XSF Editor Team - 2014-03-11

  1. m&m has left

  2. Neustradamus has joined

  3. stpeter


  4. stpeter

    m&m let's discuss in the meeting tomorrow

  5. stpeter has left

  6. Kev has left

  7. jabberjocke has left

  8. Steffen Larsen has joined

  9. winfried has joined

  10. Lloyd has joined

  11. Steffen Larsen has left

  12. Steffen Larsen has joined

  13. Steffen Larsen has left

  14. Steffen Larsen has joined

  15. Steffen Larsen has left

  16. Steffen Larsen has joined

  17. Steffen Larsen has left

  18. Steffen Larsen has joined

  19. Steffen Larsen has left

  20. m&m has joined

  21. Steffen Larsen has joined

  22. Steffen Larsen has left

  23. Steffen Larsen has joined

  24. m&m

    I need to put together an agenda for today

  25. winfried

    some suggestions:

  26. winfried

    - post mortum

  27. m&m

    remember we only have 30 minutes!

  28. winfried

    - access

  29. m&m

    - BOSH

  30. winfried

    - dividing work

  31. winfried

    - how to communicate with the council

  32. winfried

    - structuring changelogs and tagging changes as major/minor

  33. winfried

    - XEPS we have to act on

  34. winfried

    - the next humorous xep

  35. Steffen Larsen


  36. m&m

    that is more like 120 minutes of stuff

  37. Steffen Larsen


  38. m&m

    we're not talking about it all

  39. Steffen Larsen

    its actually hard to divide work when we use email as our XEP queue

  40. Steffen Larsen

    unless we are talking together and splitting work in our muc here

  41. Lloyd

    Agree with Steffen Larsen

  42. Steffen Larsen

    well I am off.. talk to you in a couple of hours guys

  43. Steffen Larsen has left

  44. Kev

    Isn't it just a case of replying to an item on the list before you deal with it? It hardly affects me what tools you folks use, but still...mailing lists seem like they should work fine.

  45. stpeter has joined

  46. Steffen Larsen has joined

  47. m&m

    Lloyd: would you track down Ash for us, please?

  48. winfried

    I Have to excuse Stefan Strigler, he probably can't make it today

  49. Lloyd

    He;s around

  50. Steffen Larsen

    excused! :-)

  51. Lloyd

    just poked ash to join early

  52. Ash has joined

  53. Ash


  54. winfried


  55. m&m

    my clock sais we still about about two minutes

  56. m&m

    says even

  57. m&m

    clearly that is demonstrating the elite typing skills of an editor

  58. Lloyd


  59. Steffen Larsen


  60. Ash


  61. Steffen Larsen

    hello Ash and Winfried!

  62. winfried

    counting down for banging the gavel

  63. winfried

    hi steffen ;-)

  64. Steffen Larsen


  65. Steffen Larsen


  66. Steffen Larsen


  67. winfried


  68. m&m bangs gavel

  69. m&m

    alright, so the agenda for today

  70. m&m

    1) Hand-off Portmortem ------------------------------

  71. m&m

    I kept meaning to write this up while in London last week, but failed miserably

  72. stpeter

    hi :-)

  73. winfried

    how much is there to say?

  74. m&m

    XEP-readme was updated to reflect the latest

  75. Steffen Larsen

    yes it looks more modern now :-)

  76. m&m

    it still requires a good amount of manual steps

  77. m&m

    and special access

  78. m&m

    list administration for standards@

  79. stpeter


  80. m&m

    WordPress (until Simon and Laura replace the WP-based site with something static)

  81. m&m


  82. m&m


  83. Ash

    Not sure but I guess the new site will still be wordpress

  84. stpeter

    yeah, too many disparate tools

  85. m&m

    I think there's still a couple of bugs in the XEP-readme, and I'll submit a patch to address that

  86. Steffen Larsen

    yes a lot could be done automatically

  87. m&m

    the shell and python scripts have some documentation, which probably should go into the readme (or someone to update the scripts)

  88. Steffen Larsen

    but lets do that when we understand the process better

  89. m&m


  90. winfried


  91. m&m

    I started looking into what it would take to use git hooks

  92. winfried

    would love to be able to test / run all scripts and so locally

  93. m&m

    I think it's possible, but I have some concerns if there are non-Editor team people with push rights

  94. m&m


  95. Steffen Larsen

    how about also using merge request from gitorious?

