[15:00] <barry> #startmeeting
[15:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 16:00. The chair is barry.
[15:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:00] <intellectronica> me
[15:00] <barry> hello everyone and welcome to this week's ameu launchpad reviewers meeting
[15:00] <bigjools> premature
[15:00] <barry> who's here today?
[15:00] <bigjools> me
[15:00] <gmb> me
[15:00] <sinzui> me
[15:00] <flacoste> me
[15:00] <allenap> me
[15:00] <bac> me
[15:00] <salgado> me
[15:01] <intellectronica> me, and i'm not premature, just a bit weird
[15:01] <bigjools> :)
[15:01] <gmb> bigjools: Time does not apply to intellectronica as it does to the rest of us. ;)
[15:01] <statik> me
[15:02] <sinzui> Time is an illusion
[15:02] <bigjools> he's about to do my review, I'm not going to insult him :)
[15:02] <barry> danilo__: ping?
[15:02] <gmb> Meeting time doubly so.
[15:02] <barry> schwuk: ping
[15:03] <barry> [TOPIC] next meeting
[15:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  next meeting
[15:03] <barry> same time and place?  anybody know they can't make it?
[15:04] <barry> cool
[15:04] <barry> [TOPIC] action items
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  action items
[15:04] <barry>     * barry submitted bug reports for bzr-lpreview about the 1.2.6 milestone and `utilities/paste` path.  the sftp urls issue is because of the settings in `locations.conf`
[15:04] <gmb> I completely forgot to do that, so thanks barry :)
[15:05] <barry> gmb: np!  note that the sftp thing is due to the setting of your public_branch config
[15:05] <schwuk> barry: sorry!
[15:05] <schwuk> me
[15:05] <barry> schwuk: np
[15:05] <barry>  * (continued) barry to remind lp devs to do pre-impl calls (*done*)
[15:05] <BjornT_> me
[15:06] <barry> there's nothing like an impending meeting to get action items done :)
[15:06] <barry>  * barry to remind devs that sending a cover letter isn't enough to trigger a review (*done*)
[15:06]  * bigjools noticed that barry only just did that :)
[15:06] <barry>  * barry to prod mwh about gmb's 800-line limit patch (*done*)
[15:06] <barry> :)
[15:06] <gmb> Cool.
[15:06] <flacoste> barry: this means that we shouldn't use public_branch anymore or that we should use bzr+ssh in it?
[15:06] <barry>  * gmb to add lpreview to sourcecode and hack rf-setup to link it in
[15:06] <gmb> I appear to be made of fail.
[15:06] <barry> flacoste: that you should use bzr+ssh in it
[15:06] <gmb> I need to talk to someone about getting this into sourcecode.
[15:06] <flacoste> barry: what about pqm?
[15:07] <gmb> I have a hack in rocketfuel-setup, however.
[15:07] <flacoste> barry: iirc, that was for pqm submission which don't support bzr+ssh
[15:07] <barry> flacoste: i think i've been told that pqm can now handle bzr+ssh, but i haven't tried it myself
[15:07] <bigjools> there are two separate configs
[15:07] <bigjools> one's for PQM and it has to be sftp
[15:08] <flacoste> actually, looking at my cache copy of PQM quey:
[15:08] <flacoste> Merge bzr+ssh://devpad.canonical.com/code/mwh/launchpad/code-import-worker-db sftp://devpad.canonical.com/code/rocketfuel/launchpad/devel
[15:08] <flacoste> so i guess PQM handles bzr+ssh just fine
[15:08] <flacoste> now
[15:08]  * bigjools has this:
[15:08] <bigjools> submit_branch = sftp://devpad.canonical.com/code/rocketfuel/launchpad/devel
[15:08] <bigjools> public_branch = bzr+ssh://devpad.canonical.com/code/julian/launchpad
[15:08] <salgado> I think we still need to use sftp for the submit branch
[15:08] <flacoste> public_branch had to be sftp:// previously
[15:09] <salgado> I recently tried using bzr+ssh there and it failed
[15:09] <barry> bigjools: yes, i have sftp in my submit_branch right now, but i think the asiapac folks told me pqm can handle bzr+ssh
[15:09] <bigjools> salgado: yes, I tried too
[15:09] <barry> salgado, bigjools okay, that's good to know
[15:09] <bigjools> barry: it doesn't work, at least for us
[15:09] <barry> so, submit_branch = sftp, public_branch = bzr+ssh
[15:09] <bigjools> the review plugin uses public_branch
[15:09] <barry> agreed?
