launchpad development
ReviewerMeeting20100428
summary
- henning completed his two outstanding items.
- bac did not.
- rockstar pointed out grim statistics showing we aren't doing many UI reviews.
tim announced new test structure test_traverse
logs
ameu
[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> who besides graham is here? [15:00] <sinzui> me [15:00] <noodles775> moi [15:01] <bac> and welcome to the reviewers meeting [15:01] <henninge> me [15:01] <bac> bigjools, danilos: ping [15:01] <bigjools> o/ [15:01] <danilos> koo [15:02] <abentley> me [15:02] <bac> if EdwinGrubbs were here the registry team would be complete [15:03] <EdwinGrubbs> me [15:03] <deryck> me [15:03] <bac> noodles775: where's your mentat? [15:04] <noodles775> coming :) [15:04] <jelmer> me [15:04] <mars> me [15:04] <flacoste> me [15:04] <salgado> me [15:05] <mars> bac, Gary and Leonard send their apologies [15:05] <bac> mars: thanks. did gary get hung up taking leonard to the train station? [15:05] <bac> let's get started. rounding up everyone might take longer than the meeting. [15:06] <mars> bac, he had an appointment after to go to [15:06] <bac> [topic] agenda [15:06] <MootBot> New Topic: agenda [15:06] <bac> * Roll call [15:06] <bac> * Agenda [15:06] <bac> * Outstanding actions [15:06] <bac> * Mentoring update [15:06] <bac> * New topics [15:06] <bac> * Reduction of negation preferred over "common case first" in if statements? [henninge, jtv] [15:06] <bac> * Peanut gallery [15:06] <bac> [topic] outstanding actions [15:06] <MootBot> New Topic: outstanding actions [15:06] <bac> [topic] * bac to define new doctest policy regarding what is "testable documentation". [15:06] <MootBot> New Topic: * bac to define new doctest policy regarding what is "testable documentation". [15:07] <bac> i must roll this to next week. [15:07] <bac> [topic] * henninge to update the style guide regarding multi-line parameters in function defns and calls. [15:07] <MootBot> New Topic: * henninge to update the style guide regarding multi-line parameters in function defns and calls. [15:07] <henninge> bac: done ;) [15:07] <bac> henninge: any progress? [15:07] <bac> yay [15:07] <bac> [topic] * bac to write community reviewer and contributor policy and announce it on the list. [15:07] <MootBot> New Topic: * bac to write community reviewer and contributor policy and announce it on the list. [15:08] <bac> i've started this email but haven't finished. hope to send it off today or tomorrow. [15:08] * bac 0 for 2 [15:08] <adeuring> me [15:08] <bac> [topic] * henninge to update style guide regarding readability and 'if not condition' tests. [15:08] <MootBot> New Topic: * henninge to update style guide regarding readability and 'if not condition' tests. [15:08] <henninge> bac: that's old, we discussed it last week. [15:08] <henninge> I mentioned in the style guide, too. [15:08] <bac> henninge: we discussed it but you said you'd write it up [15:08] <henninge> bac: I did ;-) [15:09] <bac> ok, great. thanks henninge. you're a model of german efficiency. [15:09] <henninge> oh, that's still action items ... [15:09] <henninge> I wish ... [15:09] <bac> so we have no other new items to discuss [15:09] <bac> [topic] peanut gallery [15:09] <MootBot> New Topic: peanut gallery [15:09] <bac> anyone have a new issue to raise today? [15:10] <bac> hey i forgot to ask how the mentoring is going. noodles and jelmer? [15:11] <noodles775> from my pov, jelmer is doing great... just learning the process really... how do you feel jelmer ? [15:11] <bac> noodles775: ? [15:11] <jelmer> I think it's going well too. [15:11] <bac> jelmer: have you been kept busy reviewing? [15:11] <jelmer> bac: Not really, I've mostly actually reviewed other Soyuz branches so far. [15:12] <henninge> and one from Translations! ;) [15:12] <bac> jelmer: your day is thursday, right? [15:12] <jelmer> bac: Yep, but I've been on leave two thursdays in the last month or so. [15:13] <bac> right. we'll try to get you some non-soyuz branches. [15:13] <bac> so, any other issues? [15:13] <jelmer> There's still quite some things that noodles775 catches that I didn't spot, but I'm sure that'll get better over time. [15:13] <bac> let's end early then. [15:13] <bac> #endmeeting [15:13] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 09:13.
