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