[15:00] <bac> #startmeeting
[15:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:00. The chair is bac.
[15:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:01] <bac> Hi, welcome to the Launchpad Reviewers Meeting serving Europe and the Americas.  Who is here?
[15:01] <rockstar> me
[15:01] <noodles775> me too
[15:01] <abentley> also me
[15:02] <deryck> me
[15:02] <henninge> me
[15:02] <allenap> me
[15:02] <bigjools> me
[15:02] <bac> sinzui, EdwinGrubbs: ping
[15:02] <bigjools> or should I say, moi aussi
[15:02] <EdwinGrubbs> me
[15:02] <sinzui> me
[15:03] <bac> danilos: ping
[15:03] <bac> Registry Team is here!
[15:03] <adeuring> me
[15:03] <intellectronica> me
[15:03] <bac> gary_poster: ping
[15:03] <gary_poster> bac: me
[15:03] <bac> flacoste: ping
[15:03] <flacoste> me
[15:04] <bac> TLs ping your peeps
[15:04] <mars> me
[15:04] <henninge> bac: I did ping my TL
[15:04] <salgado> me
[15:04] <henninge> ;)
[15:04] <bac> [topic] agenda
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  agenda
[15:04] <bigjools> soyuz here
[15:04] <al-maisan> me
[15:05] <bac> * Roll call
[15:05] <bac>  * Agenda
[15:05] <bac>  * Outstanding actions
[15:05] <bac>  * New topics
[15:05] <bac>    * YUI namespacing for lp specific items should start with lp (rockstar)
[15:05] <bac>  * Peanut gallery
[15:05] <bac> [topic] outstanding actions
[15:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  outstanding actions
[15:05] <bac> [topic] * gary_poster to do timing tests for try/except, examine current usage of check_permission, and we'll discuss again 3-Mar.
[15:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  * gary_poster to do timing tests for try/except, examine current usage of check_permission, and we'll discuss again 3-Mar.
[15:05] <bac> any progress gary_poster?
[15:06] <gary_poster> let's take it off the list, and I'll ping when I do it
[15:06] <gary_poster> that would be a no :-)
[15:06] <bac> gary_poster: ok.
[15:06] <bac> [topic] * salgado to update the wiki page to encourage reviews with sufficient context.
[15:06] <MootBot> New Topic:  * salgado to update the wiki page to encourage reviews with sufficient context.
[15:07] <salgado> oh, crap.  haven't done it yet
[15:07] <salgado> sorry
[15:07] <bac> np.  i keep meaning to harass people with items on mondays but i keep forgetting.
[15:07] <bac> [topic] bigjools to start ML discussion about community reviewers and committers.  (done 24-Feb)
[15:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  bigjools to start ML discussion about community reviewers and committers.  (done 24-Feb)
[15:07] <bac> thanks bigjools -- you're our star today
[15:08] <bigjools> I don't suck!
[15:08] <bigjools> next action on you to talk to legal?
[15:08] <bac> and on a related note:
[15:08] <bac> [topic] * bac to seek opinion of IS and Legal wrt community reviewers and committers. (due 10-Mar).
[15:08] <MootBot> New Topic:  * bac to seek opinion of IS and Legal wrt community reviewers and committers. (due 10-Mar).
[15:08] <bac> i agreed to do this task yesterday but haven't gotten to it yet.
[15:09] <danilos> bac, do you want it to be an action or a topic?
[15:09] <bac> martin pool made the reasonable request that we/I write a statement on the wiki about the fact we're looking into the issue in the interim
[15:10] <bac> [action] bac to update wiki re: interim status of community reviewers and committers
[15:10] <MootBot> ACTION received:  bac to update wiki re: interim status of community reviewers and committers
[15:10] <bac> danilos: i use -topic- for old items and -action- for new ones.  not that it matters much as mootbot is mostly useless
[15:11] <bac> new stuff
[15:11] <bac> [topic]  YUI namespacing for lp specific items should start with lp (rockstar)
[15:11] <MootBot> New Topic:   YUI namespacing for lp specific items should start with lp (rockstar)
[15:11] <bac> rockstar has sacrificed his morning bike ride to be with us today
[15:12] <rockstar> Yes, but I would half-assed the ride anyway.
[15:12] <deryck> he'd only get hit by a car anyway ;)
[15:12] <deryck> hi rockstar
[15:12] <bigjools> step away from the car deryck
[15:12] <deryck> heh
[15:12] <rockstar> So the current rule in YUI namespacing for launchpad is to start with the app it's being used on.
[15:12] <danilos> rockstar, good morning, I'd be +1 on your suggestion
[15:12] <danilos> (not that I heard it fully :)
[15:13] <rockstar> I think that's a little inconsistent with the way we precede lazr-js widgets with lazr.
[15:13] <rockstar> So I propose that javascript namespaces start with lp.
