17:00:32 <nickm> #startmeeting weekly network team meeting
17:00:32 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Oct 10 17:00:32 2016 UTC.  The chair is nickm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:32 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:33 <nickm> hello!
17:00:38 <asn> hello!
17:00:46 <nickm> I've heard that dgoulet is out for Canadian Thanksgiving.
17:00:50 <nickm> good to see you, asn!
17:01:08 <isis> good morning!
17:01:13 <nickm> hi isis!
17:01:13 <asn> hello nickm.
17:01:18 <asn> hello isis.
17:01:43 <nickm> So, starting with status.
17:02:19 <nickm> last week I did LOTS of followup and recovery from the dev meeting. And I tried to track down some hard bugs and figure out how to get 029 and 030 done right. And I reviewed piles of code and kept working on #15056
17:02:57 <nickm> This week I hope I finish #15056, write a bunch of docs, put out an alpha release, do some guard stuff, and freeze on friday per the email I sent here: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-October/011513.html
17:03:23 <nickm> (I hope everybody saw that -- I really am going to freeze out anything besides criticial bugs, regressions, security issues, and trivial typo fixes.)
17:03:43 <armadev> freeze freeze freeze (hello from denver airport)
17:03:45 <nickm> and that's my status!
17:03:59 <nickm> next?
17:04:03 <nickm> hi armadev
17:04:04 <asn> ack
17:04:11 <armadev> nickm: you mentioned at the dev mtg having a person from the network team team up with me on maintaining the stables
17:04:25 <armadev> is that idea on its way to somewhere?
17:04:32 <isis> i can confirm that it is canadian thanksgiving, from canada, surrounded by people who are like "why are you working and why didn't you know it's thanksgiving"
17:05:34 <asn> apparently it's also colombus day in the US, so this whole north america place is kind of sloooooow
17:05:46 <nickm> armadev: isabela's been trying to advance it along; there are some emails I should respond to...
17:05:59 <nickm> ...I don't know if I should seek volunteers orjust randomly assign people
17:06:45 <nickm> (I don't observe columbus day, but the local school system does)
17:06:46 <asn> personally, i'm hesitant assigning myself as the first guinea pig here. this is my first week starting at princeton, so i will probably be ultra busy.
17:06:57 <nickm> makes sense
17:07:01 <isis> last week i spent three days going home because i haven't been home in a year, then i went to canada for a wedding, so i got very little done
17:07:08 <nickm> awesome
17:07:13 <asn> but if no one else steps up for it, i can go for it. wrt new bug traging.
17:07:26 <armadev> or dgoulet and asn can team up to be co guinea pigs? :)
17:07:33 <isabela> o/
17:07:38 <armadev> in theory it is not that much work
17:07:42 <asn> ok
17:07:44 <armadev> mostly it's just having willpower to decide not to backport stuff
17:07:47 <asn> i can put myself as the first guinea pig
17:08:04 <isis> "maintaining the stables" in this case meansdoing the releases?
17:08:10 <nickm> i think we should figure out what the scope is too.
17:08:11 <armadev> oh, that's a good question too
17:08:17 <nickm> there is more than just one rotation to talk about.
17:08:24 <nickm> I wanted at least:
17:08:28 <nickm> * handling stable branch
17:08:35 <isis> i can be a guinnea pig this week
17:08:36 <nickm> * bug triage
17:08:42 <asn> i will put myself up for the "wake up; check new bugs; triage them" task
17:08:46 <nickm> * coverity issue triage.
17:08:58 <nickm> asn: ok. want a flowchart?
17:09:14 <asn> nickm: that would be really helpful.
17:09:18 <nickm> asn: ok!
17:09:24 <isabela> armadev: on my email following up from seattle i left a note for you about that (a person with you on maintaining the stables)
17:10:04 <isabela> armadev: i guess you have some idea of what you expect for that so i asked if you could make a bulletpoints list of it
17:10:22 <armadev> isabela: ok
17:10:24 <asn> (ok I claimed it: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam#Weeklybugtriagerotation)
17:10:32 <nickm> woo thanks
17:10:33 <armadev> does anybody have backlog from the meeting with andrea in..december or something where i made a bulletpoints list of it? :)
17:10:43 <nickm> I can try to find it
17:10:48 <nickm> but maybe it needs some editing
17:10:52 <armadev> it surely does
17:11:23 <armadev> anyway, i am not really back yet, so let's not focus too much on me. that bug triage thing looks like a great, and also big, and important, task
17:11:37 <isabela> i could try to find it too
17:12:30 <isabela> nickm: on that url from asn for bug triage there is a 'duties' part where you could add also bulletpoints of what is expected
17:12:41 <nickm> I'll try to draft something
17:12:45 <nickm> any more updates?
