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

#sugar-meeting, 2017-09-19

 « Previous day | Index | Today | Next day »     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:06 walterbender <walterbender!~walter@> has joined #sugar-meeting
02:05 walterbender has quit IRC
06:05 JatinD[noreply] has quit IRC
06:05 ignacio has quit IRC
06:05 ignacio <ignacio!ignacio@2001:4830:134:7::11> has joined #sugar-meeting
06:05 ignacio <ignacio!ignacio@fedora/sugar/ignacio> has joined #sugar-meeting
06:09 Raphaelt[m] has quit IRC
07:15 bikram <bikram!~bikram@> has joined #sugar-meeting
07:20 JatinD[noreply] <JatinD[noreply]!jatindhank@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-dytmsjdfpdfuiucs> has joined #sugar-meeting
07:46 Raphaelt[m] <Raphaelt[m]!raphaeltma@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-ghwxpmdhklnpwarb> has joined #sugar-meeting
10:55 meeting <meeting!~sugaroid@rev-18-85-44-69.sugarlabs.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
11:28 bikram has quit IRC
11:49 walterbender <walterbender!~walter@> has joined #sugar-meeting
12:02 Ibiam <Ibiam!~ibiam@hymax.hyperia.com> has joined #sugar-meeting
13:45 Ibiam has quit IRC
13:46 Ibiam <Ibiam!~ibiam@hymax.hyperia.com> has joined #sugar-meeting
14:03 Ibiam has quit IRC
14:24 Ibiam <Ibiam!~ibiam@hymax.hyperia.com> has joined #sugar-meeting
14:48 Hrishi <Hrishi!uid200307@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-dqvslnyufwtsqxyf> has joined #sugar-meeting
16:11 Ibiam has quit IRC
16:14 Ibiam <Ibiam!~ibiam@hymax.hyperia.com> has joined #sugar-meeting
16:17 Ibiam has quit IRC
18:18 Hrishi has quit IRC
20:14 Quozl <Quozl!~quozl@antitheft.laptop.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
20:47 walterbender hi Quozl
20:47 Quozl g'day.
20:59 tony37 <tony37!~webchat@rev-18-85-44-69.sugarlabs.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
20:59 walterbender wonders if anyone will show up to our party?
21:00 tony37 Hi, Walter
21:00 walterbender hi tony37
21:00 shall we get started?
21:01 tony37 Sounds like a dialog
21:01 Quozl \hi.
21:01 walterbender triolog?
21:01 #start-meeting
21:01 meeting Meeting started Tue Sep 19 21:01:38 2017 UTC. The chair is walterbender. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:01 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #endmeeting
21:01 walterbender welcome to a long-overdue meeting of Sugar Devel
21:02 I had a few agenda items I wanted to cover and of course you are welcome to raise more items as time permits.
21:02 #topic release manager
21:03 I thought it would be prudent to let everyone know that our current release manager is James Cameron AKA Quozl
21:03 Quozl for interest, past release managers were martin abente (0.108), sam parkinson (0.110), and ignacio (interim).
21:03 walterbender We've never had a very formal mechanism for choosing the release manager... usually the current release manager hands off the baton.
21:04 tony37 Quozl - thanks for volunteering
21:04 walterbender James has graciously jumped in the fill a void.
21:04 Quozl tony37: no worries, i held off until 11 months after 0.110, but the merged gci gsoc work was starting to feel unloved and i wanted to ensure it got out to users.
21:04 walterbender Perhaps for post 0.112 we can reassess... Quozl may have had his fill... not something anyone cares to do forever.
21:05 If I recall, Sam handed off to Ignacio, but ignacio never really got the support and mentoring he needed to move things forward.
21:06 I would love it if you could take him under your wing, Quozl
21:06 good to groom our future.
21:06 Quozl walterbender: sure.  sam was easy, he was local to me.  only five hours drive away.  ignacio will be a bit harder, but doable.
21:07 walterbender anything else re this topic? or shall we move on?
21:07 Quozl i'm fine to move on.
21:07 walterbender #topic community standards
21:08 tony37 has quit IRC
21:08 walterbender We have guidelines and standards of conduct within the devel community that are important to our community
21:09 most important is treating everyone with respect
21:09 And assuming we are all here to learn and grow
21:09 And we need to adhere by the practices laid out in our documentation.
21:09 Esp. in regard to features and changes.
21:10 tony37 <tony37!~webchat@rev-18-85-44-69.sugarlabs.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
21:10 Quozl *nod* ... the features process has worked well.
21:10 walterbender We have a policy of letting anyone propose a feature
21:10 a wiki forum for that
21:10 they get vetted there.
21:10 the release manager is ultimately responsible for what features are included in a release.
21:11 developers cannot and should not make such decisions unilaterally
21:11 and while anyone is welcome to make a pull request,
21:12 Quozl just to clarify slightly; while the release manager is responsible for whether a feature is ready for a release, he would work with all developers to move a feature forward into a form that achieves consensus.
