17:01:13 <jzb> #startmeeting
17:01:13 <cs-meeting> Meeting started Wed Oct 24 17:01:13 2012 UTC. The chair is jzb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:13 <cs-meeting> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:01:20 * ke4qqq shows up
17:01:42 <jzb> #chair chipc edison_cs iswc jlkinsel ke4qqq noe techpubs widodh
17:01:42 <cs-meeting> Current chairs: chipc edison_cs iswc jlkinsel jzb ke4qqq noe techpubs widodh
17:01:54 <jzb> bhaisaab: are you going to switch nicks again? 
17:02:44 <jzb> OK, let's get started - thanks everyone for showing up
17:02:54 <jzb> bhaisaab: do you have anything to report or discuss?
17:03:31 <jzb> OK, we'll move on
17:03:36 <jzb> chipc: anything to discuss or report?
17:03:44 <jzb> #topic chipc has the floor
17:03:54 <chipc> nope - vote's up - 48 hours have passed
17:04:10 <jzb> chipc: how's it looking?
17:04:10 <chipc> waiting for more votes + the nex 24 hours to pass
17:04:11 <noe> howdy
17:04:34 <chipc> we're all +1's
17:04:34 <chipc> that's all
17:04:34 <jlkinsel> i thought votes were 72hrs?
17:04:34 <noe> chipc: i have only one thing to say
17:04:34 <jzb> excellent
17:04:34 <widodh> chipc: I haven't got the time to test it yet
17:04:34 <chipc> noe: please!
17:04:41 <noe> chipc: i may not be able to vote within the 72 hours
17:05:14 <noe> chipc: the 72 hours are a minimum
17:05:14 <widodh> so I might note vote since I'm not going to be able to do it within 72 hours
17:05:19 <chipc> noe: indeed… understood
17:05:19 <noe> chipc: it is perfectly fine, and preferable, to wait until you, as the RM, are satisfied people have had enough time
17:05:20 <noe> chipc: sorry but its a busy week and im trying to slot my asf duties in
17:05:37 <chipc> ok - so noe, do you have a timeframe when you might be able to review it?
17:05:47 <noe> if its not tomorrow it will be the day after
17:05:54 * jzb refers folks to the release management page
17:05:57 <jzb> #link http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
17:06:27 <jzb> specifically: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-incubator-release-vote
17:06:29 <chipc> noe / widodh: your votes would be good… looking forward to you guys getting the time
17:06:42 <noe> chipc: feel free to cat hurd publicly on the vote thread
17:06:46 <widodh> chipc: Yes, I understand. I'm doing my best
17:06:52 <noe> chipc: CC people so the mail is flagged as important for them in their client
17:07:05 <chipc> ok
17:07:09 <noe> chipc: i have delayed counting votes and listed people who's vote i am explicitly looking for
17:07:32 <chipc> noe and widodh, will wait for you guys
17:07:34 <jzb> noe: whose votes are you specifically looking for?
17:07:44 <chipc> ke4qqq has prodded a couple of other mentors as well
17:07:50 <noe> noe: well, in the past, i want all the release mansgers to vote
17:07:50 * ke4qqq is specifically looking for mentor votes
17:07:52 <chipc> will be good to get them
17:07:55 <noe> noe: i would also want our pmc chair to vote
17:08:02 <noe> noe: and unless more than one person from the pmc has voted i would wait
17:08:08 <noe> erm why am i highlighting myself lol
17:08:09 <chipc> noe: we don't have a PMC chair, do we?
17:08:11 <noe> jzb for you ^
17:08:30 <noe> chipc: the point remains. who are the important people? identify them and bug them]
17:08:39 <noe> i would hope that more than one or two people from the ppmc vote
17:08:40 <chipc> noe: yeah, got the point
17:08:53 <chipc> I think we can move on - got it
17:08:57 <chipc> thanks noe!
17:08:59 <noe> the pmc is a crucial organisation for releases, that is the primary output of the project
17:09:03 <noe> no worries!
17:09:08 <jzb> chipc: thanks - and thanks for all the work on the release, too.
