| === mthaddon_ is now known as mthaddon | ||
| === Ursinha is now known as Jorjao | ||
| === Jorjao is now known as Amelinha | ||
| === Amelinha is now known as Ursinha | ||
| === bac_afk is now known as bac | ||
| === vednis is now known as mars | ||
| barry | #startmeeting | 15:00 |
|---|---|---|
| MootBot | Meeting started at 09:00. The chair is barry. | 15:00 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 15:00 |
| barry | hello everyone and welcome to this week's ameu reviewer's meeting. who's here today? | 15:00 |
| danilos | me | 15:00 |
| EdwinGrubbs | me | 15:00 |
| mars | me | 15:00 |
| bigjools | me | 15:01 |
| bac | me | 15:01 |
| barry | jtv: hi! | 15:02 |
| jtv | hi barry! | 15:02 |
| barry | adeuring: ping | 15:02 |
| barry | allenap: ping? | 15:02 |
| adeuring | whoops, me | 15:02 |
| salgado | me! | 15:02 |
| barry | BjornT: ping | 15:02 |
| gary_poster | me | 15:02 |
| barry | cprov: ping | 15:02 |
| BjornT | me | 15:02 |
| barry | gmb: ping | 15:03 |
| barry | intellectronica: ping | 15:03 |
| gmb | me | 15:03 |
| barry | rockstar: ping | 15:03 |
| intellectronica | me | 15:03 |
| jtv | me | 15:03 |
| barry | sinzui: ping | 15:03 |
| sinzui | hi barry | 15:03 |
| flacoste | me | 15:03 |
| barry | hi everyone | 15:04 |
| sinzui | me | 15:04 |
| barry | [TOPIC] agenda | 15:04 |
| MootBot | New Topic: agenda | 15:04 |
| barry | * Roll call | 15:04 |
| barry | * asiapac meeting time change | 15:04 |
| barry | * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary | 15:04 |
| barry | * Action items | 15:04 |
| barry | * Mentoring update | 15:04 |
| barry | * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda) | 15:04 |
| barry | [TOPIC] * asiapac meeting time change | 15:05 |
| MootBot | New Topic: * asiapac meeting time change | 15:05 |
| barry | so just a quick note that we've changed the date and time of the asiapac meeting. 10pm my time was just too difficult for me to remember, so now it's wednesdays utc 2300 | 15:05 |
| barry | which i think also makes it easier to communicate between the two review teams | 15:06 |
| barry | just in case y'all wanted to drop by :) | 15:06 |
| danilos | in case I have no idea what to do at midnight, I might ;) | 15:06 |
| barry | :) | 15:06 |
| barry | [TOPIC] * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary | 15:06 |
| MootBot | New Topic: * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary | 15:06 |
| barry | gary_poster: the floor is yours | 15:07 |
| flacoste | for US fols, that's nice, we'll be able to drop by | 15:07 |
| gary_poster | :-) k | 15:07 |
| barry | flacoste: yep. we don't have jamesh's tz to worry about any more :) | 15:07 |
| gary_poster | Zope deprecated zapi and ztapi quite awhile ago | 15:07 |
| gary_poster | Jim Fulton significantly refactored the zope.component API so that it was easier to use it directly | 15:07 |
| gary_poster | these APIs are more parallel (register/unregister for instance for adapters and utilities) | 15:08 |
| rockstar | me | 15:08 |
| gary_poster | and also don't hide how views work as adapters, for instance, behind what I believe to be an unnecessary and ultimately confusing veil | 15:08 |
| gary_poster | I think we (probably me) should come up with a cheat sheet on "if you were doing this, try doing this" | 15:09 |
| gary_poster | but Zope is already leaving that stuff behind, and I think we should too | 15:09 |
| barry | gary_poster: what kinds of things do we commonly do now that would be better off w/o zapi? | 15:09 |
| sinzui | I only see zapi and ztapi in old code. I have never reviewed code that added it. | 15:09 |
| barry | gary_poster: % fc lib/canonical zapi | wc -l | 15:09 |
| barry | 23 | 15:09 |
| gary_poster | sinzui: so, do you mean, it is already effectively deprecated? | 15:10 |
| sinzui | gary_poster: I think so | 15:10 |
| barry | sinzui: 23 hits on zapi, 35 hits on ztapi | 15:10 |
| barry | which doesn't seem like much | 15:11 |