[15:10] <bigjools> yup
[15:10] <barry> [AGREED] submit_branch = sftp, public_branch = bzr+ssh
[15:10] <MootBot> AGREED received:  submit_branch = sftp, public_branch = bzr+ssh
[15:10] <barry> [ACTION] barry to email about submit_branch vs public_branch
[15:10] <MootBot> ACTION received:  barry to email about submit_branch vs public_branch
[15:10] <sinzui> barry I don't recalled the Antipodean's saing PQM like bzr+ssh
[15:11] <barry> sinzui: no?  i could be misremembering where i heard that.  but it doesn't work, so we'll just chalk that up to sleep deprivation
[15:11]  * sinzui decides not to fix his spelling
[15:12] <sinzui> Heard? or IRC?
[15:12] <barry> sinzui: irc
[15:12] <sinzui> We're we in the same meeting?
[15:12]  * barry will scan his logs
[15:12] <barry> sinzui: could have been pvtmsg
[15:12]  * sinzui refrains from fixing grammar
[15:12] <barry> (i.e. not in the meeting)
[15:13] <barry> [TOPIC] queue status
[15:13] <MootBot> New Topic:  queue status
[15:13] <barry> 7 pinkies
[15:13] <barry> but many of those look like stub db reviews
[15:14] <barry> and jamesh's ongoing review branch
[15:14] <barry> schwuk: what's up with cprov's branch?
[15:15] <barry> schwuk: ?
[15:16] <schwuk> barry: nothing - It only hit my queue yesterday, I saw it this morning, and I'm reviewing it now.
[15:16] <schwuk> Or if it did hit my queue before yesterday, I missed it
[15:16] <barry> schwuk: cool.  it must have been sitting around for a while before you got it.  thanks for reviewing it!
[15:16]  * schwuk pokes irc notifications
[15:17] <sinzui> schwuk: I allocated it on Saturday
[15:17] <cprov> schwuk: thanks, you are my hero.
[15:17] <barry> any other queue comments?
[15:17] <schwuk> sinzui: I must of missed it then - my bad
[15:17]  * sinzui review period carried over to Saturday
[15:17] <barry> yes, we do still need to keep an eye on our PR queues
[15:17] <intellectronica> sinzui: it's a good idea to prod folks when you allocate reviews, because people are not used to this anymore
[15:17] <sinzui> intellectronica: agreed
[15:18] <barry> intellectronica: is it still a good idea to do this allocation?
[15:18] <schwuk> cprov: thank me *after* the review :)
[15:18] <sinzui> I don't care for the allocation
[15:19] <bigjools> I check my queue once a day, in the morning
[15:19] <barry> sinzui: how can we better handle reviews the oncaller doesn't get to?
[15:19] <sinzui> I think we pull from the general queue if no on-call review could get to it. large branches still require an agreement
[15:19] <bac> barry: i think we should still do the allocation.  i always target trainees or reviewers who don't do on-call.
[15:20] <intellectronica> barry: i think so. otherwise the general queue can end up being too long in the beginning of a shift, which is not really fair to the OCR
[15:20] <schwuk> I do check my queue - it just always seem to be at the wrong time.
[15:20] <barry> bac: +1, intellectronica +1
[15:21] <barry> let's keep doing it.  just remember to take a look at your queue once per day.  and don't feel bad about rejecting a branch (more on this later)
[15:21] <barry> any other queue status feedback?
[15:21]  * sinzui sees the FIOS cables being laid outside his window
[15:21]  * bigjools is jealous of sinzui
[15:22] <bac> as a reminder, i've written a little cronscript that will notify you of changes to *your* section of PendingReviews.  talk to me later if you'd like to use it.