  96. m&m

    I'm not a Git expert, but wouldn't that require us to have the canonical repo in gitorius?

  97. winfried

    Steffen: maybe better understand the current process before doing so

  98. Steffen Larsen


  99. m&m

    I think the current readme covers the steps fairly well now

  100. Steffen Larsen


  101. m&m

    the only bug I've found are references to a local git working copy that is not in the right place

  102. Steffen Larsen

    my biggest concern is not the process.. but more the queue and the many mails that confuses me..

  103. winfried

    the readme still needs to be build into html and updated on the site ;-)

  104. Ash

    Steffen: +1

  105. m&m

    Steffen Larsen: one thing at a time!

  106. Steffen Larsen

    thats done by a script right

  107. Steffen Larsen

    m&m: right

  108. m&m

    yes, XEP-readme is a XEP, so gen.py can do the right thing with it

  109. m&m

    I'm not sure there's much more to say about the postmortem

  110. m&m


  111. stpeter

    sounds about right to me

  112. winfried

    ok, that brings us to the access rights....

  113. stpeter

    I'd like to get more people working on things (see next topic) because different people will find different process bugs

  114. m&m

    2) Access Control ------------------------------ + Website + Git + Mailing lists

  115. m&m

    I lumped website together

  116. m&m

    that's really shell (for the static-ish side) and WP

  117. m&m

    to get access, you need to send Kev your SSH key

  118. m&m

    to get git and shell

  119. winfried


  120. Ash

    Kev had concerns with lots of people having shell access. Has that been resolved?

  121. m&m

    he's nervous about signing everyone up for that, though

  122. m&m

    no it has not

  123. Steffen Larsen


  124. Steffen Larsen

    so we will ship him our key?

  125. m&m

    Steffen Larsen: correct

  126. m&m

    I understand Kev's concerns about shell access

  127. winfried

    so there is no editor group with proper limits?

  128. m&m

    but, we need to be able to do the job

  129. m&m

    so unless we're going to do a potentially massive tooling effort right now ...

  130. m&m

    … the i-team is going to have to grant limited access

  131. m&m

    there are limits, though

  132. Steffen Larsen


  133. Lloyd

    if we implemented git hooks then shell access would become a moot point

  134. m&m

    we really just need to have /bin/bash as user "xsf"

  135. m&m

    Lloyd: most likely, yes

  136. m&m

    I'm not sure how much effort is required there

  137. Steffen Larsen

    for what? updating the local repo and generating the html ?

  138. m&m

    Steffen Larsen: yes

  139. Kev

    If you all want shell, can you let me know which commands you need to run as xsf, please?

  140. Kev

    Just granting lots of extra people access to bash doesn't sound ideal.

  141. Steffen Larsen

    ok. we might just be able to do that by cron? and let it check out the latest master from the repo?

  142. m&m

    Steffen Larsen: slow down a little (-:

  143. Steffen Larsen

    sorry.. just trying to make it easier by not having ssh access

  144. m&m

    if we're willing to limp along with a couple of people having shell...

  145. Lloyd

    I'd prefer not to have shell if possible, there should be tools/procedures in place to make things as simple as possible. (happy to have shell I'm talking the global "I")

  146. m&m

    … and others (possibly those same people) working on more automated tooling ...

  147. Lloyd

    m&m +1

  148. m&m

    … we could get by with a lot fewer shell rights

  149. Steffen Larsen


  150. winfried

    ok so we should divide efforts: tooling and current queue

  151. Lloyd


  152. m&m

    winfried: +1

  153. Steffen Larsen


  154. winfried


  155. winfried


  156. m&m

    the tooling group should be able to work with a local clone of git

  157. Ash

    In terms of tooling, we could make use of Atlassian's tools which are free for open source projects

  158. m&m

    Ash: you need to clear that with the i-team

  159. m&m

    they would be the ones to maintain the base software

  160. m&m

    installs, updates, runtime, etc

  161. Ash

    Their cloud service is free

  162. Steffen Larsen has left

  163. m&m

    if the Board is not comfortable moving git to a cloud service, I don't see this being acceptable either

  164. winfried

    guess some git-hooks being build on the current scripts should do?

