=== Edwin_ is now known as EdwinGrubbs [14:59] Hi jtv! [15:00] hi henninge! [15:00] hi jtv! [15:00] hi henninge! [15:00] Hi danilos, jtv, henninge! [15:01] * mars wonders if he has the right meeting - looks like translations [15:01] hi abentley! [15:01] hi abentley! [15:01] Hey, code's here too! [15:01] mars: we arrive by team now, like the Olympics [15:01] Hi rockstar! [15:01] ok, ok, we can stop this :) [15:01] Hi rockstar! [15:01] Hi mars! [15:01] jtv, heh, so who gets to light the MootBot flame? [15:01] heh [15:01] hi abentley! [15:02] * jtv plots out n² for some ballpark values of n [15:02] hi barry? [15:02] It's really early for me. This is my least favorite meeting of the week. [15:02] barry lost his connection 3 minutes [15:02] ago === sinzui1 is now known as sinzui [15:02] rockstar, could be worse - look at thumper's TL calls :) [15:02] mars, yes, those would be even worse. [15:09] barry! [15:09] irc sucks for me today [15:09] sorry [15:09] barry: your back for our meeting? [15:09] #startmeeting [15:09] Meeting started at 09:09. The chair is barry. [15:09] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [15:10] hi everyone. who's here today? [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:10] me did not send the email *and* is not around for to give reviews today, again. [15:10] and danilos, too [15:10] me [15:10] me [15:11] * mars pokes flacoste [15:11] me [15:11] gary_poster_: ack [15:11] me [15:12] allenap: ping [15:12] cprov: ping [15:12] me [15:12] me [15:12] me [15:12] gmb: ping [15:12] oops, gmb sorry [15:12] still me... [15:12] noodles775: ping [15:13] rockstar: ping [15:13] me :) [15:13] me [15:13] [TOPIC] agenda [15:13] New Topic: agenda [15:13] very light day today i thik [15:13] * Roll call [15:13] * Action items [15:13] * Mentoring update [15:13] * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda) [15:13] [TOPIC] mentoring update [15:14] New Topic: mentoring update [15:14] anything to report ? [15:14] I hear I graduated? [15:14] yes, that's at least my proposal [15:14] Sorry for missing last week's meeting ... [15:14] henninge: you did. i will send out the announcement today. congratulations! [15:14] barry: noodles775 is almost there. [15:14] cprov: fantastic [15:15] barry, adeuring. Thank you! [15:15] barry missed the opportunity for a cruel joke there [15:15] jtv: :) [15:15] henninge: you can switch from euro/friday if you want [15:15] anybody any suggestion? [15:15] henninge: we have good euro coverage, so it's up to you. if anyone else wants to switch, that's fine too [15:16] i just want at least one person for each euro day [15:16] I think I had look a Tuesdays [15:16] and remember al-maisan is on loan to ubuntu [15:16] henninge: cool, just ping me when you decide [15:17] ok [15:17] who is currently /not/ a reviewer (other than team leads)? i know about deryck and leonardr [15:18] barry: I'm a reviewer but without OCR slot [15:18] (was holding this for the peanut gallery) [15:18] jtv: let's get you a slot! [15:18] barry: noodles775 and me were the only ones when we started. [15:18] jtv: what would work for you? [15:19] barry: so since onyl deryck has joined lately, I guess that is all. [15:19] barry: working day when I'm here starts 06:00 UTC. [15:19] henninge: right. and deryck has started doing js reviews [15:19] any glaring holes in the schedule for the hours after that? [15:20] jtv: so america probably doesn't work for ya :) [15:20] barry: nyet, comrade [15:20] jtv: we have two wholes in asia on tuesday and wednesday [15:20] barry: oh, you're beginning to spell like an Asian [15:20] jtv: but other than that we have pretty good coverage. you're always welcome to double up on a euro slot [15:21] jtv, henninge: it would be nice not to have you guys taken up on the same day to OCR [15:21] jtv: sorry, i meant too hoales [15:21] danilos: I was just thinking that [15:21] barry: ohh, hoales [15:21] me (apologies for joining late) [15:21] so we're looking at a swap, not a hole [15:21] s/at/for/ [15:22] jtv: How about Tuesday? [15:22] * gmb just wants an easier life ... [15:22] gmb: or henninge on tuesday and jtv on friday? [15:22] gmb: yes, that would work [15:22] Either way works for me. [15:22] me on tuesday, jtv on wednesday. [15:23] barry: disadvantage of friday is: one needs-reply can bump your branch across my weekend. [15:23] friday gets pretty crowded, too. [15:23] reviewer-wise [15:23] which is just great for week 3's [15:23] yeah [15:24] jtv, henninge why don't you guys work it out. i'm fine with whatever you decide, just let