16:29:58 <djmitche> #startmeeting weekly
16:29:58 <bb-supy> Meeting started Tue Sep 27 16:29:58 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is djmitche. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:29:58 <bb-supy> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:29:58 <bb-supy> The meeting name has been set to 'weekly'
16:30:18 * sa2ajj waves
16:30:18 <djmitche> #topic introduction
16:30:20 <djmitche> https://titanpad.com/ep/pad/view/buildbot-agenda/v3hIm0CMOM
16:30:26 * djmitche waves to sa2ajj -- who else is here?
16:30:38 <tomprince> -ish
16:30:51 * tardyp waves as well
16:31:21 <djmitche> hi all -- please tack items into AOB if you wish to discuss :)
16:31:31 <djmitche> #topic Development week in review
16:31:48 <bdbaddog> Here..
16:31:58 <bdbaddog> have client call at 12:45, but it'll be short.
16:32:19 <djmitche> hm, I can't load trac..
16:32:38 <djmitche> #info Bug 3612 - failing to send usage reports makes the master fail to start
16:33:11 <djmitche> that sounds like something straightforward to fix, since it was intended to not cause failure anyway?
16:33:26 <skelly> (I can load trac but it's very slow)
16:33:45 <djmitche> I can't even SSH
16:34:07 <skelly> same
16:34:09 <tardyp> trac was working 5 hours ago
16:34:09 <tardyp> re bug 3612: I missed that
16:34:09 <tardyp> my master managed to start when events.buildbot.net was down last weel
16:34:33 * sa2ajj . o O (loading...)
16:34:38 <tardyp> but there was a traceback in the log, so maybe  was confusing
16:34:43 <djmitche> well we can address teh downtime in a bit
16:35:25 <djmitche> tardyp: other highlights of the week?
16:36:28 <tardyp> I have fixed 3614, and another old one
16:36:45 <tardyp> but last week, I did n't manage to do much
16:36:46 <djmitche> awesome :)
16:37:12 <sa2ajj> for some reason -- no luck :/
16:37:21 <verm__> it's up now
16:37:22 <verm__> it's their networking
16:37:25 <tardyp> I'll look at the other bugs, and probably release rc4 this week
16:37:37 <djmitche> #info bug 3614 (responsive design not working) is fixed now
16:37:37 <djmitche> cool!
16:37:40 <verm__> look at all the timeouts here
16:37:44 <djmitche> verm__: thanks for looking! their = OSUOSL
16:37:57 <verm__> i think it's not the OSL some kind of big network flap happened
16:38:11 * sa2ajj does not seem to be able to change the agenda :/
16:38:16 <skelly> no longer just Krebs now?
16:38:32 <djmitche> sa2ajj: might the same effect
16:38:52 <djmitche> #info skelly also did some updates to the infra machines
16:39:00 <djmitche> ok, let's talk releases
16:39:05 <skelly> service3 is pretty much done
16:39:08 <djmitche> #topic Releases
16:39:11 <sa2ajj> anyway, i wonder if moving trac (tickets, wiki) to github is a feasible option
16:39:13 <skelly> the jails need to be updated still
16:39:14 <djmitche> awesome :)
16:39:18 <djmitche> #undo
16:39:18 <bb-supy> Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x80692b510>
16:39:28 <skelly> I rebuilt world and probably now kernel on vm1
16:39:29 <djmitche> #info service3 is almost done, but jails need to be updated
16:39:40 <sa2ajj> bb-supy: thanks for the informative message
16:39:40 <bb-supy> sa2ajj: Error: "thanks" is not a valid command.
16:39:45 * sa2ajj knows
16:39:46 <djmitche> hahaha
16:39:51 <skelly> so if anyone ( verm__ ??) wants to install and reboot and pray ;)
16:40:15 <djmitche> do you guys want to schedule a time (when the network is back up..) to work on that?
16:40:32 <djmitche> #info vm1 has a new kernel and needs a (careful) reboot
16:40:47 <verm__> skelly: we can do that tonight possibly
16:41:11 <verm__> i will be dismanteling my lab thursday morning for my move i won't have access to any computers for a day or two
16:41:18 <skelly> I haven't done any install* targets yet
16:41:23 <skelly> okay
16:41:39 <djmitche> cool!
16:41:51 <djmitche> well, not cool moving.. that's no fun
16:41:52 <skelly> /done
16:42:08 <verm__> yeah heh it's a lot of work
16:42:15 <djmitche> #agreed amar and skelly will work together to do that reboot
16:42:19 <djmitche> #topic Releases
16:42:46 <djmitche> #info tardyp planning an rc4 this week after a few other bugs are fixed
16:42:52 <djmitche> sa2ajj: updates on 0.8.x?
