| barry | #startmeeting | 03:00 |
|---|---|---|
| thumper | hi barry | 03:00 |
| thumper | I'll have to duck out a bit early | 03:00 |
| barry | thumper: np, we can make it short | 03:00 |
| thumper | barry: you'll be happy to know I'm working on branch merge queues | 03:00 |
| mwhudson | me | 03:00 |
| barry | welcome to this weeks' asiapac reviewers meeting. who's here today? | 03:00 |
| barry | thumper: excellent! | 03:00 |
| spiv | Hello. | 03:00 |
| barry | spiv: hi | 03:00 |
| barry | mwhudson: hi | 03:00 |
| barry | jml: ping? | 03:01 |
| jml | hi | 03:01 |
| barry | jamesh: hi | 03:01 |
| barry | jml: hi | 03:01 |
| jamesh | hi | 03:01 |
| barry | [TOPIC] agenda | 03:01 |
| barry | ok, screw you mootbot | 03:01 |
| barry | * Roll call | 03:02 |
| barry | * Next meeting | 03:02 |
| barry | * Action items | 03:02 |
| barry | * Queue status | 03:02 |
| barry | * Mentoring update | 03:02 |
| barry | * new recruits? (leonardr, abentley, mars) | 03:02 |
| barry | * Review process | 03:02 |
| thumper | barry: mootbot isn't listening | 03:02 |
| barry | * (intellectronica) JS-related templates should be tested (as much as possible). | 03:02 |
| barry | * (barry) don't assign GQ after on-call session? | 03:02 |
| barry | thumper: like a child in front of a wii | 03:02 |
| barry | * Next meeting | 03:02 |
| barry | same time next week? | 03:02 |
| spiv | barry: also like an adult in front a wii... | 03:02 |
| barry | spiv: :) | 03:03 |
| mwhudson | barry: sure | 03:03 |
| barry | i may miss next week though. i'm not sure yet, but i might be picking my wife up from the airport at this time | 03:03 |
| barry | i'll send an email if i have to switch/cancel | 03:03 |
| thumper | ok | 03:03 |
| barry | * Action items | 03:04 |
| barry | * mwhudson to start discussion on page test purpose | 03:04 |
| * thumper didn't file that bug | 03:04 | |
| mwhudson | didn't do this mostly through slackness | 03:04 |
| mwhudson | will do it before the next meeting | 03:04 |
| barry | k, we'll just continue them both ;) | 03:04 |
| barry | there was definitely some hearty discussion on both subjects at the last ameu so i think these are good things to start talking about | 03:05 |
| barry | * Queue status | 03:05 |
| mwhudson | i noticed flacoste said something that made me aaargh | 03:05 |
| barry | not much from me here. any comments on your side? | 03:05 |
| barry | mwhudson: what? | 03:06 |
| mwhudson | the pqm queue is more of a bother than the review queue at the moment | 03:06 |
| barry | mwhudson: definitely. pqm needs some serious love | 03:06 |
| barry | it's driving people crazy | 03:06 |
| jml | mwhudson: is that what flacoste said? | 03:06 |
| mwhudson | <flacoste> sinzui: testing template in doc/*-pages is not our standard, although it might make a good idea | 03:07 |
| * thumper stabs doc/*-pages | 03:07 | |
| mwhudson | "aaaaaargh, no, doc/* should be documentation!" | 03:07 |
| jml | mwhudson: +1 | 03:07 |
| thumper | should be browser/tests in unit tests!!! | 03:07 |
| mwhudson | but anyway, --> mailing list | 03:07 |
| barry | +1 | 03:07 |
| jml | thumper: +1 | 03:07 |
| barry | yeah -> ml | 03:07 |
| mwhudson | barry: (about the queues again) to be fair, it's mostly not pqm | 03:08 |
| mwhudson | it's our test suite | 03:08 |
| barry | well, there /are/ issues with pqm losing branches, sending false success emails, etc | 03:08 |
| mwhudson | though the disappearing merges thing seems to be a bzrlib/pqm thing | 03:08 |
| mwhudson | yes | 03:08 |
| mwhudson | btw, mthaddon and lifeless uncovered some clues about that this morning | 03:08 |
| barry | do tell! | 03:09 |
| thumper | thank <insert deity here> | 03:09 |
| mwhudson | barry: it's something to do with autopacks | 03:09 |
| jamesh | so every tenth commit disappears or something? | 03:10 |
| spiv | That's Weird(TM). | 03:10 |
| barry | wow | 03:10 |
| mwhudson | when pqm pushes to devpad after a successful test suite, it can trigger an autopack | 03:10 |
| mwhudson | and sometimes 'things go wrong" | 03:10 |
| thumper | oh FFS | 03:10 |
| mwhudson | for example: https://pastebin.canonical.com/6500/ | 03:11 |
| mwhudson | so there are two bugs really, that this happens (a bzr problem) | 03:11 |
| mwhudson | and that the user visible symptom is so mysterious (a pqm problem) | 03:11 |
