Skip to content

2013 09_Meeting_IRC_Log

William Desportes edited this page Apr 6, 2019 · 4 revisions

Marc9: Team meeting in five minutes Friberg: I wish I had a team :( ruleant: hi guys Marc9: Hi Dieter and team nijel: Hello everybody chanaka777: Hi team zixtor_: Hi all! * Marc9 wishes to play ping-ping with chanaka777 madhuracj: Hi everyone nijel: I guess we're complete? madhuracj: JM? ruleant: i don't see rouslan yet Marc9: Is Isaac still having problems? Marc9: mynetx is JM Marc9: We should get started with the ones who are there madhuracj: Sorry I didn't see him on the list at first madhuracj: Yes zixtor_: we should go ahead ruleant: todays agenda is on the wiki : Marc9: A volunteer to update the wiki team page after the meeting? nijel: I can do that Marc9: Ok. Marc9: 1. Conservancy nijel: Good news here :-). Everything should be settled down and Bradley should send official announcement today or tomorrow. Marc9: I guess that after the announcement we should add somewhere on the home page, that we are a Software Freedom Conservancy project nijel: We will then shutdown our PayPal account and migrate all pointers to it to conservancy one. nijel: Marc9: Yes, Bradley will write this to team list soon. nijel: Any other questions to this? Marc9: Look at the botttom of Marc9: We could use a similar mention ruleant: @Marc9 : I agree nijel: It will be pretty much on us what we will use (if you look at other member projects, many of them don't mention conservancy on main page). Marc9: Let's make the Conservancy happy ;) ibennetch: Hello, I'm back Marc9: Hi Isaac ibennetch: Sorry for the delay; freenode kept rejecting my mobile connection, but I'm here and stable. ruleant: hi isaac, we were just discussion the current state of our application with conservancy Marc9: Ready for 2. Server ? nijel: welcome Isaac nijel: Yes for me. ibennetch: I'm willing to serve as a backup on the infrastructure if you wish Marc9: 2. Server nijel: I think pretty much everything is written in the wiki agenda, so any opinions on preferred setup? Marc9: ibennetch, let's wait until item 3 ibennetch: Oh, I jumped up, sorry, ibennetch: nijel: what's your preference? nijel: for me it really does not matter much Marc9: I believe that a machine legally owned by the Conservancy would be better ibennetch: For me, options 1 and 2 both seem good. No need for nijel to run multiple servers if it's powerful enough to run all services, but I see some benefits of #2 in that it will be dedicated to PMA and that may make conservancy happier nijel: In all cases the server will have to be reinstalled because current setup is not maintainable in the long term (no longer supported kernel with vserver support). nijel: any other opinions? ruleant: how about backup access from other pma team members, will they work in all cases? Marc9: For example, the Conservancy could buy the half that was payed by Michal for the old server nijel: ruleant: yes, they will work ruleant: Marc9, I guess the old server has no value anymore (from an accounting point of view) ibennetch: Seems that may be best; then Conservancy would own the server and there are no concerns about who owns what. Provided the old server can handle our needs (Selenium, for instance) nijel: Marc9: I think this would make things just more complicated, I will happily donate that part (though we might have to buy new hard drives, it looks like current one is dying). nijel: ibennetch: I'm not really sure how much of selenium it could do, but we intend to run selenium tests on browserstack, at least this is current plan. Marc9: nijel, if you want to donate, thanks! But Conservancy should pay the hosting for this one ruleant: hosting is something else, there are regular bills from the hosting provider Marc9: To recap, it runs wiki, demo, a few lists, and ci ? nijel: currently I pay for hosting something like 45 EUR nijel: Marc9: see Marc9: plus DNS ruleant: per month? nijel: yes, per month nijel: DNS is done at Gandi Marc9: I imagine that translations would move to the new server, with the rest of Weblate ? ruleant: and it will run the error reporting server nijel: Marc9: translations can be split or I can continue to host them in similar way I do hosting for other free software, this can be discussed separately nijel: ruleant: indeed, I'm adding it to wiki Marc9: I would be happy to see the translation server become faster ;) Marc9: Do we have a consensus on the server? ibennetch: So we've eliminated the first option, I believe, as we want it to be owned by Conservancy. So that leaves the old server or a new hosting provider. I'm rather indifferent but tend to prefer keeping the "old" server. Marc9: Good for me ruleant: I agree madhuracj: Sounds good for me as well nijel: Okay, I will go into this direction, but it will take some time ruleant: from a practical point of view : the current server has to be reinstalled , so this will mean downtime at some point? nijel: ruleant: yes, some downtime will be necessary Marc9: ... plus a hard drive change Marc9: 3. Infrastructure ibennetch: This is fine; an outage is needed regardless :) * Marc9 would like to help on infrastructure nijel: ibennetch: now it's your turn :-) ibennetch: Okay, now I can say: if you'd like I'm happy to help out with infrastructure. ibennetch: Since Marc9 wishes to as well, I'm happy to stand aside and let him do it ruleant: our major services (website, github and downloads) will stay available, so it's not such a big deal (previous point) * Marc9 is fine with ibennetch helping on this too nijel: I think two guys doing backup is fine - you will get root account on the new server ruleant: i can help out, if necessary as well, I manage linux servers on a daily basis * Marc9 gives his place to ruleant :) nijel: okay, so ruleant and ibennetch are the winners :-) ibennetch: So ruleant and myself, then as backups? Probably ruleant as primary backup and myself as a backup-backup :) Marc9: 4. Issue trackers ibennetch: Good since I'm several timezones away from both of you as well Marc9: Moving items do not happen so frequently so I would prefer keeping