[15:14] <mars> rockstar, do you have an example of the old way, and the new way?
[15:14] <rockstar> That way, if/when we start using third party widgets (yes please), there's no confusion which ones, are lp specific.
[15:14] <intellectronica> +1
[15:14] <intellectronica> what about existing code?
[15:14] <rockstar> mars, no, unless you count what we have as the old way, and what I have sitting in a branch as the new way.
[15:15] <rockstar> intellectronica, I assume we migrate as we can.  There are already open bugs that EdwinGrubbs filed because namespaces are wrong is some places already.
[15:15] <bac> it's a lovely suggestion rockstar.  i wish you'd made it about a month ago...  :)
[15:15] <rockstar> I should also mention that I'm in the process of doing away with lib/canonical/launchpad/javascript.
[15:15] <bac> EdwinGrubbs: how many of those bugs have been done?
[15:17] <intellectronica> rockstar: you rock
[15:17] <EdwinGrubbs> bac: I know that I did the one for the registry. I don't know about any of the other ones except that rockstar worked on one which I reviewed, so the inconsistencies between the ways we completed it are fortunately being brought to the meeting.
[15:17] <intellectronica> star
[15:17] <rockstar> bac, we talked about this change at the lazr-js sprint, but apparently it got changed before it made it to the reviewers.
[15:17] <bac> any other thoughts?
[15:18] <rockstar> I'd be happy to help other teams get their javascript in order.
[15:18] <bigjools> yes please :)
[15:18] <bac> rockstar: thanks
[15:18] <rockstar> (specifically the teams that have no javascript)
[15:18] <rockstar> :)
[15:18] <noodles775> lol
[15:18] <bigjools> lol
[15:18] <bac> so, it looks like we're in favor of the change.
[15:19] <bac> thanks for the idea and bringing it up rockstar
[15:19] <deryck> I'm +1 and we still have the other renaming for bugs to do anyway.
[15:19] <rockstar> deryck, I'll just comment on your bugs with the new change.
[15:19] <deryck> rockstar, excellent, thanks!
[15:20] <bac> rockstar: can i get you to update he existing bugs EdwinGrubbs opened and open new ones for the apps that have already been converted?
[15:20] <rockstar> bac, yeah,  I committed to that at the UI meeting when I first proposed this.
[15:21] <rockstar> Also, updating the style guide.
[15:21] <bac> [action] rockstar to update bugs to reflect new naming convention and will update the style guide
[15:21] <MootBot> ACTION received:  rockstar to update bugs to reflect new naming convention and will update the style guide
[15:21] <bac> [topic] peanuts
[15:21] <MootBot> New Topic:  peanuts
[15:21] <bac> anything to discuss that wasn't on the agenda?
[15:21] <noodles775> New reviewer to join me for Thurs Euro?
[15:21] <noodles775> Now with al-maisan leaving soon, I'll be all on my own again :)
[15:22] <noodles775> (leaving launchpad that is)
[15:22] <abentley> Do we have a ui-reviewers team?
[15:22] <rockstar> noodles775, do you really get busy on Thursday in Euro?
[15:22] <noodles775> The last two weeks yes, pretty much my whole day (handing a queue to you), but the week before was only one, so it varies.
[15:23] <mars> abentley, we are discussing about how to graduate more UI reviewers.  Curtis is practically ready to graduate, he just hasn't assumed the crown yet :)
[15:23] <bac> noodles775: most slots only have single-person coverage
[15:23] <noodles775> bac: just checked, yeah right, only Monday and Weds have 2. OK.
[15:23] <abentley> mars, that seems only tangentially related to my question.
[15:24] <bac> https://dev.launchpad.net/ReviewerSchedule
[15:24] <bigjools> noodles775: jelmer wants to start reviewing and he might collar to be a mentor
[15:24] <noodles775> Sounds great!
[15:24] <bigjools> collar you, that is
[15:24] <bac> abentley: UI reviewers are marked under the "specialties" column on the wiki i posted
[15:25] <bac> abentley: other than that no real team
[15:25] <mars> abentley, then the answer is no: we do not have a team
[15:25] <mars> abentley, the list of reviewers ann process can be found here: https://dev.launchpad.net/UI/Reviews
[15:25] <abentley> bac, mars: I would like to be able to request a ui review from the ui-reviewers team.
[15:26] <mars> ah, interesting idea
[15:26] <abentley> Its non-existence makes that hard :-)
[15:26] <bac> abentley: ok, so you're talking about a team in launchpad for use in merge proposals.
[15:26] <abentley> bac, yes.
[15:26] <bac> abentley: so the answer is "not now" but it seems easy enough to do
[15:26] <abentley> bac, having a team might overlap with that wiki page.
[15:27] <abentley> But it might also be a nice way to find a ui reviewer.
