[04:00] <barry> #startmeeting
[04:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 05:01. The chair is barry.
[04:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[04:01] <barry> hi everybody and welcome to this week's asiapac reviewers meeting
[04:01] <barry> who's here today?
[04:01] <sinzui> me
[04:01] <thumper> me (kind of)
[04:01] <sinzui> Well this is looking embarrassing.
[04:01] <spiv> I'm here.
[04:01] <barry> sinzui: i was going to say, if it was just you and me, we should do it when the sun is up :)
[04:02] <jml> hi
[04:02] <barry> jml: hi
[04:02] <barry> spiv, thumper hi
[04:02] <barry> mwhudson: are you around?
[04:02] <jml> thumper is unwell and is off
[04:02] <barry> thumper: :(
[04:03] <barry> [TOPIC] agenda
[04:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  agenda
[04:03] <jml> mwhudson last said "afk for a little while" 4 minutes ago
[04:03] <barry> jml: okay thanks, oh well
[04:03] <barry>  * Roll call
[04:03] <barry>  * Next meeting
[04:03] <barry>  * Action items
[04:03] <barry>  * Queue status
[04:03] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[04:03] <barry>  * Review process
[04:03] <barry>     * '''Pre-imp calls are falling by the wayside''' (gmb)
[04:03] <barry> [TOPIC] next meeting
[04:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  next meeting
[04:03] <barry> so, is this a good time for y'all?
[04:03] <jml> for me, yes.
[04:04] <thumper> normally, but I'm somewhat uncommunicative right now
[04:04] <spiv> This is fine for me too (same timezone as jml).
[04:04] <barry> thumper: no worries.  anybody know if this is a good time for jamesh?
[04:04] <jml> but I'd be equally with something up to four hours earlier or two hours later, if things need rescheduling.
[04:04] <jml> barry: it's 11am in WA right now.
[04:04] <jml> barry: it *ought* to be a good time for him :)
[04:05] <barry> :)
[04:05] <jml> (the WA that's on the west coast of Australia, not the one on the west coast)
[04:05] <barry> jml, naw, i was thinking maybe 1 hour earlier, but this works just fine for me too.  in daylight saving's its 11pm, and i fake-tivo the daily show so it's all good
[04:06] <jml> :)
[04:06] <barry> cool, let's keep 0300utc then
[04:06] <jml> +1
[04:06] <barry> [TOPIC] action items
[04:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  action items
[04:06] <barry>  * (continued) thumper to report on pending-reviews killer in LP
[04:06] <thumper> barry: sorry, it's coming
[04:07] <thumper> but nothing else to report right now
[04:07] <barry> thumper: no worries, we'll just keep continuing it if you want
[04:07] <thumper> yeah
[04:07] <barry> thumper: just want to be sure you don't want to ditch the whole thing :)
[04:07] <barry> jamesh: hi!
[04:07] <jamesh> hi
[04:07] <thumper> barry: not just yet
[04:08] <lifeless> boo!
[04:08] <barry> cool
[04:08]  * barry is frightened
[04:08] <barry> just for completeness, here are the ameu action items:
[04:08] <barry>  * gmb to hack review-submit to enforce 800 line limit.
[04:08] <barry>  * schwuk to work with mwhudson to get instructions for running loggerhead onto the wiki
[04:09] <barry> any comments or should we just move on?
[04:09] <jml> barry: I don't think enforcing the 800 limit is a good idea.
[04:09] <jml> barry: unless that means "show a warning"
[04:09] <thumper> me neither
[04:09] <sinzui> jml: 800 + shame
[04:09] <barry> yeah, it's mostly so you have a warning
[04:10] <barry> i really think the option to override should be --isuck
[04:10] <lifeless> rather than say enforce
[04:10] <lifeless> say 'warn' perhaps ?
[04:10] <sinzui> jml: the 800 line flag really means you need to send with the -r switch (have a review lined up)
[04:10] <lifeless> if you mean warn :>
[04:10]  * barry speaks as someone who sucks often
[04:10] <jml> sinzui: perhaps.
[04:10] <barry> yes, the point is you really need to arrange things with a reviewer if your >800 lines
[04:11] <jml> I think that's fair enough. I still think you should be able to override whatever policy the tool has by default.
[04:11] <barry> i'm happy to reword this action item to be clearer about it, but i think gmb knows what we mean
[04:11] <barry> jml: definitely
[04:12] <jml> anyway, review-submit will be an addon to send eventually.
[04:12] <jml> barry: cool. now I know what gmb means, I'm happy :)
[04:12] <barry> cool!
[04:12] <barry> [TOPIC] queue status
[04:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  queue status
[04:13] <barry> some bonehead's got two branch's in the general queue
[04:13] <jml> :)
[04:13] <barry> :-D
[04:13] <jml> just to be clear
[04:13] <jml> are we supposed to send emails *and* hack wiki?
[04:14] <barry> jml: i don't know anymore.  i do, but that's just me
[04:14] <jml> hah!
[04:14] <jml> ok :)
[04:14] <barry> i fully intend to ask tomorrow's on-caller to review these branches though
[04:14] <lifeless> someone should patch submit-review to edit the wiki
[04:14] <jml> there's also at least one email sent that's not on the wiki page and has no assigned reviewer
[04:15] <jml> lifeless: yes. it's getting close to that already.