17:09:14 <noe> +1
17:09:31 <noe> ke4qqq: mentor votes would be good. chipc, perhaps bug brett specifically
17:09:32 <jzb> OK, let's move on. I'll assume that the bots don't have anything helpful to report.
17:09:40 <jzb> edison_cs: anything to discuss or report?
17:09:47 <jzb> #topic edison_cs has the floor
17:10:17 <edison_cs> no
17:10:23 <jzb> edison_cs: OK. Thanks!
17:10:34 <jzb> iswc: do you have anything to discuss or report?
17:11:38 <jzb> OK, we'll move on.
17:11:48 <jzb> jlkinsel: anything to discuss or report?
17:12:03 <jlkinsel> umm slowly making progress on cloudstack-planet
17:12:13 <jlkinsel> also, i've got a successful fortify source scan - no critical issues.
17:12:24 <jzb> jlkinsel: fortify?
17:12:46 <ke4qqq> jlkinsel: any idea on timeline for planet?
17:12:50 <jlkinsel> Fortify SCA is a static code analyzer which looks for software defects which may be security-related in nature
17:13:04 <jzb> ah, nifty
17:13:04 <jlkinsel> ke4qqq: no going to...enagge with infra again shortly
17:13:16 <jlkinsel> engage
17:13:39 <jzb> #action jlkinsel follow up with INFRA on getting a CloudStack planet set up.
17:13:55 * jzb reminds committers to add themselves to Apache Planet if they have not done so. And blog.
17:14:13 <widodh> I have a question regarding that
17:14:26 <widodh> can Apache Planet only pick up posts having a specific tag or category?
17:14:26 <jzb> widodh: OK, shoot
17:14:36 <jzb> widodh: depends on your blogging software
17:14:39 <jlkinsel> widodh: if you have an rss feed for that tag, yes
17:14:39 <widodh> Wordpress
17:14:40 <ke4qqq> widodh: yes - provided you push the right rss feed for that
17:14:47 <chipc> widodh: if you set up a tag that can have it's own RSS feed, yes
17:14:48 <jzb> you can create a feed specific to a tag/category, then yes.
17:14:58 * widodh is not so used to blogging
17:15:00 <widodh> But ok, cool! I'll add my blog
17:15:11 <jlkinsel> would there be value in us putting up a wiki page on how to do that?
17:15:20 <jzb> widodh: if you diff between dissociatedpress.net and what shows up on Apache Planet, you'll see I don't send anything but CloudStack posts to Planet.
17:15:28 <ke4qqq> jlkinsel: better to update the existing page to talk about that IMO
17:15:35 <jzb> which means the larger Apache world misses out on my cat pics, but such is life.
17:15:37 <widodh> jzb: Ok, I'll look into that
17:15:39 <jlkinsel> o - didn't know there was one. will look
17:15:42 <jlkinsel> anyways, that's it for me
17:16:00 <ke4qqq> jlkinsel: it's an a.o page not a cs-specific one
17:16:06 <jlkinsel> ah 'k
17:16:45 <jzb> ke4qqq: is there a wiki page?
17:16:48 <jzb> I know of this one: http://apache.org/dev/committer-blogs
17:16:54 <jzb> not sure I've seen a wiki page.
17:17:18 <ke4qqq> no it's no wiki - but it's cms, so any committer can make a change.
17:17:24 <ke4qqq> not
17:17:25 <jzb> gotcha
17:17:29 <jzb> #link http://apache.org/dev/committer-blogs
17:17:41 <jzb> jlkinsel: anything else?
17:18:15 * jzb forgot to update topic, dang it.
17:18:44 <jlkinsel> no sir I"m good
17:18:53 <jzb> jlkinsel: thanks!
17:18:59 <jzb> OK, moving on
17:19:06 <jzb> ke4qqq: anything to discuss or report?
17:19:12 <jzb> #topic ke4qqq has the floor
17:19:28 <ke4qqq> not much - we need voting
17:20:00 <ke4qqq> did want to discuss one topic
17:20:09 <jzb> ke4qqq: shoot
17:20:30 <ke4qqq> what is the plan wrt docs.cs.o - I saw it mentioned yesterday and I know the plan wrt cs.o, but not d.cs.o
17:21:09 <jzb> ke4qqq: any reason we can't point docs.cs.o to incubator.apache.org/cloudstack/docs?