  165. Ash

    Jira for ticket management, Bamboo for CI (to do the builds)

  166. m&m

    s/Board/XSF membership/

  167. Ash

    Fair enough. Just an idea :)

  168. m&m

    I do appreciate it

  169. stpeter

    Ash: we have previously used Atlassian tools so I think we could use them again if desired / needed

  170. Lloyd

    Not a fan of atlassian, but at least it would give us an easy integrated solution. However if we were going that far I'd prefer github + travis - with the added benefit of visibility :)

  171. m&m

    but I appreciate the arguments against better (-:

  172. stpeter

    Lloyd: +1 to transparency

  173. m&m

    as long as we can run it on athena, and the i-team is willing to deal with the software installs/updates

  174. m&m

    to me, scripts are one thing, but software packages are another

  175. stpeter


  176. winfried

    can you elaborate that a bit?

  177. m&m

    and I don't think it's appropriate for the editor team to maintain software packages unless we can isolate it to just the editor team function (write-wise)

  178. Lloyd

    I think maybe we're getting a little sidetracked with solutions rather than tasks.

  179. winfried


  180. m&m

    Lloyd: I think you're right (-:

  181. m&m

    anyway, let's figure out who wants to do what

  182. stpeter

    engineers love to talk about their tools :-)

  183. m&m

    who wants to look into improved automation?

  184. Ash


  185. Lloyd

    stpeter :)

  186. winfried


  187. Lloyd

    So how about those with current access work on current queue and others in tooling team (discuss via mailing list) as a first start and then anyone who wants to switch (or do both) please say

  188. Lloyd

    m&m I'll happily do that.

  189. m&m

    thanks Lloyd

  190. Lloyd

    m&m: you might not like my suggestions ;) I have strong opinions sometimes

  191. m&m

    Lloyd: I am bigger than you, though (-:

  192. Lloyd

    ..and across an ocean :P

  193. stpeter


  194. Kev

    When we've used Atlassian previously, it has been a services we've hosted, and the maintenance was not fun.

  195. m&m

    frankly, as long as it gets the job done and the maintenance is reasonably isolated, I'm open

  196. stpeter

    Kev: agreed

  197. m&m

    s/reasonably isolated/reasonable/

  198. m&m

    as for queue management, I've found email to be sufficient for small teams like this

  199. Kev

    I'm not saying 'iteam is not willing to do this', just noting that it's a significant time drain.

  200. stpeter

    email + this chatroom are fine by me

  201. stpeter

    but I'm old-fashioned

  202. winfried

    stpeter +1 (on both)

  203. m&m

    stpeter: apparently I am too

  204. Lloyd

    mostly works for me, if it doesn't I'm sure we'll shout.

  205. m&m

    just be good about checking your email d-:

  206. m&m looks at the agenda again

  207. m&m

    is there more about access we want to talk about?

  208. m&m

    mailing lists

  209. stpeter

    right, I sent mail about that

  210. m&m

    I think we should all have admin rights on at least editor@, and probably standards@ too

  211. stpeter

    I think it would spread the load

  212. m&m

    stpeter: that's why I have it in the agenda (-:

  213. stpeter

    (we need to get some greylisting and other spam-fighting things on atlas while we're at it)

  214. winfried

    wondering what will be coming my way, but lets hit it ;-)

  215. m&m

    winfried: you can help with tooling (-:

  216. m&m

    and/or list moderation

  217. m&m

    stpeter: does the editor team need to be involved with that anti-spam effort?

  218. winfried

    thats ok, was just wondering what list moderation would end me up with ;-)

  219. m&m

    winfried: so far, it's periodically checking the editor@ list and junking a bunch of emails

  220. m&m

    really not more than once a day

  221. stpeter

    m&m I don't think so

  222. winfried


  223. m&m

    standards@ has maybe one thing a week that needs attention

  224. m&m

    from what I've noticed

  225. m&m

    ok, we're behind schedule

  226. winfried


  227. m&m

    any more on access?

