[06:50] <dholbach> good morning
[07:57] <davidcalle> dholbach: when is the d.u.c meeting with Thibaut?
[07:57] <dholbach> aucune idée
[07:58] <dholbach> ah, 17:00 - it's in dpm's calendar
[08:01] <dpm> dholbach, davidcalle, invitations sent
[08:02] <davidcalle> dpm: thanks and welcome back :)
[08:02] <dpm> davidcalle, thanks :)
[08:02] <dpm> I've invited you guys to another documentation meeting tomorrow
[08:03] <dpm> after the chat I had with ev last week, davidcalle's suggestion with hosting scopes documentation in markdown, and the snappy docs being in github
[08:04] <dholbach> dpm, so we drop the snappy docs from dev.u.c?
[08:04] <davidcalle> dpm: yes, just seen it
[08:04] <davidcalle> dholbach: I think it's about their upstream location before reaching duc (?)
[08:05] <dpm> dholbach, yeah, not really about dropping documentation, I think we need to have d.u.c as the central place for docs
[08:05] <dpm> davidcalle, yea
[08:05] <dpm> h :)
[08:05] <dholbach> ok... so just where we import it from? ok
[08:05] <dpm> exactly
[08:05] <dholbach> bzr and git are both fine ... once we land the newest we should be good to go
[08:07] <davidcalle> dpm: dholbach: btw, deployment: I need to sync up with Mike today to see if he wants to continue solving the pip issue (currently blocking) or if we revert pip updates we have in trunk and deploy today.
[08:08] <dpm> davidcalle, I'm still catching up. Would you mind giving me the tl;dr about this pip issue?
[08:08] <dholbach> feel free to revert the pip cache update
[08:08] <dholbach> I think it'd be nice if we could solve it some time soon, so we can regularly benefit from upstream fixes
[08:08] <dholbach> but if we can get all the other stuff for now and then look into updating, that's absolutely fine with me too
[08:10] <davidcalle> dpm: the charm we are using to handle the django part of the deployment is not behaving well with upgraded pip dependencies: it tries to pull some of them from the web (which doesn't work) instead of the dependencies branch.
[08:10] <davidcalle> dholbach: I think Mike wanted to dig a bit deeper first
[08:11] <dholbach> thanks davidcalle
[08:11] <dholbach> you both are heroes
[08:12] <davidcalle> dpm: we don't need this depenendency upgrade right now, so we will likely revert it and keep all the other goodness
[08:12] <davidcalle> "depenendency" -> we dug too deep!
[08:13] <dpm> :)
[11:01] <dpm> davidcalle, could you remind me where our mojo spec lives?
[11:02] <davidcalle> dpm, trunk of https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-is/canonical-mojo-specs in ue/mojo-ue-devportal
[11:03] <dpm> awesome, thanks
[11:20] <dpm> dholbach, does the markdown importer for snappy docs support both LP and github?
[11:23] <dholbach> dpm, yes
[11:23] <dholbach> although I haven't tried with LP git yet
[11:27] <dpm> dholbach, thanks. Np, I was asking just to have a rough idea
[11:28] <dholbach> but in general, yes, both is possible
[11:30] <dpm> dholbach, davidcalle, do you know which formats the API docs importer for the phone supports? I know of qdoc, doxygen...
[11:31] <dpm> but I can't remember how the JS API docs are imported, for instance
[11:31] <dholbach> import_cordova.py  import_qdoc.py    import_yuidoc.py
[11:31] <dholbach> import_doxygen.py  import_sphinx.py
[11:31] <dholbach> dpm, ^
[11:32] <dpm> ah, nice, thanks!
[11:33] <dholbach> I think the JS bits were YUI
[11:33] <dholbach> but I'm not 100% certain
[11:34] <dholbach> yep, just checked
[11:44] <dpm> cool, thanks
[11:46] <dpm> davidcalle, dholbach, so I think looking at the site, a review of the IA would make sense. I think the phone part dominates quite a bit, and the snappy/IoT/core/$whichevernameoftheday is something we put there in between because we needed it, but now it's growing on it's own and disconnected from the rest of the site
[11:46] <dpm> pun intended: I think we need to converge there too :)
[11:55] <davidcalle> dpm: dholbach: I'm all for convergence, but let's make sure we are not converging our topics "too early" and diverge too much from the reality of what's available.