[04:15] <barry> jml: it's still the responsibility of the dev to get his branches reviewed
[04:15] <jml> *nod*
[04:15]  * barry still likes the pending-reviews page tho
[04:15] <barry> it tells me we have 5 pink branches
[04:16] <barry> i know about stub's two
[04:16] <barry> jml: what's up with your use-inmemory-proxies branch?
[04:16] <jml> barry: shelved, for the time being.
[04:16] <barry> jml: should we move that to wip?
[04:17] <jml> barry: yeah, probably.
[04:17] <barry> jml: i'll let you do that :)
[04:17] <jml> ok
[04:17] <barry> thanks
[04:17] <barry> any other queue-related comments?
[04:18] <jml> none from me
[04:18] <barry> [TOPIC] mentoring update
[04:18] <MootBot> New Topic:  mentoring update
[04:18] <barry> i don't think there are any asiapac mentors or mentorees
[04:18] <barry> are there any of you guys who /aren't/ already reviewers?
[04:19] <sinzui> That was to requirement for mwhudson to emigrate.
[04:19] <jml> barry: all australasian LP hackers are reviewers
[04:19] <jml> we even have a non-LP hacker who's a reviewer :)
[04:20] <barry> jml: excellent!
[04:20] <jml> a veritable superabundance of reviewers.
[04:20] <barry> you need to hire more grunts
[04:20] <barry> [TOPIC] review process
[04:20] <MootBot> New Topic:  review process
[04:20] <barry>     * '''Pre-imp calls are falling by the wayside''' (gmb)
[04:21] <jml> What does that mean?
[04:21] <barry> people 'round here slacking on pre-impl calls
[04:21] <barry> have you noticed that? is it a problem? and if so what do we do about it?
[04:21] <barry> here's specifically what gmb says:
[04:21] <barry>  * '''Pre-imp calls are falling by the wayside''' (gmb). Since we've adopted the on-call review process I've noticed that less and less people (including myself) have been having pre-imp calls before they start work. Partly, I figure that this is because the on-call process allows the developer to talk about their implementation decisions with the reviewer and so helps to substitute for a pre-imp in a lot of ways. However, I've had one
[04:21] <barry>  branch land this cycle that happily had r= from the reviewer but which, had there been a pre-imp, might not have landed in the form it did (which would have avoided me needing to ask for an RC). Should we be enforcing the requirement to have pre-imp calls, or at least be more scrutinous of those branches that don't?
[04:22] <mwhudson> oopsie
[04:22] <jml> I've observed that people aren't rigorous about calling someone before they begin work on a branch.
[04:22] <jml> I don't think that's a problem.
[04:23] <jamesh> I think I've done only two pre-impl calls with people in the last month (and only one was actually voice)
[04:23] <barry> let me ask: how have the quality of branches been lately when first submitted for review?  has it been getting better, worse, or about the same?
[04:23] <jml> the way we'd measure it being a problem is if reviewers were asking for branches to be re-implemented :)
[04:24] <jml> barry: that's hard to discern. The code I get to review is generally very clear.
[04:24] <barry> i'm curious about the rate of needs-reply branches.
[04:24] <jml> the sample is limited, because we are increasing the size of the review team.
[04:24] <barry> jml: many of the branches i've reviewed lately have been merge-* right off the bat (i.e. very good quality)
[04:25] <mwhudson> something that's definitely happening is that i'm basically only reviewing things from the code team
[04:25] <jml> needs-reply doesn't always mean lower quality
[04:25] <mwhudson> and occasionally jamesh
[04:25] <barry> jml: no, you're right, but it's an indicator that the branch maybe wasn't quite ready to code yet
[04:25] <jml> I often flag things needs-reply because I don't understand a part of the problem domain.
[04:25] <barry> mwhudson: interesting
[04:26] <jml> yeah, I'd agree w/ mwhudson on that.
[04:26] <barry> is that basically geography?
[04:26] <jml> I also almost always get code or bzr ppl to do my pre-impl calls
[04:26] <jamesh> well, it isn't that surprising that NZ reviewers mainly have overlap with NZ and AU coders
[04:26] <mwhudson> indeed
[04:27] <barry> jamesh: yep
[04:27] <jamesh> for pre-implementation calls, it is even more of an issue
[04:27] <jamesh> since that's real time when reviewing might not be
[04:27] <barry> cool, so basically you don't feel that the current rate of pre-impl's is a problem?
[04:27] <jml> no :)
[04:28] <mwhudson> i don't know how much of a problem this is, it reduces the cross-team spread of knowledge a bit
[04:28] <mwhudson> barry: no
[04:28] <barry> mwhudson: good point.
[04:28] <jamesh> while there might not be as many formal pre-impl calls as there once were, people do consult others on IRC about implementation issues
[04:28] <jamesh> (at least in this time zone)
[04:29] <barry> if it's not a problem, i'm definitely not going to try to "fix" it then :)
[04:29] <barry> thanks, this has been good feedback
[04:29] <barry> so... that's it from me.  we have 15 minutes if anybody has anything not on the agenda, or messages to convey to ameu
[04:30]  * jml has nothing on topic
[04:30] <barry> cool.  time for the colbert report then :)
[04:30] <mwhudson> :)
[04:30] <barry> #endmeeting
[04:30] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 05:31.
[04:30] <barry> thanks everyone!  g'night :)
[04:31] <mwhudson> thanks barry
[04:31] <jml> thanks barry
[04:31] <mwhudson> (and sorry for being late)
[04:31] <barry> mwhudson: no worries.  talk to you guys soon...