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

#sugar-meeting meeting, 2013-03-31 18:31:42

Minutes | Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
18:31 meeting Meeting started Sun Mar 31 18:31:42 2013 UTC. The chair is bernie. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:31 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #endmeeting
18:31 bernie #topic Trac maintenance (bernie)
18:31 alsroot: all right.
18:32 sorry guys for rebooting the old jita. it's that a few years ago we had a power outage at the ML and when i saw it running i thought i had just forgotten to remove it from the autostart
18:32 rgs_ bernie: cool
18:32 bernie which suggests that the ML also isn't immune from power outages :-)
18:33 rgs_: anyway, the trac devel instance should match (more or less) the production one
18:33 rgs_: if you can upgrade that, then we can do the other one
18:34 rgs_: maybe send an announcement on #sugar and sugar-devel@ if you plan any downtime
18:35 rgs_ bernie: k
18:35 bernie rgs_: i found some upgrade notes here: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Service/bugs
18:35 rgs_ bernie: hey, gotta go do some errands in SF
18:35 bernie: i'll follow-up on this with you offline later today
18:35 bernie rgs_: i remember both me and silbe struggling a bit with the weird upgrade procedure
18:36 rgs_: btw, if you figure out a migration path from trac to something that seems better maintained upstream, feel free to propose it to developers
18:36 rgs_: but for the time being an upgrade would be awesome
18:36 rgs_: people have been complaining to me that they get frequent 500 errors from our trac
18:36 ok, next topic?
18:37 #topic Pootle maintenance (bernie)
18:37 it should have been (cjl), i guess
18:37 cjl Pootle is ancient (2.0.5), some features (suggestion workflow) are not working.
18:37 I'd love to get an upgrade of Pootle to the soon-to-be-released 2.5, but I keep losing my sysadmin volunteers :-(
18:38 2.5 should be very stable as it has been running on translate.org and for Mozilla for a while now.  There has been a lot invested in Pootle (by Mozilla) since the version we're running
18:38 We may need a multi-step upgrade path, I'm not sure a direct jump from 2.0.5 to 2.5 is possible.
18:38 bernie Any takers?
18:39 rralcala1 I haven't used Pootle before, but I can do it, after testing somewhere else :)
18:40 cjl rralcala1: That would be great
18:40 bernie rralcala1: we have a brand new vm for pootle, probably empty right now
18:40 yeah, newpootle.sugarlabs.oeg
18:40 org
18:40 rralcala1 bernie: Great
18:41 bernie: so I can freely try there right?
18:41 cjl The RC for Pootle isn't goin gt ochange much before the release
18:41 bernie rralcala1: the "only" thing to do is installing pootle :-)
18:42 rralcala1: the pootle service is pretty well documented: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Service/translate
18:42 rralcala1 bernie: I did my homework :)
18:42 bernie rralcala1: we could not maintain it decently because nobody on our team is familiar with the intricacies of django
18:42 cjl http://docs.translatehouse.org[…]sion_control.html
18:43 http://docs.translatehouse.org[…]/users/index.html
18:44 bernie rralcala1: if you manage to solve the pootle crisis, you'll get my life-time gratitude
18:44 cjl me too
18:44 rralcala1 bernie: My tariffs are in beer currency
18:45 bernie rralcala1: trust me, you don't want my american beer :-)
18:45 cjl For Poolte we can do beer L10n
18:46 rralcala1 bernie: I'm flexible as long is > 3.5%
18:46 bernie haha
18:46 i think you need something much stronger to deal with django :-)
18:46 rralcala1 bernie: cjl: If you agree let me have that upgrade as my first official task
18:47 cjl agreed
18:47 bernie anyway, keep in touch with cjl for all the details of pootle and i'll try to be of help if i can
18:47 rralcala1 bernie: I will
18:47 bernie rralcala1: +1
18:49 walterbender bernie: there are some very good American beers... better than that Moretti swill :)
18:50 bernie walterbender: hahaha, yes... i can't be proud of our national beers either.
18:50 and i can find awesome belgian beers here too
18:51 walterbender bernie: national beer is an oxymoron
18:51 bernie haha
18:51 walterbender good beer is always local
18:51 bernie all beer is local, otherwise it wouldn't be close enough to drink it
18:51 walterbender bernie: shall we jump into the last topic?