17:12:50 <nickm> there are other awesome discussion topics too
17:13:00 <asn> my update:
17:13:05 <asn> Hello. During past week, I was pretty busy moving to the US east coast. Apart
17:13:05 <asn> from that, I drafted a proposal specifying an API for onion name systems, based
17:13:05 <asn> on a discussion with yawning and david:
17:13:05 <asn> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-October/011514.html I also
17:13:05 <asn> discussed short-term prop224 development with dgoulet and I think we have a
17:13:07 <asn> good plan for the following 1-2 months. I also caught up with insane amounts of
17:13:10 <asn> email backlog which has been creeping since the dev meeting; i'm still not done
17:13:12 <asn> of course.
17:13:15 <asn> EOF
17:14:00 <armadev> asn: i got invited to do a b-sides talk in philly dec 2-3 or something. that might coincide with your plans to come to philly after the sponsorR meeting.
17:14:10 <armadev> asn: you could do the talk or something if you want. or we could.
17:14:14 <armadev> ("invited")
17:15:31 <asn> hey
17:15:34 <asn> what's the talk about?
17:15:39 <asn> i could perhaps give it, yes.
17:15:45 <asn> or if you are gonna be there anyway, we can do it together.
17:16:18 <asn> fwiw, i will have my current house till the 5th of december. so those dates are quite close, which might be problematic. or it might mean that I have to leave philly in a hurry at some point.
17:16:31 <asn> i will likely learn more of how early december looks for me, in the following month
17:16:36 <armadev> ok
17:16:47 <asn> (let's not throttle the meting for this!)
17:16:55 <armadev> you and dgoulet should conspire to get together sometime, e.g. that weekend like you suggested, or maybe the sponsorR week
17:17:20 <armadev> agreed, no need to throttle
17:18:04 <nickm> any more updates?
17:18:29 <isabela> i am working on the draft for setting up a q&a team
17:18:42 <nickm> neat
17:18:46 <isabela> the idea is to send a letter to tor-dev to recruit people for 029
17:18:56 <isabela> i hope to share it soon for feedback
17:19:02 <isabela> sorry i couldnt get it done before this meeting.
17:19:27 <isabela> with who we get from this experience :) we can talk about maybe creating a list for it
17:19:31 <armadev> neat! so like the tbb-qa thing but for tor itself
17:19:36 <nickm> Sounds neat.
17:19:45 <isabela> or keeping contact with them for the next round so we always have people to help out
17:19:54 <isabela> armadev: yes
17:20:01 <GeKo> it is actually tor-qa
17:20:05 <isabela> yeah
17:20:10 <isabela> i was going to ask about that :)
17:20:13 <GeKo> so strictly speaking this could run there as well
17:20:21 <GeKo> (and should maybe even)
17:21:05 <isabela> i am fine with it
17:22:05 <nickm> I'm fine with anything that works. :)
17:22:11 <nickm> More updates?
17:22:15 <nickm> Or should we do discussion?
17:23:39 <nickm> ok , discussion!
17:23:51 <nickm> In addition to that email I sent, and the stuff about freezing...
17:24:53 <nickm> There was another network_team email I sent about the problem with needs_revision stuff sitting there way too long, the same way that needs_review stuff used to sit around forever.
17:25:12 <nickm> Is a similar solution to the review-group-X queue in order?
17:25:32 <isabela> nickm: about freezing period - i put some dates here https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam#Calendar:
17:25:42 <isabela> but if you could double check that would help w my email :)
17:26:34 <nickm> noted!
17:27:08 <isabela> about revision stuff - let me know if this is too crazy of an idea
17:27:42 <isabela> but i thought if we had a scrit to query this from trac and print a list of what is more than x days for monday meetings
17:28:20 <asn> i also wonder how these needs_revision tickets accumulate. is it because their owner does not keep up with them? or maybe they are handled by unreliable/volunteer people?