[12:00] <dpm> davidcalle, I probably shouldn't have used "converge", and I do see your point. I think things like Personal are definitely not yet there to put them in the site, so I agree here. But I think we need to a) think about and bear in mind convergence in the future, for app developers and b) most importantly now, have a clear journey for app developers by 16.04, given all the technologies that will be available
[12:00] <davidcalle> dholbach: I do agree that Snappy is not IoT only, but that's where all the focus is, as per Thibaut/Didier proposal
[12:01] <dholbach> davidcalle, dpm, I'm agreeing with all you're saying
[12:01] <dholbach> maybe we can think of something that'c clearer
[12:02] <dpm> ok, we're done then, let's go to the bar :)
[12:04] <dpm> In any case, there are enough technologies and mixes atm that we need to be careful how we present them not to confuse folks
[12:05] <dpm> i.e. we haven't even started talking about the unity 8 session preview on the desktop or libertine
[12:05]  * dpm sees them as low priority for d.u.c in any case
[12:09] <dholbach> davidcalle, dpm: how about continuing to call it Core and keep linking from ubuntu.com/things and other places? :)
[12:11] <davidcalle> dholbach: that's a possibility, yes. We can do this and find a way to provide clear IoT paths on the landing page.
[12:11] <dholbach> but opening a Phone section and moving apps and scopes there, makes a lot of sense
[12:12] <dpm> dholbach, I'm not sure. I think "IoT" or "Things" is easier to understand for developers, as "Core" is very much an Ubuntu-specific term
[12:12] <dholbach> it'll be interesting to see how we move/extend/rename that once we have unity8 on the desktop
[12:12] <dpm> I think that's where Personal will come in
[12:14] <dholbach> dpm, IoT and things is easier to understand, it's just that Core is already more generic than IoT and what we have in terms of docs in unspecific to IoT (as I said earlier) ... I was just trying to come up with something which reflected the immediate reality well, and it was our status quo O:-)
[12:15] <dholbach> davidcalle, would we move the snappy/community bits into community too?=
[12:15] <davidcalle> dholbach: great idea
[12:16] <dpm> +1
[12:16] <davidcalle> That's something we could converge without too much confusion
[12:16] <dholbach> yep, agreed
[12:23] <davidcalle> Use case: a developer who wants to publish an app for "Ubuntu 16.04". What's his clear path. Do we explain "Core" to him or do we put a sign saying "Desktop". Maybe we can do both: a persistent call to action on the landing page for Desktop apps: "Ubuntu Core allows you to etc." and a Core menu entry, both reaching the same page. Now, let's say we do the
[12:23] <davidcalle> same thing for an IoT board/app developer. Do we end up with a confusing landing page?
[12:23]  * davidcalle is thinking out loud
[12:24] <dholbach> Whatever we decide to call the tabs or nav links on the page, we're going to need a very clear landing page. :-)
[12:24] <dpm> yep, I was going to say the same thing as dholbach :)
[12:26] <dholbach> maybe we could even have a "ship an app" landing page on the top level? :-)
[12:27] <davidcalle> New top level IA proposal: Design it | Craft it | Ship it  ;-)
[12:28] <dholbach> <3
[12:28] <dpm> I think we should go the minimalistic way - "Do it"
[12:28] <dholbach> davidcalle for president!
[12:28] <dholbach> you have my vote
[12:28] <davidcalle> Speaking of clear landing pages: http://jp.ubuntu.com-master.demo.haus/
[12:29]  * davidcalle finds the first grey row of ^ very nice and clear
[12:31] <davidcalle> dpm, "Do it", then a maze of choices: "Pick your technology", "Pick your target", "Pick your framework"... :)
[12:31] <davidcalle> dholbach: <3
[12:31] <dpm> of course, let's just hide the complexity under the top level :)
[12:32] <dholbach> I'll try again to see if I can log into unity8 - bbiab
[12:32]  * davidcalle brb, fetching coffee
[12:35] <dpm> dholbach, any luck?