me know [15:24] i do think friday is well covered either way [15:24] barry: aye-aye [15:24] thanks! [15:24] barry: me on tuesday, jtv on wednesday. My favorite. [15:24] henninge: works for me. jtv? [15:24] henninge: shall we do this out-of-channel? [15:24] oh [15:24] yeah, sure [15:25] [AGREED] henninge to move to euro/tue, jtv to euro/wed [15:25] AGREED received: henninge to move to euro/tue, jtv to euro/wed [15:25] * jtv conspicuously fails to race to the needs-review queue Right Now [15:25] [TOPIC] peanut gallery [15:25] New Topic: peanut gallery [15:25] anybody have any topics not on the agenda? [15:26] mars: [15:26] ? [15:26] Maybe the import error lint (F040...) [15:26] noodles775: can you elaborate? [15:26] barry, I have one [15:26] There seems to be disagreement whether the lint warning about import errors should be disabled or left... [15:26] mars: you're next [15:27] Currently many files complain about this (i think after the code-reorgs...) [15:27] noodles775: i think it's more buildout related actually [15:27] i don't kjnow [15:27] noodles775 is describing lint failure messages when anything imports from canonical.launchpad [15:27] but i also noticed that pylint is reporting crack error [15:27] flacoste: maybe pylint doesn't have the correct sys.path? [15:27] barry: it probably doesn't [15:28] I'll look... [15:28] flacoste: let's fix pylint if possible [15:28] gary_poster_: thanks! [15:28] We have other pylint issues [15:28] [ACTION] gary_poster_ to look at bogus pylint import failures [15:28] ACTION received: gary_poster_ to look at bogus pylint import failures [15:28] we've seen them before buildout as well [15:28] pylnt is different on jaunty and hardy [15:28] They support different error messages [15:28] yeah the utilities lint script should probably be moved to be generated by buildout [15:28] so that it has the correct sys.path [15:28] gary_poster_: if you fix the problem please look to remove directives in code which disable that warning [15:28] flacoste: +1 [15:29] gary_poster is on leave for the next week [15:29] so that will wait for 2 weeks at least [15:29] bac, barry, flacoste, ok. I'm out for a week and a day starting tomorrow, so I was intending to just diagnose [15:29] gary_poster_: diagnose is fine. please submit a bug report [15:29] barry: ack, cool [15:30] gary_poster_: thanks === gary_poster_ is now known as gary_poster [15:30] sinzui: as for the other pylint problems. new bug report, or tack onto the one gary_poster 's going to file? [15:31] the interface stuff sinzui was mentioning in the review channel seemed unrelated, IIUC [15:31] If we control the version of pylint, the we do not need to second guess what warning and suppressions are supported [15:31] gary_poster: just fyi, an example here: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~michael.nelson/launchpad/bug-376320-add-ppa-name-to-builder-status/+merge/7236 [15:31] noodles775: gotcha. looks very suspiciously buildout related, yes [15:32] gary_poster: the interface/adapter stuff is not new, but in jaunty the frequency of false positives has increased [15:32] cool, thanks guys. let's move on to mars's issue [15:32] gotcha. sounds like a legitimate problem, worthy of a bug report, maybe [15:32] gary_poster: I don't think we can teach pylint about differed_import [15:33] thanks barry [15:33] ok, something for the JavaScript writers in the room [15:33] deferred, maybe not [15:33] about two weeks ago QA started an experiment to bring manual testing into the JavaScript review pipeline [15:33] https://wiki.canonical.com/Launchpad/Experiments/JavascriptTesting [15:33] * sinzui has pondered replacing his navel-lint script with apure python script that only enforces his rules. [15:34] the idea is to have QA look at the work in different browsers during the code review step [15:35] since it should be easier to catch and fix UI and browser issues while the branch is in development, rather than after-the-fact, on staging [15:35] By the way, this is unrelated to the [js] landing tag [15:36] mars: since after this cycle, it's all ui from here on out, should we enforce this experiment for the next cycle at least, if not all of the rest of 3.0? [15:36] barry, I was going to ask for volunteers, rather than a team-wide experiment [15:36] but it could work both ways [15:36] the process is pretty simple [15:37] what do others think? [15:37] i think it would be better to have everyone participate [15:37] barry, I think it should be enforced now. [15:37] we don't really have time for partial