| === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha | ||
| === mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch | ||
| === mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell | ||
| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-lunch | ||
| 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] | 15:00 |
| jelmer | me | 15:00 |
| bac | hello, who is here today? | 15:00 |
| abentley | me | 15:00 |
| bigjools | me | 15:00 |
| sinzui | me | 15:00 |
| jcsackett | me | 15:00 |
| benji | me | 15:00 |
| mrevell | me | 15:00 |
| deryck | me | 15:00 |
| EdwinGrubbs | me | 15:00 |
| henninge | me | 15:00 |
| flacoste | me | 15:00 |
| * benji things it should be "I" :P | 15:00 | |
| mars | me | 15:00 |
| mars | benji, "moo" is always fun | 15:01 |
| benji | heh | 15:01 |
| salgado | me | 15:01 |
| gary_poster | me | 15:02 |
| danilos | me | 15:02 |
| gmb | Me | 15:02 |
| === allenap` is now known as allenap | ||
| allenap | me | 15:02 |
| danilos | oh, capital "Me" is here as well | 15:02 |
| bac | great, let's start. pretty light agenda today | 15:03 |
| bac | [topic] agenda | 15:03 |
| MootBot | New Topic: agenda | 15:03 |
| bac | * Roll call | 15:03 |
| bac | * Agenda | 15:03 |
| bac | * Outstanding actions | 15:03 |
| bac | * Mentat update. | 15:03 |
| bac | * Salgado (ui) | 15:03 |
| bac | * StevenK (code) | 15:03 |
| bac | * MRevell (ui) | 15:03 |
| bac | * New items | 15:03 |
| bac | * Should reviewers expect the review template to be used? - abentley | 15:03 |
| bac | * Integrating test timing into reviews, recap. -bac | 15:03 |
| bac | * Peanut gallery | 15:03 |
| bac | [topic] mentat update | 15:03 |
| MootBot | New Topic: mentat update | 15:03 |
| bac | salgado, getting any more UI reviews? | 15:03 |
| gary_poster | bac, benji should be in mentat update | 15:03 |
| salgado | nope | 15:04 |
| bac | mrevell, getting any? | 15:04 |
| bac | thanks, gary_poster | 15:04 |
| mrevell | bac, No. | 15:04 |
| salgado | haven't done any in a long while | 15:04 |
| jelmer | I will have one tomorrow | 15:04 |
| jcsackett | bac: i'm in the mentoring process as well. | 15:04 |
| danilos | I've also asked henninge to be my UI mentor as well, so I'll be starting as UI reviewer one of these days as well | 15:04 |
| sinzui | salgado, me too | 15:04 |
| bac | sorry benji and jcsackett. updated on the wiki now | 15:04 |
| benji | np | 15:04 |
| danilos | perhaps there's no need for UI reviewers anymore | 15:04 |
| flacoste | danilos: why? | 15:05 |
| sinzui | salgado, may be should agree that mentoring ui <= 3 month | 15:05 |
| danilos | flacoste, why would I want to be, or why there might not be a need? | 15:05 |
| sinzui | salgado, maybe you should graduate next week because you have all the experience you are ever going to get | 15:05 |
| danilos | flacoste, it's just that people haven't been getting any UI branches for review | 15:05 |
| abentley | danilos, there's certainly a need for UI review, but maybe not one so frequent as to demand specialized reviewers. | 15:05 |
| bac | sinzui: +1 | 15:05 |
| EdwinGrubbs | benji has been doing a good job, but we haven't been getting very many requests for reviews on Wednesday | 15:06 |
| salgado | sinzui, well, I'm not sure a time limit is a good idea as in some periods (like now) we may stay a long time without doing any reviews | 15:06 |
| danilos | flacoste, i.e. mrevell and salgado hasn't gotten any in a week, so I am wondering if it's smart to try to achieve that specialization with unused workforce we've got | 15:06 |
| jcsackett | EdwinGrubbs: i've found the same thing on thursdays--i think maybe it's an end of year slow down? | 15:06 |
| flacoste | jcsackett: probably is | 15:06 |
| henninge | I have not had that many, either. | 15:07 |
| bac | jcsackett, flacoste: but with the BugJam on perhaps it'll pick up? | 15:07 |