| gary_poster | barry: zapi should be completely unnecessary. same with ztapi. It's just cruft, keeping people from understanding the actual use of the component code, for no particular win | 15:11 |
| gary_poster | ok, so maybe simple proposal: | 15:11 |
| sinzui | gary_poster: I only know what Phillip wrote in his book. I think flacoste/SteveA have driven us from using it in the past two years. | 15:11 |
| gary_poster | 1) Someone (I?) does (do) a branch that rips out the remainder | 15:12 |
| barry | maybe the newest code is in l/c/lazr/rest/tales.py? | 15:12 |
| gary_poster | 2) that policy is official | 15:12 |
| allenap | me | 15:12 |
| gary_poster | the reason that this came up is that I saw leonardr use it | 15:12 |
| barry | +1, +1 | 15:12 |
| gary_poster | ok | 15:12 |
| gary_poster | at least that was non-controversial ;-) | 15:13 |
| barry | gary_poster: maybe start with lib/canonical/lazr? | 15:13 |
| gary_poster | yeah | 15:13 |
| jtv | gary_poster: it was the "(I?)" part that sold us | 15:13 |
| gary_poster | lol :-) | 15:13 |
| gary_poster | k, done, unless someone else wants to say something | 15:14 |
| barry | jtv: are you saying that gary_poster is our jerry maguire? | 15:14 |
| barry | gary_poster: thanks | 15:14 |
| gary_poster | :-) | 15:14 |
| barry | [TOPIC] * Action items | 15:14 |
| MootBot | New Topic: * Action items | 15:14 |
| barry | * abentley to email ml and gustavo with suggestions for improving storm | 15:14 |
| barry | abentley: just in time! :) | 15:14 |
| abentley | barry: Done. | 15:14 |
| jtv | barry: EPOPCULTREF | 15:15 |
| abentley | barry: Response was not very positive. | 15:15 |
| gary_poster | heh | 15:15 |
| barry | abentley: yeah | 15:15 |
| gary_poster | conversation with stub seemed potentially fruitful though | 15:15 |
| abentley | In fact, he said if we like the SQLObject api, we should use the shim | 15:15 |
| flacoste | well | 15:17 |
| barry | what do you guys think? personally, i prefer both native storm query syntax and native storm class definitions | 15:17 |
| flacoste | that has some drawbacks | 15:17 |
| flacoste | and I don't think the shim is what we want to use | 15:17 |
| flacoste | native storm query: yes | 15:17 |
| flacoste | native storm class defs: not sure at all | 15:17 |
| abentley | I think stores should be optional. | 15:17 |
| abentley | Most of the time, we don't want or need them. | 15:17 |
| flacoste | the problem with the shim is that the results objects are incompatible | 15:18 |
| bigjools | as I found to my cost | 15:18 |
| abentley | Okay, so if we make our own base class, would that be acceptable? | 15:19 |
| barry | flacoste: what would you propose instead for class defs? base class/metaclass? | 15:19 |
| flacoste | base class is probably best | 15:20 |
| barry | abentley: not outside the realm of possibility | 15:20 |
| flacoste | as metaclass usually makes people's brain explode | 15:20 |
| barry | flacoste: indeed | 15:20 |
| barry | flacoste: how would that change the attribute definition syntax? | 15:20 |
| flacoste | i think we might need a metaclass for that, i don't know | 15:21 |
| flacoste | and maybe the native storm syntax isn't that bad | 15:21 |
| barry | flacoste: i think we would, but i guess my question is: what would you do differently? | 15:21 |
| flacoste | it's just that I agree with abentley that the ID stuff is kind of boring | 15:21 |
| barry | true | 15:22 |
| flacoste | well, the attribute names for instance | 15:22 |
| flacoste | field_id instead of fieldID | 15:22 |
| bigjools | the only real problem with Storm syntax for me is importing a gazillion content classes | 15:22 |
| allenap | bigjools: That does have the advantage that things break hard when classes are changed. | 15:23 |
| allenap | and early. | 15:23 |
| barry | is anybody motivated enough to try an experiment here? | 15:23 |
| abentley | bigjools: Not seeing the connection. | 15:23 |
| bigjools | abentley: if you use Python expressions for the query joins ... | 15:24 |