  228. winfried


  229. Lloyd


  230. Ash

    Don't think so

  231. m&m

    there is a wiki that Steffan got started, so we can capture some of the decisions made here on that page

  232. m&m

    moving on

  233. m&m

    3) Outstanding Work ------------------------------ + BOSH + Deferred XEPs + Website updates

  234. Ash

    + XEP-0060

  235. winfried

    BOSH: I send a patch to the editor@ fixing a minor type

  236. winfried


  237. m&m

    winfried: as soon as possible, please (-:

  238. m&m

    There is a list of XEP to defer

  239. winfried

    send it on feb 17th

  240. winfried

    will resend it...

  241. m&m

    oh, send not sent

  242. m&m


  243. m&m

    yes, please … it probably got lost in the shuffle from stpeter to !stpeter (-:

  244. stpeter


  245. winfried

    (and I don;t have rights) After that BOSH can be voted upon for final

  246. m&m

    stpeter: you have the list of XEPs to defer handy?

  247. stpeter

    m&m: yep, please hold

  248. m&m

    winfried: /nod

  249. m&m

    I suggest that we deal with deferment once a month

  250. Ash

    Sounds sensible

  251. m&m

    it means some Experimental XEPs will have extended times, but that seems fine to me

  252. winfried

    that is already current practice not?

  253. m&m

    winfried: the current practice is that stpeter gets to the deferred XEPs when he can (-:

  254. stpeter

    the only XEPs to be deferred that I see are 305, 316, and 317

  255. m&m

    we'll try to be a little more regular with it

  256. m&m

    stpeter: thanks

  257. m&m

    for website, I think the only thing left right now is automation, which we already discussed

  258. m&m

    all the other WP updates I had in my local .todo have been taken care of

  259. winfried

    for my picture: who has access and can work on the current queue right now?

  260. Lloyd

    not I

  261. m&m

    definitely myself and stpter

  262. Ash

    Nor me

  263. m&m

    I thought winfried had git access, but I guess that's not the case

  264. winfried


  265. m&m

    I think all of us should have git rights

  266. m&m

    then you can ping myself or stpeter for the stuff that requires shell access

  267. m&m

    at least until we get better automation going

  268. stpeter

    that seems fine for now

  269. stpeter


  270. m&m

    *hint hint Lloyd (-:

  271. Lloyd

    I will start looking into tooling this week and report back via email/next meeting

  272. m&m


  273. m&m

    Ash: you mentioned XEP-0060 … are the patches pending?

  274. Ash

    Not yet. I have started, but don't have much time.

  275. m&m

    ok, so you're working on patches, but don't have them yet

  276. Ash


  277. m&m

    so there's no action for the rest of the editor team (-:

  278. Ash

    So not to worry

  279. Ash


  280. m&m

    I think that covers #4

  281. m&m

    er #3

  282. m&m

    4) Future Work ------------------------------ + Automation options + Humorous XEP

  283. m&m

    we've already figured out automation

  284. Lloyd

    Ash, remind me to talk about patches dwd and I discussed last week

  285. m&m

    regarding a humorous XEP …

  286. Ash

    Lloyd: Will do

  287. m&m

    do we want to try and do one this year? or does someone already have a writeup ready for council sign-off?

  288. winfried

    well... I suggest we vote on a humorous xep before sxep-0001 is changed :-P

  289. m&m


  290. m&m

    we need an idea first

  291. stpeter

    I haven't done one of those in years

  292. stpeter

    they were fun, though

  293. winfried

    was thinking about ciricular approving bodies for approving humorous xeps

  294. stpeter

    in London we got to talking about the morse code transport binding - who needs WebSocket? ;-)

  295. m&m

    winfried: (-:

  296. m&m

    either of those are fine with me

  297. m&m

    I think I might have been the one to suggest the morse-code transport, too (-:

  298. m&m

    if something is to come from this body, I think we would need it ready before next Friday (03/21)

  299. m&m

    it's just under two weeks, but I know I don't have the time myself

  300. winfried

    was brainstorming once with steffen on xmpp over humanpowerd two wheeled pedal transport

  301. winfried

    but I want to have that one implemented before submitting ;-)

  302. m&m


  303. m&m

    remember — "XEP or it doesn't exist". Someone needs to write it before we can publish

  304. m&m

    any volunteers?