| mwhudson | by chance, beuno had the same problem pushing to launchpad today | 03:11 |
| barry | mwhudson: can we turn autopacks off? | 03:12 |
| spiv | Not without hacking bzr. | 03:12 |
| barry | :-( | 03:12 |
| mwhudson | and we probably managed to grab enough data to reproduce | 03:12 |
| mwhudson | barry: now you know as much as me, we should get lifeless to summarize what he knows to the list | 03:12 |
| mars | mwhudson, related question: lifeless was wondering if PQM was sending emails - he hadn't seen an exception email for a long time. Was it sending them? | 03:12 |
| barry | [ACTION] barry will ask lifeless to summarize what he knows about The PQM Mystery to the ml | 03:12 |
| jamesh | autopacking is desirable when it works | 03:13 |
| mwhudson | mars: yes, it seems that they disappeared somewhere in his own email setup | 03:13 |
| barry | btw, do any of you have any thoughts about pqm groking looms? | 03:13 |
| mars | mwhudson, sorry, he was wondering about PQM *error emails* | 03:13 |
| mars | ah | 03:13 |
| mars | mwhudson, cool | 03:13 |
| mwhudson | mars: probably easier to ask him than me :) | 03:13 |
| jamesh | barry: if PQM grokked loom threads, sure. | 03:13 |
| jml | barry: I think it would be good to clarify what that meant. | 03:14 |
| barry | really, i just want to pqm-submit a loomed branch | 03:14 |
| thumper | barry: I think we'd just have to have the loom plugin on the pqm instance | 03:14 |
| jml | barry: like jamesh is getting at, we probably want to land a thread of a loom, rather than a whole loom | 03:14 |
| thumper | barry: and fix the push bug | 03:14 |
| jamesh | just loading the plugin would probably give you "merge which ever thread was active when I just published to devpad" | 03:14 |
| spiv | If a) PQM received merge directives, and b) had the loom plugin installed | 03:14 |
| spiv | Then it would Just Work. | 03:14 |
| barry | jml: interesting, that's not quite how i use looms, but i can see what you mean | 03:14 |
| barry | it gets tricky, eh? | 03:15 |
| thumper | jamesh: there is a bug where push over bzr+ssh doesn't work properly | 03:15 |
| barry | let me ask a meta-question: are we submitting bug reports for these issues (he ask, knowing that he has not done so) | 03:15 |
| jml | barry: sometimes we are. | 03:16 |
| thumper | bzr-loom product | 03:16 |
| jml | barry: I file bugs on bzr-loom fairly often :) | 03:16 |
| barry | :) | 03:16 |
| barry | cool, thanks | 03:16 |
| thumper | https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bzr-loom/+bug/201613 | 03:16 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 201613 in bzr-loom "pushing looms does not work properly" [Critical,Triaged] | 03:16 |
| jamesh | having PQM do merge directives might be the way forward | 03:17 |
| jml | yeah. | 03:17 |
| thumper | I think Odd_Blok1 may be looking at this | 03:17 |
| thumper | *may* | 03:17 |
| thumper | and moving along... | 03:18 |
| jamesh | of course, the way merge directives specify the revision ID to merge might cause a bit of havoc with the way we use PQM, pushing fixes after submitting the merge | 03:18 |
| barry | i'm just afraid that pqm is currently hampering productivity (it is mine) so we should spend some Real Time fixing things | 03:18 |
| thumper | jamesh: right now, we'll have the same problem with my current work | 03:19 |
| barry | jamesh: yeah, i kind of wish we couldn't do that, although i've used it to my advantage before | 03:19 |
| thumper | jamesh: however I'm thinking of a work around | 03:19 |
| spiv | jamesh: well, the proper fix to that is having actual queue management | 03:19 |
| barry | sorry for getting off track... back to the agenda | 03:19 |
| barry | * Mentoring update | 03:19 |
| barry | folks were generally positive in ameu about inviting new reviewers. gmb, intellectronica, and i all offered to mentor after 2.0 is out | 03:20 |
| barry | i think abentley will be the first invitee | 03:20 |
| thumper | abentley said he is happy to have a go after 2.0 | 03:20 |
| barry | with leonardr and mars following | 03:20 |
| barry | thumper: great | 03:21 |
| barry | any other thoughts here? | 03:21 |
| barry | * Review process | 03:22 |
| barry | * (intellectronica) JS-related templates should be tested (as much as possible). | 03:22 |