| abentley | bigjools: Is that compared to raw SQL with SQLObject? | 15:24 |
| bigjools | yes. if you write a string in SQL then you don't have the import pain, but then Storm can't work out the FROM tables | 15:25 |
| jtv | barry: what experiment did you have in mind? | 15:25 |
| flacoste | barry: well, i think abentley's gripes are good, so if he's willing to try to cook up a base class that suits him, that would be a good start | 15:26 |
| bigjools | allenap: that's a great point | 15:26 |
| abentley | flacoste: Sure, I'm happy to start with that. Metaclass foo later. | 15:26 |
| barry | jtv: a base class/metaclass to make various common boring or painful things easier | 15:26 |
| barry | abentley: cool. i know there's an experiments page somewhere but my firefox is misbehaving right now | 15:27 |
| barry | [ACTION] abentley to experiment with a base class to ease the pain and boredom with storm | 15:28 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: abentley to experiment with a base class to ease the pain and boredom with storm | 15:28 |
| barry | * flacoste to take dead zone reviews issue to ml | 15:29 |
| flacoste | done | 15:29 |
| flacoste | not sure of the resolution there | 15:29 |
| flacoste | though | 15:29 |
| barry | flacoste: me neither | 15:29 |
| barry | jtv: what do you think about that thread? | 15:29 |
| barry | jtv: i think you and stub get weighted more heavily here as you're the most tz challenged | 15:30 |
| * barry taps the mic and asks "is this thing still on?" | 15:31 | |
| jtv | barry: I do agree, just slightly concerned about having yet more ways to write a database class | 15:31 |
| jtv | barry: sorry, hard to type at this temperature | 15:31 |
| rockstar | jtv, +1 | 15:31 |
| barry | jtv: TOOWTDI | 15:31 |
| barry | jtv: and you're dutch so it should be obvious to you | 15:31 |
| gary_poster | :-) | 15:31 |
| barry | jtv: sorry, i meant the dead zone review thread | 15:32 |
| jtv | barry: ahhh | 15:32 |
| jtv | barry: I thought we already were discussing that on the ml | 15:33 |
| * jtv reads back | 15:33 | |
| barry | jtv: we are, just wanted to give you a higher bandwidth channel. but it's okay, we can continue on the ml | 15:33 |
| jtv | barry: yes, sorry, having that one line added in the middle changed the meaning of my backlog | 15:34 |
| jtv | I think we agreed that cover letters are good, and possibly better than asking a reviewer personally | 15:34 |
| barry | cover letters + mp + (maybe?) irc topic? | 15:35 |
| jtv | barry: ah yes, the topic line, I liked that | 15:35 |
| barry | jtv: cool. let's see if we can make that work. we can always try something else if need be | 15:36 |
| jtv | maybe a "candidate queue"? | 15:36 |
| jtv | after all, the "queue" is what an OCR has accepted | 15:36 |
| jtv | or a "review backlog" | 15:36 |
| barry | jtv: backlog: xxx in the topic? | 15:37 |
| jtv | barry: looks lovely | 15:37 |
| danilos | we can have two queues, one for on call, another for backlog, with OCRs reviewing alternately one from each | 15:37 |
| barry | danilos: +1 | 15:37 |
| jtv | oh, practical problem: how does the next reviewer know which *branch*? that's too long to record in the topic | 15:37 |
| barry | jtv: give an mp #? | 15:38 |
| danilos | how about just using links to bugs or MPs? | 15:38 |
| jtv | Yeah, nick:mp# would do it for me | 15:38 |
| barry | danilos: i think that makes the topic too long | 15:39 |
| abentley | hmm: The MP ids are unique. Maybe we should provide a direct link to them. | 15:39 |
| danilos | abentley: yeah, that would be an improvement (something like we have for bugs) | 15:39 |
| barry | abentley: do you mean, have the bot recognize "mp 1234"? | 15:40 |
| danilos | barry: I meant only bug ids (and bugs will point to branches, which will point to mps :) | 15:40 |
| barry | danilos: ah yes, fair enough | 15:40 |
| danilos | I'd prefer a bookmarklet https://code.launchpad.net/+merge-proposal/%s :) | 15:40 |
| jtv | danilos: good idea, but blueprint names get longer | 15:41 |
