=== salgado is now known as salgado-afk === mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson === mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson === Seveaz is now known as Seveas === Seveaz is now known as Seveas === mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch === mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell [15:00] #startmeeting [15:01] Welcome to this weeks' reviewers meeting [15:01] mootboot seems not to be available, so we'll do without [15:02] so who's here today? [15:02] me [15:02] me [15:02] me [15:02] me [15:02] me [15:02] me [15:02] (btw, i'm chairing in lieu of barry) [15:02] me [15:02] (who is out sick) [15:02] bigjools said he might not be around. [15:02] salgado: ping [15:02] me [15:03] danilos: ping [15:03] flacoste: sorry, on a sprint, will miss the meeting [15:03] danilos: ok [15:03] intellectronica: also sent his apologies [15:03] == Agenda == [15:03] i'm here but will have to leave around 14:30 [15:03] * Roll call [15:03] * Next meeting [15:03] * Action items [15:03] * Queue status [15:03] * Mentoring update [15:03] * Review process [15:03] * '''Pre-imp calls are falling by the wayside''' (gmb) [15:04] '''pending-reviews is missing branches listed on PendingReviews''' [15:04] '''Is there a policy on private name mangling?''' [15:04] Topic: Next meeting [15:04] Same time, same place? [15:04] anybody knows they can't make it? [15:04] 5 [15:04] 4 [15:04] 3 [15:04] 2 [15:04] 1 [15:05] great, same time, same place, everybody should be there! [15:05] TOPIC: Action items [15:05] * gmb to hack review-submit to enforce 800 line limit. [15:05] This is done [15:05] Hurrah [15:05] awesome! [15:05] I've sent the patch to mwh to look at. [15:05] i guess people have to upgrade their plugin to have it? [15:06] ah, it's not landed yet [15:06] anyway, that's still cool! [15:06] thanks gmb [15:06] * schwuk to work with mwhudson to get instructions for running loggerhead onto the wiki [15:06] gmb: Is there an --override option, for when we're agreed in advance with a reviewer? [15:06] --isuk? [15:06] flacoste: that was finished a couple of weeks ago when gmb chaired [15:06] allenap: Yes. [15:07] gmb: Cool :) And thanks sinzui :) [15:07] flacoste: https://launchpad.canonical.com/RunningLoggerhead [15:07] * gmb forgot to update the agenda after that last minute chairing. [15:07] ok [15:07] any other actions i'm not aware of? [15:08] i guess not [15:08] Topic: Queue status [15:09] according to the QueueStatus, there are two stub's branch needing a review [15:09] one branch that has the wrong status (that's my fault) [15:10] and another branch which is 7 days old but not marked over SLA? [15:10] salgado, that's the abel's branch, what's the status there? [15:10] it's merge-approved, IIRC [15:10] let me check [15:10] yeah, I approved it [15:11] ok [15:11] * salgado updates the status [15:11] i guess the two stub's branch are the ASIAPAC meeting responsibility [15:11] anything else to add on queue status? [15:12] It's not showing all branches [15:12] sinzui: i think we have another item to discuss that [15:12] or is this something eles? [15:12] flacoste: we do :) [15:12] ok, moving on then [15:12] Topic: Mentoring update [15:13] who's it going? schwuk, allenap? [15:13] bigjools and danilos are two other mentees being absent (or maybe their mentor have something to say) [15:13] hmm, bigjools mentor's is sick [15:13] schwuk: Are you going to take an on-call slot? [15:13] Last week fell apart for me with my father, so I got no reviews done. I'm on call this Friday so I can overlap with sinzui. [15:14] gavin and did our first on-call yesterday and it went really well [15:14] Going well, did a couple of reviews on call yesterday, which bac mostly thought were good. [15:14] * schwuk remembers to update the schedule [15:14] * gmb cheers at the idea of having even more people to throw branches at on a Friday [15:14] who is mentoring danilos? [15:14] allenap: they were quite good! [15:14] flacoste: danilos graduated last cycle. [15:14] bac: Thanks :) [15:14] danilos: graduated [15:14] oops :-) [15:15] no offense meant [15:15] so we only have three mentees? [15:15] * flacoste will take that for a yes [15:16] anything else to add on