[12:35] <dholbach> dpm, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg-server/+bug/1543192 I'm afraid not
[12:35] <dpm> argh
[12:36] <dholbach> but maybe that's unrelated - what I'm doing is:
[12:36] <dholbach>  - log out from unity7, see lightdm pop up
[12:36] <dholbach>  - try to login to unity8, see something flicker, see lightdm pop back up again
[12:36] <dholbach>  - try to login to unity7, see something flicker, see lightdm pop back up again
[12:36] <dholbach> so I need to go back to the console to restart lightdm
[12:37] <dholbach> and then I can go and login to unity7
[12:48] <davidcalle> dpm: dholbach: I've sent you an invite to a Chrome app, just to try and brainstorm more visually, feel free to play with it, I need to be afk for a short moment
[12:48] <dholbach> cool
[12:48] <dpm> ok, thanks!
[12:48] <dpm> dholbach, what I had to do was to ensure that the cgmanager service was running
[12:49] <dpm> unrelated, but another trick
[12:49] <dholbach> ok
[13:59] <dholbach> davidcalle, nice work!
[13:59] <davidcalle> dholbach?
[13:59] <dholbach> davidcalle, in the coggle thing
[14:00] <davidcalle> Ah! Thanks, trying to figure a way to get all our options in front of us
[14:03] <dholbach> davidcalle, would it make sense in proposal 2 to have "unity7 snaps" under "core" and "writing a unity8 app" in "personal"?
[14:05] <davidcalle> dholbach: makes sense
[14:05] <dholbach> davidcalle, I just added them to the proposal... not in an attempt to make this final, but to visualise where the "desktop" section would go
[14:06] <dholbach> feel free to rearrange or rephrase
[14:10] <dpm> dholbach, davidcalle, I think I'm going to add a link to the coggle thing in the proposal doc
[14:11] <dholbach> cool
[14:15] <dpm> davidcalle, is proposal #1 yours? I like it, but I'm not too sure about "Store" - it might lead to think that we're offering a web view to the store, which we aren't
[14:16] <dholbach> dpm, there are discussion about moving the /publish docs to myapps itself
[14:17] <davidcalle> dpm: I just wasn't sure about keeping a verb when the rest are nouns. Store is a bit misleading, I agree.
[14:17] <dpm> davidcalle, and another question, do we need to explicitly invite people to see coggle, or can we just share the link?
[14:17] <dholbach> well... we had the discussions since we started developer.u.c, but beuno recently said they'd do it
[14:17] <davidcalle> dholbach: I don't see this happening soon honsetly
[14:17] <davidcalle> oh
[14:17] <dholbach> and assigned the bug to stevenbiscuit
[14:17] <dpm> dholbach, yeah, good point I remember that, but I don't think much has happened
[14:17] <dholbach> but that was 3 weeks ago
[14:18] <dholbach> I can find out what's happening
[14:18] <dholbach> it'd give us the benefit of handing over maintenance to them and they'd probably be quicker to update screenshots and stuff if necessary
[14:18] <davidcalle> dpm: I think you can simply share the link, invite is only to add editors. btw, do you have the "+" button at the top to add editors?
[14:18] <dpm> I do, thanks
[14:19] <dholbach> that's a really neat tool
[14:20] <dpm> it is! I wished it had existed when we did the IA rearrangements in d.u.c in the past
[14:20] <dpm> or that we had known about it. Good call davidcalle
[14:30] <dpm> hey didrocks o/
[14:30] <didrocks> hey dpm :)
[14:32] <davidcalle> dpm: dholbach: stumbled upon it earlier today ;)
[14:32] <davidcalle> Hey didrocks o/
[14:32] <dpm> davidcalle, it makes IA rearrangement even fun ;)
[14:33] <didrocks> hey davidcalle!
[14:37] <davidcalle> dpm: let's create a Django app for it -> Link it to Django CMS -> Manage our live IA with it -> Call it "Juju for Docs"
[14:37] <dholbach> davidcalle, somebody should create a djangocms-redirect plugin :-P
[14:38] <davidcalle> dholbach: heh :)
[14:40] <davidcalle> Scrap "Juju for Docs", we call it "Make Your Own D.U.C" with public edit rights. IA problem solved.
