[15:00] <barry> #startmeeting
[15:01] <barry> mootbot, like gwb is an ex-mootbot
[15:01] <bigjools> the mystery of the missing mootbot
[15:01] <rockstar> mootbot is dead.
[15:01] <rockstar> I killed him.
[15:01] <barry> anyway.  welcome to this week's ameu reviewer's meeting.  who's here today?
[15:01] <sinzui> me
[15:01] <bigjools> me
[15:01] <rockstar> me
[15:01] <mars> me
[15:01] <al-maisan> miau
[15:01] <gary_poster> me
[15:01] <adeuring> me
[15:01] <abentley> me
[15:01] <allenap> me
[15:01] <salgado> me
[15:02] <bac> me
[15:02] <intellectronica> me
[15:03] <barry> BjornT, cprov, danilos ping
[15:03] <gmb> me
[15:03] <danilos> me
[15:03] <flacoste> me
[15:03] <barry> EdwinGrubbs: ping
[15:03] <danilos> (though I am likely to be on and off)
[15:03] <EdwinGrubbs> me
[15:03] <barry> np, today's a light agenda
[15:03] <barry> [TOPIC] agenda
[15:04] <barry>  * Roll call
[15:04] <barry>  * mars to stop ocr, will review js on call until more reviewers are trained
[15:04] <barry>  * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:04] <barry>  * Action items
[15:04] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[15:04] <barry> oops.  ignore the mars item, we did that last week
[15:04] <mars> *whew*
[15:04] <barry> let's skip around a bit...  i suck today
[15:04] <barry> [TOPIC] action items
[15:04] <barry>  * barry to look into techniques for eliminating back-patching of schema types (avoiding circular imports)
[15:05] <barry> i actually started to look at this and i might have a branch for review later this week
[15:05] <bigjools> \o/
[15:05] <barry>  * barry to add `pretty()` functions to reviewers docs
[15:05] <barry> not done
[15:05] <barry>  * flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet
[15:05] <flacoste> *sigh*
[15:06] <barry> no worries.  do you want to keep it on the list?
[15:06] <flacoste> yeah, for two more weeks
[15:06] <barry> you got it :)
[15:07] <barry> [TOPIC] mentoring update
[15:07] <barry> any word from mentors or mentats?
[15:07] <gmb> al-maisan's doing very well now that the volume of reviews is back up to something approaching normal
[15:08] <gmb> Mondays aren't the ideal day for mentoring, I think; they can be quite quiet.
[15:08]  * abentley agrees they are quiet.
[15:08] <barry> should we move you guys to get better coverage?
[15:09] <barry> i think adeuring was looking for a monday slot
[15:09] <gmb> barry: I'm not sure, it depends on how al-maisan feels.
[15:09] <barry> we also have euro/tues free
[15:09] <adeuring> adeuring: well, I wouldn't oopose to taking Monday
[15:10] <adeuring> ...or Tuesday or Wednesday
[15:10] <al-maisan> gmb: I am your apprentice, so will tag along :)
[15:10] <bigjools> any day ending in a "y"
[15:10] <gmb> :)
[15:11] <gmb> al-maisan, barry Maybe it's worth moving to Tuesday for a week or two.
[15:11] <barry> bigjools: thank goodness that leaves satursun out
[15:11] <barry> gmb, al-maisan ok. let's move you guys to tuesday for two weeks to get more mentoring in
[15:11] <gmb> Cool.
[15:12] <al-maisan> fine :)
[15:12] <barry> adeuring: let's keep you at friday for now and then depending on how it goes with gmb and al-maisan we could switch you after that
[15:12] <gmb> I'll update the OCR page.
[15:12] <adeuring> barry: OK
[15:12] <barry> gmb: awesome, thanks
[15:12] <barry> any other mentoring issues?
[15:13] <barry> guess not!
[15:13] <barry> [TOPIC] peanut gallery
[15:13] <abentley> I have a PSA
[15:13] <barry> well, that's all i have on my agenda, i open the floor to y'all
[15:14] <barry> abentley: go ahead
[15:14]  * al-maisan wonders what a PSA is..?
[15:14] <gmb> al-maisan: public service announcement
[15:14] <al-maisan> ah!
[15:14] <abentley> When you approve a merge proposal, please mark its status approved as well.
[15:14] <abentley> If you are using email, you can use the "status approved" command.
[15:15] <rockstar> Now you know, and knowing is half the battle! Gee Eye JOOOOOOOOOOE
[15:15] <abentley> This will remove the proposal from the list of active reviews.
[15:15] <barry> abentley: that is a continuing source of pain ;)
[15:15] <abentley> Which makes it easier to see what needs to be reviewed.
[15:15] <bac> abentley: +1
[15:15] <gmb> Nurse, nurse! rockstar's out of bed again...
