Web   ·   Wiki   ·   Activities   ·   Blog   ·   Lists   ·   Chat   ·   Meeting   ·   Bugs   ·   Git   ·   Translate   ·   Archive   ·   People   ·   Donate

#sugar-meeting, 2010-03-22

Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
10:10 tomeu #topic welcome newcomers
10:11 do we have any new people in the meeting?
10:11 counts to five
10:11 mk8 tomeu: I hope to follow all the meeting today
10:11 alsroot here
10:12 satellit_ listening
10:12 tomeu mk8 is not a newcomer, but maybe is not known by everybody yet?
10:13 silbe mk8: go ahead and introduce yourself, please.
10:13 so we can start with the meeting :)
10:14 tomeu isn't obligatory, but would be a way of inaugurating this permanent topic
10:14 mk8 ok silbe, I'm follow the sugar project from some years and for it I develop the sugar-sharp a modulo to allow to write activity in mono
10:14 tomeu and you also coded a fuse plugin for the DS
10:14 mk8 and fsgateway that is a fuse module to access to the sugar datastore from outside sugar, like a normal filesystem
10:14 also writte in mono
10:15 s/writte/written
10:15 silbe ah, the mono filesystem guy :D
10:15 erikos_ is around
10:16 tomeu ok, so next topic:
10:16 (unless we have more presentations)
10:16 #topic 0.88 Release: hard code freeze, final release, 0.88.1
10:16 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/D[…]m/Release/Roadmap
10:16 erikos_ http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0[…]/Roadmap#Schedule
10:17 tomeu: may I?
10:17 tomeu sure
10:17 erikos_ As you see in the 0.88 schedule: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0[…]/Roadmap#Schedule
10:17 we are in hard code freeze at the moment
10:17 this means: No source code changes can be made without approval from the release-team. Translation and documentation can continue.
10:18 any questions about the hard code freeze?
10:18 tomeu no questions from here
10:18 erikos_ (approval can be gained by asking for an exception on the sugar-devel mailing list)
10:18 ok
10:19 the next tarballs will be produced by next monday
10:19 all the exceptions must therefore land by then
10:19 (landing includes reviewing the patch of course)
10:19 so waht do we need to do during that weeK:
10:20 a) testing - I started to put together the site: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0[…]ing#Testing_plans
10:20 that will be announced today
10:20 b) see if there are critical bugs and fix them
10:21 c) finish the release notes at: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Notes
10:21 that's mainly what we need to do for the 0.88 release
10:21 now one may ask: "What if my bug is not a show stopper, but I want to include it as it is important?"
10:21 walterbender erikos_: nice
10:21 erikos_ there will be a bug fix release
10:22 silbe_ goes reading the backlog (IRC connection timed out)
10:22 erikos_ at Apr 28
10:22 so, fixes can go in there
10:22 any questions about the bugfix release?
10:24 waits.... :)
10:24 satellit_ bug 1835
10:24 oops
10:24 erikos_ ok, so let's see...
10:25 tomeu erikos_: should we get a list of the bugs we want in the bugfix release?
10:25 erikos_ silbe: what would you do if you find today a 'major' bug not a show stopper?
10:25 picked sascha randomly of course
10:25 tomeu sees erikos is in teacher mode
10:25 silbe_ erikos_: curse the one who introduced the bug :-P
10:25 erikos_ silbe: that would be a god start ;p
10:26 tomeu: yeah that would be great - we can start now with it, if you want
10:26 sdziallas: shhhh
10:26 sdziallas: has the yellow card ;p
10:26 sdziallas erikos_: mhm?
10:26 tomeu maybe we have enough time?
10:27 erikos_ would be fine with me
10:27 sdziallas: i am just kidding
10:27 tomeu do people have any tickets in their minds for the bugfix release?
10:28 sdziallas erikos_: blahblah :)
10:28 tomeu and even features, but those should have very strong support from deployments
10:28 erikos_ tomeu: http://tinyurl.com/yb65glf
10:29 tomeu: maybe we can start with the open reviews
10:29 tomeu good idea
10:29 silbe_ I've got a data store fix for rainbow support that would be a good candidate for 0.88.1; will commit it after I finish testing.