[14:40] <dholbach> d.u.cAAS
[14:42] <davidcalle> Genius.
[14:50] <dholbach> davidcalle, dpm: stevenbiscuit replied and said "AFAIK yes, certainly the store related help documents are going to move under myapps."
[14:53] <davidcalle> nice
[16:18] <dpm> dholbach, davidcalle, didrocks, related to the conversation we had today, I'd like to have (yet!) another chat about importing markdown documentation vs. the CMS. Would you guys have time some time tomorrow early?
[16:18] <dholbach> sure
[16:18] <davidcalle> dpm: sure
[16:19] <dpm> ah, I think Didier mentioned he had to go to another meeting right now
[16:19] <davidcalle> dpm: btw, has the meeting about location of upstream doc been really moved to 9pm today?
[16:21] <dpm> davidcalle, yeah, dholbach was pinging ev about this earlier on. I definitely can't do it at that time :/
[16:21] <davidcalle> Same
[16:21] <dholbach> yeah
[16:22] <dpm> dholbach, were you on that thread where they were discussing times?
[16:22] <dpm> I replied earlier on to say the time worked for me... and then they changed it
[16:23] <dholbach> dpm, I pinged ev in #canonical
[16:25] <dpm> dholbach, yeah, I saw that. He asked you to reply on that thread, but I'm not sure if you were in the CC, that's why I'm asking, as I didn't know if you'd seen it
[16:25] <dholbach> ah sorry, no - I don't think I was CCed
[16:32] <dpm> dholbach, indeed you weren't. Replied with an alternative proposal and CC'd you
[16:32] <dholbach> thanks
[16:34] <dpm> davidcalle, it seems Peter has got only a slot available in his calendar tomorrow morning. Are you comfortable with being "the mojo spec expert" if mhall119 is not in there?
[16:34] <dpm> I bet mhall119 is chuckling at not being at the call :)
[16:36]  * mhall119 is glad nobody can see him doing his happy dance
[16:44] <dpm> :)
[16:44] <didrocks> dpm: isn't that on the one we would have tomorrow already?
[16:45] <didrocks> with Peters?
[16:45] <didrocks> I'm unsure I would have a slot TBH, I have some demo deadlines already before I go on holidays
[16:45] <didrocks> and etoomanymeetings ;)
[16:46] <dpm> didrocks, with Peter it was about moving to a megamenu (I think that's what he calls it), I don't think he's interested in which format we use for importing
[16:46] <didrocks> I guess that was about this as well
[16:46] <didrocks> the import
[16:46] <didrocks> but if not, yeah, we need one for actions
[16:46] <didrocks> can we have one with Peter first to check, and then, if not addressed, we have the second one, mind you?
[16:46] <dpm> didrocks, nw, I can have a chat with dholbach and davidcalle. I wanted to talk specifically about importing
[16:47] <didrocks> dpm: well, I guess this is about the generation of content
[16:47] <didrocks> which is what my backend is doing, sounds related at least :p
[16:48] <dpm> it is indeed related, but to me it's more about going deeper into the change of moving from a CMS approach to an upstream import approach, which I'm not sure Peter would be interested in
[16:48] <didrocks> IIRC, Thibaut mentioned he was
[16:48] <didrocks> (but that was last week)
[16:49] <didrocks> so, let's see what the meeting is tomorrow with Peter on the technical side
[16:49] <didrocks> if not addressed, let's talk about that on Monday/Tuesday?
[16:49] <didrocks> (because yeah, this is part of the doc draft)
[16:59] <dpm> davidcalle, dholbach, I've added the "Long-term proposal IA" to the coggle
[16:59] <dholbach> cool, thanks
[17:04] <dpm> ok, and with this, I call it a day
[17:04] <dpm> see you all tomorrow!
[17:04] <dholbach> see you! :)
[20:59] <davidcalle> mhall119: I've fixed the certificate situation for d.s.u.c
[21:39] <davidcalle> mhall119: d.s.u.c deployed with the new changes :) Still missing the three branches Daniel wants, though.
[22:27] <davidcalle> mhall119: merged (only 2, the 3rd was a components update) and deploying on staging.
[22:46] <davidcalle> \o/