[15:27] <bac> abentley: would you like to coordinate getting that team established?
[15:27] <rockstar> abentley, I'm your ui reviewer.  Never forget that.  :)
[15:27] <abentley> rockstar, :-)
[15:27] <abentley> bac, sure.
[15:27] <mars> abentley, we can discuss it at the next UI call, if you wish
[15:28] <abentley> mars, okay.
[15:28] <bac> [action] mars to discuss UI reviewers team on UI call
[15:28] <MootBot> ACTION received:  mars to discuss UI reviewers team on UI call
[15:28] <bac> any other topics?
[15:29] <bac> ok, thanks for coming everyone.
[15:29] <rockstar> Why would we need to discuss making a UI reviewers team?  Couldn't we just JFDI?
[15:29] <bac> #endmeeting
[15:29] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 09:29.
[15:29] <danilos> thanks bac
[15:29] <al-maisan> thanks!
[15:30] <mars> rockstar, I don't think throwing a UI review at a team will necessarily stick.  "If everyone owns it, no one owns it"
[15:30] <mars> Unless we all agree to pick up team reviews
[15:30] <rockstar> mars, well, it'll stick as well as throwing a code review at a team.
[15:30] <intellectronica> rockstar: i agree with mars. making you chase a real person is going to help make sure the review actually gets done promptly
[15:31] <rockstar> We've never just "thrown" the UI at a team.  It's assigned to a team, and then we go find a member of that team to do it.
[15:31] <rockstar> Er, "thrown" a review at a team.
[15:32] <mars> well, you do throw it at them, but you know there is someone over there looking for things to catch :)
[15:32] <intellectronica> rockstar: the problem is that assignment means something very specific in Launchpad. it means 'this person is going to do that'
[15:32] <rockstar> mars, if someone were to just assign a review to me, it's not likely I would do it.  I'd expect them to come to me and say "Hey, I assigned this review to you.  Can you do it?"
[15:33] <intellectronica> if that person is not really a person then it's confusing
[15:34] <mars> rockstar, right.  There is a social convention, or contract, there.  The UI reviewers team has not actually talked about said contract yet, so how would we know what to do when other people, not ourselves, invoke it?
[15:34] <rockstar> We do this on a regular basis with canonical-launchpad
[15:35] <intellectronica> rockstar: good point
[15:35] <intellectronica> but we always also go find a reviewer
[15:35] <rockstar> Team or Individual, there's already an existing social contract.
[15:36] <mars> rockstar, but not between "anyone in launchpad" and the UI Reviewers team
[15:36] <mars> if you just created that team tomorrow, and assigned a review to it, nothing would happen
[15:37] <noodles775> But if you assigned a review to it, pinged someone and they weren't able to do it, other people would be aware of the need?
[15:37] <mars> because we, the UI reviewers, don't know what to do yet.  Who should pick up the review?  Who can safely ignore it?
[15:37] <rockstar> Creating the team allows you to see who you can track down.
[15:37] <mars> noodles775, maybe, depends if that happens already.  Is creating a team just paving cowpaths?  Or creating a new contract?
[15:38] <rockstar> I can safely ignore any review that no one specifically asked me to review.  If you don't track down a specific reviewer, obviously your review isn't a high priority.
[15:38] <mars> rockstar, true, but so does the UI Reviewers wiki page.  And the page tells you what skill people have.
[15:39] <rockstar> mars, we don't need a wiki to make people honest.  I know I haven't graduated (a theme that constantly irks me).
[15:39] <rockstar> I'll make sure to say something like "you'll need to get another review from <graduated-reviewer>"
[15:40] <rockstar> We already have "social contracts" that work fine, and ARE working.
[15:41] <mars> rockstar, so the reason I think we should talk about this a bit at the meeting is so we all know what to do when we get notified that someone assigned a review to the UI Reviewers team.  You may know, but I, for example don't.
[15:41] <rockstar> mars, what do you do when someone assigns a code review to canonical-launchpad?
[15:41] <mars> If you know, great, then you can tell everyone on the team about during the the UI call :)
[15:41] <mars> rockstar, absolutely nothing
[15:42] <rockstar> mars, now you know, and knowing is half the battle.
[15:42] <rockstar> We're not changing anything here.  We're not doing anything new.
[15:42] <mars> rockstar, so why have the team at all then?  What does it do?
[15:43] <mars> If no one does anything when it is assigned to the team, then what is the point?
[15:43] <rockstar> mars, what's the point of canonical-launchpad then?
[15:43] <abentley> mars, It allows me to flag the fact that it needs ui-review before I know who my ui-reviewer is.
[15:44] <mars> abentley, ah!  ok, *that* makes sense.
[15:45] <mars> rockstar, so the point of canonical-launchpad is just a placeholder as well.  Just a flag of intent.