21:13 walterbender all PRs must be reviewed by a qualified developer, where community consensus is considered and ultimately the release manager makes the call
21:13 Unilateral commits are unacceptable.
21:13 We can talk more features
21:14 tony37 As I understand the github process, a release could be composed by the latest merged version of the components
21:14 walterbender tony37, yes... and so we need to control what gets commited to the release
21:15 we can maintain parallel branches with new features
21:15 Quozl tony37: yes.  at the moment, a sugar release is of the major components that make up the sugar desktop environment, and i had released the core activities in the past few months with their small updates.
21:15 walterbender tony37, we can support "forks" for special releases and needs
21:15 tony37 So what is the connection between the merge process and the release?
21:15 Quozl walterbender: yeah, my day job is a fork.  ;-)
21:16 walterbender but the core Sugar release is something that needs the close supervision of the core developers and the release manager
21:16 tony37 No - what I am asking is that merges of PRs should be ongoing. So a release could be the current state of those components at the time.
21:16 Quozl tony37: the merge process brings a set of commits into the main history of a repository; and for sugar labs it is code review, refinement, testing, then landing.
21:16 walterbender tony37, maybe Quozl can walk you through the release process and mechanics in a separate discussion
21:17 Quozl tony37: we've had so few pull requests lately it hasn't been a problem.
21:17 tony37 That was my impression
21:17 Quozl tony37: most of the recent activity has been in the activities lately, and code review is more relaxed for the activities, as the impact of a mistake is smaller.
21:18 (because most of the gsoc was in activities this year).
21:19 walterbender tony37, for GCI, if you have ideas, let me know
21:19 tony37 What is the expected difference between 0.111 and 0.112?
21:19 Quozl tony37: new translations is the expected difference.  unexpected differences will be bugs that i don't know about that need fixing.
21:20 tony37 How do you learn about bug fixes that are needed?
21:20 Quozl tony37: testing and feedback.
21:21 walterbender let's get back on topic
21:21 tony37 I assume thes generate issues against the sugar components. Is there a deadline for those to be reported as required for 0.112?
21:21 walterbender I don't have anything more to say about community standards
21:21 the next topic:
21:21 #topic testing the current release
21:21 tony37, and Quozl the floor is yours
21:22 tony37 What is the version of Fedora expected for this release?
21:22 Quozl tony37: https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.112/Roadmap has the dates i've proposed, in the hope of release one year after 0.110.
21:23 tony37: 0.111 and 0.112 is supported by me on fedora 18, fedora 26, and ubuntu 16.04.
21:23 walterbender Quozl, are the instructions for testing in the wiki?
21:24 Quozl tony37: in the release announcement http://lists.sugarlabs.org/arc[…]ember/054631.html the stuff about WebKit 3.0 API is to ensure continued fedora 18 support.
21:24 tony37 So for the Xo the 0.112 release is likelyt to be F18
21:24 Quozl tony37: you can test with an XO now using yum.
21:25 tony37 Actually later this week as I fly back to the US early tomorrow
21:25 Quozl walterbender: yes, on https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.112/Testing testing options for OLPC laptops, or for other systems.  Unfortunately none of the distributions have taken 0.111 yet, and we wouldn't expect them to do so so quickly, it may take a few weeks.
21:26 tony37 We are dependent on Debian for the RPI image?
21:27 Quozl tony37: sadly, yes.  the gsoc team didn't get into making the packages, they only achieved use of the debian packages.
21:27 tony37 What other distributions are we dependent on?
21:28 Quozl tony37: sorry, i don't understand.
21:28 tony37 You mentioned that none of the distributions have taken 0.111. This certainly includes Debian. What other distributions were you referring to?
21:29 walterbender Fedora
21:29 Quozl tony37: on the page for testing, the other distributions we monitor are ubuntu and fedora.
21:29 tony37 Wouldn't we test these ourselves?
21:30 Quozl tony37: we do test these ourselves, but the process to install sugar is very labour intensive until those distributions make a package.
21:30 walterbender tony37, it is much easier when we work with upstream processes
21:31 Quozl upstream processes do take a few weeks or months though, as they have their own deadlines.
21:31 for fedora 18 were the upstream processes have ended, i made packages for olpc.
21:31 tony37 I understand - we are referring to these distributions as upstream.
21:31 walterbender we used to try to time the Sugar releases to ride on top of Fedora releases to minimize the lag...
21:31 Quozl sorry, wrong term.
21:31 walterbender but we have fallen out of sync somewhat
21:31 Quozl as far as debian is concerned, sugar labs is upstream.
21:32 walterbender lots of moving parts
21:32 Quozl so where i said upstream above, it should have been distributions.
21:32 walterbender for example GDK is upstream from us
21:33 We have enough to get the testing started
21:33 Quozl okay, next topic?
21:34 walterbender Maybe Sam can be recuited to help us.
21:35 tony37 has quit IRC
21:35 walterbender with the Fedora packaging
21:35 #topic misc
21:36 We should lokk at the repercussions of rethinking version numbers
21:36 tony37 <tony37!~webchat@rev-18-85-44-69.sugarlabs.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
21:36 walterbender Let's target v1.13 instead of 0.113???