10:30 erikos_ silbe_:
10:30 ok
10:30 tomeu http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1719 depending on how often can the race happen
10:30 " resume journal entry race may duplicate resumed activity id"
10:30 erikos_ yeah
10:30 tomeu btw, should be branching soonish?
10:30 erikos_ tomeu: I commented in the ticket what I have found out so far
10:31 tomeu do people want to start pushing 0.90 stuff?
10:31 erikos_ tomeu: thought about that, too
10:31 silbe_ that's one I probably encountered during testing and that made me fix the bug I cannot reproduce right now ;)
10:31 tomeu silbe_: cannot make the race more probable by adding a time.sleep()?
10:32 silbe_ tomeu: yes, please fork soon so I can finally fix those pesky pylint+PEP8 complaints
10:32 erikos_ tomeu: I think we have a few features and enhancements that we did not land in 0.88
10:32 tomeu: I would like to push them early in 0.90 - so they do not miss the boat again
10:32 tomeu erikos_: silbe_: ok, sounds good to fork early, push to 0.90, and think if we want anything backported to 0.88.x
10:32 erikos_ silbe_: right, those I think would be good as well
10:33 silbe_ tomeu: the problem was finding out how to enter the code path that got the second bug - I can produce a duplicated data store entry manually
10:33 erikos_: +1
10:33 tomeu pushing cleanups will make harder to backport, but well
10:34 erikos_ tomeu: yeah, that is true - but as backports should not be invasive...
10:34 tomeu yeah, no big deal
10:35 silbe_ tomeu: that's always the case, and we already delayed the style fixes for two releases, i.e. over a year.
10:35 erikos_ tomeu: silbe_ I would say to directly branch after 0.88.0
10:35 tomeu sounds good
10:35 silbe_ erikos_: sounds like a plan
10:35 tomeu silbe_: sure
10:35 erikos_ nice
10:36 ok, let's go back to the tickets...
10:36 silbe_: 1659 - 0.88.x or 0.90 ?
10:38 silbe_ looks
10:39 erikos_: let's move it to 0.90, but early so it finally gets more testing
10:39 erikos_ silbe_: ok
10:39 silbe_: 1755 ?
10:40 silbe_ erikos_: 0.88.1
10:41 erikos_ silbe_: sounds ok with me - tomeu?
10:41 tomeu: re #1755
10:42 tomeu yeah, it's annoying
10:42 erikos_ ok
10:43 #1755: tch, Daniel said it would be great to land it in 0.88.1 - the bugfix release
10:43 tch: do you agree that it is for your deployment important?
10:44 silbe_ erikos_: wrong ticket?
10:44 *ticket number
10:44 tomeu guess http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1759
10:45 erikos_ silbe_: tomeu thanks
10:45 tch: I mean 1759
10:45 silbe_: tomeu 1823 can even go into 0.88 - as it does not touches code
10:46 tomeu sounds good
10:46 silbe_ has it been rebased and cleaned up as requested? (17599)
10:47 erikos_: +1 on 1823
10:47 it's not perfect, but way better than what we have now
10:47 erikos_ silbe_: yeah, Daniel has been doing some work on 1759
10:48 silbe_ erikos_: ok, then no objection from me :)
10:48 erikos_ silbe_: 1438 - can we have a milestone here?
10:48 tch erikos: yeah, i think is important to have some feedback when something goes wrong while using 3g
10:49 erikos_ tch: yeah, what is a bit pitty is that documentation will change :/
10:49 one month after the release....
10:50 silbe_ erikos_: let's make it 0.90 for now. Maybe 0.88.x later.
10:50 erikos_ as much as I like to land it, I am somehow as well worried
10:51 tomeu: what do you think?
10:52 tomeu dunno, depends on how much are deployments interested
10:52 it could go in when OLPC makes a build with 0.88, for example
10:52 silbe_ erikos_: we should at least include the error showing stuff.
10:52 tomeu so in 2 years :p
10:53 erikos_ hehe
10:53 silbe_ not sure about the design change - it makes sense to change is ASAP so people don't get used to the "bad" one, but the docs change is a good point.