| danilos | jtv: they are also not linked to branches afaik | 15:41 |
| abentley | barry: No, I meant to be able to put code.launchpad.net/mp/1234 as a url. | 15:41 |
| barry | abentley, jtv, danilos let's see if we can hash out the details on the ml | 15:41 |
| jtv | danilos: good point :) | 15:41 |
| barry | only a couple of minutes left, so... | 15:42 |
| barry | * gary to email list about RENormalizing test, investigate alternate inline spellings | 15:42 |
| gary_poster | done. See how to do it. doctest not easily extensible for this, so will need to hack. | 15:42 |
| barry | i think that one's done | 15:42 |
| barry | gary_poster: thanks | 15:42 |
| barry | * barry to add `pretty()` functions to reviewers docs | 15:43 |
| barry | i suck, not done | 15:43 |
| barry | * flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet | 15:43 |
| flacoste | i suck, not done | 15:43 |
| barry | [TOPIC] peanut gallery | 15:43 |
| MootBot | New Topic: peanut gallery | 15:43 |
| danilos | I'd like to raise one issue here | 15:43 |
| barry | does anybody have anything not on the agenda? | 15:43 |
| barry | danilos: go4it | 15:43 |
| flacoste | if it's not done next week, i change my name to flacoste_hoover | 15:43 |
| danilos | the lightness of our reviews makes them not be that useful anymore as a learning tool | 15:43 |
| barry | flacoste: :) | 15:43 |
| danilos | we need to reiterate some points even if they are not necessarily what we expect developer to do | 15:44 |
| flacoste | what do you mean? | 15:44 |
| flacoste | or can you give an example? | 15:44 |
| danilos | eg. concrete example I have: we should mention LaunchpadForm for any form which is not using it | 15:44 |
| flacoste | good point | 15:44 |
| danilos | Henning was not aware of LaunchpadForm and hacked around even though he modified quite a few forms before | 15:44 |
| danilos | just a question for reviewers to ask: "why is this not using this and that infrastructure we have" | 15:45 |
| barry | danilos: +1 | 15:46 |
| gmb | I didn't realise that our reviews were that shallow. | 15:46 |
| * bigjools fears for future Soyuz reviews | 15:46 | |
| gmb | Just last week EdwinGrubbs pointed out a much easier way for me to do something that I'd spent ages hacking around with. | 15:47 |
| danilos | (even if reviewer knows the answer, we should help developers get to learn more about existing infrastructure, since there's so much of it) | 15:47 |
| bigjools | we need an infrastructure cheat sheet | 15:47 |
| gmb | bigjools: The only way you can have a shallow soyuz review is if the person doing the review is dead. | 15:47 |
| al-maisan | :) | 15:47 |
| gary_poster | :-) | 15:47 |
| flacoste | lol | 15:47 |
| bigjools | gmb: that can be arranged! | 15:47 |
| danilos | bigjools: the idea is not to force people to switch to new infrastructure, just to be aware of it, and understand why it's not being used | 15:47 |
| bigjools | danilos: that's fine - I just know that we have lots of, er, legacy code shall we say, done before a lot of the infrastructure was in place | 15:48 |
| bac | it works the other way too. yesterday i saw something cool sinzui was doing in a doctest i was reviewing and adopted it. | 15:48 |
| danilos | bac: indeed | 15:48 |
| bigjools | bac: yes, that's a great reason to be a reviewer | 15:49 |
| danilos | anyway, we're over time already, and I think I am done | 15:49 |
| barry | bac: we should find a way to share those insights across the team! | 15:49 |
| barry | danilos: thanks. and apologies for going over | 15:49 |
| * sinzui just wanted the code to be readible | 15:49 | |
| danilos | barry: we've tried so far to do that using wikis and mailing lists, but it doesn't really work out | 15:49 |
| mars | danilos, how about cleaning up technical debt as a learning exercise, rather than reviewing or using a cheat sheet? | 15:49 |
| * barry will eagerly await bac's email describing this insight :) | 15:49 | |