asiapac
[23:06] <bac> #startmeeting [23:06] <bac> me [23:06] <MootBot> Meeting started at 17:06. The chair is bac. [23:06] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [23:12] <rockstar> UI reviews do have a reputation for being a PITA, usually because they are done too late in the review process. [23:12] <rockstar> But that shouldn't excuse us from not doing UI reviews. [23:12] <thumper> agreed [23:12] <rockstar> Or even doing ui=rs [23:12] <bac> rockstar: i'll admit we've gotten a little lax. i did a review for mrevell yesterday and could've insisted on a UI review but didn't. (it *was* pretty simple) [23:12] <rockstar> (which I used recently with thumper, and felt okay about it since it's not available UI anywhere but dev) [23:13] <rockstar> bac, there's no reason why he couldn't have done ui=rs then. [23:13] <bac> rockstar: are y'all still doing ui reviewers meetings? [23:13] <bac> rockstar: ec2 land definitely doesn't support that... [23:13] <rockstar> bac, well, we just had our last call for now. Our group is taking things to the launchpad-dev list now. [23:14] <rockstar> (for transparency as well) [23:14] <thumper> bac: with lp-land you can edit the string :) [23:14] <rockstar> bac, if the tools don't work, we should fix them. [23:14] <bac> thumper: true. rockstar: agreed [23:15] <bac> i think the larger issue is getting a UI review if you really need one. [23:15] <rockstar> Yeah, reviewers should either say "put my name down as ui reviewer" or "go get a ui review" [23:15] <bac> perhaps just a gentle reminder will work. [23:15] <rockstar> bac, ack. [23:15] * rockstar was poet and didn't realize it. [23:15] <bac> rockstar: would you like to send out such an email or do you want me too? [23:16] <rockstar> bac, I'd be happy to. [23:16] <bac> nice, thanks [23:16] <bac> [action] rockstar to kick some butt re: ui reviews [23:16] <MootBot> ACTION received: rockstar to kick some butt re: ui reviews [23:17] <bac> y'all have anything else to chat about? [23:17] <thumper> yep [23:17] <thumper> just landed in r10800 of devel we have two new testing bits [23:17] <thumper> test_traverse in lp.testing.publication [23:17] <thumper> which given an url, will return a tuple of (object, view, request) [23:17] <thumper> it hooks into the zope publication method [23:18] <thumper> to do exactly what normal browser traversal would do [23:18] <thumper> this is then used in the update BaseBreadcrumbTestCase [23:18] <thumper> so you can get breadcrumbs for an object [23:18] <bac> neat [23:18] <thumper> without having to fake the traversed objects [23:18] <thumper> also I'd like an action point to remind people [23:18] <thumper> not to put new code in canonical.launchpad [23:19] <thumper> I moved the test case to lp.testing.breadcrumbs [23:19] <thumper> from canonical.launchpad.webapp.tests [23:19] <rockstar> Yay thumper [23:19] <bac> thumper you'll be happy i followed rockstar's example today and moved the registry javascript out of there [23:19] <thumper> \o/ [23:19] <bac> i think we're the only two apps to do so [23:20] <thumper> it's a start [23:20] <rockstar> bac, awesome. [23:20] <thumper> my change to the breadcrumb tests required quite a lot of fixing [23:20] <bac> yeah, it's hard to believe the big migration was last march and we still have so much cruft [23:20] <rockstar> bac, did you have any problems with that? [23:20] <thumper> as I had to fix all the existing test_breadcrumbs [23:20] <bac> rockstar: no, just hunting down all of the relative paths to change [23:20] <thumper> even found one real bug [23:21] <thumper> that was not being tested as it should have been [23:21] <bac> thumper i did too. [23:21] <thumper> I wish we had a unittest school to help people learn how to write better unittests [23:21] <bac> thumper: perhaps you can lead us at the epic [23:21] <thumper> hah [23:21] <thumper> I'd defer to mwhudson or jml [23:22] <thumper> I've learnt a huge amount from them [23:22] <bac> seriously it would be a good topic [23:22] <thumper> it would [23:22] <thumper> we should do something like that [23:22] <bac> if only jml weren't so shy about public speaking [23:22] <thumper> hahaha [23:22] <bac> anything else? [23:22] <thumper> I don't think so [23:23] <bac> i'd like to apologize for missing the meeting lately. last week i got super frustrated and left to go biking, completely forgetting about this meeting [23:23] <bac> i'll try not to do it again [23:23] <bac> please ping me if you remember [23:23] <mwhudson> i guess i won't be attendng after this one [23:24] <bac> mwhudson: you're always welcome to drop by... [23:24] <bac> mwhudson: hope the new assignment is fun [23:25] <mwhudson> bac: so do i! [23:25] <bac> rockstar and thumper thanks for bringing up those points. i'll take them back for discussion in the bigger group. [23:25] <thumper> mwhudson: I guess it depends on how much LP work you acdtually do [23:25] <bac> i need to run. ttyl. [23:25] <mwhudson> yeah [23:25] <bac> #endmeeting [23:25] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 17:25.
