19:59:17 <ahf> #startmeeting anti-censorship checkin 2019/02/28
19:59:17 <MeetBot> Meeting started Thu Feb 28 19:59:17 2019 UTC.  The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:59:17 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
19:59:20 <ahf> hello everyone
19:59:33 <ahf> our pad is at: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-censorship-2019-keep
19:59:46 * nickm lurks again :)
20:00:45 <ahf> cohosh, dcf1, catalyst: here?
20:00:49 <dcf1> hello
20:00:59 <cohosh> yup!
20:01:30 * sysrqb is lurking, too
20:01:39 <dgoulet> o/
20:01:46 * kat5 is still sick, but following along.
20:01:48 <ahf> dgoulet: pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-censorship-2019-keep
20:02:01 * gaba went through the updates and updated roadmap but please check that everything is right with what you are doing.
20:02:02 <ahf> sysrqb: o/
20:02:23 <sysrqb> \o
20:02:24 <ahf> should we start with going over our snowflake roadmap?
20:02:39 <gaba> yes
20:02:40 <ahf> https://storm.torproject.org/shared/OdNtwrtRrqklh76l4PfcngBbQFDbjv_jRroj0WeSY0B
20:03:28 <ahf> #29489 can go to done
20:03:33 <ahf> hm
20:03:35 <ahf> maybe not
20:03:53 <gaba> it was in review
20:04:12 <ahf> ohh, i can mark it as closed, it is done i think
20:04:25 <ahf> cohosh: don't you think we can close it? even with the small fetch-the-repo comment i had to your work?
20:04:40 <cohosh> yep
20:04:41 <ahf> i just forgot to mark it as closed in my last comment
20:04:58 <gaba> ok, i moved it in the board but needs to be close in trac
20:05:07 <ahf> done on trac now
20:05:07 <ahf> great
20:05:23 * gaba would love to have this automated trac <-> wekan some day in the future future :)
20:05:39 <ahf> yeah :-S
20:05:58 <ahf> i am not very good at remembering to update the kanban board, i keep just looking at trac
20:06:03 <gaba> anything else for snowflake?
20:06:11 <ahf> no, we are in protocol land now, which is great
20:06:35 <ahf> it's very nice with the docker image for #29489 - that was a lot easier than i had thought it would be
20:06:55 <ahf> and should be able to work with gitlab ci once we get that, with not that much modification i guess
20:07:02 <ahf> let's check non-snowflake roadmap
20:07:16 <gaba> #29489 needs also actual points to see how much it took to complete
20:07:30 <ahf> https://storm.torproject.org/shared/nNhTJhoWUB8lSnW3hMbS42BRf2ArVCNvyeCX3zBYTzN
20:07:31 <cohosh> gaba: i can add that to trac
20:07:36 <ahf> gaba: ohh, right
20:07:37 <gaba> it would be great to require 'actual points' in trac when you close a ticket :P
20:07:40 <gaba> yes
20:07:43 <gaba> thanks
20:07:49 <ahf> cohosh: if you add it, maybe add 0.3 extra for me?
20:08:38 <cohosh> sure, i just realized i wasn't paying very careful attention to this but i'll do better in the future for other tickets >.<
20:08:59 <gaba> yes, np
20:09:21 <ahf> hm, i haven't done any non-snowflake s19 things this week. i added s19 to dcf1's crash bug in #29562
20:09:29 <ahf> but it wasn't on the roadmap because it was unknown of course
20:10:00 <gaba> ahf: you closed 28848
20:10:13 <gaba> #28848
20:10:19 <ahf> ah, right, but that is snowflake related 8)
20:10:31 <gaba> ah yes
20:10:41 * catalyst is here, catching up
20:10:43 <ahf> it sounds like nickm is hacking on the chutney parts, dgoulet/sysrqb is working on the bridgedb stuff
20:10:50 <dgoulet> yes
20:11:11 <ahf> catalyst: o/
20:11:18 <nickm> I'm trying to make chutney hve its own CI, and be part of Tor's CI.
20:11:31 <gaba> \o/
20:11:31 <nickm> PT support in chutney will come, but it isn't started yet
20:12:06 <gaba> is #26920 ready for tbb-team?
20:12:20 <cohosh> yes!
20:12:24 <ahf> nice with pt and chutney integration
20:13:57 <ahf> dgoulet: does sysrqb do review for your stuff or do you need help with that?
20:14:18 <dgoulet> yeah sysrqb is the reviewer, I'm going to let him defer to someonelse if he can't
20:15:00 <ahf> cool, yeah, that sounds like a good plan if it becomes too much
20:15:01 <sysrqb> i'm hoping i'll have time this week for reviewing
20:15:25 <sysrqb> (tb release coming up, so maybe this will happen next week)
20:15:32 <dgoulet> big second part would be to apply all the changes once reviewer to BridgeDB itself in production, shouldn't be crazy but requires some hours
20:15:58 <ahf> like to move all these changes into the running bridgedb environment?
20:16:04 <dgoulet> yes
20:16:17 <ahf> is this before or after the step we had on the roadmap called "make a bridgedb release" ?
20:16:25 <dgoulet> big part of the current work is to uncomplexify and bring order to the current BridgeDB in production
20:16:31 <ahf> ya
20:16:49 <dgoulet> ahf: BridgeDB code hasn't change and so we could do a release with what we have now
20:16:50 <dgoulet> imo
20:16:54 <cohosh> dgoulet: nice!
