Members present: jan____, benoitc, ryan_ramage, wendall911, chewbranca, tilgovi, nslater_, Wohali
---------------- Meeting summary: ---------------- 1. Preface 2. 1.3.0 release a. wohali to create a ./configure check for >=R16B (jan____, 2) b. benoitc and wendall911 concerned about test suite stability. (jan____, 2) c. Noah to abourt 1.3.0.rc.2 and wait for fixes to go int 1.3.x (jan____, 2) d. EVERYBODY TEST RC.3 when it comes out (jan____, 2) e. or else... (nslater_, 2) 3. 1.2.2 a. someone explain xylophone (Wohali, 3) b. ship 1.2.2 (jan____, 3) 4. spidermonkey 17 a. mozilla started the release of https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/SpiderMonkey/17 (jan____, 4) b. benoitc & tilgovi to look into SM 17 (seventeen) compat and deprecation of support for SM 1.7 (thatâs one dot seven) (jan____, 4) c. deprecate SM 1.7 via ./configure (jan____, 4) d. Jan opens a beer (jan____, 4) 5. Google Summer of Code (GSoC) a. Yay GSoC. filed a bunch of issues, waiting for process now. dch in charge. (jan____, 5) b. some gsoc tagged issues need to be deduplicated against ongoing efforts (rcouch merge etc) (jan____, 5) 6. Any Other Business a. wendall911 tor each out to dev@ for help with test suite issues (jan____, 6) -------- Actions: -------- - wohali to create a ./configure check for >=R16B (jan____, 20:18:50) - Noah to abourt 1.3.0.rc.2 and wait for fixes to go int 1.3.x (jan____, 20:26:11) - EVERYBODY TEST RC.3 when it comes out (jan____, 20:26:18) - ship 1.2.2 (jan____, 20:32:56) IRC log follows: # 1. Preface # 20:09:06 [tilgovi]: oh, hey 20:09:27 [jan____]: letâs roll :) 20:09:27 [chewbranca]: jan____: not that I know of, been caught up on other things since last week 20:09:41 [jan____]: chewbranca: aye # 2. 1.3.0 release # 20:09:56 [nslater_]: i am still poorly. please consider me available for answering direct questions only 20:10:26 [jan____]: nslater_: ack 20:10:42 [Wohali]: woo spidermonkey 17 20:11:11 [tilgovi]: "JavaScript 17 includes significant updates to language features, yo." 20:11:20 [tilgovi]: Thanks, Mozilla :-P. (Source: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/SpiderMonkey/17) 20:11:27 [jan____]: 1.3.0: we are currently in rc2 and consider pulling it due to a test that fails for many testers, but doesnt constitute a bug in CouchDB itself. This one could be annoying for downstream packagers and from source/make check users though 20:11:27 [benoitc]: mmm 20:11:35 [jan____]: the fix is increasing a timeout, that is all. 20:11:42 [jan____]: the question is whether to cancel rc.2 and rol rc.3 with the fix 20:11:50 [jan____]: tilgovi: on topic pls 20:12:00 [benoitc]: so for some reason wouldn't write to this chan 20:12:15 [benoitc]: or read. what are the topics? 20:12:37 [tilgovi]: 1.3.0, 1.2.2, release testing, GSoC, spidermonkey 17.... 20:12:42 [jan____]: I would like to hear from Wohali / rnewson / wendall911 (he already posted on dev@) about this 20:12:57 [ryan_ramage]: jan____: well I think to send a good build message to the community a rc3 would be good (and easier now I hope) 20:12:58 [jan____]: benoitc: [21:07:26] <jan____> 1.3.0 release, 1.2.2 release, release testing in general, sm17, gsoc 20:13:12 [tilgovi]: I think what Benoit said about noting the erlang incompatibility is a good idea, too 20:13:13 [benoitc]: ok 20:13:35 [Wohali]: cancel and do rc3, and note we require erlang >= r14b01 < r16 20:13:35 [benoitc]: there is a patch oin master 20:13:50 [wendall911]: I'm here now. I am for aborting if this is something that packagers are running into. Personally, this is not an issue with my package building. I'm having serious issues with the javascript test runner. 