18:52 bernie template:fozzy_the_bear
18:52 yup
18:52 #topic Code hosting on GitHub (walter)
18:52 walterbender #topic - hosting code on GitHub (walter)
18:52 dnarvaez has been experimenting with a workflow for github
18:53 there are a number of potential advantage, not the least of which would be to lessen the infrastructure burden
18:53 dnarvaez e
18:53 walterbender that would presume a complete migration, which may be complicated by things like pootle integration
18:53 alsroot could someone list them
18:54 walterbender there are some disadvantages too
18:54 alsroot: I've been experimenting with the workflow and there are some nice features on github, like the ability to make inline comments during a review
18:55 dnarvaez the main reason we are considering github is that pull request allows 1 to make the review process visible to anyone interested 2 they allow to track reviews in progress
18:55 walterbender and the possibility of more visibility to potential contributors
18:55 rralcala1_ <rralcala1_!~rralcala1@> has joined #sugar-meeting
18:55 alsroot it exists on gitorious in some kind (didn't compare), the point is that nobody uses them
18:55 dnarvaez (well the review-related reasons, cjb suggested non review related reasons too)
18:55 walterbender and someone else maintains the infrastrcuture
18:56 of course, in 3 days, I have gotten more 404 errors on github than in the past year on g.sl.o
18:56 dnarvaez alsroot: yes, I have not played with gitorious pull requests yet and perhaps we should. Someone suggested that they are better in github but I can't see anything about that myself
18:56 s/see/say
18:56 alsroot it doesn't matter which is the best if it is not being used
18:56 cjl In gitorious they are "merge requests" aren't they?
18:57 rralcala1_ is now known as rralcala
18:57 walterbender dnarvaez: so far, for me, the real benefit has been the inline comments... that is a great productivity tool
18:57 dnarvaez alsroot: we are going to try and use them
18:57 walterbender dnarvaez: I use them pretty routinely working with new contributors on my apps
18:57 dnarvaez alsroot: they won't be used unless the maintainers says they will accept patch that way...
18:57 walterbender: yep
18:58 bernie yes, works also on gitorious: https://git.sugarlabs.org/test[…]/merge_requests/1
18:58 alsroot walterbender: inline comment, afaik, exists also in gitrorious
18:58 walterbender alsroot: I'd love a tutorial
18:58 dnarvaez I honestly don't have a strong point about gitorious vs github
18:58 walterbender made a merge request on g.sl.o just this morning
18:58 and it has already been merged :)
18:58 dnarvaez I feel more stronly about pull requests vs trac/ml
18:59 walterbender dnarvaez: +1
18:59 rralcala1 has quit IRC
18:59 bernie dnarvaez: is the underlying issue that reviews on the mailing list are being done too slowly or something like that?
18:59 dnarvaez I think cjb has point about github being the standard these days though
18:59 bernie windows is also the standard...
18:59 dnarvaez having your own git hosting service it's becoming a bit like having your own social service :)
19:00 bernie: reviews on the ml can't be tracked
19:00 walterbender my question to the infra team is more concerning load
19:00 alsroot dnarvaez: we already did it, ML, wiki, git, trac
19:00 walterbender what is the overhead of maintaining g.sl.o?
19:00 alsroot s/did/do/
19:00 dnarvaez bernie: also it's much less pleasant to review in an email form than in a web tool designed for reviweing
19:00 alsroot: seems pretty different, those are not social services
19:00 github has a pretty strong social component these days
19:01 walterbender should that be a factor in our decision about our review process?
19:01 dnarvaez it acts sort of like a CV even...
19:01 alsroot anyway, ML vs request review is a bit offtopic for git.sl.o vs. github
19:01 bernie dnarvaez: so the thinking is that, by making the UI more pleasant, reviews are going to be prioritized over other work?
19:01 dnarvaez they are two separate issues, yes
19:01 walterbender I worry that as much as we'd like to maintain all of our own services, the infra team is overburdened
19:02 dnarvaez bernie: the "pleasant" part is mostly a nice side effect :) the required points are the two I said at the beginning
19:02 walterbender so is g.sl.o a worthy candidate for decomissioning?
