launchpad development
ReviewerMeeting20090211
summary
- do not use zapi and ztapi
- abentley to experiment with storm base class for making things easier
- for the tz challenged: cover letter + mp + irc topic
mp bookmarklet possible? https://code.launchpad.net/+merge-proposal/%s
use field_id in storm classes, barry to add this to coding guidelines
- jml to keep mentoring stub for another week to see how it goes
ameu log
Feb 11 10:00:37 <barry> #startmeeting Feb 11 10:00:38 <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:00. The chair is barry. Feb 11 10:00:38 <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] Feb 11 10:00:52 <barry> hello everyone and welcome to this week's ameu reviewer's meeting. who's here today? Feb 11 10:00:55 <danilos> me Feb 11 10:00:56 <EdwinGrubbs> me Feb 11 10:00:58 <mars> me Feb 11 10:01:23 * flacoste (n=francis@canonical/launchpad/flacoste) has joined #launchpad-meeting Feb 11 10:01:29 <bigjools> me Feb 11 10:01:38 <bac> me Feb 11 10:01:51 * jtv (n=jtv@jtv.xs4all.nl) has joined #launchpad-meeting Feb 11 10:02:16 <barry> jtv: hi! Feb 11 10:02:24 <barry> adeuring: ping Feb 11 10:02:24 <jtv> hi barry! Feb 11 10:02:29 <barry> allenap: ping? Feb 11 10:02:35 <adeuring> whoops, me Feb 11 10:02:37 <salgado> me! Feb 11 10:02:45 <barry> BjornT: ping Feb 11 10:02:46 <gary_poster> me Feb 11 10:02:52 <barry> cprov: ping Feb 11 10:02:56 <BjornT> me Feb 11 10:03:13 <barry> gmb: ping Feb 11 10:03:18 <barry> intellectronica: ping Feb 11 10:03:23 <gmb> me Feb 11 10:03:31 <barry> rockstar: ping Feb 11 10:03:34 <intellectronica> me Feb 11 10:03:42 <jtv> me Feb 11 10:03:43 <barry> sinzui: ping Feb 11 10:03:52 <sinzui> hi barry Feb 11 10:03:53 <flacoste> me Feb 11 10:04:00 <barry> hi everyone Feb 11 10:04:01 <sinzui> me Feb 11 10:04:07 <barry> [TOPIC] agenda Feb 11 10:04:08 <MootBot> New Topic: agenda Feb 11 10:04:23 * al-maisan (n=al-maisa@p5087D5A2.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #launchpad-meeting Feb 11 10:04:46 <barry> * Roll call Feb 11 10:04:46 <barry> * asiapac meeting time change Feb 11 10:04:46 <barry> * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary Feb 11 10:04:46 <barry> * Action items Feb 11 10:04:46 <barry> * Mentoring update Feb 11 10:04:46 <barry> * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda) Feb 11 10:05:07 <barry> [TOPIC] * asiapac meeting time change Feb 11 10:05:08 <MootBot> New Topic: * asiapac meeting time change Feb 11 10:05:50 <barry> so just a quick note that we've changed the date and time of the asiapac meeting. 10pm my time was just too difficult for me to remember, so now it's wednesdays utc 2300 Feb 11 10:06:05 <barry> which i think also makes it easier to communicate between the two review teams Feb 11 10:06:17 <barry> just in case y'all wanted to drop by :) Feb 11 10:06:40 <danilos> in case I have no idea what to do at midnight, I might ;) Feb 11 10:06:51 <barry> :) Feb 11 10:06:56 <barry> [TOPIC] * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary Feb 11 10:06:57 <MootBot> New Topic: * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary Feb 11 10:07:03 <barry> gary_poster: the floor is yours Feb 11 10:07:04 <flacoste> for US fols, that's nice, we'll be able to drop by Feb 11 10:07:12 <gary_poster> :-) k Feb 11 10:07:23 <barry> flacoste: yep. we don't have jamesh's tz to worry about any more :) Feb 11 10:07:30 <gary_poster> Zope deprecated zapi and ztapi quite awhile ago Feb 11 10:07:49 <gary_poster> Jim Fulton significantly refactored the zope.component API so that it was easier to use it directly Feb 11 10:08:10 <gary_poster> these APIs are more parallel (register/unregister for instance for adapters and utilities) Feb 11 10:08:30 <rockstar> me Feb 11 10:08:46 <gary_poster> and also don't hide how views work as adapters, for instance, behind what