| salgado | danilos, fwiw, I was doing 3 or so reviews a week when I started. just lately there doesn't seem to have been many people working on UI | 15:07 |
| abentley | fwiw, monday OCR is rarely busy. | 15:07 |
| flacoste | bac: number of reviews should yes | 15:07 |
| flacoste | salgado, danilos: yeah, UI reviews usually come in burst | 15:07 |
| flacoste | when a new feature is developped | 15:07 |
| danilos | salgado, right, thanks; I don't want to become a mentat as well and thus distribute the low UI activity over more people | 15:08 |
| bac | danilos: perhaps you have a point that we don't need new UI reviewers in the pipeline if we can't get enough to get the current mentats trained. | 15:08 |
| danilos | bac, right, that was my point | 15:08 |
| jcsackett | bac: maybe get a queue of people willing to be UI and phase them in when the next feature rush begins? | 15:08 |
| abentley | danilos, Sorry, I thought you meant the whole concept was outdated. | 15:08 |
| bac | abentley: yeah, me too | 15:09 |
| danilos | abentley, oh no, sorry for confusing you guys :) | 15:09 |
| bac | [topic] Should reviewers expect the review template to be used? - abentley | 15:09 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Should reviewers expect the review template to be used? - abentley | 15:09 |
| abentley | Back when I started, there was a template that was expected to be used for code review. | 15:10 |
| abentley | It's basically preserved in the lpreview_body plugin. | 15:10 |
| abentley | It expects a summary, pre-implementation notes, implementation details, lint, etc. | 15:10 |
| abentley | I use it, but I find that basically no one else does. | 15:11 |
| bac | abentley: i always use it and really like it when others do. | 15:11 |
| abentley | Okay, maybe that's too strong. | 15:11 |
| jcsackett | abentley: that template was provided to me when i started. i've seen it from a few others (though sometimes not with all sections). | 15:11 |
| bigjools | I use it sometimes. It's massive overkill for simple branches. | 15:11 |
| abentley | There are a bunch of people not using it. | 15:11 |
| bac | personally i like it because i'm both lazy and forgetful. it helps with both. | 15:11 |
| deryck | I don't use it. there I owned up to it. ;) | 15:11 |
| * deryck looks around at the rest of the room | 15:12 | |
| deryck | I feel it's too prescriptive. | 15:12 |
| bac | bigjools: the sections that are overkill are easily deleted or marked 'n/a' | 15:12 |
| abentley | bac, +1 | 15:12 |
| jcsackett | deryck: could you unpack that a bit? not sure what you mean. | 15:12 |
| bigjools | that's extra hassle, particularly if I use the web ui | 15:12 |
| flacoste | actually, web ui is the major problem there | 15:12 |
| bac | bigjools: oh. i *never* use the web ui... | 15:12 |
| flacoste | i most often use the web ui to submit branches | 15:12 |
| flacoste | (ok, i don't submit that many anymore...) | 15:13 |
| jcsackett | i use the web ui, and find that pasting in the template as a starting point isn't that big a deal. | 15:13 |
| gary_poster | more people may be using it soon, if the switch to using tarmac is successful | 15:13 |
| flacoste | i'd use the template | 15:13 |
| gary_poster | it == the web | 15:13 |
| flacoste | if it was easy to get at | 15:13 |
| abentley | gary_poster, why? | 15:13 |
| flacoste | gary_poster: why? | 15:13 |
| bigjools | if the branch is cleaning up, or a trivial bug, I find that template too prescriptive, annoying to edit and a waste of time. | 15:13 |
| gary_poster | because you'll be able to submit without using a commandline if you want | 15:13 |
| bigjools | however, it's useful for a more complex change | 15:13 |
| abentley | gary_poster, I think you are talking about lp-land, not lp-propose. | 15:14 |
| jelmer | It'd be nice if it the template was available in the web interface as well, not just in "bzr send". | 15:14 |
