[15:00] <statik> me
[15:01] <bac> me 2
[15:01]  * sinzui says me
[15:01] <barry> welcome to the ameu launchpad reviewers meeting, for the next 45 minutes or less
[15:01] <barry> == Agenda ==
[15:01] <barry>  * Roll call
[15:01] <barry>  * Next meeting
[15:01] <barry>  * Action items
[15:01] <barry>  * Queue status
[15:01] <barry>   * Leftover branches - confirm that the on-call reviewer should allocate all remaining branches on the general queue at the end of his shift (or discuss a different solution).
[15:01] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[15:01] <barry>  * Review process changes
[15:01] <barry>    * Tool update
[15:02]  * barry goes a reviewer-rustlin'
[15:02] <BjornT_> me
[15:02] <salgado> me
[15:02] <intellectronica> me
[15:03] <gmb> me
[15:03] <statik> me
[15:03] <sinzui> me
[15:03] <flacoste> me
[15:03] <bac> me
[15:04] <barry> great, welcome to our first meeting of 2008!
[15:04] <barry>  * Next meeting
[15:04] <barry> today + 1week?  any objections?  any known absences?
[15:04] <barry> 5
[15:04] <barry> 4
[15:04] <barry> 3
[15:05] <barry> 2
[15:05] <barry> 1
[15:05] <barry>  * Action items
[15:05] <barry> Actions from the last meeting:
[15:05] <barry>  * barry to edit him some wikis about on-call procedures
[15:05] <barry>  * intellectronica to work on a cover letter template
[15:05]  * barry sucks; he will edit him some wikis
[15:05]  * intellectronica sucks too
[15:05] <barry> i really will try to do that this week
[15:06] <barry> * Queue status
[15:06] <barry>   * Leftover branches - confirm that the on-call reviewer should allocate all remaining branches on the general queue at the end of his shift (or discuss a different solution).
[15:06] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[15:06] <intellectronica> i'll try to do this promptly and talk to mwh about inclusion in his tool
[15:06] <barry> (oops c&p error there)
[15:06] <barry> intellectronica: excellent, thanks
[15:06] <barry> so the general queue got pretty big
[15:07] <sinzui> intellectronica: mwh is out for the next 3.5 weeks
[15:07] <barry> and intellectronica reminded me this morning that we'd decided to have on-call reviewers do a general queue assignment at the end of his shift
[15:07] <intellectronica> sinzui: well, i won't talk to him, then
[15:08] <barry> intellectronica: we can keep this on the agenda until mwh gets back
[15:08] <barry> i don't think it's urgent
[15:09] <barry> fwiw, i gave lifeless the opportunity to shed load so he won't be doing PR assignments for now
[15:09] <barry> and i know we all want to just kill off PR anyway
[15:09] <barry> but for now, intellectronica can you do a general queue assignment when you're done for the day?
[15:10] <intellectronica> will do. if ppl /don't/ want branches for review tonight, drop by in #launchpad-reviews and say yo
[15:10] <salgado> I'd stopped doing the allocations because then on call reviewers could take the unassigned ones when there wasn't any branches for them to review
[15:11] <intellectronica> salgado: but today, for example, by the time i finish the queue will, in all likelihood, still have quite a few branches in it
[15:11] <barry> salgado: i wonder if falling behind was mostly an aberration around the holidays/new years?
[15:12] <salgado> yeah, I was wondering that as well
[15:12] <sinzui> barry: That and the fact that reviewers are still out
[15:12] <intellectronica> barry: from what i can tell the queue filled up significantly after your shift yesterday
[15:12] <intellectronica> barry: so it's something we can expect to happen every now and then
[15:12] <barry> intellectronica: it was pretty full when i checked toward the latter part of my shift, but by then i was already booked on reviews
[15:13] <intellectronica> either way - allocations are not going anywhere, even with on call reviews :-/
[15:13] <barry> we need to clear the backlog, so let's do this: intellectronica do an assignment at the end of today and let's all do our reviews the old way
[15:14] <barry> that should clear the backlog and let us get back to our super-efficent on-call process :)
[15:15] <salgado> sounds good to me
[15:15] <barry> so maybe we should do general assignments on an as-needed basis only, and not as s.o.p. for on-callers?