| bigjools | I would like a cheat sheet, personally | 15:49 |
| mars | that's how I started - fixing callsites, submitting 2000-line patches... | 15:50 |
| jtv | mars: it's not always stuff you'd easily recognize as tech debt | 15:50 |
| gary_poster | cheat sheets get awfully big | 15:50 |
| bigjools | then the info is shared | 15:50 |
| gary_poster | we already have some | 15:50 |
| danilos | gary_poster: only if you want to cheat in everything you do :) | 15:50 |
| gary_poster | that are really really big | 15:50 |
| gary_poster | :-) | 15:50 |
| bigjools | gary_poster: they can't get bigger than the doctests we have though :) | 15:50 |
| gary_poster | heh | 15:50 |
| barry | :) | 15:50 |
| barry | anyway. let's break for today | 15:50 |
| barry | #endmeeting | 15:50 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 09:50. | 15:50 |
| flacoste | thanks barry | 15:50 |
| barry | thanks everyone! | 15:51 |
| bigjools | thanks barry | 15:51 |
| jtv | thanks barry | 15:51 |
| gary_poster | thanks, bye | 15:51 |
| danilos | thanks all | 15:51 |
| === bac is now known as bac_lunch | ||
| === bac_lunch is now known as bac | ||
| === salgado is now known as salgado-afk | ||
| barry | #startmeeting | 23:01 |
| MootBot | Meeting started at 17:01. The chair is barry. | 23:01 |
| MootBot | Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] | 23:01 |
| barry | hello and welcome to the first of our newly scheduled asiapac reviewers meetings. who's here today? | 23:01 |
| * barry pings jml thumper and mwhudson | 23:01 | |
| mwhudson | hello | 23:01 |
| * thumper pongs | 23:02 | |
| thumper | :) | 23:02 |
| jml | barry: hi | 23:02 |
| barry | yay! how's it going guys? | 23:02 |
| thumper | busy | 23:02 |
| jml | yeah, very busy | 23:02 |
| thumper | too many things to do at once | 23:03 |
| barry | mwhudson: very very busy? | 23:03 |
| jml | people keep finding bugs in our software | 23:03 |
| thumper | oh, and I have a dentist appt in 1 hour | 23:03 |
| mwhudson | barry: you guessed it! | 23:03 |
| thumper | which I need to walk to | 23:03 |
| barry | well then, we'll make this quick! | 23:03 |
| barry | [TOPIC] agenda | 23:03 |
| MootBot | New Topic: agenda | 23:03 |
| barry | * Roll call | 23:03 |
| barry | * asiapac meeting time change | 23:03 |
| barry | * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary | 23:03 |
| barry | * Action items | 23:03 |
| barry | * Mentoring update | 23:03 |
| barry | * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda) | 23:03 |
| barry | that's basically copied from the ameu meeting this morning, which i have not had time to write up yet | 23:04 |
| thumper | ok | 23:04 |
| mwhudson | well the first one seems to have worked | 23:04 |
| barry | indeed! | 23:04 |
| barry | [TOPIC] * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary | 23:04 |
| MootBot | New Topic: * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary | 23:04 |
| barry | let me see if i can channel gary_poster | 23:04 |
| thumper | do anyone outside foundations care? | 23:05 |
| jml | barry_imposter | 23:05 |
| thumper | haha | 23:05 |
| barry | thumper: probably not. there's only about 70 hits for both in our code base | 23:05 |
| mwhudson | i've used ztapi in a test i think once | 23:05 |
| barry | and most of those are in very old code | 23:05 |
| mwhudson | i won't do it again :) | 23:05 |
| mwhudson | next | 23:05 |
| barry | mwhudson: yeah, you better not. gary_poster is a big guy | 23:06 |
| barry | [TOPIC] * Action items | 23:06 |
| MootBot | New Topic: * Action items | 23:06 |
| mwhudson | i can't imagine him as a brawler though some how | 23:06 |
| barry | :) | 23:06 |
| barry | * abentley to email ml and gustavo with suggestions for improving storm | 23:06 |
| jml | I think that's been done for some time :) | 23:06 |
| barry | abentley: right. though today we talked about an experiment that abentley will conduct to see if he can create a base class that makes some annoyances simpler | 23:07 |
