Not logged in - Log In / Register

Describe ReviewerMeeting20090805




[15:00] <bac> #startmeeting
[15:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:00. The chair is bac.
[15:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:00] <bac> hello everyone and welcome to the AMEU reviewer's meeting.
[15:00] <bac> who is here today?  team leads will you help me round up your folks who may be tardy?
[15:00] <gary_poster> me, me me!
[15:00] <bigjools> me
[15:00] <rockstar> ni!
[15:00] <noodles775> me
[15:00] <henninge> ich
[15:00] <leonardr> me
[15:00] <kfogel> hey
[15:01] <sinzui> me
[15:01] <bigjools> soyuz non-vacationing/non-seconded team members all correct and present SAH
[15:01] <abentley> me
[15:01] <bac> sinzui, EdwinGrubbs, salgado: registry team ping
[15:01] <rockstar> Code's here.
[15:01] <bac> sorry sinzu
[15:01] <bac> i
[15:01] <sinzui> o
[15:01] <sinzui> u
[15:02] <salgado> me!
[15:02] <EdwinGrubbs> me
[15:02] <bac> thanks bigjools
[15:02] <allenap> me
[15:02] <mars> me
[15:02] <bac> henninge: any more bug folks?
[15:02] <bigjools> bac: o7
[15:03] <bac> will flacoste be joining us?
[15:03] <flacoste> i am
[15:03] <flacoste> me
[15:03] <henninge> bac: you mean translations? danilos?
[15:03] <bac> welcome back flacoste!
[15:03] <bac> henninge: yeah, that's what i meant.  sorry.
[15:03] <bac> allenap: any of your cohorts around?
[15:04] <allenap> bac: I've just pinged them all... let's see..
[15:04] <jtv> me
[15:04] <intellectronica> me
[15:04] <danilos> ok, ok, me too
[15:04] <danilos> :)
[15:04] <bac> welcome special guest kfogel
[15:04] <bac> [TOPIC] agenda
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  agenda
[15:04]  * jtv applauds kfogel
[15:04] <bac> * Roll call
[15:04] <bac> * Apologies: None
[15:04] <bac> * Action items
[15:04] <bac> * Mentoring update (leondardr/rockstar)
[15:04] <bac> * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:04] <kfogel> thanks bac, jtv
[15:05] <bac> [TOPIC] * Action items
[15:05] <bac> * Karl to update wiki about sponsoring contributions and take RFC to the mailing list.
[15:05] <MootBot> New Topic:  * Action items
[15:05] <kfogel> So, kfogel would like to know if that item is done or not.
[15:05] <kfogel> I wasn't sure what the original spec was; I improvised.  Thoughts, folks?
[15:05] <bac> Thanks kfogel for taking care of that item.  I read it and it looks good.
[15:05] <kfogel> bac: thank you.
[15:05] <salgado> where is it?
[15:05] <bac> Did anyone else get a chance to read karl's updates?
[15:06] <intellectronica> no, url?
[15:06] <kfogel> (most of the material was there already, actually -- barry and I put it there long ago)
[15:06]  * kfogel finds urls...
[15:06] <bac>
[15:06] <kfogel> okay, three:
[15:06] <kfogel>
[15:06] <kfogel>
[15:06] <kfogel>
[15:06] <kfogel> they interlink
[15:07] <bac> kfogel: are these all new pages or just additions to existing ones?
[15:07] <kfogel> the first two are directly linked from the top nav box on the home page
[15:07] <kfogel> bac: FixBugs is a new page
[15:07] <kfogel> bac: I updated Patches (and renamed it from PatchSubmission); I don't think I tweaked Reviews much.
[15:08] <bac> i think this is a good start.
[15:08] <intellectronica> i think we should avoid using the word "patch", because it might confuse people that are familiar with diff/patch but not with dvcs
[15:08] <bac> the process and our description on the wiki will evolve but i appreciate karl writing the first cut.
[15:08] <kfogel> I'd like to know what's missing; my email to the list didn't get much reaction AFAICT.
[15:09] <kfogel> Happy to add more (also happy for people to edit directly, of course!).
[15:09] <bac> intellectronica: do you have a suggested wording?
[15:09] <intellectronica> bac: branch
[15:09] <kfogel> intellectronica: I didn't quite understand: how will "patch" confuse people in that situation?
[15:09] <intellectronica> or changeset, if you want to talk about it in the abstract
[15:10] <kfogel> "change" ?
[15:10] <intellectronica> kfogel: they might think that we want them to produce a patch file, rather than a bzr branch
[15:10] <abentley> So I thought the idea was that when you wanted to fix a bug, for example, you found a sponsor and they guided you through the process, starting with some facimile of a pre-implementation call.