[15:16] <flacoste> well
[15:16] <flacoste> i have some problems with that strategy
[15:17] <flacoste> problem being that branches on the general queue still should be serviced in the <48H SLA
[15:17] <flacoste> so they sould be assigned ASAP for that
[15:17] <flacoste> if the on-call cannot do them
[15:17] <flacoste> otherwise, there is a risk that they'll be unassigned for a complete shift
[15:17] <flacoste> because the on-call is prompted for new branches
[15:18] <flacoste> and then branches on general reviews will linger
[15:18] <flacoste> so i think the process should be
[15:18] <flacoste> on-call reviewer does allocation
[15:19] <flacoste> many times during the day
[15:19] <flacoste> if he has slack he assigns some to himself
[15:19] <flacoste> put assign others
[15:19] <flacoste> no keeping in general queue for the case - where the on-call "might" have time
[15:19] <flacoste> reviewers should still check PendingReviews daily to see if they have assigned branches
[15:19] <sinzui> +1
[15:20] <barry> ok, that's fine by me
[15:20] <flacoste> i would suggest that after each review, the on-call does an allocation run
[15:20] <intellectronica> flacoste: you've got a point there
[15:20] <intellectronica> +1
[15:20] <flacoste> and it's ok for new branches to pre-empt stuff in the general queue
[15:21] <flacoste> iow, even if there are unallocated reviews in the general queue, the on-call should still accept an interactive request for a review
[15:22] <flacoste> the 'general queue' stuff will be assigned to other reviews
[15:22] <flacoste> reviewers
[15:22] <flacoste> one gotcha though
[15:22] <barry> sounds good.  the only risk is that the on-caller will not have anything to do while there are still needs-review branches in other people's queue.  i'm okay with that
[15:22] <flacoste> allocation of reviews to somebody who is fed up with reviews because he was on-called the previous day
[15:22] <flacoste> or something like that
[15:23] <barry> flacoste: that reviewer can always move the branch to the rejected queue
[15:23] <flacoste> good point!
[15:23] <flacoste> and we should emphasis that!
[15:23] <barry> yep
[15:23] <flacoste> don't be afraid of rejecting reviews because you had a full on-call day!
[15:24] <flacoste> of course, allocating to the next on-call is probably a good idea
[15:24] <bac> or on-call reviewers can mark their queue with /!\ if they really don't want to accept other reviews.  20% is a lot for of time for reviewing
[15:24] <barry> hey, there ya go.  we should just wipe all the review queues and round-robin all needs-reviews to the next on-caller :)
[15:25] <flacoste> barry: i fear for the SLA with that strategy
[15:25] <barry> flacoste: i was kidding
[15:26] <barry> well, this is never going to be perfect until we get rid of PR anyway <wink> so let's go with flacoste's plan and see how it goes
[15:26]  * barry will edit him some wikis
[15:27] <barry> anything else on this topic?
[15:27] <barry> 5
[15:27] <barry> 4
[15:27] <barry> 3
[15:27] <barry> 2
[15:27] <barry> 1
[15:27] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[15:28] <gmb> I've had no reviews for salgado or mwhudson to mentor since last cycle.
[15:28] <barry> gmb: cool.  you're next on-call is coming up right?
[15:28] <gmb> A combination of sickness and super-efficient on-call revfiews, I think.
[15:29] <gmb> barry: I think so. salgado, are you o/c tomorrow?
[15:29] <salgado> gmb, yep
[15:29] <gmb> salgado: Mind if I join you?
[15:29] <salgado> gmb, not at all!
[15:29] <gmb> Cool.
[15:29] <flacoste> hey, another worthwhile allocation strategy: gives them to mentoree!
[15:29] <gmb> barry: There's your answer then :)
[15:29] <barry> gmb: excellent!