10:54 erikos_ I would even prefer to land it with an exception...because of the doc change
10:54 tomeu so, am I right if I say that developers want to have their code in HEAD and are deployers who should request backports?
10:54 silbe_ has anybody done documentation for the 3G stuff?
10:54 tch erikos_: is it a big doc change?
10:54 erikos_ silbe_: I would do today for the 0.88 page
10:55 tomeu hmm, maybe we should add the documentation team coordinator to the jobs page in the wiki
10:55 erikos_ tch: mainly here: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Notes
10:55 walterbender tomeu: good idea... someone to coordinate with the various deployments
10:55 erikos_ tomeu: yeah, that would be a highly regarded position
10:56 tomeu added to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/V[…]mporary_caretaker
10:56 silbe_ tomeu: deployers should get a say what gets actually backported, but I'd prefer not relying on them to actively request backports.
10:56 walterbender tomeu: it would be nice to know what sorts of materials could be produced by an individual that would be of the most use to deployments...
10:56 tomeu walterbender: well, we already have the deployment team vacancy
10:56 walterbender will put the thumb screws to Rafael.
10:56 tomeu I guess the documentation work could be included in the deployment team, or have its own team
10:57 whatever works better for the people who will do the actual work
10:58 silbe_: maybe you are thinking about a particular kind of bugs that can be backported without their participation?
10:58 such as security bugs, data loss, etc
10:59 silbe_ tomeu: sounds good
10:59 stuff like the data store bugs I've discovered recently
10:59 tomeu yeah, that makes sense
10:59 3 minutes to go
11:00 silbe_ (and that still need test cases as the test suite didn't notice them0
11:00 tomeu erikos_: are you done?
11:00 silbe_: when will you push the test suite?
11:00 erikos_ ok, how do we move on with http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1759 ?
11:00 silbe_ ok, what about the exceptions then?
11:00 erikos_ Daniel_C: around?
11:00 silbe_ tomeu: see above, 0.90
11:00 tomeu erikos_: I would say to push it to 0.90, then backport if people actually ask for it
11:02 silbe_ tomeu: why?
11:02 Daniel_C i am here, is ok for my. I think that Paraguay and Uruguay will need it in a short time
11:02 tomeu silbe_: because I hadn't heard anybody pushing for it
11:02 tch erikos_: i think it worth it to add it asap
11:02 tomeu now, after what Daniel_C said, we could push it for 0.88.1
11:03 erikos_ tomeu: and tch ;p
11:03 tomeu Daniel_C, tch: you want it backported to 0.84, right?
11:03 tch i did it already with bernie,
11:03 until the last patch included in the head,
11:04 erikos_ tch: the 3G Feature including 1759?
11:04 tch no, only what have been "upstreamed"?
11:04 erikos_ ok, that is good policy
11:05 s/policy/habbit
11:05 tch i would backport 1759 also ;)
11:05 Daniel_C tch: Do you think that ticket 1759 is necesary?
11:05 tch soon as it is upstream
11:06 silbe_ so do we agree 1759 should go into 0.88.1? at least the error showing part?
11:06 tch tch: i know it is
11:06 Daniel_C: ^
11:07 tomeu needs to go for a while
11:08 Daniel_C silbe_: so, we agree
11:08 erikos_ ok, let's decide and finish here
11:08 silbe_ erikos_: when do we decide about the exceptions?
11:08 erikos_ silbe_: for 0.88.1?
11:08 silbe_ erikos_: no, for 0.88
11:09 erikos_ silbe_: are there some open?
11:09 silbe_ erikos_: the data store migration fix?
11:09 0.82 -> 0.86/0.88
11:09 erikos_ silbe_: was agreed on the ml
11:09 silbe_: got +1'ed
11:09 silbe_ erikos_: ah, ok, must have been today.
11:10 erikos_ silbe_: right, today
11:10 silbe_ erikos_: ok, then I'm done for today. We should discuss review handling at a future meeting.
11:10 erikos_ silbe_: fine with me
11:11 tomeu: I guess you can close the meeting then
11:11 tomeu #endmeeting

Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.