Date: February 15, 2010 1:11:17 PM PST
Subject: HelsinkiMeetingLog2010x02x15.txt

[10:02am] PeterJones joined the chat room.
[10:02am] PeterJones:Good evening Peter
[10:07am] peterthoeny:hi pete!
[10:07am] peterthoeny:still very cold in switzperland?
[10:07am] peterthoeny:"switzerland"
[10:09am] PeterJones:I was on holiday last week and it was ,inus 19 in the Valais
[10:09am]  SopanShewale joined the chat room.
[10:09am] PeterJones:Hi Sopan
[10:09am] SopanShewale:Hi Peter{J, T}
[10:09am] SopanShewale:good morning
[10:09am] peterthoeny:hi sopan
[10:10am] peterthoeny:i do not understand irc
[10:10am] peterthoeny:i am supposed to be an admin of this channel
[10:10am] peterthoeny:but when i join this happens:
[10:10am] SopanShewale:and who does understand that? its very old style of communication
[10:11am] SopanShewale:its like using UUCP for reading emails
[10:11am] peterthoeny:[09:19am]  You rejoined the room.
[10:11am] peterthoeny:[09:19am]  You were demoted from operator by services..
[10:11am] peterthoeny:[09:19am]  ChanServ joined the chat room.
[10:11am] peterthoeny:[09:19am]  ChanServ was promoted to operator by services..
[10:11am] peterthoeny:[09:19am]  ChanServ left the chat room.
[10:11am] peterthoeny:[09:19am]  pratchett.freenode.net: *** Notice -- TS for #twiki_release
changed from 1266254369 to 1264820420
[10:11am] SopanShewale:hmm....
[10:11am] peterthoeny:now i can't set the topic
[10:12am] peterthoeny:anyway, here we are: 
http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/HelsinkiReleaseMeeting2010x02x15
[10:12am] peterthoeny:pete, are you here?
[10:13am] PeterJones:Yes Im here.
[10:14am] peterthoeny:shall we start?
[10:14am] peterthoeny:proposed agenda:
[10:14am] peterthoeny:# 1. Feature requests for Helsinki Release
[10:14am] peterthoeny:# 2. Review Urgent Bugs
[10:14am] peterthoeny:# 3. Release Process: 14 Days Rule => 7 Days Feedback Period
[10:14am] peterthoeny:# 4. Miscellaneous
[10:14am] peterthoeny:anything to add?
[10:15am] peterthoeny:---++ 1. Feature requests for Helsinki Release
[10:15am] SopanShewale:nope - from my side
[10:15am] peterthoeny:http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiFeatureProposals
[10:15am] peterthoeny:i proposed QuerySyntaxInSearchFormat  and QuerySyntaxWithArraySize
[10:16am] peterthoeny:both useful i think
[10:16am] peterthoeny:for twiki apps
[10:16am] peterthoeny:more or less ready to go if no objections
[10:16am] SopanShewale:no objection from my side
[10:17am] peterthoeny:
[10:17am] peterthoeny:sopan is working on ConfigurationOnlyAfterAuthentication
[10:17am] peterthoeny:what is status?
[10:17am] peterthoeny:this is a good proposal for security
[10:17am] SopanShewale:The code is ready except one item pending in that
[10:17am] peterthoeny:nice
[10:17am] SopanShewale:i tested it on my close instances...
[10:18am] peterthoeny:only trunk, right?
[10:18am] SopanShewale:tested it on trunk and release branch code - but on my test instances
[10:18am] PeterJones:PreferencesForRawEditOrWysiwygEdit is still in the Waiting to be implemented
list.
[10:19am] SopanShewale:but thats gone in the last release..