[15:30] <barry> flacoste: you're the perfect straight man.  which leads me to my next question...
[15:30] <barry> is it time for more recruits?
[15:30] <barry> right now we have just gmb, ddaa, and jvt
[15:30] <flacoste> with mwhudson off, i think it's a good idea
[15:31] <barry> i think jvt will never graduate (by his own choice iiuc)
[15:31] <flacoste> some people just like staying in school all their life!
[15:31] <barry> any nominations?
[15:31] <intellectronica> cprov
[15:31] <flacoste> barry: i think you had volunteers?
[15:32] <barry> flacoste: i did
[15:32] <barry> jsk was one :/
[15:32] <barry> schwuk was another
[15:33] <flacoste> maybe
[15:33] <flacoste> we should
[15:33] <flacoste> send an request for candidates to launchpad
[15:33] <barry> there aren't too many others left are there? :)  allenap, edwin, bigjools (actually i think he volunteered too), leondardr
[15:33] <bigjools> I did indeed
[15:34] <barry> how many can we reasonably digest now?  we need mentors for each
[15:34] <cprov> intellectronica: here
[15:34] <sinzui> allenap attended our reviewer's meeting at all hands. I thought he was interested
[15:35] <intellectronica> cprov: i was just suggesting that you might want to become a reviewer
[15:35] <flacoste> i suggest a "call for candidacy"
[15:35] <cprov> intellectronica: wait, you are nominating me to become a reviewer ...
[15:35] <flacoste> and collect candidates and try to find mentors next week
[15:35] <barry> flacoste: i say a volunteer candidate has to rustle himself up a mentor.  :)
[15:35] <flacoste> that's also a good strategy
[15:36] <barry> and we'll accept whoever 1) volunteers; 2) has an agreed mentor
[15:36] <flacoste> ok
[15:36] <flacoste> and we can talk about people who have 1) but not 2) in next meeting
[15:36]  * barry feels like we're getting very close to "everyone is a reviewer"
[15:36] <barry> flacoste: +1
[15:37] <barry> oh yeah, abel too
[15:37] <barry> (abel is not a reviewer yet)
[15:37] <barry> great.  anthing else on this topic?
[15:37] <barry> 5
[15:37] <flacoste> carlos and danilos are two others
[15:37] <barry> flacoste: right!
[15:38] <barry> 4
[15:38] <barry> 3
[15:38] <barry> 2
[15:38] <cprov> intellectronica: maybe after 1.2.5, I feel busy enough until Soyuz 2.0 features get established, but thanks for considering it
[15:38] <flacoste> as is Edwin
[15:38] <barry> 1
[15:38] <danilos> I should start the procedure soon enough
[15:38] <danilos> (as discussed with kiko last year :)
[15:38] <barry> danilos: it's never to early to find a mentor :)
[15:38] <barry> * Review process changes
[15:38] <barry>    * Tool update
[15:38] <danilos> barry: will look into finding one, thanks for the heads up
[15:39] <barry> danilos: i will send a "call for candidates" later today
[15:39] <danilos> barry: great, thanks
[15:39] <barry> gmb: anything to report on the tool?  i had some problems with the plugin yesterday, but i think it was because my rf was messed up.  i re-branched and it worked great
[15:40] <gmb> barry: No, nothing new. With sickness etc I haven't touched on it much, though allenap has volunteered to help with it when he gets time.
[15:40] <sinzui> I always use the -d option to pass the diff I made. I sometimes annotate the diff
[15:41] <barry> gmb, allenap_ great!
[15:42] <barry> okay, that's it from me.  we have 3 minutes left.  anybody have anything not on the agenda?
[15:43] <barry> sounds like we're done then
[15:43] <barry> MEETING ENDS
[15:43] <barry> thanks everyone!
[15:43] <bac> thanks barry
[15:43] <mwhudson> notes from off: there's a branch on the bazaar mailing list that will make the diff computation review-submit does much faster
[15:44] <barry> mwhudson: cool