| gary_poster | oh, you are right, abentley. thanks, sorry | 15:14 |
| jelmer | I'm also guilty of not using the template now that I've switched to using the web interface primarily for proposing merges. | 15:14 |
| abentley | jelmer, it's not just in bzr send, it's also in lp-propose, and that's preferred. | 15:15 |
| gary_poster | not using template: me too. | 15:15 |
| abentley | jelmer, I don't see how the web site is going to run lint on your local machine :-) | 15:15 |
| bigjools | I stopped using lint when it kept coming up with a million* false positives | 15:15 |
| abentley | Personally, I think it's a useful reminder of key things. | 15:15 |
| abentley | Like who the pre-implementation call was with. | 15:16 |
| abentley | I agree it's overkill for trivial bugs. | 15:16 |
| bigjools | pre-imp details are the most useful thing on that template | 15:17 |
| abentley | bigjools, it's pretty good for me now. | 15:17 |
| abentley | bigjools, lint is pretty good for me, I mean. | 15:17 |
| benji | abentley: indeed; I use it as a checklist; I make sure that I've considered every item on the template, even if I don't include it | 15:17 |
| bigjools | ok I'll try it again, thanks | 15:17 |
| bac | i guess the bigger issue is whether reviewers think the merge proposals are providing all of the expected information, whether people use the available tools, or not. | 15:17 |
| flacoste | abentley: does lp-propose submit the template on the web UI? | 15:18 |
| abentley | bac, also, if we're going to include test execution times, it would be sensible to add them to the template. | 15:18 |
| * flacoste doesn't know about lp-propose | 15:18 | |
| bigjools | s/expected/useful and pertinent/ | 15:18 |
| bac | those that i see that use the template tend to cover all of the bases. doesn't do a thing about the quality of the prose, though. | 15:18 |
| abentley | flacoste, it opens up your editor to edit the description, then loads the proposal in the browser when it's done. | 15:19 |
| flacoste | bac: dev writes in code :-p | 15:19 |
| flacoste | abentley: then I should be using that! | 15:19 |
| jcsackett | abentley: that sounds like the coolest thing ever. | 15:19 |
| flacoste | i think it might just be that people don't know about lp-propose | 15:19 |
| danilos | I find it's hard to find out about it | 15:19 |
| * jcsackett never heard about it. | 15:19 | |
| deryck | bac: that's part of my issue with the template, sometime those who use it, just list a bunch of info, rather than writing a couple paragraphs explaining what is happening in the code, which is often more useful to me. | 15:19 |
| danilos | I used to have one of previous submit plugins with the template, but now I type most of the relevant sections out of my head | 15:19 |
| bac | abentley: i think part of the problem is new people don't know how to use your plug-in and some experienced folks forgot. could you send out a reminder email or a pointer to the wiki? | 15:20 |
| jelmer | I was vaguely aware of it, but didn't know it was the proper way to propose merges instead of the web UI. | 15:20 |
| danilos | it's simply hard to find what the latest and best way to submit MPs is (i.e. appropriate plugin and such: I knew nothing about lp-propose either) | 15:20 |
| flacoste | jelmer: it sounds like it's a wrapper around the uI, which is exactly what we need | 15:20 |
| abentley | jelmer, I meant that it's preferred over "bzr send", not necessarily the web UI. | 15:20 |
| mars | danilos, yes, that is odd - we used to do that just fine (years ago, when I joined) | 15:21 |
| abentley | danilos, it ships as part of bzr :-P | 15:21 |
| jelmer | abentley: don't you still need lpreview_body to actually get the template though? | 15:21 |
| abentley | jelmer, yes, you do. | 15:21 |