19:02 dnarvaez bernie: being able to track and being visible to everyone
19:02 bernie: ml doesn't give you that, nor trac
19:02 alsroot git.sl.o takes attention mostly during upgrade time (one time in 2y)
19:03 dnarvaez alsroot: should consider also the bug tracking part though, github offers that
19:03 walterbender alsroot: OK. so that answers my question... it will have little impact on the infra team
19:03 cjl and we just had the upgrade recently?
19:03 dnarvaez alsroot: and trac seems to be a prob for you guys
19:03 bernie walterbender: i feel that, of all the services we have, gitorious has been pretty maintenable for us
19:03 walterbender bernie: OK...
19:03 after the upgrade, it is reasonably responsive
19:03 it was pretty painful to use before that
19:04 bernie walterbender: the only feature we lack is a UI for changing project ownership, but github also won't provide it to us.
19:04 dnarvaez: for patch tracking, silbe was fond of this: http://patchwork.sugarlabs.org[…]oject/sugar/list/
19:04 dnarvaez bernie: patchwork doesn't work :P
19:05 bernie dnarvaez: i never felt that _tracking_ the patch was very useful per se. the lkml has easily scaled to the size of over 1000 developers without patchwork
19:05 dnarvaez proof is that everyone set it up and then not use it for real, included us
19:05 bernie: our maintainers feels otherwise
19:05 bernie: they are using trac because ml doesn't provide tracking
19:05 walterbender I agree... patchwork was too much overhead for the lowly developer
19:06 bernie dnarvaez: the problem i had years ago, when trying to upstream work from paraguay, was that patches don't get reviewed very quickly. neither in trac, nor on the mailing list.
19:06 dnarvaez bernie: I don't think the tool is the main issue there, but it is involbed
19:06 bernie dnarvaez: this is why i'm skeptical that changing the tool once again would fix the problem by itself
19:06 dnarvaez bernie: the main issue is that we need more people to do reviews, the current ones are too few and too busy
19:06 walterbender bernie: but workflow does matter
19:07 dnarvaez bernie: we are going to get more people with patch approval powers
19:07 bernie dnarvaez: agreed
19:07 walterbender and optimizing the efforts of our handful of reviewers would make sense
19:07 bernie dnarvaez: wait, DISAGREED on the second part: being too busy is not a good excuse imho
19:07 dnarvaez bernie: but that requires patches to be visible to everyone, so that the most experienced maintainers would still be able to keep an eye on things
19:07 alsroot lets be concentrated on practical question, ie, "git.sl.o vs. github" (the patch workflow is a real offtopic since should be widely discussed)
19:07 bernie dnarvaez: it's a matter of priority: reviews should come before other things, in order for the project to work well
19:08 dnarvaez bernie: people are currently using trac, which doesn't provide visibility. So we need to get off there :)
19:08 bernie dnarvaez: for patch reviews?
19:08 walterbender bernie: what is the overhead of maintaining trac?
19:08 dnarvaez bernie: and our maintainer clearly said they are not using ml because they can't track open bugs
19:08 bernie walterbender: none, because it's not being maintained :-)
19:08 dnarvaez bernie: yes, most patches are being reviewed in trac these days
19:09 bernie: so we need something which gives both visibility and trackability
19:09 bernie: which is why we started to play with pull requests
19:09 walterbender maybe we need to revisit the merge request system on g.sl.o (and figure out how to do inline comments on commits)
19:09 bernie dnarvaez: hmm... i don't believe better tracking will do much without giving more priority to reviews, but if we want to give github a shot, i will help out.
19:09 walterbender alsroot: can you please look into ^^
19:10 dnarvaez bernie: what will do something is to get more people to do reviews
19:10 alsroot suggests popup (if it makes sense) popup patch workflow question widely and revisit "git.sl.o vs. github) question after that (more especially, there is a FOSS analog of github and we can install SL instance w/ keeping all benefits we have w/ git.sl.o)
19:10 dnarvaez bernie: that's my main goal
19:10 bernie dnarvaez: that was my belief too, when i asked to switch from trac to the mailing list
19:11 (this was over 2 years ago, i'm not very up to date these days)
19:12 walterbender FWIW, my goal in raising the topic in this meeting was more informational... understanding the impact from the infra POV
19:12 dnarvaez bernie: yes but we need to use a tool our maintainers are comfortable with, and they aren't with mls
19:12 walterbender seems like a nop from that perspective
19:13 dnarvaez bernie: otherwise they just won't use it, which is what happened
19:13 walterbender so we can bring those data back to the broader devel team discussion
19:13 bernie dnarvaez: ok, why don't we switch over a couple of core repos, say sugar and sugar-toolkit and see if it helps speed up reviews a bit?