17:28:43 <isabela> with other teams at twitter we used to have a big monitor in the team areas and we could see the columns of the workflow so stuff like that was quite visually and people would be up to date with what to prioritize
17:29:06 <asn> that's neat
17:29:33 <isis> in my case, i'm not paid to work on that stuff, and i have a full-time load of other non-core-tor things i'm supposed to be doing
17:30:10 <nickm> I think people have big multitasking-ish piles of priorities.
17:30:22 <nickm> isabela: i like the idea of weekly queries.
17:30:30 <nickm> Or ongoing queries youcan look at whenever.
17:30:54 <isis> what would be the best way to mark something as "this isn't going to get done until month X because i need to do my deliverables"?
17:31:07 <isabela> we can have a bash script at a repo (like we side before, of having a collections of little things like that people could use on their own)
17:31:08 <asn> seems like another task for the non-existent devops person!
17:31:10 <nickm> Saying so on the ticket would be great.
17:31:13 <armadev> should one of the rotating roles be to look through the needs-revisions tickets and see if they're all still legit?
17:31:42 <isabela> hmm
17:32:13 <isabela> i think a script and a guideline to add a comment if you are not moving on with your ticket so others knows should be ok
17:32:34 <isis> i think they're all still legit, but it's more a matter of people honestly saying "there's no way i can do that right now"
17:32:47 <nickm> maybe making it "assigned" again and changing the subject to "[revise code]" ? Dunno.
17:33:31 <asn> or maybe change the milestone to the next one?
17:33:37 <nickm> I'm thinking of doing something like we do with review-group-X: If a ticket gets revised within a week, it gets considered in the same review group. Otherwise it doesn't.
17:33:52 <nickm> (and it waits for a new review group to open)
17:33:58 <nickm> This assumes that people want their code merged though
17:36:08 <nickm> possibly it's a several-of-the-above thing
17:37:17 <isabela> ok
17:37:17 <nickm> more ideas? more topics?
17:37:27 <isis> how can i help with the 029 finalisation?
17:37:30 <asn> another topic that i would like to bring up
17:37:37 <asn> is the topic of monthly status reports
17:37:38 <isabela> ah
17:37:45 <asn> and why people don't do them
17:37:57 <asn> and whether people should do them
17:38:00 <isabela> FYI i requested an extension on sponsorU so deadline would be nov 30th instead of oct 31st
17:38:17 <nickm> isis: Most useful would be to look through the tickets and see if there's anything you really like, and if so, work to advance it.
17:38:21 <asn> i literally have no idea what andrea works on every month, since does not send out reports
17:38:27 <asn> same for yawning, even before he was on a break
17:38:28 <nickm> I am currently not planning to work on any tickets for 029 I'm not owner on.
17:38:43 <asn> i kind of know what nickm is working on, because he is active on IRC
17:38:59 <armadev> (and active on trac)
17:39:02 <nickm> In theory, they should be coming to these meetings and doing status updates, if they are doing any work.
17:39:03 <mikeperry> isabela: uh oh. in the past they tried to get us to do that, so they can start the next contract later
17:39:05 <asn> but in general, i feel like we are lacking visibility on what's going on.
17:39:22 <asn> or what things are being worked on every month
17:39:27 <armadev> mikeperry: yep. we have accepted that this time.
17:39:35 <mikeperry> that usually means that we miss out on the ability to invoice for that period of time..
17:39:53 <armadev> mikeperry: in large part because we think it's unlikely they'll start the next contract a day after this one ends anyway. assuming there *is* a next one.
17:40:05 <armadev> where 'we' is isabela but her opinions sounds plausible :)
17:40:29 <asn> 17:39 < nickm> In theory, they should be coming to these meetings and doing status updates, if they are doing any work.
17:40:37 <asn> yes that's true in theory. it kind of works, but not very well.
17:40:44 <nickm> isis: in particuler, there are some tickets in "new" that nobody has claimed that would take only a few hours of work.  But I am walking away from the position that it's on me to provide all those few hours.
17:41:10 <nickm> there are already some assigned tickets in 029 for me, arma, yawning, sebasatian, and teor.
17:41:32 <nickm> basically, look at the tickets in the 0.2.9 milestone and pick something. :)
17:42:14 <nickm> I personally stopped doing monthly status lists because isabela was already hunting me down once a month to tell all the sponsors where we were on everything.
17:42:34 <isabela> mikeperry: another point is that we dont invoice monthly we invoice per deliverables / and with what armadev said about not thinking the new contract will start nov 1 but dec 1 / this give us time to get 2 big milestone done in a better shape than not having it.. / nov was a window we always had, this nce is not creating it imo
17:42:52 <asn> nickm: ack
17:43:35 <armadev> nickm: have we implicitly switched 'do monthly reports' to 'make sure isabela knows the stuff you did each month'?