the topic? [15:16] 5 [15:16] 4 [15:16] 3 [15:16] 2 [15:16] 1 [15:16] * Review process [15:16] we have 3 items for discussion on the process [15:16] first one: [15:16] * '''Pre-imp calls are falling by the wayside''' (gmb) [15:16] flacoste: Was that not covered last week? [15:16] TOPIC: 'Pre-imp calls are falling by the wayside (gmb) [15:16] * gmb was on vacation [15:16] i guess [15:17] I was covered here and in asiapac [15:17] there was an action about "barry to remind lp devs to do pre-impl calls " [15:17] did that occured? [15:17] * flacoste can't remember [15:17] * gmb didn't see anything [15:17] i guess not then [15:17] ACTION: barry to remind lp devs to do pre-impl calls (repost) [15:17] so let's move on [15:18] TOPIC: pending-reviews is missing branches listed on PendingReviews (sinzui) [15:18] * flacoste hands the mic to sinzui [15:18] I noticed that the two of jtv's branches I reviewed are not on pending-reviews [15:19] sinzui: is it because they are not on PendingReviews, or because of a bug? [15:19] I also noticed that one of cprov's branches that was marked merge-approved several days ago still states it was need-reply [15:19] The branchs were/are on PendingReviews. All came from the general queue to my queue [15:20] I removed cprovs branch because I saw the commit message. [15:20] jtv's branch are still missing though [15:21] right [15:21] i guess there is a bug in the script [15:21] jamesh maintains that [15:21] sinzui: can you email jamesh about the problem? [15:21] cc list [15:21] I will [15:22] ACTION: sinzui to email jamesh about some branches not being picked up by pending-reviews [15:22] anything else to add here? [15:22] 5 [15:22] 4 [15:22] 3 [15:22] 2 [15:22] 1 [15:22] TOPIC: Is there a policy on private name mangling? (allenap) [15:22] allenap has the floor [15:23] * allenap starts copying and pasting frantically. [15:23] A branch I reviewed yesterday had a _pseudo_private method on a mix-in class. Not that it's a big danger, but this seems like a sensible place to use __private_name_mangling. Or is mangling frowned upon, or deprecated? [15:24] allenap: what's your opinion [15:24] I'm all for it, but I wanted other's opinions. [15:24] i don't think we should do this unless it's really dangerous for a consumer to touch an attribute [15:24] But, even in this case, it didn't matter too much. I wanted to see if there were good reasons for or against. [15:25] you never know, for example, when you might need to monkeypatch [15:25] I'm with intellectronica here. [15:25] Not that I'm advocating monkeypatching ;) [15:25] But I don't think we'd gain too much from using mangling. [15:25] the problem with mangling is that it makes it very hard to work with the attribute [15:25] in the debugger [15:25] or in subclass [15:26] so i usually prefer _pseudo_private to __mangling [15:26] but this all might be because I'm an ex-perl hacker and I live by the motto 'we rather you don't come in our living room because you weren't invited, not because I have a shotgun' [15:27] flacoste: There's also the Python motto "We kind of expect you to know what you're doing; on your head be it if you don't." [15:27] Which is less snappy but... [15:27] +1 for _pseudo_private [15:27] I don't really see name mangling as a way to prevent access, more as a way to avoid shooting self in foot. [15:28] allenap: True, but the test suite *should* pick up on foot-shooting anyway. [15:28] Okay, consensus seems to be for _singles, so I'll add that to the guidelines on the wiki. [15:28] allenap: you see, if you didn't have a shotgun, you wouldn't have the problem of shooting yourself in the foot ;) [15:28] Perl hackers and their shotguns, heh. [15:29] flacoste: Back to you I think. [15:29] anyway, gotta go now. my apologies again [15:29] ACTION: allenap to update Reviewers' guidelines with _pseudo_private policy [15:29] that's it for the items on the agenda [15:29] we have some time left [15:29] anybody has a topic to propose? [15:30] 5 [15:30] 4 [15:30] 3 [15:30] 2 [15:30] 1 [15:30] Then we are done [15:30] Meeting Ends [15:30] thanks a lot everyone [15:31] Thanks flacoste === vednis is now known as mars === salgado is now known as salgado-lunch === salgado-lunch is now known as salgado