I believe to be an unnecessary and ultimately confusing veil Feb 11 10:09:18 <gary_poster> I think we (probably me) should come up with a cheat sheet on "if you were doing this, try doing this" Feb 11 10:09:36 <gary_poster> but Zope is already leaving that stuff behind, and I think we should too Feb 11 10:09:47 <barry> gary_poster: what kinds of things do we commonly do now that would be better off w/o zapi? Feb 11 10:09:51 <sinzui> I only see zapi and ztapi in old code. I have never reviewed code that added it. Feb 11 10:09:58 <barry> gary_poster: % fc lib/canonical zapi | wc -l Feb 11 10:09:58 <barry> 23 Feb 11 10:10:25 <gary_poster> sinzui: so, do you mean, it is already effectively deprecated? Feb 11 10:10:42 <sinzui> gary_poster: I think so Feb 11 10:10:56 <barry> sinzui: 23 hits on zapi, 35 hits on ztapi Feb 11 10:11:03 <barry> which doesn't seem like much Feb 11 10:11:15 <gary_poster> barry: zapi should be completely unnecessary. same with ztapi. It's just cruft, keeping people from understanding the actual use of the component code, for no particular win Feb 11 10:11:35 <gary_poster> ok, so maybe simple proposal: Feb 11 10:11:45 <sinzui> gary_poster: I only know what Phillip wrote in his book. I think flacoste/SteveA have driven us from using it in the past two years. Feb 11 10:12:12 <gary_poster> 1) Someone (I?) does (do) a branch that rips out the remainder Feb 11 10:12:15 <barry> maybe the newest code is in l/c/lazr/rest/tales.py? Feb 11 10:12:22 <gary_poster> 2) that policy is official Feb 11 10:12:31 <allenap> me Feb 11 10:12:37 <gary_poster> the reason that this came up is that I saw leonardr use it Feb 11 10:12:43 <barry> +1, +1 Feb 11 10:12:56 <gary_poster> ok Feb 11 10:13:08 <gary_poster> at least that was non-controversial ;-) Feb 11 10:13:09 <barry> gary_poster: maybe start with lib/canonical/lazr? Feb 11 10:13:20 <gary_poster> yeah Feb 11 10:13:33 <jtv> gary_poster: it was the "(I?)" part that sold us Feb 11 10:13:43 <gary_poster> lol :-) Feb 11 10:14:11 <gary_poster> k, done, unless someone else wants to say something Feb 11 10:14:14 <barry> jtv: are you saying that gary_poster is our jerry maguire? Feb 11 10:14:21 <barry> gary_poster: thanks Feb 11 10:14:25 <gary_poster> :-) Feb 11 10:14:39 <barry> [TOPIC] * Action items Feb 11 10:14:40 <MootBot> New Topic: * Action items Feb 11 10:14:46 * abentley (n=abentley@bas1-toronto09-1279621843.dsl.bell.ca) has joined #launchpad-meeting Feb 11 10:14:49 <barry> * abentley to email ml and gustavo with suggestions for improving storm Feb 11 10:14:55 <barry> abentley: just in time! :) Feb 11 10:14:56 <abentley> barry: Done. Feb 11 10:15:00 <jtv> barry: EPOPCULTREF Feb 11 10:15:06 <abentley> barry: Response was not very positive. Feb 11 10:15:14 <gary_poster> heh Feb 11 10:15:22 <barry> abentley: yeah Feb 11 10:15:32 <gary_poster> conversation with stub seemed potentially fruitful though Feb 11 10:15:58 <abentley> In fact, he said if we like the SQLObject api, we should use the shim Feb 11 10:17:08 <flacoste> well Feb 11 10:17:09 <barry> what do you guys think? personally, i prefer both native storm query syntax and native storm class definitions Feb 11 10:17:13 <flacoste> that has some drawbacks Feb 11 10:17:20 <flacoste> and I don't think the shim is what we want to use Feb 11 10:17:30 <flacoste> native storm query: yes Feb 11 10:17:36 <flacoste> native storm class defs: not sure at all Feb 11 10:17:37 <abentley> I think stores should be optional. Feb 11 10:17:53 <abentley> Most of the time, we don't want or need them. Feb 11 10:18:01 <flacoste> the problem with the shim is that the results objects are incompatible Feb 11 10:18:53 <bigjools> as I found to my cost Feb 11 10:19:16 <abentley> Okay, so if we make our own base class, would that be acceptable? Feb 11 10:19:41 <barry> flacoste: what would you propose instead for class defs? base class/metaclass? Feb 11 10:20:06 <flacoste> base class is probably best Feb 11 10:20:08 <barry> abentley: not outside the realm of possibility Feb 11 10:20:19 <flacoste> as metaclass usually makes people's brain explode Feb 11 10:20:28 <barry> flacoste: indeed Feb 11 10:20:54 <barry> flacoste: how would that change the attribute definition syntax? Feb 11 10:21:26 <flacoste> i think we might need a metaclass for that, i don't know Feb 11 10:21:38 <flacoste> and maybe the native storm syntax isn't that bad Feb 11 10:21:44 <barry> flacoste: i think we would, but i guess my question is: what would you do differently? Feb 11 10:21:52 <flacoste> it's just that I agree with abentley that the ID stuff is kind of boring Feb 11 10:22:00 <barry> true Feb 11 10:22:04 <flacoste> well, the attribute names for instance Feb 11 10:22:10 <flacoste> field_id instead of fieldID Feb 11 10:22:26 <bigjools> the only real problem with Storm syntax for me is importing a gazillion content classes Feb 11 10:23:41 <allenap> bigjools: That does have the advantage that things break hard when classes are changed. Feb 11 10:23:54 <allenap> and early. Feb 11 10:23:57 <barry> is anybody motivated enough to try an experiment here? Feb 11 10:23:58 <abentley> bigjools: Not seeing the connection. Feb 11 10:24:17 <bigjools> abentley: if you use Python expressions for the query joins ... Feb 11 10:24:56 <abentley> bigjools: Is that compared to raw SQL with SQLObject? Feb 11 10:25:21 <bigjools> yes. if you write a string in SQL then you don't have the import pain, but then Storm can't work out the FROM tables Feb 11 10:25:47 <jtv> barry: what experiment did you have in mind? Feb 11 10:26:06 <flacoste> barry: well, i think abentley's gripes are good, so if he's willing to try to cook up a base class that suits him, that would be a good start Feb 11 10:26:07 <bigjools> allenap: that's a great point Feb 11 10:26:31 <abentley> flacoste: Sure, I'm happy to start with that. Metaclass foo later. Feb 11 10:26:31 <barry> jtv: a base class/metaclass to make various common boring or painful things easier Feb 11 10:27:49 <barry> abentley: cool. i know there's an experiments page somewhere but my firefox is misbehaving right now Feb 11 10:28:26 <barry> [ACTION] abentley to experiment with a base class to ease the pain and boredom with storm Feb 11 10:28:27 <MootBot> ACTION received: abentley to experiment with a base class to ease the pain and boredom with storm Feb 11 10:29:02 <barry> * flacoste to take dead zone reviews issue to ml Feb 11 10:29:08 <flacoste> done Feb 11 10:29:13 <flacoste> not sure of the resolution there Feb 11 10:29:14 <flacoste> though Feb 11 10:29:21 <barry> flacoste: me neither Feb 11 10:29:43 <barry> jtv: what do you think about that thread? Feb 11 10:30:20 <barry> jtv: i think you and stub get weighted more heavily here as you're the most tz challenged Feb 11 10:31:19 * barry taps the mic and asks "is this thing still on?" Feb 11 10:31:25 <jtv> barry: I do agree, just slightly concerned about having yet more ways to write a database class Feb 11 10:31:40 <barry> jtv: TOOWTDI Feb 11 10:31:40 <jtv> barry: sorry, hard to type at this temperature Feb 11 10:31:40 <rockstar> jtv, +1 Feb 11 10:31:49 <barry> jtv: and you're dutch so it should be obvious to you Feb 11 10:31:55 <gary_poster> :-) Feb 11 10:32:23 <barry> jtv: sorry, i meant the dead zone review thread Feb 11 10:32:29 <jtv> barry: ahhh Feb 11 10:33:03 <jtv> barry: I thought we already were discussing that on the ml Feb 11 10:33:37 * jtv reads back Feb 11 10:33:48 <barry> jtv: we are, just wanted to give you a higher bandwidth channel. but it's okay, we can continue on the ml Feb 11 10:34:09 <jtv> barry: yes, sorry, having that one line added in the middle changed the meaning