17:21:35 <chipc> I thought that was the plan… 
17:21:47 <techpubs> I can't think of any reason why not since the community decides it's better to have an easier to maintain site that's owned by Apache
17:22:24 <ke4qqq> jzb: I know of no reason we can't.
17:22:32 <jzb> OK
17:22:35 <techpubs> We have not, I believe, duplicated all content that's on there (notably, the KB articles)
17:22:40 <ke4qqq> there is still a good bit of content on docs.cs.o that is valuable.
17:22:47 <techpubs> Does Apache want the KB articles, which are mostly troubleshooting?
17:23:33 <techpubs> And does ACS want some of the miscellaneous docs, like the adapter implementation guide and UI customization guide?
17:23:34 <ke4qqq> I personally like the idea of keeping them - just no cycles to move them personally
17:23:59 <jzb> so the only concerns I have here is 1) how do we migrate that content to Apache, and 2) who tends to them once they move to apache?
17:24:01 <ke4qqq> i have allocation implementation guide in docbook already, just not in the repo, but will address that post 4.0
17:24:30 <jzb> KB articles tend to age quickly
17:24:33 <ke4qqq> the problem is the new plugin stuff has invalidated alot of it.
17:24:34 <techpubs> The KB articles were always outside my dept...mostly done by support guys
17:24:57 <techpubs> ke4qqq: oh, that's good news that you have it in XML already. It will be easier to update it!
17:25:14 <techpubs> What about the UI Customization Guide?
17:25:35 <ke4qqq> techpubs: maybe, let me look
17:26:12 <techpubs> There are also a FAQ and Glossary
17:26:24 <jzb> ke4qqq: perhaps porting/moving the docs.cs.org content specifically should be a discussion?
17:26:33 <jzb> (on the ML, I mean)
17:26:59 <techpubs> Yes, it's starting to look like it.
17:27:06 <ke4qqq> indeed
17:27:16 <ke4qqq> i'll be happy to start that
17:27:27 <jzb> #action ke4qqq start ML discussion on migration of docs.cs.org
17:27:53 <jzb> ke4qqq: any other topics?
17:28:07 <ke4qqq> nope
17:28:21 <jzb> groovy - thanks!
17:28:33 <jzb> noe: anything to report or discuss?
17:28:38 <jzb> #topic noe has the floor
17:28:53 <noe> already discussed what i wanted to say
17:29:04 <jzb> noe: alrighty
17:29:07 <noe> please dont close the vote at 72 hours mechanically, and please heard those catz
17:29:16 <noe> also
17:29:17 <noe> wait
17:29:30 <noe> i would like to highlight the obvious drop in participation between round 1, 2, and three
17:29:42 <noe> now, some of this is the usual attrition you're likely to see
17:29:53 <noe> the other half may be due to people seeing the bar raised for voting (which is a good thing)
17:29:59 <noe> either way, something to be mindful of!
17:30:00 <chipc> noe: we know that lots of testing is going on right now
17:30:04 <noe> thats great!
17:30:15 <noe> thats it from me
17:30:21 <jzb> OK, thanks
17:30:31 <jzb> techpubs: anything to discuss or report?
17:30:37 <jzb> #topic techpubs has the floor
17:30:48 <techpubs> First off, thanks to everyone who is reviewing / testing documentation
17:30:53 <techpubs> Notably chipc!
17:31:10 <techpubs> We have lots of new doc bugs filed as a result - about 16 targeted to 4.0.0 release
17:31:12 <chipc> we can still fix stuff, in master - the site can be updated frequently!
17:31:12 <techpubs> About 32 in all
17:31:28 <techpubs> Yes! I fixed a couple yesterday myself.
17:31:55 <techpubs> My question is who is assigned to fix all the bugs. I will continue assigning to myself and fixing as many as I can.