20:13:51 [tilgovi]: but, if I can get a clarification on release procedure, does the first RC to pass a vote *become* the final release, or is there another vote for 1.3.0 after the release candidates? 20:13:59 [jan____]: tilgovi: we werent gonna not note it, just not in NEWS/CHANGES, but it doesnât hurt fixing that, when we roll anew 20:14:04 [benoitc]: for some reason i coulcn't apply it easily this tmorning on 1.3.x and didn't have time time to investigate 20:14:06 [Wohali]: recently went through chef hell on something similar, they ended up specifying a MAXIMUM version for a dependency, seems fair to me. 20:14:18 [jan____]: wendall911: notethat your errors are unrelated to this particular issue 20:14:20 [wendall911]: tilgovi: the rc becomes the release if +1 20:14:26 [jan____]: tilgovi: the rc *becomes* the final release 20:14:33 [Wohali]: in semver terms, a major release increase implies a possible abi breakage, which effectively we're at right now. 20:14:35 [wendall911]: jan____: noted 20:14:36 [Wohali]: and yes bump to fix the timeout 20:14:48 [Wohali]: because CI matters. 20:15:13 [jan____]: Wohali: that means we want a ./configure level check for >=R16B as well 20:15:26 [Wohali]: imo yes 20:15:27 [benoitc]: i'm confused about the thing that people can vote +1 or a release while using patched tests on their own 20:15:35 [jan____]: Wohali: can you provide one? 20:15:36 [benoitc]: imo we should clarify the release procedure as well 20:15:48 [jan____]: benoitc: you can vote whatever on whatever 20:15:56 [jan____]: it is pretty clear 20:15:57 [benoitc]: for me make check should always work 20:16:03 [jan____]: you can vote even if tests fail 20:16:14 [jan____]: or iv you have to jump though a hoop to make it pass for your configuration 20:16:18 [benoitc]: yeah and i'm confused how you can vote +1 on a broken release 20:16:20 [jan____]: I think that is snesible 20:16:34 [benoitc]: when it's supposed to be testing sign and make check 20:16:41 [jan____]: benoitc: in an idael world yes, but are you gonna sit down the three weeks straigt to make the test suite work perfect everywhere? 20:16:49 [jan____]: a failing test does not constitute a failing release 20:16:56 [jan____]: *broken 20:16:56 [benoitc]: jan____: i make sure make check run 20:17:03 [Wohali]: jan____: Sure, I can do that. 20:17:03 [benoitc]: even if it's about disabling tests 20:17:11 [wendall911]: benoitc: I do the same, and that's been my issue also. 20:17:11 [jan____]: also, this is a derail at this point, can we focus on what we want to do for rc.3? 20:17:41 [jan____]: Wohali: any time soon, too? no rush, just want to get this over with quick 20:17:43 [Wohali]: can do it in the next 24h 20:17:48 [Wohali]: will take offline a concern i have with you 20:17:50 [Wohali]: not for this group 20:18:11 [nslater_]: for clarification: you can vote +1 based on any criteria you choose. shipping with broken tests or even broken software is fine from a policy stand point. the only thing you can't do is ship anything that is not compatible with the apache license 20:18:18 [jan____]: we might want to tie in the general lack of tests/votes in the Release process. what can we do to improve that, so we donât need an rc.4? 