17:59:23 #startmeeting network team meeting, 10 february 2020 17:59:23 Meeting started Mon Feb 10 17:59:23 2020 UTC. The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:59:23 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 17:59:25 hello network-team 17:59:37 o/ 17:59:37 https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep is our pad 17:59:43 hello 18:00:02 let's give folks a few min to get in 18:00:39 o/ 18:00:49 hello jnewsome! 18:00:58 hi! 18:01:05 jnewsome: we have this pad above which is static for each year where poeple note down a bit what they are doing right now 18:01:07 o/ 18:01:39 hello! 18:01:46 okay, so first an announcement before we begin: next monday is a TPI holiday, so we move the meeting to wednesday next week at 23 UTC 18:01:59 so the 19/2 at 23 UTC 18:02:48 Let's check and update our roadmap: What's done, and what's coming up? Use: https://dip.torproject.org/torproject/core/tor/boards 18:03:02 are folks doing alright here or is everybody in 0.4.3 or TROVE land? 18:03:20 hi everybody! ahf: cool, looking at the pad 18:03:33 im a bit swamped with the TROVE, latest hackerone, latest CVE and the pending reviews, plus obv3 work 18:03:42 the dip kanban is not currently related to much of anything I'm working with 18:03:44 and i think everybody in here already knows, but jnewsome is our new shadow hacker working together with Rob from NRL 18:03:49 im hoping that i will finalize TROVE tomorrow or the day after 18:04:05 (TROVE is https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TROVE ) 18:04:15 but if it gets bigger than this, i will have to restrict the scope of the analysis so that i move on with other things 18:04:55 cool asn 18:05:26 nickm: is that because you are currently focusing on 0.4.3 things, i guess? 18:05:34 that's right 18:05:51 maybe we should see the roadmap as just for sponsored stuff and not for these 0.4.3 things? i think we did that for 0.4.2 too? 18:06:06 right. it seems ok 18:06:22 hm. there are things on the roadmap that are leftovers from previously sponsored work. I don't know what we're doing on those... 18:06:26 err, 18:06:28 We could change that when we are in gitlab and everything is integrated... 18:06:31 yeah 18:06:35 nickm: I'm removing them 18:06:38 ok 18:06:46 I think this will be much much better when we're on gitlab 18:06:51 isn't some of the s31 items now non-sponsored-but-roadmap tasks? 18:06:52 yes 18:06:56 yeah no doubt lol 18:07:13 ahf: some of those tickets were still being work on by catalyst and that is why i left them there 18:07:23 ah, makes sense 18:08:08 ok, so, nothing else here 18:08:16 are we doing alright with reviewer assignments? 18:08:40 i think dgoulet has something here 18:08:42 #33159 is the only ticket in the set without a reviewer but that one also seems open to everyone 18:08:49 only 1 ticket that is a proposal under discussion on tor-dev@ 18:09:02 #32193 could be broken into multiple tickets. the commits seem individually well-structured, though 18:09:09 so ... not much point to be in "needs_review" since review doesn't happen on Trac for that 18:09:22 FWIW, it would be good if even more people reviewed teor's ipv6 proposals. The time to fix design problems is before we start building :) 18:09:32 +1 ^ 18:10:07 asn: do you think you'll be able to look at my new test on #33104 today, so I can get it into the next alpha? If not, that's fine too 18:10:20 hmm 18:10:24 yes i can 18:10:40 fortunately all the right functions were already hooked, so the test should be straightforward 18:10:50 thank you for having me do it :) 18:10:52 catalyst: i think you are free to make that call if you think it should happen? 18:11:05 nickm: thanks for doing it :) 18:11:21 ahf: ok, thanks 18:11:56 oki, cool, otherwise reviews looks ok 18:12:04 Go over our 0.4.3 status page at https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases/043Status 18:12:45 I still have the most owner-action tickets there, at 7 18:12:58 Everything that is 043-must is at high severity 18:13:27 I hope I can get through some or all of my action tickets this week there, and take on some more of the unassigned ones 18:13:51 i hope to do some of the android related ones i have in the second half of this week 18:14:48 nickm: FIY, #33029 and #33072 (043 dirauth stuff), the dirauth discussion went for backport there but we might skip next alpha I presume? 