Weekly Meeting 2017 02 16

Agenda

• Weekly summary
• Opens

##Minutes

#ciao-project: weekly meeting

Meeting started by kristenc at 17:06:56 UTC. The full logs are available at ciao-project/2017/ciao-project.2017-02-16-17.06.log.html .

Meeting summary

• Role call (kristenc, 17:07:11)

• Weekly Summary (kristenc, 17:09:02)

• Opens (kristenc, 17:11:26)

• copyright notices (kristenc, 17:12:33)

  • ACTION: kristen to create bugscrubber role and rotation (kristenc, 17:24:32)

Meeting ended at 17:26:27 UTC.

Action Items

• kristen to create bugscrubber role and rotation

Action Items, by person

• UNASSIGNED
  • kristen to create bugscrubber role and rotation

People Present (lines said)

• kristenc (47)
• rbradford (9)
• markusry (6)
• mrkz (5)
• ciaomtgbot (3)
• albertom (3)
• tcpepper (2)
• btwarden (1)
• jvillalo (1)
• obedmr (1)

Generated by MeetBot_ 0.1.4

.. _MeetBot: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot

###Full IRC Log

17:06:56 <kristenc> #startmeeting weekly meeting
17:06:56 <ciaomtgbot> Meeting started Thu Feb 16 17:06:56 2017 UTC.  The chair is kristenc. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:06:56 <ciaomtgbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:06:56 <ciaomtgbot> The meeting name has been set to 'weekly_meeting'
17:07:05 <kristenc> #role call
17:07:11 <kristenc> #topic Role call
17:07:28 <kristenc> o/
17:07:31 <markusry> o/
17:08:09 <kristenc> our agenda this week is just the weekly summary, then opens.
17:08:25 <btwarden> o/
17:08:29 <tcpepper> o/
17:08:33 <jvillalo> o/
17:08:55 <obedmr> o/
17:09:02 <kristenc> #topic Weekly Summary
17:09:15 <kristenc> We have new gatekeepers this week, markusry & tcpepper.
17:09:27 <kristenc> Last week we we moved ciao a step closer to real usability by adding a change that allows users to create private workloads. It also make all admin created workloads public, allowing a cloud admin to share workload definitions.
17:09:43 <kristenc> We also merged the first part of our new quotas service code. The quotas service will provide a generic interface for handling quotas that all our ciao services can use and will allow a user to finally be able to set limits and quotas for tenant resource consumption. Since being able to meter service is one key part to providing useful cloud system software, completion of this feature gets ciao yet another step closer to real usability.
17:10:02 <kristenc> We moved closer to our goal of having a converged production and development install process by merging a change to install ciao by building from source, rather than from pre-built distro binaries. This is the initial step towards consolidation of production and development deployments under the same set of scripts. All deployment dependencies will be handled by ansible. There were also some minor bug fixes to ansible.
17:10:21 <kristenc> Activity on the repo ticked up this week, with the busiest week so far since the beginning of the year - although still not as active as we were at the end of the last sprint.
17:10:36 <kristenc> We have zero P1 bugs open.
17:10:36 <kristenc> (yay!)
17:10:55 <kristenc> that's it for the summary - any questions?
17:11:26 <kristenc> #topic Opens
17:11:35 <kristenc> Any opens from anyone?
17:12:22 <markusry> I had an outstanding question from last week about copyright notices
17:12:26 <kristenc> right!
17:12:33 <kristenc> #topic copyright notices
17:12:53 <kristenc> I followed up on your question last week about when we needed to change the year on the headers for our source code files.
17:12:59 <albertom> kristenc: is the workload api documented somewherE?
17:13:06 <kristenc> legally, the year actually isn't needed at all.
17:13:15 <albertom> sorry didnt notice its meeting time :)
17:13:21 <kristenc> albertom, swagger code for the ciao apis isn't there yet.
17:13:51 <kristenc> we lost our swagger owner, and I honestly don't know how to use swagger.
17:14:01 <mrkz> kristenc: does that mean that having (or not) bumping the year of the license is not relevant?
17:14:28 <albertom> cant stop thinking of https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/90/eb/6e/90eb6e586c48f4faafe5eecd34043aa3.jpg when i read that word
17:14:42 <kristenc> the year is only needed if you are like disney, and you have a copyright you are trying to hold onto after 80 years.
17:14:59 <kristenc> however, the common practice is to update new files only with the year.
17:15:08 <markusry> Okay,sounds good.
17:15:10 <mrkz> right, ah that was my next question
17:15:17 <markusry> Thanks for the clarification
17:15:18 <kristenc> if ciao is still around in a few years, then we can decide if it's warranted to update years.
17:15:21 <mrkz> so new source code files has current year
17:15:25 <kristenc> yes.
17:15:32 <mrkz> I'm OK with that
17:16:02 <tcpepper> if it's not required...why not just remove them all and not worry about it further?
17:16:23 <kristenc> just following standard practices for Intel here, that's why.
17:16:55 <kristenc> but we definitely don't have to worry about it.
17:17:09 <kristenc> were there any other opens?
17:17:36 <rbradford> kristenc, i wanted to ask how the non-team bugscrubbing was going?
17:17:38 <mrkz> I don't have any atm
17:18:08 <rbradford> kristenc, i'm worried that we might be missing labels on issues, in particular P values
17:18:49 <kristenc> rbradford, it's going ok. it has been hard to scrub lately since our issues are a mix of bugs and features. people often don't put priorities on their features, and I don't feel like I should prioritize that for them.
17:19:15 <kristenc> I try to search through the non-labelled ones to search for real bugs, but sometimes they aren't completely non labelled.
17:19:21 <kristenc> so the search doesn't catch them.
17:19:27 <rbradford> kristenc, so guidance is that feature owners should P there issues. sounds fair
17:19:36 <rbradford> what about bug label?
17:19:52 <kristenc> we have a bug label - nobody uses it.
17:20:02 <kristenc> it'd be nice if people did, that would help.
17:20:16 <rbradford> right, should we make sure every bug vs feature is labelled as such?
17:20:20 <kristenc> i don't think we can count on that.
17:20:29 <rbradford> i know
17:20:37 <kristenc> i label bugs as I find them.
17:20:40 <rbradford> so how do you find the issues you need to scrub?
17:21:01 <kristenc> i look at the new issues entered for a week and manually try to figure it out.
17:21:04 <rbradford> i'm worried this is unfair work on you.
17:21:39 <kristenc> well, I don't like bug scrubbing, but tbh we don't have any users and rarely get bug reports :).
17:21:44 <kristenc> for now - it's ok :)
17:21:44 <markusry> We could have assigned scrubbers that alternate with gatekeepers
17:22:16 <rbradford> maybe gatekeepers could look at the issues being opened during their week and set sensible labels
17:22:21 <kristenc> markusry, I like that idea - certainly that would scale better when we take over the world...
17:22:30 <markusry> Well gatekeepers have enough to do I think
17:23:42 <kristenc> so - I am sold on the idea of having a bug scrub rotation. if nobody objects, I'll take the action to create a schedule.
17:24:32 <kristenc> #action kristen to create bugscrubber role and rotation
17:24:53 <kristenc> I'll try to find a place to document that this is what we do.
17:25:06 <kristenc> just in case the curious want to know.
17:25:28 <kristenc> Are there any other opens?
17:26:23 <kristenc> ok, let's end this thing.