16:43:03 <sa2ajj> not yet, sorry :(
16:43:50 <djmitche> ok :)
16:44:11 <djmitche> are you hearing demand for those releases?  Are folks suffering on 0.8.12?
16:44:31 <djmitche> and is the release issue with 0.8.14 causing pain?
16:44:44 <skelly> haven't seen any questions about it in a few weeks
16:44:48 <skelly> it did pop up a few times
16:45:00 <djmitche> ok
16:45:10 <djmitche> #info no update on 0.8.x yet
16:45:18 <djmitche> #topic Infra downtime
16:46:27 <djmitche> #info it appears today's downtime was due to an OSUOSL-level issue, or perhaps something even bigger
16:46:44 <djmitche> #topic move tickets/wiki to github
16:46:48 <skelly> just got a global that freenode is under attack too
16:46:50 <djmitche> ^^ sa2ajj take it away
16:46:54 <djmitche> ahh
16:47:59 <sa2ajj> i've been going through a major update of 0.8.x local installation
16:48:00 <sa2ajj> there's a number of things that i should submit upstream (missing items for plugin classes)
16:48:00 <sa2ajj> and that goes to master first (as they can :))
16:49:09 <djmitche> ah, cool
16:49:22 <djmitche> I meant "take it away" regarding tickets/wiki on github :)
16:49:26 <skelly> oh, that reminds me
16:49:26 <tardyp> good
16:49:39 <skelly> there was something that came up about deprecated loggers in twisted 16.2+
16:50:12 <skelly> don't see anything filed for it
16:50:21 <sa2ajj> 0.8.14 was taken away
16:50:33 <sa2ajj> demand -- yes
16:51:05 <tomprince> skelly: The old logging system likely isn't going away anytime soon.
16:51:16 <tomprince> twisted itself isn't entirely ported over, even.
16:51:18 <djmitche> I feel like I'm in a time-warp :)
16:51:19 <sa2ajj> even thought it was explicitly stated: master first, eight next
16:51:49 * sa2ajj is [slowly] moving internal tools from py2 to py3
16:51:55 <djmitche> sa2ajj: I think it's OK to land fixes on eight
16:53:54 <djmitche> I think maybe we should cut this meeting short due to the freenode issues..
16:54:04 <skelly> seems to better now
16:54:12 <djmitche> ok
16:54:13 <skelly> haven't seen a disconnect in four minutes
16:54:24 <djmitche> sa2ajj: do you want to talk about github issues/tickets?
16:55:45 <sa2ajj> yes, it is OK, it's just not meeting people's expectations :/
16:56:01 <sa2ajj> yes, github thingie :)
16:56:54 <tardyp> what is the context?
16:57:30 * djmitche wondering the same
16:57:36 <sa2ajj> we have issue that are closed by PRs
16:57:57 <sa2ajj> and those PRs do not always refer properly to trac tickets
16:58:27 <sa2ajj> if we have issues on github, then we have good linkage
16:58:33 <sa2ajj> (that's first thing)
16:59:00 <sa2ajj> 2nd. we have lots of spam fighting engines in place for wiki updates
16:59:12 <tardyp> well, its the same, we have linkage only if people are actually refering to the issue they are fixing
16:59:53 <sa2ajj> true, however, not everybody puts a link to the fixed trac issue
17:00:10 <sa2ajj> they quite often put "Fixes #trac-ticket", which is not helpful
17:00:40 <tardyp> even my self, I put fixes when I can, but the ticket dont get closed
17:01:05 <skelly> it worked for a little while but broke again
17:01:06 <tardyp> which is not that annoying for me . ticket closing is more like  nice to have
17:01:08 <djmitche> #info pro: github PRs and trac tickets do not interlink well; using github only would take advantage of github's integration
17:01:35 <djmitche> #info pro: github takes care of fighting spam so we don't have to
17:02:01 <djmitche> I'll add, just about everyone has a github account, and many are reluctant to create a new account just to file or comment on a bug
17:02:02 * sa2ajj nods
17:02:21 <djmitche> #info pro: everyone has a github account, whereas many do not want to sign up for Trac for a small issue
17:02:32 <skelly> not using trac means a bit less effort needed for infra
17:02:35 <sa2ajj> our contributors have to have a github account
17:02:37 <tardyp> especially that the spam filter often prevent them to create accoun
17:02:50 <sa2ajj> and that as well
17:02:57 <djmitche> #info (regarding spam, this also prevents people from creating accounts quite frequently)
17:03:08 <djmitche> #info pro: less infra requirements if we're not running our own Trac
17:03:14 <djmitche> so what are the cons?