20:18:26 [jan____]: Wohali: ack 20:18:33 [jan____]: #actin wohali to create a ./configure check for >=R16B 20:18:50 [jan____]: #action wohali to create a ./configure check for >=R16B 20:19:11 [jan____]: #info benoitc and wendall911 concerned about test suite stability. 20:19:20 [nslater_]: i am happy to do rc.3 if people agree we need to abort 20:19:33 [nslater_]: i am just waiting for that message. 2 x -1 votes are pretty loud. a third would convince me 20:19:48 [jan____]: nslater_: that seems to be the consenus for now 20:20:03 [nslater_]: okay then i have a request: 20:20:11 [nslater_]: please can we test the release thoroughly *now* so we dont end up doing an rc.4 20:20:28 [nslater_]: anyone who's in this channel who hasn't tested/voted - please do so! 20:20:41 [jan____]: remsg: we might want to tie in the general lack of tests/votes in the Release process. what can we do to improve that, so we donât need an rc.4? 20:20:48 [nslater_]: aborting constantly because the testing is so fragmented wastes everybody's time 20:20:48 [Wohali]: nslater_: consider this my official -1, i can email to dev@ if you need 20:21:12 [nslater_]: jan____: saw that - i dont think this is a process thing. no way you can solve engagement issues with process 20:21:33 [nslater_]: jan____: we have what 14 committers at this stage? like 20% of them voted 20:21:48 [jan____]: nslater_: I am not asking for process 20:21:57 [nslater_]: okay 20:22:03 [chewbranca]: I went and looked at rc.2 thread last night, and given the number of -1s, I assumed it would be aborted 20:22:11 [nslater_]: bare minimum activity from a pmc member should be testing releases imo 20:22:26 [chewbranca]: I might have time to test tomorrow night, at the very least I'll have more time friday night and over the weekend 20:22:33 [nslater_]: if they can't do that, i dont see what business they have being on the pmc ;) 20:22:56 [nslater_]: (modulo time/family/personal constraints. obviously. i am being hyperbolic. but you get my point) 20:22:58 [jan____]: nslater_: pmc issues are out of scope for this meeting 20:23:03 [Wohali]: i will remind folks it's easter weekend 20:23:11 [nslater_]: Wohali: it wasn't 1 week ago ;) 20:23:13 [Wohali]: public holidays for a lot of people (in commonwealth nations) 20:23:18 [Wohali]: fair. 20:23:18 [jan____]: nslater_: (also see pm) 20:23:33 [nslater_]: not sure why pmc activities are out of scope 20:23:41 [tilgovi]: I'll run it, but probably -0 since I'd prefer we raise that timeout and add a configure check for R16 20:23:48 [tilgovi]: I did run the last rc pretty thoroughly 20:23:56 [jan____]: nslater_: meta, xylophone whatever, lets move on. 20:24:03 [nslater_]: what is this xylophone reference? second time i see it now 20:24:11 [benoitc]: tilgovi: you also have fraction in votes 20:24:14 [nslater_]: sure, move on. i am just highlighting an engagement issue we have 20:24:19 [nslater_]: not sure how to solve it without cajoling people 20:24:41 [jan____]: tilgovi: did you tell dev@ (currently not seeing you there, might be me) 20:24:48 [wendall911]: On a positive note, looks like 1.2.2 is gtg :) 20:24:48 [tilgovi]: nope, I will do so after I do the testing 20:24:56 [tilgovi]: sorry for confusion 20:25:13 [nslater_]: wendall911: yes i am good to call that as soon as i dont feel super-poorly 20:25:26 [nslater_]: thanks everyone for pitching in on that one! 20:25:26 [jan____]: tilgovi: thanks 20:26:11 [jan____]: #action Noah to abourt 1.3.0.rc.2 and wait for fixes to go int 1.3.x 20:26:18 [jan____]: #action EVERYBODY TEST RC.3 when it comes out 20:26:48 [nslater_]: #info or else... 20:27:12 [jan____]: ok # 3. 