| danilos | abentley, heh, right, that's probably why it's harder for people to find out about it: if you are not actively looking for it and you've been using something like lpreview_body or whatever in the past, you wonder why it doesn't work as well anymore | 15:22 |
| abentley | jelmer, since it's packaged, we could add it to lp-developer-dependencies, if it's not already. | 15:22 |
| danilos | (and I was actually stuck on whatever was before lpreview_body with my "lpsend" as the alias) | 15:22 |
| jelmer | abentley: I think that's a good idea | 15:23 |
| bac | abentley: can you send that reminder email and pursue getting it added to lp-d-d? | 15:23 |
| abentley | danilos, I bear some blame, since I wrote it and didn't promote it. | 15:23 |
| abentley | bac, Sure. | 15:23 |
| bac | abentley: thanks for bringing up the topic...and for writing the tool. | 15:23 |
| bac | moving on | 15:23 |
| bac | [topic] Integrating test timing into reviews. --bac | 15:23 |
| MootBot | New Topic: Integrating test timing into reviews. --bac | 15:23 |
| bac | last week we started the discussion about paying attention to test timing. we've had a lot of discussioin on the mailing list about what that means. | 15:24 |
| bac | has anyone tried and have successes or failures to report? | 15:24 |
| mars | Aaron added two tests yesterday, timing was 2 seconds | 15:25 |
| bigjools | timing info on its own means nothing to me | 15:25 |
| mars | TBH, I didn't know how far to pursue it - how much was setup, how much existing tests, what it ok? | 15:25 |
| mars | 'what is ok' | 15:25 |
| flacoste | bac: given that we are planning on rewriting the persistence layer and that there is controversy on the metrics side | 15:26 |
| flacoste | why don't we move on to another aspect? | 15:26 |
| flacoste | and revisit this later, once the story around persistence and tests is more clear | 15:26 |
| bac | francis, sure we can do that | 15:26 |
| flacoste | well, that's not an edict! | 15:26 |
| flacoste | just proposing | 15:26 |
| bac | i unwisely thought this would be an easy one to start with | 15:26 |
| bigjools | I concur :) | 15:26 |
| bac | i'll propose something next week | 15:27 |
| bac | [topic] peanuts | 15:27 |
| MootBot | New Topic: peanuts | 15:27 |
| bigjools | o/ | 15:27 |
| bac | yes bigjools? | 15:28 |
| abentley | Who's seen A Charlie Brown Christmas this year? :-) | 15:28 |
| bac | are you really left handed? | 15:28 |
| bigjools | ... | 15:28 |
| danilos | bac, that was him with his back turned on us | 15:28 |
| gary_poster | :-) | 15:28 |
| * bigjools is speechless for the first time in ages | 15:28 | |
| bigjools | anyway | 15:28 |
| danilos | but he's also a slow typist (especially with only one hand) | 15:28 |
| * gary_poster laughs | 15:29 | |
| * bigjools sees the gutter approaching | 15:29 | |
| mars | lol | 15:29 |
| bigjools | I want to talk about the mailing list thread that jelmer brought up | 15:29 |
| bigjools | regarding api only functions in model classes | 15:29 |
| jelmer | bigjools: thanks, I forgot about that | 15:29 |
| bigjools | I think it's a good idea to prepend api_ in front of any method that's only used in the api | 15:30 |
| * danilos is still behind on his mail | 15:30 | |
| bigjools | anyone got any comments? | 15:30 |
| abentley | bigjools, I think it's a good idea. | 15:30 |
| bigjools | (with liberal use of export_as of course) | 15:30 |
| danilos | other than that we should have made API a separate layer in the first place? no :) | 15:30 |
| bigjools | I assume that's coming | 15:31 |
| danilos | anyway, "api_" as the prefix for API-only methods is probably good | 15:31 |
| bigjools | this is a stopgap | 15:31 |
| abentley | bigjools, it makes me sad that the API has the zope naming convetion, though. | 15:31 |
| jelmer | abentley: is that documented somewhere? | 15:31 |
| bigjools | we should change that *now* if we can | 15:31 |
