[15:00] <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 and welcome to this week's ameu reviewers meeting.  who's here today?
[15:00] <bigjools> me
[15:00] <rockstar> ni!
[15:00] <bac> me
[15:00] <henninge> me
[15:00] <allenap> me
[15:00] <abentley> me
[15:00] <mars> me
[15:00] <noodles> yup
[15:00] <sinzui> me
[15:00] <BjornT> me
[15:01] <EdwinGrubbs> me
[15:01] <barry> intellectronica sends his apologies
[15:01] <barry> adeuring: ping
[15:01] <adeuring> me
[15:01] <gmb> me
[15:01] <barry> cprov, danilos ping
[15:02] <cprov> me
[15:02] <barry> gary_poster: ping
[15:02] <barry> salgado: ping
[15:02] <gary_poster> barry: thanks
[15:02] <gary_poster> me
[15:02] <salgado> me!
[15:02] <barry> [TOPIC] agenda
[15:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  agenda
[15:02] <barry>  * Roll call
[15:02] <barry>  * Wednesday AMEU hard stop, barry
[15:02] <barry>  * Action items
[15:02] <barry>  * Mentoring update
[15:02] <barry>  * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:03] <barry> i have a hard stop at 14:45 today.  hopefully we won't go that long anyway :)
[15:03] <barry> [TOPIC] action items
[15:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  action items
[15:03] <barry>  * adeuring to update wiki pages regarding `except Exception`, `KeyboardInterrupt` and `SystemExit`
[15:03] <adeuring> done
[15:03] <barry> adeuring: thanks!
[15:04] <barry>  * gary_poster to take importfascist and rSP() discussion to ml
[15:04] <gary_poster> nope.  I will bring new energy to the task. ;-)
[15:04] <barry> gary_poster: cool.  keep it on the list then?
[15:04] <gary_poster> y
[15:04] <barry> +1
[15:04] <danilos> me
[15:04] <barry> intellectronica's not here today, so...
[15:05] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Mentoring update
[15:05] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Mentoring update
[15:05] <barry> lessee, i think we're missing both deryck and leonardr
[15:05] <barry> any word from their mentors?  how are things going?
[15:06] <rockstar> barry, things is going well.
[15:06] <barry> leonardr_: hi!
[15:06] <gmb> Very well.
[15:06] <leonardr_> hi barry
[15:06] <gmb> Speaking of which...
[15:06] <barry> rockstar: great, thanks for mentoring.  leonardr_ any comments, problems, feedback on reviewing?
[15:07] <barry> gmb: what's up?
[15:07] <gmb> barry: Oh, nothing, I just realised deryck wasn't here :)
[15:07] <barry> :)
[15:07] <barry> deryck: how's the reviewing going?
[15:08] <gmb> barry: FTR, deryck's doing a fine job. He'll graduate in no time.
[15:08] <deryck> barry, I think going well, if I could remember to show up for things. :)
[15:08] <barry> gmb, deryck excellent
[15:08] <barry> deryck: isn't it almost your eod? :)
[15:08] <leonardr_> barry: i was hoping for some more interactive mentoring. on thursday i was reviewing a complicated branch and both rockstar and the person who submitted the branch were afk. i did the review but i don't think i learned as much from it as i could have
[15:08] <deryck> barry, not quite. :)
[15:09] <barry> leonardr_: you can always ping me if needed
[15:09] <leonardr_> barry, ok, cool
[15:09] <barry> anything else on mentoring?
[15:09] <rockstar> leonardr_, I was afk?  Hm.  I don't remember that.  I'll make sure to be around.
[15:09] <bigjools> leonardr_: if the submitter is not around, drop the review if you have questions
[15:10] <rockstar> I don't think dropping the review is right.  I think you can respond without voting.
[15:10] <barry> or just ask all those questions in the review!
[15:10] <bigjools> if it was requested as an OCR, it goes to the back of the queue until that person shows up
[15:10] <leonardr_> that's what i did. i did other reviews which were easier, and then i did this one
[15:11] <bigjools> these are the rules we agreed on a long time ago
[15:11] <barry> bigjools: +1
[15:11] <leonardr_> and i asked my questions in the review
[15:11] <bigjools> but leave a question in the review and mark it needs-reply
[15:11] <leonardr_> the reason it was difficult is it took me a long time to understand the code well enough to formulate the questions
[15:11] <rockstar> bigjools, hm, I guess you have different rules than I, but my team spans more timezones than yours.