1.2.2 # 20:27:26 [jan____]: SHIP IT 20:27:41 [nslater_]: yep 20:27:56 [Wohali]: #info someone explain xylophone 20:28:20 [nslater_]: apparently it means "time is up. let's move on." 20:29:41 [Wohali]: ship it 20:32:48 [tilgovi]: did I get disconnected or did this just die somehow? 20:32:56 [tilgovi]: what's next? 20:32:56 [jan____]: #action ship 1.2.2 # 4. spidermonkey 17 # 20:33:03 [tilgovi]: good 20:33:11 [tilgovi]: so, I just glanced at the SM 17 docs 20:33:18 [jan____]: #info mozilla started the release of https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/SpiderMonkey/17 20:33:26 [jan____]: we need to asses what that means for us 20:33:26 [jan____]: s 20:33:43 [tilgovi]: I will say for sure that if I do any work to make it happen I am cutting SM 1.7 support 20:33:56 [tilgovi]: that's 1 DOT 7 not 17 20:34:11 [benoitc]: tilgovi: apaprently there are 1/2 lines to change in our code 20:34:14 [jan____]: tilgovi: just out of principle? 20:34:18 [tilgovi]: yeah 20:34:26 [benoitc]: or at least in the only sm185 version of rcouch 20:34:33 [tilgovi]: okay 20:34:33 [jan____]: tilgovi: I thoguht the sm/abstraction was fairly self contained? 20:34:36 [tilgovi]: if it's only 1/2 lines changed from 1.8.5 20:34:41 [benoitc]: +1 for removing 1.7 20:34:48 [jan____]: cool 20:34:48 [tilgovi]: then we can probably support it all still 20:34:56 [tilgovi]: but it does feel a bit ridiculous 20:34:56 [benoitc]: i will make a full test tonight 20:35:03 [jan____]: we can deprecate it at least 20:35:11 [tilgovi]: ahh! that's the way to do it! 20:35:11 [benoitc]: i've prepared a build but was qide tracked by a customer 20:35:18 [wendall911]: tilgovi: we'll need to have an "official" 1.8.5 package for RHEL, etc. and some older Debian versions, as 1.7 is default there. 20:35:18 [tilgovi]: deprecate with a configure warning, remove in the next version 20:35:43 [jan____]: #info benoitc & tilgovi to look into SM 17 (seventeen) compat and deprecation of support for SM 1.7 (thatâs one dot seven) 20:36:03 [wendall911]: tilgovi: Wohali has one she supports for cloudant, and I have a working spec on my github for RHEL 20:36:11 [jan____]: #info deprecate SM 1.7 via ./configure 20:36:18 [tilgovi]: I had a working spec for 1.8.5 somewhere once, too 20:36:26 [jan____]: #info Jan opens a beer 20:36:26 [tilgovi]: we'll talk it on the list 20:36:33 [tilgovi]: or wherever 20:36:33 [tilgovi]: out of meeting 20:36:41 [jan____]: aye 20:36:48 [jan____]: eot? 20:36:50 [tilgovi]: i think so # 5. Google Summer of Code (GSoC) # 20:38:11 [jan____]: I am behind the email thread, but I saw dch and others came with a great list of things, that got added to JIRA 20:38:18 [jan____]: and I am told we met any ASF/GSoC orga daedlines 20:38:26 [jan____]: *deadlines 20:38:33 [jan____]: to which I say: Fuck Yeah Go Team! <3 20:39:04 [benoitc]: i would just remove the already wip from the jora tickets tagged gsoc 20:39:18 [jan____]: benoitc: do it :) 20:40:13 [benoitc]: ok 20:40:20 [jan____]: #info Yay GSoC. filed a bunch of issues, waiting for process now. dch in charge. 