of my backlog Feb 11 10:34:46 <jtv> I think we agreed that cover letters are good, and possibly better than asking a reviewer personally Feb 11 10:35:37 <barry> cover letters + mp + (maybe?) irc topic? Feb 11 10:35:47 <jtv> barry: ah yes, the topic line, I liked that Feb 11 10:36:17 <barry> jtv: cool. let's see if we can make that work. we can always try something else if need be Feb 11 10:36:23 <jtv> maybe a "candidate queue"? Feb 11 10:36:31 <jtv> after all, the "queue" is what an OCR has accepted Feb 11 10:36:54 <jtv> or a "review backlog" Feb 11 10:37:08 <barry> jtv: backlog: xxx in the topic? Feb 11 10:37:22 * andrea-bs (n=andrea-b@ubuntu/member/beeseek.developer.andrea-bs) has joined #launchpad-meeting Feb 11 10:37:24 <jtv> barry: looks lovely Feb 11 10:37:28 <danilos> we can have two queues, one for on call, another for backlog, with OCRs reviewing alternately one from each Feb 11 10:37:43 <barry> danilos: +1 Feb 11 10:37:51 <jtv> oh, practical problem: how does the next reviewer know which *branch*? that's too long to record in the topic Feb 11 10:38:20 <barry> jtv: give an mp #? Feb 11 10:38:27 <danilos> how about just using links to bugs or MPs? Feb 11 10:38:55 <jtv> Yeah, nick:mp# would do it for me Feb 11 10:39:27 <barry> danilos: i think that makes the topic too long Feb 11 10:39:28 <abentley> hmm: The MP ids are unique. Maybe we should provide a direct link to them. Feb 11 10:39:45 <danilos> abentley: yeah, that would be an improvement (something like we have for bugs) Feb 11 10:40:12 <barry> abentley: do you mean, have the bot recognize "mp 1234"? Feb 11 10:40:18 <danilos> barry: I meant only bug ids (and bugs will point to branches, which will point to mps :) Feb 11 10:40:31 <barry> danilos: ah yes, fair enough Feb 11 10:40:54 <danilos> I'd prefer a bookmarklet https://code.launchpad.net/+merge-proposal/%s :) Feb 11 10:41:01 <jtv> danilos: good idea, but blueprint names get longer Feb 11 10:41:13 <danilos> jtv: they are also not linked to branches afaik Feb 11 10:41:21 <abentley> barry: No, I meant to be able to put code.launchpad.net/mp/1234 as a url. Feb 11 10:41:38 <barry> abentley, jtv, danilos let's see if we can hash out the details on the ml Feb 11 10:41:46 <jtv> danilos: good point :) Feb 11 10:42:14 <barry> only a couple of minutes left, so... Feb 11 10:42:25 <barry> * gary to email list about RENormalizing test, investigate alternate inline spellings Feb 11 10:42:50 <gary_poster> done. See how to do it. doctest not easily extensible for this, so will need to hack. Feb 11 10:42:50 <barry> i think that one's done Feb 11 10:42:58 <barry> gary_poster: thanks Feb 11 10:43:00 <barry> * barry to add `pretty()` functions to reviewers docs Feb 11 10:43:03 <barry> i suck, not done Feb 11 10:43:08 <barry> * flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet Feb 11 10:43:12 <flacoste> i suck, not done Feb 11 10:43:25 <barry> [TOPIC] peanut gallery Feb 11 10:43:26 <MootBot> New Topic: peanut gallery Feb 11 10:43:32 <danilos> I'd like to raise one issue here Feb 11 10:43:33 <barry> does anybody have anything not on the agenda? Feb 11 10:43:40 <barry> danilos: go4it Feb 11 10:43:45 <flacoste> if it's not done next week, i change my name to flacoste_hoover Feb 11 10:43:48 <danilos> the lightness of our reviews makes them not be that useful anymore as a learning tool Feb 11 10:43:53 <barry> flacoste: :) Feb 11 10:44:12 <danilos> we need to reiterate some points even if they are not necessarily what we expect developer to do Feb 11 10:44:23 <flacoste> what do you mean? Feb 11 10:44:28 <flacoste> or can you give an example? Feb 11 10:44:31 <danilos> eg. concrete example I have: we should mention LaunchpadForm for any form which is not using it Feb 11 10:44:44 <flacoste> good point Feb 11 10:44:57 <danilos> Henning was not aware of