experimentation. if we find that there are problems, we'll fix them [15:37] i don't want to start this cycle, but i'd be willing to enforce it for 2.2.7 [15:38] One thing to bear in mind here [15:38] Is sabdfl's edict at UDS: [15:38] UI reviews shouldn't be blockers to landing things. [15:38] Does this come under that? [15:38] that's a different thing [15:38] and no, it doesn't come under that [15:39] "UI reviews shouldn't be blockers to landing things." [15:39] gmb: right, separate. and remember we have [ui=rs] (with the understanding that you'll back fill that review later) [15:39] !?! [15:39] that's the first i heard of it [15:39] and not what we are applying now [15:39] gmb, that's a design review, rather than "I just denied IE users access to the site" [15:39] gmb, yes, this is the first I've heard of it too. [15:39] imperfect UI can be fixed (and anyway it's often a matter of taste). broken code is really bad and the shortest time to fixing is too long [15:39] beuno's review are blocking [15:39] flacoste, rockstar: He said it in a Launchpad gripe session for, IIRC, the community team (could be wrong about which track it was in; it was all a blur). [15:39] yeah, i also never heard about ui reviews not blocking, b.t.w [15:39] flacoste: that's exactly the part that he said we shouldn't be blocking on. [15:40] What jtv said [15:40] that's new [15:40] The principle problem with UI reviews blocking is that developers are not submitting designs to beuno *before* they write code [15:40] and should be discussed [15:40] i don't agree [15:40] gmb, I think we need clarification on what he meant, because as it is now, beuno's reviews block. [15:40] we are very bad at fixing thigns later [15:40] are UI reviews a bottleneck at the moment? i didn't have that impression [15:40] So why does ui=rs exist then? [15:40] for trivial stuff [15:40] intellectronica: A bit. It depends how much of a fight beuno and kiko get into. [15:40] it's not uised anyway [15:41] gmb: I can get rs if I designed the UI with beuno *first* [15:41] flacoste: no. ui=rs exists explicitly not to block on beuno's review [15:41] gmb: for trivial landings or when you absolutely can't get a ui review and are very confident [15:41] * barry remembers discussion that very fact with the man himself :) [15:41] flacoste, the fact that we are bad at fixing things later is another issue. [15:41] gmb: surely if there's a disagreement it's even more important to resolve it before landing [15:41] I am doing UI review *before* code, and I don't start until Martin and seen my proposal [15:41] sinzui, I am doing the same. [15:41] intellectronica: Right, but I've had branches wait up to three weeks because of UI disagreements + week 4. [15:42] I'm not saying that we should just land things without talking to Martin. [15:42] I believe full UI reviews were ultimately to be for "real" design decisions, not for "does it look okay like this." [15:42] sinzui, because often, more code changes happen on UI review than code review. [15:42] That's just crackpottery. [15:42] rockstar: :) [15:42] gmb: sounds like you have to work a bit on your social engineering skills ;) [15:42] jtv, good point [15:42] just repeating... [15:42] rockstar: yes! it's the 80/20 rule [15:42] gmb: we should do a root-cause-analysis on your experience [15:42] sinzui, also, I dread UI reviews, where I don't dread code reviews, so I do the band-aid thing. [15:43] or its inverse. or something. [15:43] anwyay, that's kind of besides the current discussion i think [15:43] if we want to discuss UI reviews, we should bring that separately as another topic [15:43] flacoste: Well, I've got another big UI branch coming up in the next couple of days, so let's analyse that one rather than rehash my previous experience. [15:43] flacoste: good point. [15:43] let's take up ui review issues on the ml please [15:44] as for js, let's vote on requiring the experiment for all devs in 2.2.7 [15:44] So, with the current QA plan, at least they can defer it. I think we should request a review from them (so they get an email) but not block on it. [15:44] barry, so! full-team experiment for manual UI testing next cycle? [15:44] [VOTE] require full-team experiment for manual ui testing in 2.2.7 [15:44] Please vote on: require full-team experiment for manual ui testing in 2.2.7. [15:44] Public votes can be registered by saying +1/-1/+0 in the channel, private votes by messaging the channel followed by +1/-1/+0 to MootBot [15:44] E.g. /msg MootBot +1 #launchpad-meeting [15:44] +1 [15:44] +1 received from barry. 