[15:11] <rockstar> leonardr_, was this cprov's branch?
[15:12] <leonardr_> rockstar, yeah
[15:12] <bac> we should reiterate that people requesting an OCR need to be around or negotiate their absense with the reviewer
[15:12] <barry> leonardr_: that'll happen at first, don't worry about it too much
[15:12]  * bigjools is shocked that cprov was not around :)
[15:12] <rockstar> bac, why do they need to be around?
[15:12] <bigjools> leonardr_: yeah, don't feel too bad about doing another review
[15:12] <bigjools> instead of that one
[15:13] <abentley> rockstar: OCR is supposed to be interactive.
[15:13] <rockstar> leonardr_, I was around last week.  Remember, we got swamped?
[15:13] <bac> rockstar: so the review can be interactive.  that was one of the principles of having OCR
[15:13] <cprov> leonardr_: I thought it was perfectly fine to jump to another review when I was out
[15:13] <barry> rockstar: they need to negotiate their absence with the reviewer, who might not want to take a particular branch if the submitter isn't around to answer questions in realtime
[15:13] <bigjools> this is written up on the OCR page I thought
[15:13] <rockstar> barry, okay, I think "negotiate with the reviewer" is better than "drop it until they come back"
[15:14] <cprov> leonardr_: there was enough time for finishing the review while I was around, but you had problems with your account, remember ?
[15:14] <leonardr_> cprov: i did
[15:14] <barry> rockstar: right. but if the submitter just disappears, the reviewer has every right to move on
[15:14] <bigjools> exactly
[15:14] <leonardr_> i don't blame anyone for not being around at my convenience. and i did move on--i reviewed the other two branches in the queue before coming back
[15:14] <rockstar> barry, yes, because it wasn't negotiated.  I'm happy with that.
[15:14] <cprov> leonardr_: right, I think when something like this happens there isn't much you can do, abstain and move on, no worries.
[15:15] <barry> cool
[15:15] <barry> cprov: yep
[15:15] <leonardr_> ok, in the future i'll abstain and do other work rather than bang my head against a branch all day
[15:15] <barry> leonardr_: thanks for bringing this up
[15:15] <leonardr_> np
[15:16] <barry> [TOPIC]  * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:16] <MootBot> New Topic:   * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:16] <barry> does anybody have any other topics today?
[15:17] <barry> that seems like a "no" :)
[15:17] <henninge> barry: just to mention:
[15:17] <barry> henninge: go ahead
[15:17] <henninge> I changed my OCR slot to Monday Euro.
[15:17] <rockstar> barry, do we have a policy on multiline list comprehensions?
[15:17]  * bigjools thought of something
[15:17] <barry> henninge: thanks.  did you update the wiki page?
[15:17] <henninge> barry: yes
[15:18] <barry> rockstar: i believe we do, in our python style guide
[15:18] <barry> henninge: thanks!
[15:18] <barry> bigjools: go ahead
[15:18] <bigjools> ok
[15:18] <salgado> leonardr_, another option is to use kiko's approach and ask tons of questions on the review.  once the developer answers them you can do a proper review
[15:18] <bigjools> in a fix I made this week I had a hellish time dealing with code that was a mix of unicode and ascii strings
[15:18] <bigjools> Bjorn had some interesting post-review points
[15:19] <bigjools> but the upshot is that the code should be using unicode strings throughout, up until the point where you have to encode it as utf
[15:19] <bigjools> is this enforceable?
[15:19] <leonardr_> salgado, true
[15:19] <bigjools> across LP I mean
[15:19] <cprov> salgado: yes, that would work too, but unnecessarily binds the reviewer to the branch.
[15:19] <rockstar> bigjools, it'd be nice.
[15:20] <abentley> bigjools: In bzr, we often hold strings as utf-8-encoded bytes, for performance reasons.