17:43:43 <nickm> isabela: would these status reports be useful to you?
17:43:53 <nickm> I can do them again if you want, but something has to give.
17:44:05 <asn> nickm: i don't mean to disturb your workflow here.
17:44:24 <asn> my visibility concerns are mostly towards the people not in this meeting anyway.
17:44:40 <isabela> hmm
17:44:56 <nickm> athena: are you travelling today or something?
17:45:09 <armadev> i think artificially doing monthly reports when they're not needed is not best. but we should be sure isabela gets what she needs. and we should be sure that all the active people are at meetings or it's otherwise obvious what they're doing,
17:45:11 <isabela> this is the thing - if people would add the monthly tag to their tickets it would be an easy answer to find 'what people are working on'
17:45:22 <armadev> and we should get better at following up with/about people who go silent.
17:45:23 <isabela> and no overhead on writing reports than project reports
17:45:30 <athena> nickm: no, here, just got in
17:45:34 <isabela> like sponsor r does and i am doing for sponsor u
17:45:36 <nickm> glad you made it!
17:45:40 <isabela> metrics does like that too
17:45:43 <asn> isabela: that's only if you assume that trac work is the only kind of tor work.
17:45:44 <isabela> tbb
17:45:55 <isabela> ah
17:45:58 <armadev> ok airplane for me, good luck all
17:45:59 <isabela> asn: that is true
17:46:18 <nickm> athena: got a status update?
17:47:49 <athena> status update: working on #19878 and #19880 right now; i assigned some #19877 subtickets to nickm so we can split that up
17:48:07 <asn> isabela: also in this case, perhaps "tickets modified by asn during july" would give a good visibility of what trac things I did during july. including some false positives.
17:48:29 <isabela> asn: yeah to cover everything people would have to do personal reports / but again, i think we should try to look at then answer to your question in a way that dont create overhead. for instance updates on monday meetings could cover that need / maybe we need to work on that than adding one more task
17:48:55 <asn> isabela: agreed, extra overhead is not good.
17:50:52 <nickm> athena: cool. what did you think of the various plans for making sure revisions happen?
17:51:23 <isabela> ok i will try something - i will try email the list on sundays reminding about this meeting and asking those who can't be here to email their updates
17:51:33 <nickm> You have #18320 and #19552 in 0.3.0 for needs_revision, and we'll want #19552 merged for the guard stuff
17:51:35 <isabela> updates == what you did last week what you doing this week and if you have any blockers
17:51:41 <nickm> isabela: sounds good.
17:51:42 <isabela> lets see if that helps increase them
17:51:53 <asn> isabela: let's try it. thx.
17:52:30 <nickm> athena: whoops, I meant #19858 as the need-for-guards one.
17:52:45 <nickm> dgoulet: has #17238 and 20004 and 19024.
17:52:48 <nickm> I have 7164
17:53:07 <nickm> the others are contributors nikkolasg, cypherpunks, and dcf.
17:54:02 <asn> nickm: btw, wrt weekly bug triaging, should I wait for a workflow from you? or should try it out a few times and see how it works?
17:54:15 <asn> nickm: my plan was to check timeline in the morning, find new tor bugs, and then triage them.
17:54:26 <asn> nickm: and by triage I mean assign the relevant keywords, milestones, etc.
17:54:32 <nickm> that sounds about right; there's a little more but I'll try to write it all up.
17:55:02 <nickm> I never use the timeline; I only use the mailing list.  So your first step might be "update the instrudctinos to say how to do it using the timeline"
17:55:18 <asn> perhaps the mailing list is a better idea!
17:56:26 <GeKo> 4 min to tor browser meeting
17:57:23 <nickm> any more for today?
17:57:50 <athena> hmm, the rotating role of looking at needs_revision tickets seems like a reasonable plan
17:59:03 <mikeperry> I have been doing non-tor things. I am metting with a bunch of funders today about IoT stuff. I'm generally trying to decide how to balance my time between Tor Labs, traffic analysis in core-tor, and handling what feels like a whole bunch of organiational odds and ends. I feel like I'm treading a lot of water :/
17:59:53 <nickm> ok. better
17:59:54 <nickm> #endmeeting