#duraspace IRC Log


IRC Log for 2013-02-20

Timestamps are in GMT/BST.

[6:39] -brooks.freenode.net- *** Looking up your hostname...
[6:39] -brooks.freenode.net- *** Checking Ident
[6:39] -brooks.freenode.net- *** Found your hostname
[6:39] -brooks.freenode.net- *** No Ident response
[6:39] * DuraLogBot (~PircBot@atlas.duraspace.org) has joined #duraspace
[6:39] * Topic is '[Welcome to DuraSpace - This channel is logged - http://irclogs.duraspace.org/]'
[6:39] * Set by cwilper!ad579d86@gateway/web/freenode/ip. on Fri Oct 22 01:19:41 UTC 2010
[13:24] * mhwood (mwood@mhw.ulib.iupui.edu) has joined #duraspace
[18:17] * eddies (~eddies@unaffiliated/eddies) Quit (Quit: Leaving.)
[18:18] * eddies (~eddies@cm107.eta98.maxonline.com.sg) has joined #duraspace
[18:18] * eddies (~eddies@cm107.eta98.maxonline.com.sg) Quit (Changing host)
[18:18] * eddies (~eddies@unaffiliated/eddies) has joined #duraspace
[18:58] * Leo_ (8f6be18b@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #duraspace
[18:59] * Leo_ (8f6be18b@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has left #duraspace
[19:36] * helix84 (~a@ip4-95-82-147-170.cust.nbox.cz) has joined #duraspace
[19:45] * bram-atmire (~bram@94-225-36-191.access.telenet.be) has joined #duraspace
[19:48] <bram-atmire> hi
[19:48] <bram-atmire> just read the following "Tim will be on vacation next week (will be offline from Feb 20 - 25). Developers are still encouraged to meet on Weds, Feb 20, but there's no formal agenda as of yet."
[19:50] * hpottinger (~hpottinge@mu-162198.dhcp.missouri.edu) has joined #duraspace
[19:50] <mhwood> I'm here. It looks like others are arriving. Nobody has claimed the moderator's chair yet.
[19:53] <bram-atmire> Hi Mark
[19:53] <bram-atmire> Hi Hardy
[19:53] <mhwood> Hi, new committer, and welcome!
[19:54] <hpottinger> what mhwood said, welcome, bram-atmire
[19:54] <hpottinger> I'm way too distracted to sit in that chair :-)
[19:56] <bram-atmire> ty ty!
[20:00] <helix84> hello everyone
[20:00] <helix84> congrats, Bram!
[20:01] <bram-atmire> thanks Ivan
[20:01] <helix84> does anyone want to lead the discussion today?
[20:04] <mhwood> I can moderate. We have no agenda that I know of.
[20:05] <helix84> or shall we just do jira today?
[20:06] <mhwood> Does anyone have a topic to put forward? Otherwise JIRA sounds good.
[20:06] <hpottinger> Jira review sounds great
[20:07] * helix84 is keeping one eye on this channel
[20:08] <mhwood> Actually I did have a topic. In times past people would file JIRA issues and then, sometimes they just sat. So we started doing weekly issue reviews. Now things get as far as a pull request and then, often, they just sit. Do we need periodic PR reviews?
[20:09] <mhwood> JIRA issues also sometimes get stuck at "review needed".
[20:09] <mhwood> s/review needed/code review needed
[20:09] <kompewter> mhwood meant to say: JIRA issues also sometimes get stuck at "code review needed".
[20:10] <helix84> theoretically, PRs should have always an issue associated (unless it's something like a typo)
[20:10] <helix84> of course that just doesn't hold true
[20:11] <helix84> but the problem is we have two tools that are used to do a similar job
[20:11] <helix84> Jira issues and GitHub PRs
[20:11] <helix84> both can have discussion
[20:11] <helix84> and we can't just forbid discussion in Jira
[20:11] <helix84> s/Jira/GitHub/
[20:11] <kompewter> helix84 meant to say: and we can't just forbid discussion in GitHub
[20:12] <bram-atmire> hmm, tricky that a discussion can "fork off" like that
[20:12] <helix84> the other duplication here is that PRs can't be easily associated with an issue,
[20:13] <helix84> so we just paste the link in comments where it can get lost easily
[20:13] <helix84> so we started using the has-pull-request label
[20:13] <helix84> not ideal
[20:13] <hpottinger> it *is* tricky, and it would be nice if Jira could tie in to those discussions, and be more pull request-aware in general
[20:14] <helix84> well Jira just leaves it up to a plugin, and no GitHub-specific plugin exists (last time I checked)
[20:15] <mhwood> These are important considerations, but my concern is that the scheduler never runs to allocate resources to the task.
[20:15] <helix84> btw, for Jira plugin developers: https://marketplace.atlassian.com/codegeist
[20:15] <kompewter> [ Atlassian Codegeist Development Competition | Atlassian Marketplace ] - https://marketplace.atlassian.com/codegeist
[20:16] <hpottinger> a friend tells me his workplace is testing a Jira/Github plugin, and promises to report back if it's helpful
[20:16] <bram-atmire> Atlassian sees Github also as a competitor in a way, especially now they have their own git product, stash http://www.atlassian.com/software/stash/overview
[20:16] <kompewter> [ Enterprise Git Repository Management | Atlassian Stash ] - http://www.atlassian.com/software/stash/overview
[20:17] <bram-atmire> so I don't know whether atlassian will invest themselves in more github interaction
[20:17] <mhwood> So there's no point in waiting for Atlassian to provide a link.