17:03:14 <tardyp> we have lots of wiki pages that depend on trac's integration between wiki and bugs
17:03:34 <sa2ajj> the cons are: different markup language
17:03:35 <tardyp> we have to figure out if it is possible to achieve the same
17:03:42 <djmitche> tardyp: I don't get the feeling many people look at those pages
17:03:49 <sa2ajj> the issues are not on github
17:04:01 <sa2ajj> (this can be fixed *easily*)
17:04:06 <tardyp> I can only think of gsoc page, indeed
17:04:11 <djmitche> #info con: different wiki markup language, so porting wiki pages would be tricky
17:04:25 <djmitche> sa2ajj: what could be fixed easily?
17:04:29 <tardyp> there is a wiki translation engine I think
17:04:32 <djmitche> just enabling issues on the repo?
17:04:35 <djmitche> oh cool
17:04:46 <sa2ajj> and we'd force our users to get github account (those who just report issues)
17:05:20 <sa2ajj> not just enabling issues, but transferring the existing one
17:05:22 <bdbaddog1> pandoc is your friend here.
17:05:25 <__aalvz> Hi guys. i Don't get how to pass properties via "sendchange" I'm trying "buildbot sendchange .... --property=test:something" and in the steps I have  "steps.ShellCommand(command=['echo', 'buildername:',util.Property('test')]"
17:05:34 <tardyp> bdbaddog1: yes, that's pandoc
17:05:39 <__aalvz> Is there something I'm doing wrong? =/
17:05:48 <djmitche> #info (although pandoc would help there)
17:05:55 <djmitche> sa2ajj: so, how would we transfer existing issues?
17:06:01 <tardyp> __aalvz: hi. we are in the middle of a meeting. please ask your question after
17:06:13 <__aalvz> sorry! thanks
17:06:15 <sa2ajj> i *think* there are tools. i can look into that.
17:06:40 <djmitche> sa2ajj: that's my major concern is that the history currently in trac be preserved and findable somehow
17:06:40 <tomprince> Moving issues would keep the existing issue numbers. Probably not a big deal, although any references in the code would probably want to be updated.
17:06:43 <sa2ajj> __aalvz: we are about to finish :)
17:06:52 <djmitche> tomprince: we have PR's with the same #'s as bugs
17:07:01 <djmitche> and github shares the namespace for PRs and issues
17:07:20 <tomprince> Gah. I meant wouldn't.
17:07:23 <bdbaddog1> https://github.com/mavam/trac-hub
17:07:29 <djmitche> ah, ok
17:07:46 <bdbaddog1> looks like trac -> github is a fairly common path.
17:07:54 <skelly> yeah, multiple tools
17:07:56 <bdbaddog1> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6671584/how-to-export-trac-to-github-issues
17:07:59 <djmitche> I think I'd be satisfied if we had a bunch of 302's from trac to buildbot, or if trac was "frozen" with pointers to github issues where necessary
17:08:21 <bdbaddog1> u still need to maintain trac then though..
17:08:27 <djmitche> verm__: ^^ what do you think?
17:08:41 <djmitche> bdbaddog1: yeah, although maybe it could be snapshotted with wget or something and just served as static content?
17:08:48 <tardyp> indeed, the namespace will change, so we need to update the doc
17:08:49 <skelly> it could be put in read-only first
17:09:01 <tardyp> we have plenty of links to trac in the doc
17:09:16 <djmitche> yes :)
17:10:09 <djmitche> so I'm hearing a lot in favor of this
17:10:16 <djmitche> I'm kind of surprised :)
17:10:41 <bdbaddog1> seems like it would unload the need for a bunch of infra support and you wouldn't lose much (if anything) in the process.
17:10:43 <skelly> but someone still needs to actually do all of this
17:10:44 <djmitche> proposal: those in favor here draft a plan for discussion next week
17:10:46 <djmitche> yeah
17:11:38 <djmitche> I figure drafting a plan is a good measurement of the desire to actually act :)
17:11:47 <bdbaddog1> sure..
17:12:26 <tardyp> +1
17:12:36 <djmitche> ok
17:12:38 <skelly> freenode failing so seems like a good time to wrap it up
17:12:56 <djmitche> #agreed interested parties will draft a plan, circulate on mailing list, and discuss in next week's meeting
17:12:57 <djmitche> indeed
17:13:03 <tardyp> lets close the meeting and wait freenode is back online...
17:13:03 <djmitche> also, taskcluster's broken so I should go
17:13:06 <djmitche> :)
17:13:12 <djmitche> #endmeeting