launchpad development|
Size: 6626
Comment:
|
Size: 7694
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 13: | Line 13: |
| * Asia``Pac '''Tuesday 18-Nov-2008 0300 UTC - 0345 UTC''' * AMEU '''Wednesday 12-Nov-2008 1500 UTC - 1545 UTC''' |
* AMEU '''Wednesday 22-Apr-2009 1500 UTC - 1545 UTC''' * Asia``Pac '''Wednesday 22-Apr-2009 2230 UTC - 2315 UTC''' |
| Line 22: | Line 22: |
| * What support can beuno and mrevell offer during the review process? (mrevell) * Email cover letter to ml after pre-imp call? - barry * If there's time, the old boring script * Next meeting * Action items * Queue status * Mentoring update |
* Action items * Mentoring update * Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda) |
| Line 34: | Line 30: |
| * your name, date, reason * gmb, 2008-11-12, November Nexus @ Lexington |
* your name, date |
| Line 39: | Line 34: |
| * flacoste and foundations to look into techniques for eliminating back-patching of schema types (avoiding circular imports) * rockstar to take discussion of adding launchpadlib tests for exposed api to ml * abentley to investigate current code coverage tools for lp tests |
* allenap to look into storm/sqlobject result set compatibility * flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet |
| Line 45: | Line 39: |
| gary writes: * What is the goal (are the goals?) of our use of security proxies and the import nazi? My understanding is that they are "belt and suspenders" to try and keep us from revealing private information. * Do we still agree with those goals? * Do we feel that our use of security proxies helps us with these goals? * Do we feel that our use of the import nazi helps us with these goals? As we know, security is very hard, and trying to answer these questions well should not be done lightly or too quickly. I am hopeful that the small, specific question of whether we should import removeSecurityProxies in view code will fall out obviously, if not easily, from our answers to the discussion above. |
|
| Line 47: | Line 55: |
| * your topic, your name * don't return unwrapped objects from view methods, barry and gary ("the fightin' arries!") |
|
| Line 50: | Line 61: |
| * [[ReviewerMeeting20090415]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090408]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090318]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090311]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090304]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090225]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090218]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090211]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090204]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090128]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090121]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090114]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20090107]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20081217]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20081210]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20081209]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20081203]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20081126]] * [[ReviewerMeeting20081125]] |
Agenda of the next Launchpad review team meeting
Launchpad review team meetings are held on #launchpad-meeting on irc.freenode.net, and are chaired by BarryWarsaw for both the Asia/Pacific (AsiaPac) and Americas/EU (AMEU) time zone meetings. We use MootBot to record the meetings.
The purpose of the meetings is to coordinate Launchpad code reviews, and particularly to ensure that emerging issues with the review process are addressed - such as getting people to take on tough reviews, keeping the latency down, etc.. Blockage in reviews leads to blockage in Launchpad code landings.
The next Launchpad review team meeting will be held at this time:
AMEU Wednesday 22-Apr-2009 1500 UTC - 1545 UTC
AsiaPac Wednesday 22-Apr-2009 2230 UTC - 2315 UTC
You can add new items to the list of proposed items. If they don't make it onto this meetings agenda, they'll most likely get onto the next meeting's agenda instead.
Agenda
- Roll call
- Action items
- Mentoring update
- Peanut gallery (anything not on the agenda)
Apologies
Please include the date for which you will be unavailable.
- your name, date
Outstanding Actions
- allenap to look into storm/sqlobject result set compatibility
- flacoste to work on API reviewer cheat sheet
Notes
gary writes:
- What is the goal (are the goals?) of our use of security proxies and the import nazi? My understanding is that they are "belt and suspenders" to try and keep us from revealing private information.
- Do we still agree with those goals?
- Do we feel that our use of security proxies helps us with these goals?
- Do we feel that our use of the import nazi helps us with these goals?
As we know, security is very hard, and trying to answer these questions well should not be done lightly or too quickly.
I am hopeful that the small, specific question of whether we should import removeSecurityProxies in view code will fall out obviously, if not easily, from our answers to the discussion above.
Proposed items
- your topic, your name
- don't return unwrapped objects from view methods, barry and gary ("the fightin' arries!")
Rejected items