18:14:58 FYI* 18:15:37 I want to get 0.4.3.2-alpha out today or tomorrow, so yeah, targetting 0.4.3.3-alpha would make more sense 18:15:44 ack 18:16:42 (if you get it out today then we can include it in this week's tor browser alpha release) 18:16:54 (else, in ~2 weeks with our next release) 18:16:56 the alpha? I'd like to 18:17:00 yes 18:17:03 (thanks for the info) 18:17:13 (np! :) ) 18:17:32 sysrqb: "Today" for me means "some time in the next 10 hours". What does it mean for you? :) 18:18:00 nickm: i can work with that 18:18:36 great 18:18:38 but if today is too tight then that's okay too 18:18:44 we'll see 18:18:47 we're planning another alpha release mid-Feb, too 18:19:03 but i'd like to tag our tor browser alpha code today 18:19:05 also good to know 18:19:48 ok 18:20:14 ok, there is a question to catalyst and mikeperry from teor on the pad. i just asked mike (in the wrong channel), but he got the question 18:21:44 i can't even load trac right now 18:22:02 it doesn't look like I've worked on this code before? going forward, I would like to limit my reviews of tor.git code to weeks that I am actively working on tor.git stuff.. I might pick up some circpad bugs next week from tor.git to work on, but this week I'm likely not doijng much network-team stuff, let alone tor.git stuff 18:22:09 ah, it was the gitlab one catalyst asked about earlier 18:22:41 mikeperry: i don't think historically reviews have been assigned only to areas we have worked in, but i think that is OK 18:22:46 so ideally you want it put back in the queue? 18:23:02 mikeperry: can you wrap up the reviews you have now before moving to not getting reviews? 18:25:31 okay, and teor wants more review of the proposal #313 18:25:37 this looks like a PR teor was reviewing? 18:25:44 I wrote one, but others may do more 18:25:50 teor reviews everything 18:26:00 like teor looks at a lot of patches and gives feedback if they care for it 18:27:42 but teor also have a ton of other things to do right now so it is no matter what not going to fallback on them :-) 18:28:59 Is the github pull request the best place to leave review/comments? 18:29:11 jnewsome: yeah, we do all code reviews right now on github itself 18:29:29 and then use trac's "needs_review" feature to tell folks about whether things are ready for review 18:29:42 we're hoping to migrate to use github for all of this 18:29:45 jnewsome: if you want to dive into code reviews, you are welcome to, but it isn't expected at all :-) 18:29:49 nickm: gitlab :-P 18:29:53 arr, yeah, sorry 18:29:55 gitlab 18:30:14 mikeperry: you want it to go back in the queue? :-) 18:30:36 Oh, I was talking about prop 313. I'm looking at it in github; is it also in gitlab? https://github.com/torproject/torspec/pull/108/files 18:31:17 ah 18:31:25 props are usually reviewed on tor-dev@lists.torproject.org 18:31:32 like there is a discussion there where people respond with feedback 18:32:07 ok, thanks. I think I might not be on that list; I'll see if I can subscribe myself 18:32:23 jnewsome: yeah, it is a very good list to be on for all things tor dev and specs and proposals and such 18:32:30 mikeperry: ok, removed you as reviewer now... 18:32:46 * Any blockers on 0.4.3.2-alpha? Else I'm aiming for today/tomorrow there. 18:32:48 asked by nickm 18:33:35 * dgoulet is good on the blockers 18:33:45 ok. I'll start working on the alpha then 18:33:45 ahf: I can try to look it over.. but yeah I was a little surprised. was not expecting it, since I had been mostly doing non-network-team stuff in jan.. 18:34:13 ahf: going forward we should figure out when I should be in the review queue vs not. I still will end up doing network-team stuff on and off, so I can review during those times 18:34:18 mikeperry: right, i don't think the folks doing assignments has known that until recently, so all the things that was assigned to you four weeks ago is still assigned to you 18:34:34 please reassign it to yourself then and then this will be the last thing we need to have reviewed using this system :-) 18:34:37 we have a "net team" list of people ;) 18:34:37 mikeperry: i think it has not been announced that you were doing something else 18:34:51 it is fair to wrap up that work before moving into new role 18:35:14 mikeperry: i think it is not a good idea to have it be a dynamic entrance/exit thing with the review system because we really depend on people doing these reviews every week 18:35:24 and it's not fair to david and george who needs to keep track of more things here 18:37:02 okay, do we have anything else today? 18:37:12 just one thing 18:37:33 i'm hoping to have #32709 ready by the end of the week, which is required for OBv3 18:37:40 when do we plan to open 044 merging window? 18:37:47 I hope to to it this week 18:37:51 right after 0.4.3.2-alpha 18:37:51 i'm hoping to get #32709 on master soon, so I can prepare an even better testing call 18:37:55 so that peopel dont have to run my custom branch 18:38:00 but it might take a couple of days 18:38:04 ack 18:38:10 ok thanks! 18:38:20 no rust, but just letting you know that this is coming 18:38:23 *no rush 18:38:25 :) 18:38:37 no rust lol 18:38:42 ok nothing else from me 18:38:58 okay, i'm gonna end the meeting folks 18:39:06 thanks for the meeting ahf 18:39:10 have a nice week. remember wednesday at 23 UTC we have the style meeting for people who wanna join that 18:39:11 and thanks for the tor, everybody! 18:39:14 #endmeeting