LaunchpadForm and hacked around even though he modified quite a few forms before Feb 11 10:45:43 <danilos> just a question for reviewers to ask: "why is this not using this and that infrastructure we have" Feb 11 10:46:11 <barry> danilos: +1 Feb 11 10:46:32 <gmb> I didn't realise that our reviews were that shallow. Feb 11 10:46:39 * bigjools fears for future Soyuz reviews Feb 11 10:47:01 <gmb> Just last week EdwinGrubbs pointed out a much easier way for me to do something that I'd spent ages hacking around with. Feb 11 10:47:01 <danilos> (even if reviewer knows the answer, we should help developers get to learn more about existing infrastructure, since there's so much of it) Feb 11 10:47:27 <bigjools> we need an infrastructure cheat sheet Feb 11 10:47:28 <gmb> bigjools: The only way you can have a shallow soyuz review is if the person doing the review is dead. Feb 11 10:47:37 <al-maisan> :) Feb 11 10:47:37 <gary_poster> :-) Feb 11 10:47:43 <flacoste> lol Feb 11 10:47:45 <bigjools> gmb: that can be arranged! Feb 11 10:47:54 <danilos> bigjools: the idea is not to force people to switch to new infrastructure, just to be aware of it, and understand why it's not being used Feb 11 10:48:28 <bigjools> danilos: that's fine - I just know that we have lots of, er, legacy code shall we say, done before a lot of the infrastructure was in place Feb 11 10:48:40 <bac> it works the other way too. yesterday i saw something cool sinzui was doing in a doctest i was reviewing and adopted it. Feb 11 10:48:49 <danilos> bac: indeed Feb 11 10:49:00 <bigjools> bac: yes, that's a great reason to be a reviewer Feb 11 10:49:04 <danilos> anyway, we're over time already, and I think I am done Feb 11 10:49:05 <barry> bac: we should find a way to share those insights across the team! Feb 11 10:49:21 <barry> danilos: thanks. and apologies for going over Feb 11 10:49:25 * sinzui just wanted the code to be readible Feb 11 10:49:28 <danilos> barry: we've tried so far to do that using wikis and mailing lists, but it doesn't really work out Feb 11 10:49:34 <mars> danilos, how about cleaning up technical debt as a learning exercise, rather than reviewing or using a cheat sheet? Feb 11 10:49:39 * barry will eagerly await bac's email describing this insight :) Feb 11 10:49:54 <bigjools> I would like a cheat sheet, personally Feb 11 10:50:01 <mars> that's how I started - fixing callsites, submitting 2000-line patches... Feb 11 10:50:04 <jtv> mars: it's not always stuff you'd easily recognize as tech debt Feb 11 10:50:06 <gary_poster> cheat sheets get awfully big Feb 11 10:50:07 <bigjools> then the info is shared Feb 11 10:50:16 <gary_poster> we already have some Feb 11 10:50:20 <danilos> gary_poster: only if you want to cheat in everything you do :) Feb 11 10:50:23 <gary_poster> that are really really big Feb 11 10:50:25 <gary_poster> :-) Feb 11 10:50:30 <bigjools> gary_poster: they can't get bigger than the doctests we have though :) Feb 11 10:50:38 <gary_poster> heh Feb 11 10:50:43 <barry> :) Feb 11 10:50:51 <barry> anyway. let's break for today Feb 11 10:50:56 <barry> #endmeeting
asiapac log
Feb 11 18:01:06 <barry> #startmeeting
Feb 11 18:01:07 <MootBot> Meeting started at 17:01. The chair is barry.
Feb 11 18:01:07 <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
Feb 11 18:01:25 <barry> hello and welcome to the first of our newly scheduled asiapac reviewers meetings. who's here today?
Feb 11 18:01:44 * barry pings jml thumper and mwhudson
Feb 11 18:01:48 <mwhudson> hello
Feb 11 18:02:03 * thumper pongs
Feb 11 18:02:05 <thumper> :)
Feb 11 18:02:18 <jml> barry: hi
Feb 11 18:02:33 <barry> yay! how's it going guys?
Feb 11 18:02:41 <thumper> busy
Feb 11 18:02:58 <jml> yeah, very busy
Feb 11 18:03:01 <thumper> too many things to do at once
Feb 11 18:03:06 <barry> mwhudson: very very busy?