| barry | we still do not want to use the sqlobject shim | 23:07 |
| jml | barry: sure. | 23:07 |
| barry | we were generally agreed that native storm class defs and queries are fine with us | 23:07 |
| jml | ok. | 23:08 |
| barry | though foo_id is boring | 23:08 |
| barry | and needing to specify the store is boring | 23:08 |
| barry | we'll see what he comes up with | 23:08 |
| thumper | LPStorm class? | 23:08 |
| jml | it's also complicated :) | 23:08 |
| mwhudson | do you have to have the foo_id as a separate definition? | 23:08 |
| jml | barry: so I guess this is out-of-scope for reviewer meetings for the moment? | 23:08 |
| barry | thumper: something like that, tho i suspect a metaclass may be necessary | 23:08 |
| thumper | mwhudson: I believe so | 23:08 |
| barry | mwhudson: yep | 23:08 |
| thumper | I've seen both field_id and fieldID | 23:09 |
| thumper | do we have a standard? | 23:09 |
| barry | mwhudson: foo_id = Int(primary=True); foo = Reference(foo_id, Foo.id) | 23:09 |
| barry | thumper: we do not | 23:09 |
| * barry prefers and uses foo_id | 23:09 | |
| * thumper votes for field_id | 23:09 | |
| barry | thumper: rock on | 23:09 |
| mwhudson | barry: wouldn't foo = Reference(Int(primary=True), Foo.id) work? | 23:09 |
| barry | mwhudson: interesting! dunno | 23:09 |
| thumper | barry: can you add an agenda item to add it for the next reviewer meeting | 23:09 |
| mwhudson | if it does, i think we can write a convenience class.... | 23:10 |
| barry | [ACTION] barry will add foo_id vs fooID to next reviewers meeting | 23:10 |
| MootBot | ACTION received: barry will add foo_id vs fooID to next reviewers meeting | 23:10 |
| mwhudson | FKeyIDRef or something | 23:10 |
| thumper | mwhudson: sometimes you need to do field.foo_id.is_in([1,2,3]) | 23:10 |
| jml | mwhudson: best. name. evar. :P | 23:10 |
| mwhudson | ah ok | 23:10 |
| thumper | mwhudson: a bit hard to do without a defined foo_id | 23:10 |
| mwhudson | i should mention this on the list i guess | 23:10 |
| barry | mwhudson: please do | 23:10 |
| barry | next? | 23:11 |
| thumper | ya | 23:11 |
| thumper | yarp | 23:11 |
| barry | * flacoste to take dead zone reviews issue to ml | 23:11 |
| barry | he did this | 23:11 |
| barry | jtv was at our meeting and i think we've decided on mp + cover + an irc cue | 23:11 |
| barry | basically jtv and stub would add a cue to the, er queue to let ocrs know that thye have branches they'd like reviewed | 23:12 |
| barry | or something like that. i don't remember the details, but i'll write it up when i go through the minutes | 23:12 |
| thumper | I've also cleaned up the claiming a team review | 23:13 |
| thumper | so we should have less pending team review | 23:13 |
| thumper | s | 23:13 |
| thumper | when someone has done one | 23:13 |
| mwhudson | i guess in time, jtv and stub will end up reviewing each other's branches a lot | 23:13 |
| barry | yep, stubs a mentat now | 23:13 |
| jml | thumper: the remaining issue is that it's still hard to see which branches need review. | 23:13 |
| thumper | action for me: make sure a default reviewer is added through bzr send if none specified | 23:13 |
| * thumper thinks | 23:13 | |
| thumper | if we have a bug for this | 23:14 |
| barry | thumper: yes please. and btw, i used bzr send for the first time yesterday. awesome sauce | 23:14 |
| thumper | increase its priority | 23:14 |
| jml | thumper: partly because the mp status isn't always updated. | 23:14 |
| thumper | barry: just wait for the changes with jml is reviewing | 23:14 |
| thumper | jml: I've got some ideas | 23:14 |
| thumper | lets make the views better | 23:14 |
| jml | thumper: partly because there aren't clear mp statuses for "reviewed, waiting on reply" | 23:15 |
| * barry *can't* wait :) | 23:15 | |
| thumper | jml: lets make one | 23:15 |
| thumper | jml: we use a decorated class now anyway | 23:15 |
| jml | thumper: let's talk about it after :) | 23:15 |
| thumper | jml: let's just invent a new status column | 23:15 |