[15:22] <barry> sinzui: <sniff>
[15:22]  * sinzui has the lowest DSL right now.
[15:22]  * bac will never see FIOS out in the woods
[15:22] <barry> bac: can you email lp-reviews about it?
[15:23] <flacoste> bac: nice idea
[15:23] <schwuk> bac: +1
[15:23] <bac> barry: sure.  i've announced it before but no one was interested.  <sniff>
[15:23] <barry> bac: ;}
[15:24] <barry> bac: sounds like there's interest now! :)
[15:24] <barry> bac: timing is everything
[15:24]  * bac remembers why he isn't in marketing
[15:24] <schwuk> bac: maybe you didn't announce it loudly enough :)
[15:24] <barry> moving on?
[15:24] <barry> [TOPIC] mentoring update
[15:24] <MootBot> New Topic:  mentoring update
[15:25] <barry> any updates?  mentors, start thinking about graduations at the end of this cycle, and also any new devs to bring on for next cycle
[15:26] <barry> no news is good news!
[15:26] <bac> allenap continues to do excellent reviews and will definitely be up at the end of the cycle.
[15:26] <allenap> cool :)
[15:26] <barry> bac: cool, allenap great to hear!
[15:27]  * schwuk hopes this Friday's OCR will be busier than last weeks
[15:27] <schwuk> ...or maybe everyone waited for sinzui...
[15:27] <sinzui> schwuk: the Foundations team laid it all on my shoulders
[15:27]  * bigjools is happy to put a large Soyuz branch in schwuk's direction
[15:27] <sinzui> schwuk: I really did not complete my reviews until Saturday
[15:27] <barry> schwuk: careful what you wish for :)
[15:28] <schwuk> barry: true :)
[15:28] <bigjools> it's over the limit as well, and I can't pare it much more :)
[15:28] <schwuk> barry: not mentoring, but for the past two weeks jml hasn't updated the topic when he's gone 'off duty'
[15:29] <schwuk> bigjools: we can have a chat about it after the meeting
[15:29] <bigjools> schwuk: sure thing
[15:29] <barry> schwuk: k.  you might send him a friendly reminder email
[15:29] <schwuk> barry: will do
[15:29] <barry> schwuk: thanks!
[15:29] <barry> moving on...
[15:29] <barry> [TOPIC] review process
[15:29] <MootBot> New Topic:  review process
[15:30] <barry>  * '''Removing the reject queue''' (allenap). On Monday, Barry put a
[15:30] <barry>  review back on the reject queue, with a comment. I was on-call the
[15:30] <barry>  next day, as was Danilo, but neither of us noticed it. In the end,
[15:30] <barry>  Francis had to chase it up. I think it would work better if we put
[15:30] <barry>  rejected reviews back on the general queue (with a comment), and drop
[15:30] <barry>  the reject queue altogether.
[15:30] <allenap> Any objections?
[15:30] <bigjools> +1
[15:30] <danilos> +1
[15:30] <gmb> +1
[15:30] <barry> allenap: +1
[15:30] <sinzui> +1
[15:30] <bac> +1
[15:30] <schwuk> +1
[15:31] <salgado> +1
[15:31] <danilos> = +8
[15:31] <flacoste> +1
[15:31] <bac> i propose rejections be put at the *top* of the general queue
[15:31] <allenap> bac: +1
[15:31] <danilos> bac: +2 ;)
[15:31] <bigjools> +1
[15:31] <gmb> bac: +1
[15:31] <barry> [AGREED] get rid of the reject queue and just use the general queue with a comment, with rejections put at the top
[15:31] <MootBot> AGREED received:  get rid of the reject queue and just use the general queue with a comment, with rejections put at the top
[15:31] <barry> :)
[15:31] <allenap> Does anyone know if this'll break pending-reviews?
[15:32] <danilos> allenap: it shouldn't, we've been doing that in the past
[15:32] <flacoste> i don't think so
[15:32] <allenap> Great, I'll do that then.
[15:32] <barry> allenap: do you want to communicate this to the team or shall i?
[15:33] <allenap> barry: I'll do it once I've changed PR.
