16:59:47 <nickm> #startmeeting weekly network team meeting
16:59:47 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jun  6 16:59:47 2016 UTC.  The chair is nickm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:59:47 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:59:55 <nickm> hello
17:00:40 <nickm> Last week I was distrracted by bad junk, but had a little time to work on #19180. And I've made as much progress there as I think is justifiable.  Now I'm in re-triage mode
17:00:44 <nickm> I want to be hacking
17:01:17 <nickm> for re-triage I am dividing big sponsorX-must tickets into small tickets
17:01:33 <nickm> anybody else with a checkin?
17:01:58 <dgoulet> hi
17:02:19 <nickm> hi!
17:02:47 <dgoulet> most part of my last week was finalizing prop250 bugs and polishing the branch. It's now I think quite ready for your 3rd review nickm, it's been tested on our test network since mid-may and we tried to break it a lot :)
17:02:53 <dgoulet> (we did succeed but not anymore)
17:03:06 <isabela> o/
17:03:07 <dgoulet> I reviewed some tickets also (which I can't recall which one :S)
17:03:45 <dgoulet> and then was off a bit on friday because of bad junk as well
17:04:01 <nickm> currently we have 3 tickets lift in review-group-2 with status needs_review.
17:04:41 <asn> i started looking at the test-network autotools one. i should have a review soon.
17:04:42 <nickm> after that, we're on to the next review batch. :)
17:05:00 <asn> so today or tomorrow early.
17:05:03 <asn> here is my status report:
17:05:15 <asn> Hello. During past week, I mainly worked on reviewing the recent prop250
17:05:17 <asn> changes, and testing prop250 on the testnet. We found some fun bugs and fixed
17:05:20 <asn> them. I've been trying to break the testnet for the last few days, and it
17:05:21 <asn> doesn't break, so that's good :) We also did a meeting on splitting up prop224
17:05:23 <asn> into work chunks. Also some reviews. Also hackerone.
17:05:26 <asn> 
17:05:27 <asn> This week I expect to do some more hackerone and reviews. I also expect to do
17:05:29 <asn> some more prop250 as review/testing continues. I should also revive the prop259
17:05:32 <asn> project. I should also work on the prop224 stuff I said i'd do.
17:05:37 <asn> ugh. extra newlines.
17:05:39 <dgoulet> newlines!
17:05:42 <isabela> !
17:05:49 <asn> my eyes
17:05:59 <asn> https://pastee.org/3ukvb
17:06:02 <asn> here you go ^
17:06:03 <asn> sorry for that
17:06:06 <asn> EOF
17:06:12 <nickm> ok!
17:06:15 <nickm> who else is here?
17:06:24 <isabela> ok - as part of making 029 smaller this week i plan on working with nickm Yawning athena on sponsorS and U tickets
17:06:31 <isabela> also remember we changed months :)
17:06:32 <nickm> athena, Yawning : ?
17:06:37 <nickm> you around?
17:06:38 <isabela> so we need to update our june tag
17:06:44 <nickm> I've taken everything out of may
17:06:58 <nickm> I didn't put it in june again since we're reallocating.
17:06:59 <isabela> and while you do that avoid having more than 12 points for it? also update it according to your travels/events
17:07:14 <isabela> great
17:07:24 <nickm> first I'm going to try to split things, though
17:07:28 <nickm> more splitting to do
17:07:36 <dgoulet> isabela: ah yeah we moved out some R stuff out of 029 as well which brings us to a ~30 points I think
17:07:49 <isabela> next week i will be at the seattle office woking with some folks there and then i will go to detroit to an event.. so i might not be as online as i normal am
17:08:02 <isabela> dgoulet: nice
17:08:21 <isabela> argh
17:08:25 <nickm> ?
17:08:28 <isabela> i cant write english anymore either
17:08:33 <nickm> english is hard
17:08:36 <isabela> (/me looks at all her errors above)
17:09:03 <nickm> let's just have everybody do this meeting in their native language some time. :)
17:09:03 <isabela> also!