1 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 1 [15:44] rockstar, we'll see if they get swamped - it's their call [15:44] +1 [15:44] +1 received from mars. 2 for, 0 against. 0 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] +0 [15:45] +0 [15:45] Abstention received from gmb. 2 for, 0 against. 1 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] Abstention received from adeuring. 2 for, 0 against. 2 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] +0 [15:45] Abstention received from rockstar. 2 for, 0 against. 3 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] +0 [15:45] Abstention received from bac. 2 for, 0 against. 4 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] +0 [15:45] Abstention received from jtv. 2 for, 0 against. 5 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] +0 [15:45] Abstention received from gary_poster. 2 for, 0 against. 6 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:45] +0 [15:45] Abstention received from noodles775. 2 for, 0 against. 7 have abstained. Count is now 2 [15:46] +1 [15:46] +1 received from henninge. 3 for, 0 against. 7 have abstained. Count is now 3 [15:46] maybe we haven't talked this through enough; I for one don't have a clear picture of how it would fit into the process. [15:46] +1 [15:46] +1 received from intellectronica. 4 for, 0 against. 7 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:46] +0 [15:46] Abstention received from flacoste. 4 for, 0 against. 8 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:46] actually, that should be a +1 [15:46] What really is manual UI testing? What how do I know it is successful [15:46] +1 [15:46] * sinzui cannot vote, and wants to [15:47] sinzui, I was about to get to that, then a car hit my topic :) [15:47] sinzui: it's outlined on the wiki page [15:47] * gmb apologises for DUI. [15:47] sinzui: ideally, we should prepare test plans with clear predicates, but sometimes it will be just monkeying about with the interface [15:47] the process is simple: you write up a manual test plan in the cover letter [15:47] -0 [15:47] +0 [15:47] Abstention received from abentley. 4 for, 0 against. 9 have abstained. Count is now 4 [15:47] QA follows it for the A and C browsers [15:48] mars: who is responsible for making sure the branch goes all the way through the process? Still the reviewee as usual? [15:48] jtv, yes [15:48] actually, i'm -1 on a full team experiment at this point [15:48] not that it matters :-) [15:48] I don't think this test can be performed by the team if they do not posses all the A-grade browsers [15:48] flacoste: why? and it does matter [15:49] jtv, QA handles wrangling the people with the browsers for testing [15:49] well, i don't have a veto :-) [15:49] sinzui, we do [15:49] flacoste: I think that brings you to a total of 3 votes :-) [15:49] sinzui: devs don't but qa does [15:49] i think the experiment is too vague at this point to make the whole team follow it [15:49] sinzui: iiuc diogo and ursula have access to all platforms, and it's up to them to delegate the work if and when they feel they can't handle the load [15:49] sinzui, we do have the browsers. QA has access to them, and to the pool of people who have registered as having the alternative environemnets [15:49] and given that 2.2.7 is all-UI [15:49] it could degenerate [15:49] * noodles775 is unsure *how* i can go about fixing my branch if it fails for IE6 on XP? XP licenses as per the email? [15:50] flacoste: it's clear in my mind. could it be that it's not adequately expressed? [15:50] noodles775: you disable the feature for IE :-) [15:50] intellectronica: probably [15:50] noodles775, disable the feature, yes [15:50] and we haven't experimented it at all yet [15:50] (i think) [15:50] our China OEMs are using IE6 on XP. They are not permitted to change browser or OS [15:50] flacoste: that's why experimenting during the remainder of 2.2.6 can help doing the real thing for 2.2.7 [15:50] They do not like Launchpad [15:51] flacoste, mars: ok, FF3 on OSX? [15:51] sinzui: my shoes are broken, I don't like pavements :) [15:51] sinzui, that's what we are addressing with this [15:51] intellectronica, mars so perhaps volunteers for 2.2.6 to flesh out the process so everyone understands it? [15:51] intellectronica: so let's do a two-weeks experiment using volunteers [15:51] noodles775, not a concern, just the browser, not the environment [15:51] btw, if the experiment is a failure we don't need to keep running it for the whole cycle! [15:51] ok [15:51] jtv: I bought new