| bigjools | but it might be too late | 15:31 |
| abentley | jelmer, Not as a special thing. All our code has the zope naming convention. | 15:31 |
| === Ursinha-lunch is now known as Ursinha | ||
| mars | danilos, makes sense: model -> views (HTML), model -> api-layer (JSON) | 15:31 |
| jelmer | abentley: I found a couple of methods which explicitly used "export_method_as" and used names with underscores and lowercase characters. | 15:31 |
| gary_poster | I think it's too late myself | 15:31 |
| leonardr | bigjools: a while ago we decided it was too late | 15:31 |
| gary_poster | consistency is more valuable IMO | 15:32 |
| leonardr | and now it's even later | 15:32 |
| bigjools | :( | 15:32 |
| abentley | gary_poster, definitely too late for 1.0 :-( | 15:32 |
| gary_poster | yup | 15:32 |
| bigjools | maybe on the next version bump? | 15:32 |
| bigjools | then we can make everything consistent | 15:32 |
| bigjools | it's a bit of a mess right now | 15:32 |
| danilos | E_TOOMUCHWORK | 15:33 |
| danilos | at least imo | 15:33 |
| * gary_poster thinks that the webservice will get attention separately | 15:33 | |
| bigjools | I think it's valuable work - we don't have anyone looking at our whole api, other than the people who use it | 15:33 |
| danilos | of course, we can choose when the next version bump will be | 15:33 |
| gary_poster | i.e., this is the worng forum | 15:33 |
| danilos | gary_poster, +1 | 15:33 |
| jcsackett | gary_poster + 1 | 15:33 |
| gary_poster | looking at the whole api: that was to have been what leonardr did soon :-) | 15:33 |
| bac | gary_poster: yep | 15:33 |
| bigjools | anyway, votes for api_ ? | 15:33 |
| abentley | bigjools, +1 | 15:33 |
| danilos | bigjools, +1 | 15:34 |
| gary_poster | sure, _1 | 15:34 |
| bac | +1 | 15:34 |
| gary_poster | heh | 15:34 |
| deryck | +1 | 15:34 |
| gary_poster | + | 15:34 |
| jcsackett | +1 | 15:34 |
| danilos | :) | 15:34 |
| jelmer | +1 | 15:34 |
| deryck | is underbar 1 even less than -1? ;) | 15:34 |
| bigjools | it's a wunderbar | 15:34 |
| benji | +1 | 15:34 |
| gary_poster | heh, yeah, maybe so :-) | 15:34 |
| leonardr | +0 | 15:34 |
| bac | bigjools: looks like you have a winner | 15:34 |
| bigjools | motion carried | 15:34 |
| bac | bigjools: will you update the style guide? | 15:34 |
| bigjools | if I can remember where it is | 15:35 |
| bigjools | :) | 15:35 |
| jelmer | Alternatively, I'd be happy to update it | 15:35 |
| danilos | bigjools, I am guessing dev.launchpad.net/StyleGuide :) | 15:35 |
| danilos | nope, but it does give useful hints :) | 15:35 |
| bigjools | what! it's in an obvious place? I'd never have thought to look there. | 15:35 |
| bac | any other topics? | 15:35 |
| bac | i'll look at the list of people who will be around next wednesday and cancel this meeting if it looks too low. | 15:37 |
| bac | thanks for coming everyone | 15:37 |
| flacoste | thanks bac | 15:37 |
| bac | #endmeeting | 15:37 |
| MootBot | Meeting finished at 09:37. | 15:37 |
| danilos | cheers bac | 15:37 |
| mars | thanks bac | 15:37 |
| bigjools | cheers | 15:37 |
| gary_poster | thank you | 15:37 |
| gmb | Ta | 15:37 |
| abentley | thanks, bac. | 15:37 |
| jcsackett | thanks, bac. | 15:38 |
| benji | leonardr: your "and now it's even later" comment made me think of TMBG's "Older" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ltJ8kK4G90&feature=related) | 15:39 |
| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk | ||
| === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha | ||
| === leonardr is now known as leonardr-afk | ||
| === benji is now known as benji-lunch | ||
| === benji-lunch is now known as benji | ||
| === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-brb | ||
| === leonardr-afk is now known as leonardr | ||
| === Ursinha-brb is now known as Ursinha | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!