19:13 dnarvaez: if it seems to work, after a while we can switch everything else too
19:13 walterbender bernie: that is what dnarvaez has been doing
19:13 dnarvaez bernie: yup, exactly. That's what I've been trying :)
19:14 alsroot walterbender: from infra pov, the benefits we have are: (1) close integration w/ the rest of SL infra (accounts, sending translate.sl.o notifies, patchwork, possibly more); (2) we have more freedom to add/remove/modify the content;
19:14 walterbender alsroot: the t.sl.o one is perhaps the deal breaker
19:14 dnarvaez somethign I would be interested to know from you guys
19:15 is the bug tracking situation
19:15 bernie dnarvaez: ah ok. which repos are currently on github? do we need to link to them from somewhere?
19:15 dnarvaez just to keep that also into account
19:15 bernie dnarvaez: if you guys like trac, rgs is going to upgrade it soon
19:15 walterbender it is a messy situation
19:15 bernie i think trac is pure crap, but i never switched because developers seemed to like it more than redmine and other options
19:15 walterbender in part because there are bugs tracked downstream as well
19:16 dnarvaez bernie: just sugar for now and we have only tried with walterbender patches. Next step I want to check with maintainers if they are fine with trying it out for all patches
19:16 what are the alternatives to trac? redmine and bugzilla?
19:17 bernie dnarvaez: ok. if you get the buy in of most developers, i guess the migration can happen incrementally. the benefit of git is that you have a full copy of the history so moving things around doesn't require sysadmin help
19:17 walterbender rgs_ mentioned http://phabricator.org/ this morning
19:17 looks pretty interesting
19:17 dnarvaez bernie: yup exactly, git is really helpful here :)
19:17 bernie dnarvaez: and, i guess, we can keep gitorious around for the old projects that nobody wants to migrate
19:17 dnarvaez: we did the very same thing to migrate things from dev.laptop,org
19:18 alsroot generally, anyone is free to choose code hosting
19:18 ..right now
19:18 walterbender yes... there are some apps hosted on github already
19:18 dnarvaez phabricator might be worth explroiing yeah, though it would be more work for our sysadmins
19:18 Cerlyn GitlabHQ came up in one discussion I was in
19:18 but I haven't used it
19:18 walterbender or different work
19:19 bernie walterbender, rgs_: do you guys want to try setting up one of thse things? gitorious' review UI might simply be plain bad... i don't know because I use it just as a self-service git publishing tool.
19:19 alsroot: yup
19:19 Cerlyn: what is it?
19:19 Cerlyn http://gitlab.org/ - seems to be a full product management solution for git users
19:20 walterbender Cerlyn: but it doesn't seem to have a tracker
19:20 dnarvaez I think we shouldd not discount the social aspects of github though :)
19:20 it's really becoming what everyone uses these days
19:20 Cerlyn walterbender: What would you call "issues" then
19:21 walterbender Cerlyn: /me looks again
19:21 Cerlyn Just because someone pointed it out to me for possible OLPC use doesn't mean SL needs to consider it, but it's a thing out there
19:22 bernie dnarvaez: that's understandable... otoh it disturbs me a bit to see a project our size depend on an external web service for its core development infrastructure
19:22 dnarvaez: granted, git is easy to migrate even if github goes down all of a sudden...
19:22 walterbender Cerlyn: I see the word issues but not description anywhere... /me keeps looking
19:23 dnarvaez bernie: yeah I mean, there are downsides too certainly... and yeah git makes it less critical
19:23 bernie dnarvaez: but it would be awkward for projects like gnome and kde to host their code on some other domain, and so for us.