Feb 11 18:03:06 <jml> people keep finding bugs in our software
Feb 11 18:03:08 <thumper> oh, and I have a dentist appt in 1 hour
Feb 11 18:03:19 <mwhudson> barry: you guessed it!
Feb 11 18:03:24 <thumper> which I need to walk to
Feb 11 18:03:32 <barry> well then, we'll make this quick!
Feb 11 18:03:36 <barry> [TOPIC] agenda
Feb 11 18:03:37 <MootBot> New Topic: agenda
Feb 11 18:03:52 <barry> * Roll call
Feb 11 18:03:52 <barry> * asiapac meeting time change
Feb 11 18:03:52 <barry> * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary
Feb 11 18:03:52 <barry> * Action items
Feb 11 18:03:52 <barry> * Mentoring update
Feb 11 18:03:52 <barry> * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
Feb 11 18:04:09 <barry> that's basically copied from the ameu meeting this morning, which i have not had time to write up yet
Feb 11 18:04:14 <thumper> ok
Feb 11 18:04:27 <mwhudson> well the first one seems to have worked
Feb 11 18:04:32 <barry> indeed!
Feb 11 18:04:43 <barry> [TOPIC] * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary
Feb 11 18:04:44 <MootBot> New Topic: * deprecate zapi and ztapi in favor of zope.component APIs, gary
Feb 11 18:04:55 <barry> let me see if i can channel gary_poster
Feb 11 18:05:11 <thumper> do anyone outside foundations care?
Feb 11 18:05:22 <jml> barry_imposter
Feb 11 18:05:26 <thumper> haha
Feb 11 18:05:44 <barry> thumper: probably not. there's only about 70 hits for both in our code base
Feb 11 18:05:48 <mwhudson> i've used ztapi in a test i think once
Feb 11 18:05:49 <barry> and most of those are in very old code
Feb 11 18:05:52 <mwhudson> i won't do it again :)
Feb 11 18:05:57 <mwhudson> next
Feb 11 18:06:02 <barry> mwhudson: yeah, you better not. gary_poster is a big guy
Feb 11 18:06:18 <barry> [TOPIC] * Action items
Feb 11 18:06:19 <MootBot> New Topic: * Action items
Feb 11 18:06:23 <mwhudson> i can't imagine him as a brawler though some how
Feb 11 18:06:32 <barry> :)
Feb 11 18:06:34 <barry> * abentley to email ml and gustavo with suggestions for improving storm
Feb 11 18:06:50 <jml> I think that's been done for some time :)
Feb 11 18:07:15 <barry> abentley: right. though today we talked about an experiment that abentley will conduct to see if he can create a base class that makes some annoyances simpler
Feb 11 18:07:23 <barry> we still do not want to use the sqlobject shim
Feb 11 18:07:26 * mthaddon_ (n=mthaddon@203-206-35-246.dyn.iinet.net.au) has joined #launchpad-meeting
Feb 11 18:07:42 <jml> barry: sure.
Feb 11 18:07:48 <barry> we were generally agreed that native storm class defs and queries are fine with us
Feb 11 18:08:01 <jml> ok.
Feb 11 18:08:04 <barry> though foo_id is boring
Feb 11 18:08:13 <barry> and needing to specify the store is boring
Feb 11 18:08:20 <barry> we'll see what he comes up with
Feb 11 18:08:25 <thumper> LPStorm class?
Feb 11 18:08:26 <jml> it's also complicated :)
Feb 11 18:08:35 <mwhudson> do you have to have the foo_id as a separate definition?
Feb 11 18:08:40 <jml> barry: so I guess this is out-of-scope for reviewer meetings for the moment?
Feb 11 18:08:43 <barry> thumper: something like that, tho i suspect a metaclass may be necessary
Feb 11 18:08:48 <thumper> mwhudson: I believe so
Feb 11 18:08:58 <barry> mwhudson: yep
Feb 11 18:09:09 <thumper> I've seen both field_id and fieldID
Feb 11 18:09:13 <thumper> do we have a standard?