17:32:13 <ke4qqq> people who are going to fix them should assign themselves
17:32:13 <jzb> techpubs: are you volunteering?
17:32:17 <chipc> we should probably coordinate a new docs build / publish to the site after we pass both the project and IPMC votes
17:32:29 <ke4qqq> otherwise they should remain unassigned
17:32:59 <techpubs> jzb: volunteering to fix as many as I can. Keep in mind some of these, or maybe most, will affect my (cough) paying job as well!
17:33:01 <jzb> speaking of docs bugs, I have a question
17:33:07 <techpubs> jzb: what's up?
17:33:16 <jzb> actually this is more for ke4qqq or chipc or general
17:33:28 <jzb> I assigned myself a couple of docs bugs + tried to resolve the issues
17:33:37 <jzb> but I left it to the person who opened the bug to official close it
17:33:47 <chipc> hmmm
17:33:49 <jzb> is that the right procedure, or should I go ahead and close out a bug if I feel it's fixed?
17:33:55 <chipc> we haven't been following that process with bugs really
17:34:03 <jzb> s/official/officially/g
17:34:03 <chipc> perhaps that's a question for list discussion
17:34:07 <chipc> do we want a process or not
17:34:16 <jzb> chipc: do we have a process now?
17:34:26 * ke4qqq thinks it' undefined atm
17:34:40 <jzb> for quality control purposes, I think it's probably not a good idea for the person fixing a bug to declare it closed.
17:34:43 <chipc> right - exactly
17:34:54 <jzb> OK, I'll bring it up on the list.
17:34:54 <chipc> but we haven't agreed on list to that
17:35:04 <ke4qqq> I think thats a good ideal, but not sure most folks will follow through
17:35:14 <ke4qqq> particularly if they are filing bugs initially
17:35:20 <widodh> One issue I see with that, if some random outsider reports it
17:35:26 <techpubs> We have added the "ready for review" status in the workflow
17:35:26 <widodh> and never comes back?
17:35:31 <widodh> Or never thinks about closing it
17:35:35 <jzb> widodh: hmm.
17:35:58 <jzb> that brings up another Q - bug triage
17:36:17 <jzb> we had a bug reported against 4.0.0 that was about it not supporting the latest release of XenServer
17:36:30 <jzb> I moved that one to a later release b/c the release came out after freeze
17:37:02 <jzb> I think we probably need to have a larger bugs discussion, perhaps?
17:37:26 <ke4qqq> perhaps so
17:37:56 <jzb> maybe everybody's comfortable with a loose "do what you think is right" scenario, but it couldn't hurt to discuss
17:37:59 <techpubs> There is no field in the bugbase where you can assign someone to review a doc, or test your code fix and verify it
17:38:00 <techpubs> Is there?
17:38:16 <jzb> techpubs: I think you'd just re-assign the bug
17:38:33 <techpubs> Yes but then it disappears from my query of things I'd like to track.
17:38:45 <jzb> techpubs: you can still watch a bug in Jira IIRC
17:38:49 <techpubs> I guess I could construct a better query
17:39:30 <jzb> OK, I'll take this as an action
17:39:39 <jzb> #action bring up bug procedure discussion on ML
17:39:45 <jzb> techpubs: anything else?
17:39:54 <techpubs> When it comes to things like reporting stats, like "how many bugs did x person test" or "...fix," it's easier to have separate fields. But I don't know if this project cares about stats like that.
17:40:08 <techpubs> OK. on-list discussion on bugs, +1
17:40:18 <ke4qqq> not like we can fire folks for poor performance
17:40:23 <techpubs> he he
17:40:50 <techpubs> So just to summarize, we have actions to look at docs.cloudstack.org and decide what more to bring over, and assign folks to do that
17:41:13 <jzb> techpubs: ask, not assign
17:41:27 <jzb> ke4qqq: took that action
17:41:32 <jzb> to bring up the discussion.
17:41:36 <techpubs> Sure, self-assign
17:41:53 <widodh> I would vote for keeping bugfixing loose now
17:41:59 <techpubs> Also...