[15:46] <mars> rockstar, abentley, you see, I thought you meant that some action on our part was implied by assigning a review to the ui-reviewers team.
[15:46] <abentley> mars, currently people are not notified when their team is requested to perform a review, but there has been pushback about that, so we may change it.
[15:46] <mars> That is not the case
[15:46] <mars> abentley, ah
[15:49] <mars> So, I don't think you can just assume everyone will know to do the same thing in the new ui-reviewers team as what happens with canonical-launchpad.  You have to spell it out.  It's a new team, with a new contract.  (That just happens to be the same as what we do for canonical-launchpad.)
[15:50] <rockstar> mars, yeah, so it's not new.  Do we have any UI reviewers who aren't also code reviewers?
[15:50] <mars> rockstar, nope
[15:50] <mars> rockstar, wait, /me checks
[15:51] <rockstar> mars, here's a compromise.  Let's not "talk" about it at the UI reviewers meeting.  Let's just say "we're creating a group, you're in it, do what you do with code reviews"
[15:51] <rockstar> Done.
[15:52] <mars> rockstar, sure, since we already talked about it here :)
[15:53] <mars> rockstar, you should at least ask for agreement from the other team members though.  You can lay it all out on a silver platter, but don't shove it down people's throats :)
[15:57] <mars> rockstar, fwiw, mrevell is a UI reviewer, but not a code reviewer.
[16:03] <mars> rockstar, mind if I add the UI call topic in your name?
[16:05] <rockstar> mars, probably ought to do it in your name.
[16:05] <mars> ok
[16:06] <mars> done
[16:22]  * mrjazzcat is away: Auto-away after 30 mins idle (gone at 3rd Mar, 09:22:12)
[21:31] <bac> hi mwhudson, thumper, rockstar
[21:31] <thumper> bac: hi
[21:31] <mwhudson> bac: hi
[21:31] <bac> how's your morning thumper?
[21:31] <thumper> pretty good
[21:31] <bac> #startmeeting
[21:31] <MootBot> Meeting started at 15:31. The chair is bac.
[21:31] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[21:31] <bac> hi michael
[21:32] <rockstar> hi
[21:32] <bac> hi rockstar
[21:32] <rockstar> bac, I guess I'm doing double duty today.  :)
[21:32] <bac> a twofer
[21:32] <bac> rockstar: heck you should just lead the meeting
[21:32] <rockstar> bac, :)
[21:33] <bac> the only excitement from this morning was rockstar's proposal for changing (again -- :) ) the JS naming conventions
[21:33] <rockstar> bac, in my defense, this was what was originally intended.  :)
[21:33] <bac> rockstar: you want to summarize your idea?
[21:33] <rockstar> Okay, so basically all YUI namespacing for lp specific modules now starts with lp.
[21:34] <rockstar> So for the code team, our modules would be namespaced as "lp.code.whatever"
[21:34] <rockstar> The code team has more specifics to the namespace, but those aren't lp wide.
[21:34] <bac> the previous new convention had just been "code.whatever", right?
[21:35] <bac> there wasn't much discussion since everyone thought it was a reasonable idea
[21:36] <bac> abentley brought up the idea of creating a launchpad-ui-reviewers team in LP for use in assigning a reviewer in a MP
[21:36] <mwhudson> both those things make sense to me
[21:37] <bac> mars was going to bring it up on the UI reviewers call.  after the meeting ended there was some discussion about whether it made sense or not, but i couldn't hang around for the outcome
[21:37] <bac> i guess we'll learn more next week
[21:38] <rockstar> (the outcome is that we're going to talk about creating a team instead of JFDI'ing  :)
[21:38] <bac> and from the mailing list discussion about community involvement in reviews and landing i took the assignment to check with legal and IS as to whether it is feasible or not from a corporate standpoint
[21:39] <bac> rockstar: yeah, it seemed a bit wankish but i guess there is no need to create a team if in the end it's not going to be useful
[21:40] <bac> so, that was basically all we discussed.  nothing too controversial.
[21:40] <bac> either of you have anything to talk about?
[21:40] <mwhudson> i thought rob's mail on the the community reviewer thread expressed my position pretty well
[21:41] <bac> hey, i have a question.  i see in merge proposals the "reviewed version" is being set of us.  was that a recent fix?
[21:41] <mwhudson> bac: yes
[21:41] <bac> mwhudson: cool
[21:42]  * bac tries to remember what exactly rob's point was
[21:43] <mwhudson> well, partly that it was a strange limit to try to hold, given that there is plenty of community in ubuntu-core-dev
[21:43] <mwhudson> but i didn't really want to restart the discussion here :)
[21:43] <bac> no, thanks for that
[21:44] <bac> well, that's all i've got
[21:44] <mwhudson> me too
[21:44] <bac> thanks for coming.
[21:44] <bac> #endmeeting
[21:44] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 15:44.