[15:33] <barry> allenap: awesome, thanks
[15:33] <barry> [ACTION] allenap to update PR and communicate to team new rejection policy
[15:33] <MootBot> ACTION received:  allenap to update PR and communicate to team new rejection policy
[15:34] <barry> well, that's it from me.  we have about 10 minutes left.  does anybody have any other issues to discuss, about the review process or anything else?
[15:34] <bigjools> one thing just quickly
[15:35] <bigjools> something that came up in a review of gmb's branch was the pythonic vs c-style braces
[15:35] <bigjools> barry: you preferred the c-style right?
[15:35] <gmb> bigjools: barry Pointed out the python S.O.P for that instance.
[15:35] <sinzui> a brace on a line by itself inflates the lines
[15:36] <bigjools> I just wanted to formalise something in the style guide
[15:36] <bigjools> sinzui: but it reduces diff count later when changing it :)
[15:36] <barry> well, i wouldn't put it as c-style vs. python-style, but ime, closing brace/paren/bracket on a line by itself is very common python idiom
[15:36] <sinzui>  if ( this
[15:36] <barry> bigjools: right
[15:37] <sinzui>      or that
[15:37] <sinzui>     ):
[15:37] <bigjools> anyway, probably not a matter to discuss now, we can take it to the ML
[15:37] <sinzui> I think we should be consistent with how braces close
[15:37] <barry> bigjools: that's also why we always include the comma on the last line, even though it isn't required
[15:37] <gmb> sinzui: +1.
[15:37] <sinzui> I've grown to love the trailing comma
[15:37] <bigjools> barry: my thoughts exactly
[15:38] <gmb> But let's take it to the ML, 'cos from experience I feel there could be a bunfight about this
[15:38] <barry> sinzui: consistency = +1, bigjools do you want to take it to the ml?
[15:38] <bigjools> will do
[15:38]  * barry breaks out his bikeshed paint
[15:38]  * bac breaks out his buns
[15:38] <barry> [ACTION] bigjools to take brace closing policy to ml
[15:38] <MootBot> ACTION received:  bigjools to take brace closing policy to ml
[15:38]  * bigjools hides
[15:38]  * gmb avoids that mental image
[15:38] <bigjools> lol
[15:39]  * barry was going to say his buns break out, but refrains from getting so crude
[15:39] <sinzui> gmb: my implode if he was left in a room with Kurt
[15:39] <gmb> E_PARSE
[15:39] <sinzui> s/my/might/
[15:40] <gmb> sinzui: I like kurt. He's like a wind up toy. You just have to see how far he'll go...
[15:40] <bigjools> he has limits?
[15:40] <barry> bigjools: my question exactly
[15:40] <gmb> bigjools: Not so far.
[15:40]  * bigjools remembers the shower nozzle comment in #canonical
[15:40] <gmb> Ah, happy times.
[15:41] <bigjools> are we done now? :)
[15:41] <barry> we have 5 more minutes.  any more tush jokes?
[15:41] <barry> okay, i think we're done :)
[15:41] <intellectronica> 5 minutes my arse!
[15:41] <barry> #endmeeting
[15:41] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 16:41.
[15:41] <sinzui> I did follow up with mwhudson__ about his navlinks branch
[15:41] <barry> thanks everyone
[15:41] <intellectronica> cheers barry
[15:41] <gmb> Ta barry.
[15:41] <bigjools> grassy ass
[15:42] <barry> sinzui: sorry :)
[15:42]  * bigjools got one in right at the end there
[15:42] <barry> sinzui: you're supposed to say "butt wait!  i have more!"
[15:42]  * bigjools sees this one running for a while
[15:43] <barry> take it to #canonical :)
[15:43] <sinzui> schwuk: mwhudson__ has secondary concerns about the branch. he doesn't have time to work on it now, but will circle back to it. It may require additional changes and review
[15:44] <schwuk> sinzui: Do we leave it on the queue for now?
[15:44] <sinzui> I'm tempted to move it back to work in progress. If he wants to land it without changes, then he may
[15:46]  * sinzui moves branch