21:36 Quozl version numbers ... yes, the 0. prefix seems wasted.  perhaps for 113 we can lose it.
21:37 walterbender 113 works for me
21:37 Quozl tony37: what do you think?
21:37 walterbender anything that is actually monotonic
21:37 tony37 strongly in favor
21:38 walterbender so we need to make sure it doesn't break anything
21:38 but +1 from me too...
21:38 Quozl good.  i'll target that for after 0.112, which might be next year.  and will test.
21:38 walterbender Math.floor
21:39 Quozl is scg here?
21:40 walterbender re ASLOv3
21:40 we need to get scg to sit down with us
21:40 and make it happen
21:40 #action walter will find a time with scg to do what needs to be done
21:40 Quozl 'k.
21:42 tony37 What do you expect to be done about ASLOv3?
21:42 Quozl i'm hoping we'll hear what will happen next.
21:42 tony37 Great!
21:43 walterbender is it worth making sugarlabs-activities as a separate project in GH?
21:43 Quozl walterbender: i guess i'm puzzled as to what process is optimised by that.
21:43 walterbender what is the real advantage?
21:44 tony37 As you know I believe it is very important. The current gh should be for the integral activities which are release dependent.
21:44 Quozl aren't git branches better for marking release dependence?
21:44 walterbender tony37, not sure we couldn't do that with some sort of naming scheme or tag
21:45 tony37 I am sure there other ways to do it - but we need to make it simple.
21:45 walterbender if you could define what the goals are, we can think about the git way to achieve those goals
21:45 Quozl apart from the "fructose" and "glucose" terms, and the release of these activities before the main sugar release, we don't have any dependency relations between activities and sugar versions.
21:46 walterbender but having two places instead of one is inherently more complex
21:46 Quozl i'd prefer to optimise for new developers to find things, and do any scripting with the github api to skip repositories that should not be processed into aslov3.
21:46 walterbender what I am more concerned about actually is the process of reviewing commits across all thee activities
21:46 used to be developers were on their own
21:46 tony37 On the contrary, I think it makes it much easier. If I go to the sugarlabs github, I need to look at dozens of pages.
21:47 walterbender and the only review was when they uploaded to ALSO
21:47 Quozl the search feature of sugarlabs github works fine.
21:47 walterbender but the activities in sugarlabs github should adhere to the PR/review/merge process
21:47 tony37 That can essentially be replicated in github. A contributor submits a new version (as a PR submission). An owner reviews and makes the merge.
21:48 Quozl we'll lose developers focus; some will be subscribed to one github organisation and some to another.
21:48 tony37 Any procedure in github/sugar can be done in github/sugar-activities
21:48 walterbender tony37, you'll need to look at dozens of pages no matter what because there are lots of activities
21:48 tony37 That is as it should be. Developers of Sugar are not developers of activities.
21:48 walterbender the sugar "core" is less than one page so it is not a significant factor in your searching/browsing
21:49 tony37, I do both, though mostly activities these days
21:49 Quozl i think developers of sugar should also be developers of activities, otherwise they won't know how to develop activities well, and sugar won't support activities with new features.
21:49 tony37 Walter. I am thinking of the benefit for the sugar github enabling a clear understanding of what makes up Sugar.
21:49 walterbender tony37, the stuff we pin at the top.
21:49 Quozl github doesn't really support architecture diagrams.  ;-)
21:49 walterbender tony37, we could use a better README
21:50 tony37 There is no porblem of developers working on ativities - they just do it in a different github. Many do that now maintaining activites in their own repositories
21:50 Quozl there's the alternative; everything in one repository, which is what lionel did.
21:51 tony37 That doesn't seem to be going well.
21:51 Quozl tony37: agreed.
21:52 walterbender any other topics for today?
21:52 Quozl i've no other topics, thanks for the chat.
21:52 walterbender tony37, we will try to follow through with the other questions you raised in your email
21:53 let's iterate on that thread
21:53 tony37 Personally I would like to focus on ASLO v3 and the Sugar activities
21:53 walterbender tony37, Let's work with scg
21:53 and make it happen
21:53 Quozl i'm glad someone is focusing on that.  i'll be focused on sugar's core and the default activities.
21:53 walterbender tony37, Quozl thanks for coming to the meeting
21:54 tony37 Great!
21:54 walterbender I feel like we are generally on the same page
21:54 looking forward to 0.112
21:54 and 113 :)
21:55 tony37 Thanks for the meeting - much more inspiring than the current dialogs on the mailing lists.  Bye
21:55 tony37 has quit IRC
21:55 walterbender #end-meeting
21:55 meeting Meeting ended Tue Sep 19 21:55:55 2017 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. (v 0.1.4)
21:55 Minutes: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]-19T21:01:38.html
21:56 Log:     http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]17-09-19T21:01:38

 « Previous day | Index | Today | Next day »     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.