[20:21] <helix84> so, practically speaking, PR review would be beneficial
[20:22] <mhwood> I think we need some periodic action to focus attention on waiting work and ask for reviews.
[20:22] <mhwood> "The task that belongs to anyone, belongs to no one."
[20:22] <helix84> well, 10 minutes in the weekly pre-meeting Jira cleanup should do
[20:23] <mhwood> That sounds good. How do others feel about it?
[20:24] <bram-atmire> sounds good - what's the normal thing that happens when the pull request is available? Waiting for a committer to pick it up and merge?
[20:25] <mhwood> By the rules, nontrivial PRs require two committer approvals.
[20:26] <helix84> mhwood: you mean two others than the one merging it? the 3x +1, none -1 rule?
[20:27] <mhwood> Depends on whether the submitter is a committer, I suppose. Does a committer-submitter count as one approval?
[20:27] <helix84> practically, I was often glad when I could get 1 other reviewer before I hit the button
[20:27] * helix84 ducks
[20:28] <mhwood> https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Guidelines+for+Committing
[20:28] <kompewter> [ Guidelines for Committing - DSpace - DuraSpace Wiki ] - https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Guidelines+for+Committing
[20:29] <bram-atmire> tnx
[20:29] <mhwood> Yes, that's what I mean. I think that sometimes we are all sitting back thinking, "someone else is more qualified to judge this -- I'll wait".
[20:29] <hpottinger> easy changes often just go on through (says "Max")
[20:30] <mhwood> OK, I don't know where I got the rule about two approvals. That page says "one other committer."
[20:31] <mhwood> Blah, I should read before writing. Bug fixes: one other. New features: three committers. I read that as three *other* committers.
[20:33] <helix84> ;)
[20:34] <helix84> so hardy and mark, are you going to any conferences this year? (I know about Bram)
[20:34] <mhwood> Yes, trivial stuff can just be merged by the submitter. "Trivial" is determined by the submitter.
[20:34] <mhwood> Before talking about conferences, did we have a consensus on whether to do more about moving blocked issues/PRs forward?
[20:36] <helix84> sorry about derailing, I felt the discussion was kinda dying down
[20:36] <mhwood> No problem, I just want to tie it up before moving on.
[20:37] <helix84> i assume by blocked you mean stalled, no attention
[20:37] <mhwood> It looks like there is interest from several of us and no strong objection.
[20:37] <helix84> so, make PR review part of pre-meeting Jira review?
[20:37] <mhwood> Yes, whoever is working the issue is waiting for review.
[20:38] <mhwood> Yes, brief PR review as part of JIRA session sounds good and seemed generally acceptable. Shall I drop a note on the committers list?
[20:39] <bram-atmire> sounds good
[20:40] <helix84> Please, do. I don't expect the PR without Jira issue backlog to grow too much. I usually try to let people know that a Jira issue is expected for PRs.
[20:40] <helix84> So it shouldn't take long to review
[20:40] <mhwood> I will do that.
[20:42] <mhwood> Done.
[20:43] * bram-atmire (~bram@94-225-36-191.access.telenet.be) Quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
[20:44] <mhwood> On to conferences? I'll be at OR13 if there are no big delays in getting a passport. That more than consumes my travel budget for the year, so other venues seem unlikely.
[20:45] <hpottinger> best I can do is "I think I'm going"
[20:48] <helix84> btw there's a thread about who's attending OR
[20:49] <mhwood> Other topics?
[20:54] <mhwood> Quiet in here....
[20:55] <helix84> [chirp] [chirp]
[20:55] <helix84> [tumble] [tumble]
[20:57] <hpottinger> sorry, distracted, boss is here talking about other stuff, and have a 3pm meeting coming up
[20:57] <mhwood> Understood. Shall we close the meeting?
[20:58] <hpottinger> gotta go, later folks
[20:58] * hpottinger (~hpottinge@mu-162198.dhcp.missouri.edu) has left #duraspace
[21:00] <mhwood> Seeing folks leaving, I'll declare the official meeting closed. I'm here for another hour for informal discussion, if any.
[21:29] * hpottinger (~hpottinge@mu-162198.dhcp.missouri.edu) has joined #duraspace
[21:35] * bram-atmire (~bram@94-225-36-191.access.telenet.be) has joined #duraspace
[21:37] <bram-atmire> my internet got disconnected
[21:37] <bram-atmire> but just saw in the logs that there was not much further discussion
[21:38] <bram-atmire> goodnight
[21:38] * bram-atmire (~bram@94-225-36-191.access.telenet.be) Quit (Client Quit)
[21:49] * blob_ (52292725@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #duraspace
[21:52] * hpottinger (~hpottinge@mu-162198.dhcp.missouri.edu) has left #duraspace
[21:53] * blob_ (52292725@gateway/web/freenode/ip. Quit (Client Quit)
[22:01] * mhwood (mwood@mhw.ulib.iupui.edu) Quit (Remote host closed the connection)
[22:09] * helix84 (~a@ip4-95-82-147-170.cust.nbox.cz) has left #duraspace

These logs were automatically created by DuraLogBot on irc.freenode.net using the Java IRC LogBot.