20:40:20 [wendall911]: It makes sense to have tickets for everything, but not having stuff already going in with other code (rcouch, bigcouch) doesn't make sense for gsoc 20:40:50 [jan____]: #info some gsoc tagged issues need to be deduplicated against ongoing efforts (rcouch merge etc) 20:40:59 [wendall911]: There was a good discussion around partial updates. tilgovi suggested I make a thread about OT. Any interest there for gsoc? 20:41:26 [tilgovi]: I support it! 20:41:27 [wendall911]: OT meaning operational tranformation as a potential for partial updates 20:41:33 [Wohali]: ah 20:41:41 [benoitc]: wendall911: doubt anything can be achieved on that parts until the some internals are rewritten though 20:41:41 [jan____]: wendall911: it is not always clear what comes and doesnât with BC and rcouch, especially for the folks who are not into these projects. We can always kill JIRAs, so I am happy we got it all in for now 20:41:48 [Wohali]: ah, not off topic 20:41:48 [jan____]: "about OT"? 20:41:48 [Wohali]: was confused 20:41:50 [jan____]: ah 20:41:58 [wendall911]: benoitc: agreed, and we had this discussion some months back as well 20:42:03 [benoitc]: imo we should only target things that can be done and help the prokect in short terms 20:42:11 [benoitc]: project 20:42:26 [jan____]: I have a branch in my head that implements JSONPointer & JSON Patch as regular ops for CouchDB 20:42:26 [wendall911]: ok, that was my thought as well 20:42:34 [jan____]: happy to have anyone beating me to it, but thatâs the sane way forward 20:43:19 [jan____]: ok 20:43:26 [jan____]: EOT? 20:43:41 [benoitc]: jan____: also https://github.com/lechat-im/jsonq 20:43:41 [Wohali]: jan____: you mean HTTP PATCH? 20:43:56 [jan____]: whatever mnot made 20:44:18 [wendall911]: So, gsoc stuff should be obtainable implementations, not end up with a bunch of partial code? 20:45:03 [jan____]: yea 20:45:19 [wendall911]: +1 20:45:33 [jan____]: EOT? 20:46:19 [wendall911]: +1 # 6. Any Other Business # 20:46:35 [jan____]: *sits back* 20:47:05 [tilgovi]: none from me 20:47:12 [wendall911]: I need some help troubleshooting some issues with the test suite. I'm digging in, but am not seeing *why* some things are happening. I think a couple may be erlang issues. 20:47:26 [wendall911]: What I'd like to know is where best to ask. dev@ 20:47:26 [benoitc]: """ 20:47:27 [benoitc]: Keep in mind that your ideas list should be a starting point for student proposals; we've heard from past mentoring organization participants that some of their best student projects are those that greatly expanded on a proposed idea or were blue-sky proposals not mentioned on the ideas list at all. A link to a bug tracker for your open source organization is NOT an ideas list. 20:47:34 [benoitc]: """ 20:47:42 [jan____]: wendall911: shoot any requests for help on dev@, Iâm happy to pitch in where I can 20:47:56 [wendall911]: jan____: ok, will do 20:48:11 [benoitc]: http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/document/show/gsoc_program/google/gsoc2013/help_page#3._What_are_the_goals_of_this_program (source) 20:48:13 [jan____]: benoitc: we are collecting a prelimenary list, that is *not* the one we send to GSoC. 20:48:33 [benoitc]: jan____: was answerin to idea vs partial code 20:48:33 [jan____]: benoitc: we are still a step before that 20:48:42 [benoitc]: not speaking about the last part 20:48:48 [jan____]: cool, yeah, perfect 20:48:49 [wendall911]: benoitc: appreciated, answers it well 20:49:21 [jan____]: #info wendall911 tor each out to dev@ for help with test suite issues 20:49:41 [jan____]: cool, letting this all sit for three minutes, then closing the meeting. 20:50:50 [benoitc]: wendall911: about testing & co i think we need to open some discussions on @dev as well 20:51:18 [wendall911]: benoitc: agreed 20:51:28 [benoitc]: we really lack of some simple logging and tools to troubleshoot couchdb as well 20:51:41 [jan____]: yes 20:51:42 [jan____]: +100000
