Also I think "make lint" no longer tracks down committed-but-unlanded changes?
User10: User17 IME it does.
User1: if all changes are committed 'make lint' does the right thing, i think.
 * jtv will watch it more closely
User10: User17 If there are any uncommitted changes, it just lints those.
User17: That's what it used to do; I just noticed an unexpected "no changes detected."
User17: On a branch that was unlanded and full of goodies, of course.
User10: User17 But if all changes are committed make lint should lint all changes.
User17: Yes, that's what I thought.  I'll keep an eye out.
User14: jtv, make lint does commit changes that differ from parent
User17: The parent in this case was not one of the usual ones, I think.  Maybe that caused it.
User1: User17 if you find code that has been landed that is clearly a problem i think we should discuss it with the reviewer, just so he'll be aware of what was missed or to determine if it happened post review.
User1: if you'd rather not have that conversation i'll be glad to do it.
User17: Fair enough.  I just got the impression that there's a gap between the speed/thoroughness tradeoffs I like and the ones the team as a whole has evolved to.
User1: not finger pointing but for learning.
User17: Yes, that's importantâthe baseball bat was just a joke.
User1: is there anything else to discuss today?
 * jtv sits down
User1: thanks for coming
User1: #endmeeting
User4: Meeting finished at 09:30.
User10: User17 FYI bzr log -r mainline:annotate:$FILENAME:$LINENO will find the revision where the line was merged into trunk.
User17: thanks bac
User17: User10 cool!  Thanks.
User10: User17 Now we just need to be able to find merge proposals according to revision id.
User17: User10 can't find "annotate" in "bzr help revisionspec"â¦ where do I read more about it?
User10: User17 it was added recently.  You'll need a newer bzr.
User17: ah, the ol' rat race
 * jtv used to watch version numbers avidly, once upon a time
launchpad-meeting
Ubuntu IRC