[15:16] <rockstar> gmb: did you not watch GI Joe, with the PSAs at the end?
[15:16] <abentley> You can use "review approve" and "status approved" in the same email.
[15:16] <gmb> rockstar: Call it cultural differences :)
[15:16] <abentley> Just on different lines.
[15:16] <salgado> abentley, why do we need both?
[15:17] <rockstar> I know thumper talked about doing it automatically, but we have some details to figure out first.
[15:17] <al-maisan> abentley: do you need both?
[15:17] <abentley> salgado: Because one is a reviewer's opinion, and one is the status of the merge proposal.
[15:17] <rockstar> salgado: one is the status of the CodeReviewVote, the other is for the status of the BranchMergeProposal
[15:17] <sinzui> salgado: some project may require two more more reviews to be approved before the status is really approved.
[15:17] <EdwinGrubbs> abentley: btw, doesn't there need to be a leading space in the email commands, so it should be " review approve"
[15:17] <flacoste> i think you only need status approve
[15:17] <salgado> I see
[15:17] <abentley> EdwinGrubbs: Yes.
[15:18] <flacoste> iirc, it also automatically approve the review
[15:18] <rockstar> flacoste: not true currently.
[15:18] <abentley> salgado: There are two reviews in many cases.
[15:18] <salgado> I've been using only "status approve"
[15:18] <barry> salgado: i guess that approves the mp without setting your review status to approve...?
[15:19] <rockstar> salgado: it'd be " status approved" - note the tense
[15:19] <abentley> salgado: Other projects may have different rules about how many reviews are required, whether reviewers can veto, etc.
[15:19] <bigjools> maybe have a per-project policy that can be set then
[15:19] <abentley> barry: Right.  It's like: "I don't approve of this, but merge it anyway."
[15:20] <flacoste> sure, i thought thumper said it did both
[15:20] <flacoste> ?
[15:20] <salgado> abentley, I don't see it that way.  I see it more as an indication that the reviewer didn't know there were two separate things to approve
[15:20] <barry> abentley: and eventually we'll be able to specify those workflows and have it all work automatically, right? <wink>
[15:20] <rockstar> flacoste: it does in cases where you voted needs_fixing, and then revoted approve
[15:20] <abentley> barry: That's a good question.  The mandate to avoid imposing policy was from on high.
[15:21] <barry> abentley: not imposing policy, but providing the mechanisms for projects to specify their policy
[15:21] <rockstar> barry: eventually, given enough time, Launchpad will support direct teleportation to sprints.
[15:21] <barry> abentley: but i think that's also frowned on :/
[15:21] <abentley> barry: You may not from my work on Bundle Buggy that I think it makes a lot of sense to have policy about what is needed to approve a merge proposal.
[15:21] <barry> rockstar: thank goodness, 'cause i'm running out of my little round friends
[15:22] <barry> abentley: in this case, it could be as simple as a count of the number of approved reviews.  i don't even care about the rejected ones
[15:22] <al-maisan> the email generated by the webapp says: "Review: Approve" BTW .. that means we cannot use that any more?
[15:23] <rockstar> barry: in Entertainer's case, a rejected or a needs_fixing prevents the branch from landing regardless of the approveds...
[15:23] <abentley> barry: So in LP, we have mentor / mentat reviews, which are one special case.  And we have database reviews, which are another.
[15:24]  * barry invokes the 80/20 rule
[15:24] <rockstar> al-maisan: that is just the output email.  The input in " review approve"
[15:25] <salgado> does "vote approve" work as well?
[15:25] <abentley> rockstar is working on exposing BMPs through the API.  Presumably he could write a script to enforce a policy.
[15:25] <barry> abentley, rockstar +1 !
[15:25] <rockstar> abentley: yes, that's an idea.
[15:25] <rockstar> salgado: vote is deprecated.  Use review.
[15:26] <salgado> will do
[15:26] <barry> abentley: cool, thanks for that psa
[15:26] <abentley> barry: np
[15:26] <barry> anything else on this or other topics?
[15:27] <abentley> barry: I've just started work on generating diffs for all merge proposals.
[15:27]  * flacoste cheers
[15:27] <barry> abentley: yay!
[15:27] <flacoste> i propose a virtual wave for abentley!
[15:27] <al-maisan> :)
[15:28] <barry> everyone send abentley an e-beer
[15:29] <barry> are we done?
[15:29] <barry> 5
[15:29] <barry> 4
[15:29] <barry> 3
[15:29] <barry> 2
[15:29] <barry> 1
[15:29] <barry> #endmeeting
[15:30] <barry> thanks everyone!
[15:30] <gmb> Thanks barry
[15:30] <flacoste> thanks barry!
[15:30] <abentley> Thanks barry
[15:30] <al-maisan> thanks barry!