[15:20] <barry> when we're on python 2.6, i really want to add "from __future__ import unicode_literals" to the header of every file
[15:20] <bigjools> abentley: interesting, how much of a performance hit is there?
[15:20] <barry> (and absolute_import but that's a different issue)
[15:20] <abentley> bigjools: dunno.  And I know that bzr manipulates a lot more data than your typical Launchpad page.
[15:21] <bigjools> right
[15:21] <barry> abentley: bzr is probably more byte-oriented than launchpad, which is more text oriented
[15:21] <bigjools> it probably won't make much difference for us, we have bigger performance problems to worry about
[15:21] <abentley> barry: Lots of things are defined as unicode, like filenames and revision-ids.
[15:22] <barry> abentley: good point about filenames, didn't know about revids
[15:22] <bigjools> the thing I was fixing were error messages in our upload processor, as soon as an ascii string formatter pulls in some unicode from the database, you're in trouble
[15:22] <barry> i do think enforcing unicode literals will help, but it will probably expose places where we are being sloppy
[15:23] <flacoste> barry: won't that means a 100,000 line diffs?
[15:23] <bigjools> it might need a larger concentrated cross-team effort on it at some point
[15:23] <flacoste> barry: to update the expected output of doctests?
[15:23] <barry> flacoste: not if people are printing string values!
[15:23] <flacoste> barry: they are not
[15:24] <flacoste> barry: just grep for u' in the tests
[15:24] <abentley> barry: Python's willingness to convert ascii-encoded str into unicode is convenient, but can mask problems later.
[15:24] <barry> flacoste: it's our rule (now) but yeah there's legacy code
[15:24] <barry> abentley: yep
[15:25] <barry> anyway, we're not on python2.6 so it's kind of a moot discussion, but it should be a goal of ours to be explicit in our code whether we're talking strings or bytes
[15:25] <barry> (where byte literals are defined with b'' prefix)
[15:25] <barry> it won't be painless though ;)
[15:26] <barry> anyway...
[15:26] <barry> anything else on this or other topics for today?
[15:26] <bigjools> my immediate question is, it might be worth trying to enforce unicode now in reviews to reduce the potential for more problems.  What do you think?
[15:27] <barry> bigjools: possibly.  i hate to introduce more u'' prefixes when we can soon make them all go away
[15:27] <barry> bigjools: otoh, we can probably convert module-by-module
[15:28] <bigjools> I guarantee there will be lots of pain unless it's done all at once
[15:28] <bigjools> but ok, let's move on
[15:28] <barry> bigjools: which isn't to say you guarantee it will be painless if it is all done at once :)
[15:28] <bigjools> there's relative levels of pain :)
[15:29] <barry> :)
[15:29] <barry> okay, anything else?
[15:29] <barry> 5
[15:29] <barry> 4
[15:29] <barry> 3
[15:29] <barry> 2
[15:29] <barry> 1
[15:29] <barry> #endmeeting
[15:29] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 09:29.
[15:29] <barry> thanks everyone!
[15:29] <abentley> barry: thanks yous
[15:30] <gmb> Cheers barry
[15:30] <bigjools> cheers
[23:34] <mwhudson> barry: hello
[23:35] <barry> #startmeeting
[23:35] <MootBot> Meeting started at 17:35. The chair is barry.
[23:35] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[23:35] <barry> mwhudson: hi
[23:35] <barry> thumper: hi
[23:35] <barry> jml: hi
[23:35] <thumper> hi
[23:35] <barry> well, not much to recap from ameu today
[23:36] <barry> so i'll just open up the floor to anything you guys have
[23:36] <thumper> I don't have anything
[23:36] <mwhudson> oh
[23:37] <mwhudson> me neither
[23:37] <barry> mwhudson: record breaking
[23:37] <barry> i guess we're done then :)
[23:37] <thumper> w00t
[23:37] <barry> #endmeeting
[23:37] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 17:37.
[23:37]  * mwhudson wonders what the relationship between number of attendees and length of meeting is
[23:37] <mwhudson> i think it's not linear :)
[23:37] <thumper> exponential
[23:38] <barry> you don't even want to know how long the meeting is when i'm the only one there
[23:38]  * barry -> more dinner