  305. stpeter

    when was the last humorous XEP published?

  306. m&m takes a look

  307. winfried

    to be honest, xmpp over morse code gives me a bit of a feeling: "been there before"

  308. stpeter


  309. stpeter


  310. m&m

    yes, XEP-0295

  311. winfried

    commentory on some current topic (like the json xep) is great

  312. m&m

    that or another security one

  313. winfried


  314. m&m

    the anti-privacy XEP

  315. stpeter

    the problem with humorous XEPs is that you need to be inspired to write one, and I guess I haven't felt inspired in that way since 2009 :(

  316. m&m

    stpeter: exactly

  317. m&m

    and I take the lack of a hand or "I'll do it" to mean we have no volunteers to write it

  318. winfried

    if someone volunteers with me, I want to write an anti-privacy xep

  319. winfried

    got some great ideas bubbling up

  320. m&m

    I don't have the time to do that

  321. stpeter

    the best humorous specs also have a germ of truth in them

  322. m&m

    I signed up for too much extra work last week (-:

  323. winfried

    neither have I ;-)

  324. stpeter

    m&m: you did!

  325. m&m

    ok, moving on

  326. m&m

    5) Next Meeting ------------------------------

  327. winfried

    yeah, ping me if anybody wants to be involved

  328. Ash

    Automated carbons to your local government agency, to save taxpayers money?

  329. Lloyd


  330. winfried

    yep, that kind of stuff@!

  331. m&m

    I think this meeting is useful

  332. m&m

    so we should keep doing it

  333. Ash


  334. m&m

    but do we need/want to do it weekly or bi-weekly?

  335. winfried


  336. stpeter

    shall we add it to the calendar?

  337. m&m

    monthly is too long

  338. winfried


  339. m&m

    stpeter: I think that makes sense

  340. Lloyd

    fortnightly seemed to make sense

  341. Ash


  342. Lloyd

    At least until processes/automation settles?

  343. Kev

    FWIW, I think very short meetings frequently make a lot of sense. But that's just me.

  344. m&m

    Lloyd: I was about to suggest weekly until we have automation (-:

  345. winfried

    I have to leave right now...

  346. m&m

    we're 17 minutes over

  347. winfried

    I will read it back in the logs, this time usally fits, otherwise best on monday or friday

  348. m&m

    is everyone ok with resuming next week?

  349. Lloyd

    m&m fine with that, as long as they aren't all 1hr long :)

  350. m&m

    no, please no!

  351. m&m

    30 minutes

  352. Ash


  353. m&m

    and I'll have a better agenda for next week, really (-:

  354. m&m

    ok, next meeting on 2014-03-18 @ 16:00 UTC

  355. stpeter

    yep, cut it off at 30 and we can delay until the next one

  356. m&m


  357. Lloyd

    oh, a pep node for "selfies"

  358. m&m

    ok, I say we're done

  359. m&m bangs gavel

  360. m&m

    thanks everyone

  361. Lloyd

    Cool see you all next week - and every working day until then :)

  362. stpeter

    Lloyd: :-)

  363. m&m puts Lloyd on next weeks agenda (-:

  364. Ash


  365. Lloyd

    You can discuss me all you want

  366. m&m


  367. m&m

    holy crap … I'm already 31 emails behind since I last checked

  368. stpeter

    BTW I just edited the postfix config a bit on atlas, but no promises that it will help

  369. m&m

    which was just before 16:00 UTC

  370. m&m

    stpeter: we'll see (-:

  371. m&m

    everyone, be sure to get Kev your info for git access

  372. Lloyd

    Kev how best to do this?

  373. Kev

    Send me it gpg signed using the key you had me sign at the summit? ;)

  374. m&m wanders off for coffee

  375. Steffen Larsen has joined

  376. Steffen Larsen has left

  377. Lloyd has left

  378. Steffen Larsen has joined

  379. Steffen Larsen has left

  380. winfried has left

  381. winfried has joined

  382. Ash has left

  383. m&m has left

  384. winfried has left