17:42:00 <widodh> But that should be going on the ml
17:42:17 <jzb> widodh: yeah
17:42:31 <techpubs> jzb: There are no cat pictures on your blog. I am disappointed now.
17:43:11 <techpubs> So no, I have nothing more to report. We covered a lot of docs questions last time, and took the requisite actions in the intervening time. Cool.
17:43:20 <techpubs> me = Done
17:43:26 <edison_cs> techpubs: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-411
17:43:31 <edison_cs> new bug comming
17:43:44 <jzb> techpubs: thanks!
17:43:52 <jzb> OK, last but not least
17:43:58 <jzb> widodh: anything to discuss or report?
17:44:06 <widodh> jzb: Yes, 4
17:44:10 <widodh> I'll keep it short
17:44:11 <jzb> #topic width has the floor
17:44:20 * jzb stifles a snarky comment
17:44:36 <widodh> ke4qqq: Helped me with the RPM repo today. Is online and I'll add it to the docs tomorrow
17:44:48 <jzb> widodh: spiffy!
17:45:13 <widodh> I had the first Apache MeetUp last week in the Netherlands. Met two of our mentors, gave a short talk about CloudStack
17:45:20 <jzb> widodh: I've been wondering - did you ever look at the Open Build Service?
17:45:26 <widodh> The whole IaaS thing seemed to be new to them
17:45:28 <ke4qqq> mnour and?
17:45:37 <widodh> jzb: Yes, looked at it, but never went in deep enough
17:45:42 <widodh> ke4qqq: mnour and marcel
17:45:47 <widodh> Don't know Marcel's nick
17:46:23 <widodh> I got some good input on Maven and package building. Haven't got the time yet to process it. But I also asked about our current ways of doing releases and working with Maven
17:46:34 <widodh> They thought we were doing it right
17:46:53 <widodh> Got some feedback about artifact building, but it seems we are doing that in the maven-rpm repo just like they came up with
17:47:06 <widodh> So, was a good MeetUp
17:47:19 <widodh> Regarding the docs, one remark
17:47:32 <widodh> Which one are we using? The Install Guide or "All"?
17:47:41 <techpubs> Install Guide, I believe.
17:47:47 <widodh> Since All is broken since jzb did a commit this week (nofi!)
17:47:50 <ke4qqq> widodh: everything but all
17:48:03 <jzb> widodh: I didn't think we were using all
17:48:08 <widodh> Ah, ok I also changed the build_docs.sh tool
17:48:10 <ke4qqq> install admin devguide nicira releasenotes
17:48:15 <widodh> jzb: No problem, that's why I asked here
17:48:28 <techpubs> It's quite easy to break the -all build.
17:48:41 <widodh> techpubs: Agree
17:48:47 <widodh> That's why I did this commit: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=commitdiff;h=5e44e61127cf7b5ebeb7796d81942482977dafae
17:48:57 <widodh> Don't know if anybody uses that script at all?
17:49:08 <techpubs> I should say: challenging to keep all the files from cross-referencing each other in illegal ways, or including the same sections twice
17:49:31 <jzb> do we really need "all"?
17:49:35 <widodh> techpubs: No, I agree. But then I'll stay away from "all"
17:49:46 <widodh> Well, we might want to remove the config for now, to not confuse anybody
17:49:49 <techpubs> Well, I like to have "all" for certain purposes
17:50:45 <techpubs> It helps keep the doc repo clean. Once errors creep into the sub-files, it will become steadily harder to assemble new books
17:50:48 <techpubs> I think...
17:51:03 <jzb> ok
17:51:15 <jzb> widodh: I think that was 3/4?
17:51:35 <widodh> jzb: Indeed
17:51:41 <widodh> Last one, which will go onto the ML
17:51:47 <widodh> Next week I have an event
17:51:53 <widodh> Week after I have ApacheCon
17:51:59 <widodh> and then I'm heading to Bali for 4 weeks
17:52:13 <widodh> So expect low activity on my side until December 12
17:52:29 <jzb> nice (Bali)
17:52:31 <ke4qqq> you keep rubbing that in, reminding the rest of us that we are going to be working for that month
17:52:38 <ke4qqq>
17:52:41 <chipc> I already asked if I could come
17:52:44 <widodh> Indeed
17:52:45 <chipc>
17:52:54 <widodh> But so you know that I'm going to be idle for some time
17:53:01 <chipc> yup
17:53:10 <widodh> I'll post a OFFLINE message on the ml somewhere next week
17:53:16 <widodh> That's it
17:53:23 <widodh> Again, my vote for 4.0 will come this week
17:53:28 <jzb> widodh: OK, thanks!