Feb 11 18:09:16 <barry> mwhudson: foo_id = Int(primary=True); foo = Reference(foo_id, Foo.id)
Feb 11 18:09:24 <barry> thumper: we do not
Feb 11 18:09:30 * barry prefers and uses foo_id
Feb 11 18:09:30 * thumper votes for field_id
Feb 11 18:09:34 <barry> thumper: rock on
Feb 11 18:09:40 <mwhudson> barry: wouldn't foo = Reference(Int(primary=True), Foo.id) work?
Feb 11 18:09:49 <barry> mwhudson: interesting! dunno
Feb 11 18:09:54 <thumper> barry: can you add an agenda item to add it for the next reviewer meeting
Feb 11 18:10:09 <mwhudson> if it does, i think we can write a convenience class....
Feb 11 18:10:14 <barry> [ACTION] barry will add foo_id vs fooID to next reviewers meeting
Feb 11 18:10:14 * mthaddon has quit (Operation timed out)
Feb 11 18:10:15 <MootBot> ACTION received: barry will add foo_id vs fooID to next reviewers meeting
Feb 11 18:10:20 <mwhudson> FKeyIDRef or something
Feb 11 18:10:22 <thumper> mwhudson: sometimes you need to do field.foo_id.is_in([1,2,3])
Feb 11 18:10:30 <jml> mwhudson: best. name. evar. :P
Feb 11 18:10:38 <mwhudson> ah ok
Feb 11 18:10:39 <thumper> mwhudson: a bit hard to do without a defined foo_id
Feb 11 18:10:48 <mwhudson> i should mention this on the list i guess
Feb 11 18:10:55 <barry> mwhudson: please do
Feb 11 18:10:55 * salgado-afk has quit ("Leaving")
Feb 11 18:11:01 <barry> next?
Feb 11 18:11:08 <thumper> ya
Feb 11 18:11:09 <thumper> yarp
Feb 11 18:11:13 <barry> * flacoste to take dead zone reviews issue to ml
Feb 11 18:11:18 <barry> he did this
Feb 11 18:11:44 <barry> jtv was at our meeting and i think we've decided on mp + cover + an irc cue
Feb 11 18:12:08 <barry> basically jtv and stub would add a cue to the, er queue to let ocrs know that thye have branches they'd like reviewed
Feb 11 18:12:28 <barry> or something like that. i don't remember the details, but i'll write it up when i go through the minutes
Feb 11 18:13:00 <thumper> I've also cleaned up the claiming a team review
Feb 11 18:13:07 <thumper> so we should have less pending team review
Feb 11 18:13:09 <thumper> s
Feb 11 18:13:12 <thumper> when someone has done one
Feb 11 18:13:16 <mwhudson> i guess in time, jtv and stub will end up reviewing each other's branches a lot
Feb 11 18:13:30 <barry> yep, stubs a mentat now
Feb 11 18:13:40 <jml> thumper: the remaining issue is that it's still hard to see which branches need review.
Feb 11 18:13:44 <thumper> action for me: make sure a default reviewer is added through bzr send if none specified
Feb 11 18:13:56 * thumper thinks
Feb 11 18:14:02 <thumper> if we have a bug for this
Feb 11 18:14:15 <barry> thumper: yes please. and btw, i used bzr send for the first time yesterday. awesome sauce
Feb 11 18:14:17 <thumper> increase its priority
Feb 11 18:14:20 <jml> thumper: partly because the mp status isn't always updated.
Feb 11 18:14:28 <thumper> barry: just wait for the changes with jml is reviewing
Feb 11 18:14:37 <thumper> jml: I've got some ideas
Feb 11 18:14:44 <thumper> lets make the views better
Feb 11 18:15:04 <jml> thumper: partly because there aren't clear mp statuses for "reviewed, waiting on reply"
Feb 11 18:15:07 * barry *can't* wait :)
Feb 11 18:15:17 <thumper> jml: lets make one
Feb 11 18:15:30 <thumper> jml: we use a decorated class now anyway
Feb 11 18:15:38 <jml> thumper: let's talk about it after :)
Feb 11 18:15:41 <thumper> jml: let's just invent a new status column
Feb 11 18:15:44 * thumper nods
Feb 11 18:15:49 <barry> sounds good. thanks guys
Feb 11 18:16:09 <barry> * gary to email list about RENormalizing test, investigate alternate inline spellings
Feb 11 18:16:13 <barry> he did this
Feb 11 18:16:17 <barry> doctest is hard to extend
Feb 11 18:16:28 <barry> 'nuff said
Feb 11 18:16:42 * jml coughs politely
Feb 11 18:16:50 * mwhudson is tempted to say "two wrongs don't make a right"
Feb 11 18:16:54 <barry> :)
Feb 11 18:17:17 <barry> both flacoste and i suck at our two action items so i won't even mention them
Feb 11 18:17:35 <mwhudson> if you can't specify this close-to-inline, it's a terrible terrible idea
Feb 11 18:17:35 <jml> barry: you probably should :)
Feb 11 18:17:46 <mwhudson> otherwise, it's just terrible, perhaps
Feb 11 18:17:48 <barry> * barry to add `pretty()` functions to reviewers docs
Feb 11 18:17:52 <barry> * flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet
Feb 11 18:18:03 * abentley (n=abentley@bas1-toronto09-1279621843.dsl.bell.ca) has left #launchpad-meeting
Feb 11 18:18:05 <jml> these are both good ideas.