19:23 dnarvaez even mozilla is hosting a lot of stuff on github these days
19:24 bernie dnarvaez: oh really? well, then...
19:24 dnarvaez they still have mozilla-central tbh
19:24 though firefox os seems to be mostly github
19:24 bernie and kde almost lost all its git repos due to a disk corruption issue combined with buggy backup scripts
19:24 dnarvaez so maybe they are moving towards github, I dunno
19:24 cjl wandering afk
19:24 dnarvaez perhaps trying it out like us :P
19:25 Cerlyn github seems to be the new sourceforge
19:25 dnarvaez Cerlyn: now, that makes me want to run away from it :P
19:25 bernie anyway, does anyone want to experiment with locally hosted alternatives to gitorious?
19:26 if nobody volunteers, github will remain the only obvious choice
19:26 oh, besides trying out gitorious review workflow if anyone cares
19:26 dnarvaez planning to try out gitorious workflow at some point
19:26 bernie Cerlyn: indeed.
19:27 dnarvaez but I first want to focus on pull requests in general
19:27 bernie dnarvaez: let me know what you think. i never used it myself.
19:27 dnarvaez if we can prove pull requests work well for us, that's a good step :)
19:27 bernie: yup
19:27 bernie dnarvaez: i had not even realized that people had gone back to attaching patches to bugs in trac
19:27 -1
19:27 dnarvaez bernie: heh I havent realized for a while either, I thought developemnt just stalled :P
19:27 bernie dnarvaez: haha :-)
19:28 walterbender dnarvaez, alsroot: inline comments do work in gitorious in merge requests :)
19:28 bernie hey, does it mean i can turn off patchwork.sugarlabs.org? i've always hated it
19:28 dnarvaez walterbender: that's good, would have been a blocker for me :)
19:28 bernie: I think so yeah
19:28 bernie with great pleasure
19:29 #action bernie kills patchwork with great pleasure
19:29 ok, shall we call it a day?
19:29 walterbender dnarvaez: maybe we can experiment with another series of patches using gitorious merge-request?
19:29 bernie this meeting has been going on and on for a while
19:29 we should probably have one per month or so
19:30 dnarvaez walterbender: sure, maybe post the web service one there too?
19:30 walterbender dnarvaez: I could, or perhaps background image?
19:30 bernie dogi was telling me that he'd like to do weekly treehouse meetings, but i feel the frequency is a bit too high for my current time budget.
19:30 walterbender bernie: prob. once per month is enough
19:30 bernie how do people feel?
19:30 tch____ bernie: I didn't add much this time, but this meeting would be a good space for community integration also ;)
19:30 dnarvaez one per month seem good/enough for me too
19:31 bernie would someone like to send a monthly reminder to systems@ for the monthly meeting? I totally suck at remembering appointments
19:31 reminder + agenda
19:32 tch____: yup
19:32 walterbender sounds like a job for rralcala :)
19:33 bernie rralcala: yeah come on!
19:33 i'll actually also put a reminder in my calendar
19:33 walterbender quick... everyone take one step back
19:34 bernie but yeah, don't count on me for things that require organizational skills
19:34 dnarvaez walterbender: sure background image is fine too
19:34 alsroot bernie: Re: bernie kills patchwork with great pleasure -- are you sure that nobody uses it :)
19:34 walterbender dnarvaez: OK. I'll get that one started
19:34 bernie alsroot: the oldest patches are from 10-2012...
19:35 the *NEWEST* patches
19:35 alsroot bernie: anyway, better to ping silbe`away in this case
19:35 bernie alsroot: i'd do it, but i was unable to contact him for months now
19:36 tch____ bernie: maybe this wakes him up? xD
19:36 bernie alsroot: i'm actually somewhat worried for him
19:38 most colorful global notice ever
19:38 anyway, end meeting?
19:38 walterbender yes...
19:38 bernie 3..
19:38 2...
19:38 walterbender 1
19:38 bernie 1...
19:38 0.5...
19:38 #endmeeting
19:38 meeting Meeting ended Sun Mar 31 19:38:54 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. (v 0.1.4)
19:38 Minutes: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]-31T18:31:42.html
19:38 Log:     http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]13-03-31T18:31:42

Minutes | Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.