17:09:31 <isabela> armadev: if you had time to dig your computer for lowdbandwidth proposals please send them to me :)
17:10:18 <isabela> nickm: :)
17:12:32 <nickm> anyone else around?
17:12:46 <dgoulet> what's the state of our review code system action point?
17:12:51 <dgoulet> (oh sorry not discussion phase....)
17:12:58 <isabela> good question
17:13:03 <nickm> ahh, it can be discussion. I think everybody else is offline
17:13:05 <isabela> we were talking about gitlab
17:13:08 <isabela> at some point
17:13:10 <nickm> if anybody else goes for it, let's.
17:13:23 <dgoulet> yeah gitlab is being used for the _big_ #16943
17:13:29 <isabela> ah
17:13:34 <dgoulet> isabela: beta trial :)
17:13:38 <isabela> great
17:13:46 <isabela> and do you have first and second reviewers going on
17:13:47 <isabela> ?
17:13:48 <isabela> or
17:13:57 <isabela> ..
17:13:58 <dgoulet> isabela: what do you mean?
17:14:08 <isabela> like we are trying to do with nick
17:14:10 <isabela> ready to merge
17:14:32 <dgoulet> isabela: ah yeah... teor spent a lot of time reviewing it and then it moved into merge_ready and nickm started looking at it but on the gitlab
17:14:49 <isabela> cool
17:15:11 <isabela> who in team is beta testing it? everyone? should we ask others to pick a project to try (who is not trying it yet)
17:15:14 <isabela> sorry
17:15:19 <isabela> hehe :) lots of questions
17:15:32 <dgoulet> I think me and nickm, maybe asn did look at the review iirc?
17:15:51 <isabela> and teor
17:15:58 <isabela> ?
17:16:20 <dgoulet> nope teor reviewed it on trac and it was _PAINFUL_
17:16:27 <dgoulet> you can take a look at the comment of that ticket :P
17:16:28 <isabela> ahhh
17:16:48 <dgoulet> Gitlab review is far superior imo, it doesn't compare
17:17:01 <nickm> superior to gitlab, I agree.
17:17:13 <nickm> gerritt has some key problems that make it seem like the wrong match for us
17:17:26 <nickm> s/key problems/important ideas/
17:17:30 <nickm> err
17:17:31 <nickm> sorry
17:17:42 <nickm> gitlab review is easier than trac review, I mean.
17:17:46 <nickm> for big branches
17:17:47 <dgoulet> yup, special brought up good point about key issues
17:20:07 <isabela> so would be trac for tickets and gitlab for review? -- is there any integration between those ?
17:20:39 <nickm> dunno; it's probably possible somehow.
17:21:00 <nickm> I don't love the stuff that one needs to do with gitlab today in order to _create_ a branch for review...
17:21:07 <nickm> but that is also  in theory automatable
17:21:37 <nickm> of course automation takes time
17:21:56 <athena> nickm: i've got a review for #17799 on the way, but it's not quite done yet
17:22:22 <dgoulet> isabela: seems trac plugin exists for code review... maybe one of them is _great_ https://trac-hacks.org/tags/codereview
17:22:31 <dgoulet> but yeah... more testing....
17:24:32 <isabela> ok
17:24:38 <nickm> athena: ok. did you see isabela's email about triage and points from June 3?
17:24:39 <isabela> will look at those as well
17:27:29 <athena> yeah, will do
17:27:49 <nickm> other discussion items for today?
17:27:58 <nickm> Otherwise we can close this and move to happyfun bug triage
17:28:14 <dgoulet> good for me
17:28:48 <nickm> isabela: anything from you?
17:31:20 <isabela> nickm: nope -- we can just jump to triage and go down the list of deliverables tags
17:31:22 <nickm> ok with me!  I hope we get a few more people tomorrow.  Or next week
17:31:23 <nickm> whee
17:31:26 <nickm> #endmeeting