Feb 11 18:18:07 <barry> mwhudson: we all agree on that!
Feb 11 18:18:14 <mwhudson> good
Feb 11 18:18:28 <barry> jml: yep, we should suck less and do more
Feb 11 18:18:54 <barry> anyway, that's about it for my list. do you guys have anything y'all want to talk about?
Feb 11 18:19:43 <thumper> I'm working my way through the code-review bugs
Feb 11 18:19:57 <thumper> if people have a strong opinion about something
Feb 11 18:20:02 <thumper> they should contact me directly
Feb 11 18:20:12 <jml> barry: I have a couple of things
Feb 11 18:20:12 <thumper> otherwise they'll be fixed in thumper-priority
Feb 11 18:20:22 <mwhudson> i guess i could say the same about loggerhead/codebrowse
Feb 11 18:20:34 <barry> thumper: isn't that thumpertime?
Feb 11 18:20:37 <barry> thumper: thanks
Feb 11 18:20:41 <barry> jml: go ahead
Feb 11 18:20:45 <thumper> barry: something like that :)
Feb 11 18:20:49 <jml> first, the reviewer checklist
Feb 11 18:21:04 <jml> 1. it's getting kind of long
Feb 11 18:21:09 <jml> 2, it's hard to find
Feb 11 18:21:21 <jml> the first one is a someday/maybe thing
Feb 11 18:22:00 <jml> i.e. it doesn't matter too much, but it would be nice if it were shorter and more usable
Feb 11 18:22:16 <jml> but I actually don't know where to find the latest version :)
Feb 11 18:22:28 <barry> agreed, agreed. it's on My List to garden it and move it to dev.lp.net
Feb 11 18:22:34 <jml> cool.
Feb 11 18:22:44 <jml> second, mentoring
Feb 11 18:23:00 <jml> I'm mentoring stub, and I don't feel I'm doing a particularly good job of it.
Feb 11 18:23:16 <barry> jml: because of the tz?
Feb 11 18:23:22 <jml> barry: partly
Feb 11 18:23:45 <jml> barry: in more than one way, actually. there's not a huge deal of overlap, for a start.
Feb 11 18:24:12 <jml> barry: but also my OCR day is busiest in the morning, as people from the Americas submit things on their Thursday evening.
Feb 11 18:24:58 <barry> jml: and you overlap with stub in the morning?
Feb 11 18:25:12 <jml> my afternoon.
Feb 11 18:25:13 <thumper> stub's morning
Feb 11 18:25:59 <barry> jml: i can chat with flacoste and/or stub if you want to see if we can line someone else up
Feb 11 18:26:05 <jml> also, are there any docs on mentoring on the wiki?
Feb 11 18:26:19 <barry> jml: some i think, but probably not much
Feb 11 18:26:30 <jml> barry: that might be a good idea. let's leave it for another week though & see how it goes.
Feb 11 18:26:42 <mwhudson> overlapping in the mentees morning isn't really the right end of things, i guess
Feb 11 18:26:45 <barry> jml: sounds good
Feb 11 18:27:21 <jml> that's it from me.
Feb 11 18:27:23 <barry> that tz is just a challenge all around unfortunately
Feb 11 18:27:45 <barry> cool, thanks jml. anything else guys?
Feb 11 18:27:52 <thumper> nope
Feb 11 18:28:00 <mwhudson> nope
Feb 11 18:28:11 <barry> guess we're done!
Feb 11 18:28:14 <barry> #endmeeting