| * thumper nods | 23:15 | |
| barry | sounds good. thanks guys | 23:15 |
| barry | * gary to email list about RENormalizing test, investigate alternate inline spellings | 23:16 |
| barry | he did this | 23:16 |
| barry | doctest is hard to extend | 23:16 |
| barry | 'nuff said | 23:16 |
| * jml coughs politely | 23:16 | |
| * mwhudson is tempted to say "two wrongs don't make a right" | 23:16 | |
| barry | :) | 23:16 |
| barry | both flacoste and i suck at our two action items so i won't even mention them | 23:17 |
| mwhudson | if you can't specify this close-to-inline, it's a terrible terrible idea | 23:17 |
| jml | barry: you probably should :) | 23:17 |
| mwhudson | otherwise, it's just terrible, perhaps | 23:17 |
| barry | * barry to add `pretty()` functions to reviewers docs | 23:17 |
| barry | * flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet | 23:17 |
| jml | these are both good ideas. | 23:18 |
| barry | mwhudson: we all agree on that! | 23:18 |
| mwhudson | good | 23:18 |
| barry | jml: yep, we should suck less and do more | 23:18 |
| barry | anyway, that's about it for my list. do you guys have anything y'all want to talk about? | 23:18 |
| thumper | I'm working my way through the code-review bugs | 23:19 |
| thumper | if people have a strong opinion about something | 23:19 |
| thumper | they should contact me directly | 23:20 |
| jml | barry: I have a couple of things | 23:20 |
| thumper | otherwise they'll be fixed in thumper-priority | 23:20 |
| mwhudson | i guess i could say the same about loggerhead/codebrowse | 23:20 |
| barry | thumper: isn't that thumpertime? | 23:20 |
| barry | thumper: thanks | 23:20 |
| barry | jml: go ahead | 23:20 |
| thumper | barry: something like that :) | 23:20 |
| jml | first, the reviewer checklist | 23:20 |
| jml | 1. it's getting kind of long | 23:21 |
| jml | 2, it's hard to find | 23:21 |
| jml | the first one is a someday/maybe thing | 23:21 |
| jml | i.e. it doesn't matter too much, but it would be nice if it were shorter and more usable | 23:22 |
| jml | but I actually don't know where to find the latest version :) | 23:22 |
| barry | agreed, agreed. it's on My List to garden it and move it to dev.lp.net | 23:22 |
| jml | cool. | 23:22 |
| jml | second, mentoring | 23:22 |
| jml | I'm mentoring stub, and I don't feel I'm doing a particularly good job of it. | 23:23 |
| barry | jml: because of the tz? | 23:23 |
| jml | barry: partly | 23:23 |
| jml | barry: in more than one way, actually. there's not a huge deal of overlap, for a start. | 23:23 |
| jml | barry: but also my OCR day is busiest in the morning, as people from the Americas submit things on their Thursday evening. | 23:24 |
| barry | jml: and you overlap with stub in the morning? | 23:24 |
| jml | my afternoon. | 23:25 |
| thumper | stub's morning | 23:25 |
| barry | jml: i can chat with flacoste and/or stub if you want to see if we can line someone else up | 23:25 |
| jml | also, are there any docs on mentoring on the wiki? | 23:26 |
| barry | jml: some i think, but probably not much | 23:26 |
| jml | barry: that might be a good idea. let's leave it for another week though & see how it goes. | 23:26 |
| mwhudson | overlapping in the mentees morning isn't really the right end of things, i guess | 23:26 |
| barry | jml: sounds good | 23:26 |
| jml | that's it from me. | 23:27 |
| barry | that tz is just a challenge all around unfortunately | 23:27 |
| barry | cool, thanks jml. anything else guys? | 23:27 |
| thumper | nope | 23:27 |
| mwhudson | nope | 23:28 |
| barry | guess we're done! | 23:28 |
| barry | #endmeeting | 23:28 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 17:28. | 23:28 |
| thumper | yay | 23:28 |
| mwhudson | thanks bazza | 23:28 |
| barry | thanks. btw, i really like this meeting time | 23:28 |
| jml | barry: ya :) | 23:28 |
| jml | me too. | 23:28 |
| barry | great! see y'all back at the ranch | 23:28 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!