[15:10] <kfogel> intellectronica: ah.  One way might be to simply explain at the top of the Patches page that the end result is a bzr branch, not an actual patch file.
[15:10] <kfogel> I think "patch" might still be the term of art for changes.
[15:11] <intellectronica> kfogel: yeah, i guess just stressing that might be enough
[15:11] <kfogel> abentley: if that's the idea, I'd like to suggest that we be more lightweight.  It's certainly okay to do that, but people should also feel free to do more lightweight process...
[15:11] <EdwinGrubbs> The name "Patches" doesn't explain whether they can get patches on that page or learn how to submit patches.
[15:12] <bac> EdwinGrubbs: yeah, i think i prefer the old name PatchSubmission
[15:12] <kfogel> EdwinGrubbs, bac: I can revert, easy enough.
[15:12] <abentley> I try to refer to submitting a "change", rather than a patch.  Even that's broken, though, because we deal in branches, and branches represent a state, not a change.
[15:13] <kfogel> so ACTION items so far: rename back to PatchSubmission; explain at top of page that 'patch' means 'branch'.  I do think sticking with the accepted term for patches would be a good idea.  It's what everyone uses, even when they're not trading actual patch files.
[15:13] <intellectronica> abentley: +1 i think change or changeset are good terms which are much less ambiguous
[15:13] <abentley> intellectronica: bzr doesn't have changesets, so I don't think that's a good term to use.
[15:14] <jtv> "improvement"?
[15:14] <intellectronica> abentley: we could call it revision, which is what bzr actually has, no?
[15:14] <abentley> intellectronica: But multiple revisions are often submitted.
[15:14] <kfogel> intellectronica: changeset is a technical term in VC; also, having tried to use it with lots of people, I find I often have to explain it.  Many people already know "patch"; those few who don't, once they understand it, will be permanently enabled across the software ecosystem.
[15:15] <intellectronica> anyway, this turning into a theological discussion. sorry for starting. continue on the list?
[15:15] <kfogel> Let's reinforce the existing term, not try to promote a new term.  (This is an old debate and an old effort, and it hasn't succeeded in dethroning "patch" yet, IMHO.)
[15:15] <kfogel> heh
[15:15] <deryck> I'm not sure people really get tripped up over thinking "patch" literally means a patch.  The generic use of the term seems common to me.
[15:15] <bac> intellectronica: yes, good idea.
[15:15] <kfogel> okay, let's go with the two ACTION items above.  Any others so far?
[15:15] <bac> thanks again to karl.  please follow up to his email if you have further discussion.
[15:16] <bac> [TOPIC] * Mentoring update (leondardr/rockstar)
[15:16] <MootBot> New Topic:  * Mentoring update (leondardr/rockstar)
[15:16] <bac> rockstar: you have the floor
[15:16] <rockstar> leonardr has done an amazing job as a manatee since day one. His reviews are insightful and exploratory. I'm happy to announce his graduation.
[15:16] <leonardr> yay
[15:16] <rockstar> Congratulations leonardr
[15:16] <bac> whee
[15:17] <bac> congratulations leonard.
[15:17] <noodles775> congrats leonardr !
[15:17] <bac> with his graduation we are mentat-free, i believe.
[15:17] <kfogel> leonardr++
[15:17] <bac> have we reached the goal of every developer being a reviewer?
[15:18] <rockstar> I believe so.
[15:19] <bac> excellent.  i think that plan was hatched in our MIT sprint.  congratulations everyone.
[15:19] <flacoste> and barry isn't here to join the fun!
[15:19] <flacoste> congratulations leonard
[15:19] <bac> [TOPIC] * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:19] <MootBot> New Topic:  * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
[15:20] <bac> does anyone have another topic to discuss?
[15:21] <bac> thanks for coming everyone.  please do read the new wiki pages in detail and offer feedback.
[15:21] <bac> #endmeeting


We were unable to establish a quorum so it was decided to not have a formal meeting.  I quickly summarized the AMEU meeting in individual IRC messages.

ReviewerMeeting20090805 (last edited 2009-08-06 14:32:57 by bac)