All-stars and Doc Martins in London because I had holes in my shoes [15:51] noodles775, Opera on Linux is fine, no need for Opera on Win/OSX [15:51] flacoste: sounds good to me—reviewers could encourage reviewees to participate [15:52] flacoste: ...and if people don't want to, note a probable point for improvement [15:52] that's the idea, volunteering reviewers [15:52] are to make sure that the process is followed [15:53] When using safari (Webkit) can we substitute Konqueror or Epiphany-webkit? [15:53] we've gone over, and i apologize for that. i will really try to fix my irc by next week [15:53] if all the AJAX-team reviewers volunteer [15:53] flacoste, I'll rely on barry's experiement experience here, but I do agree with your points, there is risk because it hasn't been tried yet [15:53] i rather do it for the remainder of 2.2.6 rather than two weeks, for simplicity, but either way is fine. i agree that a limited experiment is a good idea [15:53] we kind of have a de-facto whole team experiment [15:53] * Ursinha reads [15:53] sinzui, that I'm not sure about [15:53] * sinzui want to add small devices to to list [15:53] i'll most definitely volunteer, as i'm sure everyone from the bugs team will ;) [15:53] sinzui, for Konqueror, no, you absolutely can not [15:53] mars: they run the webkit version [15:54] let's defer the whole-team decision until we see how the volunteer experiment works for the rest of 2.2.6 [15:54] Epiphany is on tip [15:54] sinzui, heh, nice try, but no, the Webkit Konqueror is *not* Safari [15:54] volunteers should sign up on the JavaScript experiment page [15:54] I know, I tried it [15:54] mars: 4.2 is I thought [15:54] flacoste: +1 thanks [15:54] QT [15:54] and [15:54] barry: may haev to start a new vote before the bot gets confused [15:54] we should put the link to the experiment in the launchpad-reviews channel [15:54] for OCR [15:54] sinzui, the engine, sure. But it still doesn't work the same as Safari. [15:55] #endvote [15:55] so that dev can look if they need to follow-it [15:55] * barry knows a sure fire way to end the vote... [15:55] #endmeeting [15:55] Vote is in progress. Finishing now. [15:55] Final result is 4 for, 0 against. 9 abstained. Total: 4 [15:55] Meeting finished at 09:55. [15:55] thanks everybody! [15:55] thanks barry [15:55] thanks barry! [15:55] sinzui, mars: I had some good results using Arora to test webkit after I disabled its network caching. [15:55] flacoste: can we engineer a JS oops AJAX lib that run in staging/edge clients and send us reports when our users know we broke something [15:56] sinzui, yes, we can try. It's on my Todo list [15:56] sinzui, well, my Todo wishlist :) [15:57] sinzui: we can anything, priorities, priorities, priorities [15:59] flacoste: I think that by putting enough eyes on the problem (per the Open Source mantra) there will not be a problem [15:59] We use automated testing because we do not have enough eyes [15:59] JS + automated testing is painful [16:00] so using oopses might be the best way to verify scripts [16:00] sinzui: JS + manual testing is also painful [16:01] abentley: test for the sake of testing is painful. but users of staging and edge do not mind testing for us because we provide them newer services === salgado is now known as salgado-lunch === salgado-lunch is now known as salgado === Edwin is now known as Guest51667 === salgado is now known as salgado-afk [23:30] hi barry [23:30] #startmeeting [23:30] Meeting started at 17:30. The chair is barry. [23:30] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [23:30] hi thumper [23:30] jml, mwhudson hi [23:30] hello [23:31] hi [23:31] [TOPIC] agenda [23:31] New Topic: agenda [23:31] # Roll call [23:31] # Action items [23:31] # Mentoring update [23:31] # Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda) [23:31] [TOPIC] mentoring update [23:31] New Topic: mentoring update [23:32] just wanted to let you know that henninge has graduated [23:32] cool [23:32] [TOPIC] peanut gallery [23:32] New Topic: peanut gallery [23:32] I've got a few things [23:33] thumper: go ahead [23:33] the launchpad code team have moved all interface enums to lp.code.enums module [23:33] you may want to consider this too [23:33] also looking into trying out lp.code.errors for our exceptions [23:33] moving the enums reduces circular dependency issues [23:33] as they only rely on lazr.enum [23:33] thumper: very nice [23:33] * jml has one item. [23:33] it was mentioned in the team lead call this morning [23:34] and foundations and registry may do the same [23:34]