| barry | that's a new one, so i don't know much about where tom's going with it | 03:22 |
| barry | but i can guess that as we use more js, we need to find a way to test it | 03:22 |
| thumper | right | 03:22 |
| thumper | I was bitten by this recently | 03:22 |
| thumper | the pagetests passed | 03:23 |
| thumper | but oopsed in reality | 03:23 |
| barry | that's not good :) | 03:23 |
| jamesh | Xvfb + firefox + AppServerLayer + ? | 03:23 |
| jml | can we find out what google do? | 03:24 |
| mwhudson | i wonder if it involves selenium and a very large number of machines | 03:24 |
| jamesh | jml: the google web toolkit they released a while ago had "compile java code to javascript" | 03:24 |
| jamesh | and test with java tools | 03:24 |
| mars | barry, I think I know | 03:25 |
| jml | hmm. | 03:25 |
| mars | about intellectronica's idea | 03:25 |
| barry | mars: go ahead | 03:25 |
| mwhudson | it is quite hard to google for things about google | 03:25 |
| jml | jamesh: I don't see how that gets you a way to test "how does this work in firefox" | 03:25 |
| mars | the iframe bug, and the rollback issue from edge with bad JS ruining everything, was a result of us not testing any JavaScript. | 03:26 |
| barry | yep. it's only going to get more serious as we move forward | 03:28 |
| mars | testing JS with JSUnit or something similar would at least give us an idea of which code could cause failure if it doesn't load properly. | 03:28 |
| mars | barry, exactly | 03:28 |
| barry | anyway, we'll see what comes up on wednesday | 03:28 |
| jml | jsunit would definitely be a step in the right direction | 03:28 |
| jml | and you can run it from your python test suite using subunit | 03:28 |
| * jml did something like that at divmod. | 03:29 | |
| mars | interesting | 03:29 |
| mars | it may not even take extensive testing, just 'what happens if X bombs out' | 03:29 |
| barry | indeed. jml if you want to post some of your experience to the ml, that would be great | 03:29 |
| jml | the big issue that stopped us from using it more was that spidermonkey had no dom. | 03:29 |
| mars | in this case, inlinehelp.js error'd out, and took the portlets expansion code with it :( | 03:30 |
| jml | barry: sure. I'll find out what the divmodders are doing for js testing nowadays and post something. | 03:30 |
| * jml might have a spare moment to do that soon. | 03:31 | |
| barry | i'll just add that 1) we need a more extensive js coding guideline, and 2) reviewing js is difficult! | 03:31 |
| barry | jml: thanks | 03:31 |
| barry | moving on... | 03:31 |
| barry | * (barry) don't assign GQ after on-call session? | 03:31 |
| barry | so, i know it's our policy that we should be assigning any left over GQ branches at the end of our on-call, but i think maybe we should stop that practice | 03:32 |
| barry | i think instead, we should just leave them there for the next day's ocr | 03:32 |
| mwhudson | i think that probably makes sense | 03:32 |
| barry | thing is, i think few people have time to do reviews outside their ocr | 03:32 |
| thumper | sounds reasonable | 03:32 |
| mwhudson | if someone assigns a branch to me, i can guarantee that i wouldn't notice unless i got emailed about it too | 03:33 |
| barry | i run bac's pr script, but still, i know what you mean | 03:33 |
| mwhudson | jml just sms-ed me to say that his machine just hung | 03:33 |
| barry | okay cool. i run all the crazy ideas by you guys first. we'll see what the ameus have to say | 03:33 |
| barry | dang | 03:34 |
| barry | well, i'm done anyway. anything from y'all? | 03:34 |
| mwhudson | nothing leaps to mind | 03:34 |
| barry | #endmeeting | 03:34 |
| * thumper has to go now | 03:35 | |
| thumper | barry: good timing | 03:35 |
| barry | thanks everyone, have a good week | 03:35 |
| barry | :) | 03:35 |
| jml | back. | 03:40 |
| === Odd_Blok1 is now known as Odd_Bloke | ||
| === mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch | ||
| === salgado-afk is now known as salgado | ||
| === EdwinGrub is now known as EdwinGrubbs | ||
| === salgado is now known as salgado-lunch | ||
| === salgado-lunch is now known as salgado | ||
| === salgado is now known as salgado-afk | ||
| === salgado-afk is now known as salgado | ||
| === mwhudson__ is now known as mwhudson | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!