two trackers Marc9: especially since there are so many tickets in both trackers ibennetch: I have no objection to merging, but don't feel strongly that it's needed. There are a lot of tickets, that is true chanaka777: I'm also prefer to keep them seperate Marc9: It's probably clearer for users too (being separate) ruleant: an upside of merging, is, that will only have to manage the different categories for one list nijel: for me it really does not matter, though most projects have just one tracker and it works fine for them madhuracj: I do not have a strong opinion either Marc9: nijel, are they on SF ? nijel: IMHO the border between bug and feature is always fuzzy zixtor_: I prefer merging and call it just issue-tracker (bugs and feature types) Marc9: not always fuzzy, maybe for 10% of the tickets chanaka777: Marc9 : agreed nijel: Marc9: indeed, I meant that the border is fuzzy, not that it is fuzzy decision for all tickets :-) ruleant: downside of merging : the id's will be changed (again), so we might loose the link with the old ID (before going to the new project system of SF) Marc9: With merging, we would rely on users choosing the correct tag or label or whatever (bug/feature) ? ruleant: yes, or we change the tag accordingly nijel: ruleant: that's true, that mapping would probably not survive... Marc9: nijel, do you have an example on SF of a merged tracker ? Marc9: 24 minutes till the end of meeting ... nijel: Marc9: not really, looking at it right now I see that most of the projects don't use bug tracking at at all :-) nijel: but actually good example could be allura (the platform running Marc9: Well, if we don't bother with a possible loss in the references, we can try a merge nijel: who is for merging? ruleant: can we do this ourselves, our would we need assistance from the SF support team? Marc9: I am in favor but not strongly ruleant: I mean : is there an option in the management interface to merge trackers? ruleant: I'm in favor of merging as well Marc9: It's probably a matter of creating the new tracker then moving the tickets nijel: ruleant: I have not seen it, so we will probably need assistance nijel: Marc9: I think it's easier to merge to one existing, eg. merge features to bug tracker and rename it... nijel: that way at least some IDs will stay same Marc9: ok nijel: I also prefer merging a bit Marc9: zixtor said he was in favor too Marc9: What would it be called? "Issues" ? chanaka777: In that case we can give more priority to bug tracker (save IDs) nijel: yes, I'd call that Issues Marc9: other opinions? madhuracj: I like the idea of merging. But I doubt loosing ID's would justify the benifits Marc9: madhuracj: just losing the features id madhuracj: Yes, may be that wouldn't be a big issue Marc9: ok, let's merge; nijel, do you want to work on this? nijel: Marc9: okay, I'll contact support about this Marc9: 5 - Version 4.1 roadmap Marc9: Releasing 4.1.0-alpha1 in early October, any objection? nijel: I think we're in good shape for that - this year GSoC changes were not that intrusive ruleant: what's the current status of merging GSoC 2013 projects? nijel: the unit testing projects are merged continuously, but they don't matter that much Marc9: For mine, all is merged ruleant: the client side for error reporting still has to be merged Marc9: ruleant: ETA? ibennetch-mobile: For me merging is ongoing as well, so no problems from Kasun's work ruleant: there is a pull request with all the changes mohamed made, but I didn't review/test it all yet. I don't know if Rouslan did nijel: ruleant: he did at least comment it Marc9: There is ongoing work to improve the navi panel (Atul, Kasun) so this would help being in better shape for 4.1 (and the next 4.0) Marc9: ruleant, I guess that we can release alpha1 without the error reporting stuff Marc9: Seven minutes ruleant: @nijel yes, but those are comments from 3 months ago, on commits from back then nijel: ruleant: okay, I did not notice they are that old :-) Marc9: do we have a decision here? nijel: anyway I think we can release alpha1 regardless error reporting is merged or not ruleant: but the client was worked on in the beginning of GSoC, so it's been some time since work was done on that part * Marc9 suggests to skip the mobile-readiness item, as mynetx is away Marc9: 4 minutes ruleant: @marc9 : yes, we wait with merging the client, but continue with alpha1 Emn1ty: what is the default username and password for phpmyadmin? Marc9: 7. Move to stackoverflow Marc9: Emn1ty, sorry we are in a meeting for a few minutes Emn1ty: no worries Marc9: I have found the move to stackoverflow very pleasant nijel: I think it works quite well also. madhuracj: Indeed zixtor: yeah, stackoverflow support is good Marc9: Of course, less than 15% are really phpMyAdmin questions ibennetch-mobile: So far so good for me as well. Seems to be everything we expected (easy to search, good google index, etc) ruleant: did anyone notice moderators shutting questions down? ;) nijel: Marc9: Do you think it's worse than on our forums? nijel: ...time is running out, so this is last topic Marc9: nijel, yes it's worse but we get better benefits too Marc9: ok team, I was pleased to meet you ibennetch-mobile: I try to remove tags where needed but bet you see the questions first ruleant: I sometimes see general SQL or MySQL questions being tagged with #phpmyadmin nijel: I'm also sometimes removing the tag :-) ruleant: bye marc Marc9: Emn1ty, see to get support Marc9: nijel, can we remove the tag ourselves? ruleant: so to conclude : moving to Stackoverflow for support was a good idea... nijel: Marc9: you can do that after having enough experience Marc9: nijel, ok, will try it ibennetch-mobile: Look for the Edit link under the question Marc9: Isaac, thanks, this will be useful * Marc9 is getting back to work, bye nijel: Okay, I think it's time to say good bye nijel: thanks everybody for attending ibennetch-mobile: Okay thanks to all nijel: we'll meet here in a month again :-) zixtor: thanks all, bye ruleant: bye guys, see you next month madhuracj: Bye everyone chanaka777: see you

Clone this wiki locally