20:17:13 <dgoulet> and then once we start doing changes, we can release more things but we should do one with what we have right now as the baseline starting point
20:17:18 <ahf> ah, cool, so just call that a 0.0.1 or whatever?
20:17:20 <dgoulet> but that release is really just a git tag :P
20:17:22 <dgoulet> yeah
20:17:26 <ahf> yeah
20:17:43 <ahf> i think the goal was just to get into a flow of having releases with a small changelog and such and make sure there is upgrade paths between releases and so on
20:17:51 <dgoulet> right
20:17:52 <ahf> i think
20:17:57 <catalyst> i guess also pick a release numbering scheme and starting release number?
20:18:24 <dgoulet> bridgedb already has a bunch of tag and versions "released"
20:18:33 <dgoulet> latest it bridgedb-0.6.9
20:18:38 <catalyst> oh ok
20:18:41 <ahf> ahh
20:18:44 <ahf> cool
20:19:09 <dgoulet> Date:   Tue Nov 20 02:24:39 2018 +0000
20:19:11 <dgoulet> latest tag ^
20:19:27 <ahf> cool, maybe that item on the roadmap wasn't right then? maybe i remember it wrong
20:19:35 <dgoulet> also for now, most of the work is done in bridgedb-admin.git ... which is the whole repository we have to configure and run bridgedb
20:20:18 <catalyst> should bridgedb-admin.git have its own release cycle?
20:20:21 <dgoulet> anyway... for now I don't think there is much to be done on the release side
20:20:40 <dgoulet> catalyst: I don't think so
20:21:13 <dgoulet> releasing configuration files doesn't seem like something useful much?
20:21:34 <catalyst> it might help with automating deployments or making them reproducible
20:21:34 <dgoulet> there is only one user to BridgeDB and that -admin is for that use which is us
20:21:48 <dgoulet> so I don't see a win to complexify our workflow
20:22:00 <dgoulet> that user*
20:22:02 <gaba> should it be done in the future dgoulet?
20:22:09 <sysrqb> yeah, i think with the current setup, we don't need a separate release cycle and tag
20:22:09 <catalyst> if we ever want to streamline deploying to testing or staging instances?
20:22:18 <sysrqb> in the future, it will likely be helpful
20:22:26 <sysrqb> if we use something like puppet
20:22:27 <dgoulet> BridgeDB is not something we deploy reguralarly
20:22:33 <dgoulet> yes configuration manager is probably what we want
20:22:38 <gaba> ok
20:22:55 <dgoulet> instead of within a git repo.
20:23:41 <ahf> cool
20:23:46 <dgoulet> BridgeDB needs a lot of loves and right now going into release cycle mode is not the best use of our time ... we need to be agile here to fix the important stuff
20:23:57 <dgoulet> and then we can start freezing more things as we get to a good situation
20:24:23 <ahf> kat5: when you are well again should we try to do a report #2 chat?
20:24:23 <gaba> It makes sense
20:24:58 <kat5> ahf: Yes, but first I have to sync with gaba so I'm sure I understand the direction we should be taking.
20:25:11 <kat5> ahf: Did you get a a chance to review?
20:25:19 <ahf> kat5: ahhh, cool, i think that is the same then
20:25:23 <ahf> yeah, i went over it last week
20:25:28 <kat5> Cool.
20:25:37 <cohosh> kat5: i'll take a look tomorrow or early next week as well
20:25:44 <kat5> cohosh: Thanks.
20:27:16 <ahf> the only other comment i see in the pad is catalyst asking dgoulet about something related to bridgedb tickets
20:27:31 <dgoulet> oh
20:27:48 <dgoulet> catalyst: I'm not sure I understand? :S
20:27:54 <catalyst> dgoulet: yeah if you remember the problem you ran into with an updated requirements.txt that would be great
20:28:07 <dgoulet> catalyst: ah! I already have a ticket with a very simple patch for it :)
20:28:20 <catalyst> dgoulet: cool, thanks! which ticket is it?
20:28:22 <dgoulet> catalyst: which makes it that we can update to latest the requirements.txt
20:28:32 <dgoulet> #29594
20:28:48 <dgoulet> it needs more testing I think but overall that is the only thing we need to change for now I spotted
20:29:17 <gaba> is somebody alread assigned to review that change?
20:29:22 <dgoulet> yes all sysrqb  :D
20:29:23 <gaba> s/change/ticket
20:29:24 <catalyst> dgoulet: by "update to the latest" do you mean update each package version in requirements.txt to the latest available?
20:29:26 <gaba> ah, ok
20:29:29 <dgoulet> catalyst: yes
20:29:36 <catalyst> dgoulet: thanks
20:29:52 <dgoulet> catalyst: removing the version pinning is what I tried and so far only that code change is required
20:29:55 <dgoulet> "so far"
20:30:10 <catalyst> oh, they were all pinned before?
20:30:21 <dgoulet> yes they are all pinned
20:30:25 <arma1> hello world, i am here a little bit. still technically on vacation but the vacation is ending so. :) (if you have anything i should get back onto my near term todo list, let me know)
20:31:58 <ahf> o/
20:32:05 <ahf> hvae i missed any questions on the pad?
20:32:19 <ahf> the one from _hc is from last week
20:32:36 <gaba> i think that was it. thanks for going through everything!
20:32:56 <ahf> cool, let's finish this early this time then 8)
20:33:02 <ahf> thanks everyone! see you all in a week o/
20:33:03 <gaba> :)
20:33:05 <cohosh> \o/
20:33:06 <ahf> #stopmeeting
20:33:09 <ahf> #endmeeting