17:53:40 <jzb> and I believe that's everybody - any last minute things?
17:53:44 <jlkinsel> yeah
17:53:45 <kdamage> sure
17:53:46 <jzb> are the IRC meetings still proving useful?
17:53:50 <jlkinsel> yes
17:53:57 <chipc> jzb: how is the cs.o conversion going?
17:54:02 <chipc> need help?
17:54:30 <jzb> chipc: there's not much left to convert. I'm also trying to implement Bootstrap
17:54:36 <jzb> so that the site doesn't look hideous
17:54:58 <chipc> gotcha
17:55:01 <chipc> ok - thanks
17:55:03 <jlkinsel> on the issue I was talking about in #cloudstack-dev earlier - the cloud.spec requiring openjdk 1.7 - not sure if that should be a deal breaker on the RC vote, but could we get that into the final release?
17:55:12 <jzb> but nothing to turn over - I'll file the INFRA req today to create the ghost.
17:55:25 <kdamage> @ke4qqq wiki themes?, @jlkinsel I have a new website up, how is the planet coming along?
17:55:36 <ke4qqq> kdamage: I asked, haen't gotten a response
17:55:45 * widodh has got to go, diner time!
17:55:47 <kdamage> cool, just doing weekly reminders
17:55:48 <jzb> s/ghost/vhost/
17:55:50 <jlkinsel> cya wido
17:56:00 <jzb> later widodh
17:56:06 <kdamage> cya
17:56:24 <jzb> jlkinsel: that might be an ML question
17:56:28 <jlkinsel> 'k
17:56:31 <chipc> yeah
17:56:59 <jzb> OK… any other topics?
17:56:59 <jlkinsel> kdamage: got through the legal hurdles, now waiting on infra again, I'm going to check in there later today.
17:57:06 <kdamage> thanks
17:57:30 <jzb> going once… twice...
17:57:32 <kdamage> I've started porting my content to my new site, so I can send it to you as RSS, lol
17:57:55 <jlkinsel> cool. add it to planet apache as well
17:58:10 <kdamage> can you show me how/where in PM?
17:58:18 <jlkinsel> sure
17:58:38 <techpubs> I have a little something on the topic of bugs
17:58:55 <chipc> jlkinsel / kdamage: planet apache is for committers only
17:59:02 <chipc> hence the desire for the cs planet
17:59:14 <jlkinsel> sorry thought kdamage was, my bad
17:59:42 <techpubs> ke4qqq: I think you're going to send a note to the ML about bugs, yes? Can you include something about porting bugs from the old bugbase?
18:00:02 <jzb> techpubs: that was me, actually
18:00:11 <techpubs> jzb: right, sorry
18:00:30 <kdamage> I am a non-code contributer it's cool
18:00:42 <chipc> techpubs: I thought it was decided on the ML that they wouldn't be ported en-mass
18:00:43 <jzb> IIRC we had some discussion about porting bugs, and I think there was a resolution on that
18:00:43 <techpubs> So I saw a note saying if we fix an old-bugbase bug in the Apache code base, we should port the bug into the Apache Jira and close it there
18:00:49 <techpubs> There are 1000s of old bugs, though
18:01:04 <techpubs> Oh I missed it then.
18:01:44 <techpubs> Still jzb, maybe re-iterate that resolution in your grand email on bugs. Ok, we are at an hour so I'm done now!
18:01:54 <jzb> OK
18:02:18 <jzb> thanks for the time, everyone - and all the work on 4.0.0-incubating. Get out there + test + vote!
18:02:25 <jzb> #endmeeting
Overview
Content Tools
Apps