[10:19am] SopanShewale:only Bug is not updated.. my fault at release manager
[10:19am] peterthoeny:sopan, i think this feature should go only in trunk so that we have more
value add in 5.0
[10:20am] SopanShewale:once i finish/review - the complete code.. it will go in trunk
[10:20am] peterthoeny:PeterJones: this is outdated status
[10:20am] SopanShewale:yes.. it should go in trunk
[10:20am] peterthoeny:you can change that to "merged to core"
[10:21am] peterthoeny:sopan, SessionManagement is still there. do i recall correctly that this is
no longer needed?
[10:21am] SopanShewale:no - its not required.. i shall close later
[10:21am] peterthoeny:ok
[10:21am] peterthoeny:VersionLocalSitedotCfg - good proposal by sopan
[10:21am] peterthoeny:status?
[10:22am] SopanShewale:did not get time to work on this
[10:22am] peterthoeny:ok
[10:22am] peterthoeny:that is all on features
[10:23am] peterthoeny:we should start on some more items for 5.0 as discussed prev times
[10:23am] SopanShewale:Pete was working on one proposal.. i did not get time to check the code/work
[10:23am] peterthoeny:such as skin with pulldown menu and easier insatll & upgrade
[10:23am] peterthoeny:pete, can you comment?
[10:25am] PeterJones:Let me check back on this
[10:25am] peterthoeny:ok
[10:26am] peterthoeny:in mean time lets go to next item (come back on feature as needed)
[10:26am] peterthoeny:---++ 2. Review Urgent Bugs
[10:26am] PeterJones:This was the Clone topic option.
[10:26am] peterthoeny:http://develop.twiki.org/~twiki4/cgi-bin/view/Bugs/ReleaseBlocker
[10:26am] PeterJones:I have the code to clone a topic but that does not handle the attachments
(sent to Sopan)
[10:27am] peterthoeny:is that the clone option in the "more" screen?
[10:27am] PeterJones:And  the proposal to rollback an attachment version
[10:27am] PeterJones:The clone feature was to go in the more topic actions
[10:28am] PeterJones:That was the original request that I saw somewhere
[10:28am] peterthoeny:is it http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/CloneTopicLinkUnderMore ?
[10:30am] PeterJones:Yes and the code is based on the solution to
http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Support/CloneTopic
[10:30am] peterthoeny:could you update the spec on that proposal topic?
[10:32am] SopanShewale:on bug reviews:
[10:32am] SopanShewale:Item6276: cannot specify percentBRpercent for newline value  - this is
already gone in last release  - no action required, i should have closed the bug
[10:33am] SopanShewale:Item6275: Error while Registering new user ----- Same as above
[10:33am] peterthoeny:ok
[10:33am] peterthoeny:that means, those items did not go into the prev release notes as fixed
bugs?
[10:34am] SopanShewale:Item6366: %RED% - colors syntax lost while WYSYWYG editor used to save
the topics ---- this is fixed
[10:34am]  SopanShewale left the chat room.
[10:34am] peterthoeny:if so i suggest to mark them as ready, so that we can announce the fix in
the upcoming release
[10:34am]  SopanShewale joined the chat room.
[10:34am] peterthoeny:if so i suggest to mark them as ready, so that we can announce the fix in
the upcoming release
[10:36am] peterthoeny:thanks for fixing Item6366 - please mark as ready for merge
[10:36am] peterthoeny:any other bug items to look into?
[10:37am] peterthoeny:if not, lets move on
[10:37am] peterthoeny:---++ 3. Release Process: 14 Days Rule => 7 Days Feedback Period
[10:37am] peterthoeny:please read http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/SevenDaysFeedbackPeriod
[10:38am]  SopanShewale left the chat room. (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
[10:38am]  SopanShewal1 joined the chat room.
[10:38am] SopanShewal1:sorry - network issue
[10:38am] peterthoeny:this is a process change, meant to replace 
http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TheFourteenDaysRule
[10:38am] peterthoeny:sopan, did you see my post on bugs?
[10:39am] SopanShewal1:no Peter
[10:39am] peterthoeny:peterthoeny: if so i suggest to mark them as ready, so that we can announce
the fix in the upcoming release
[10:39am] peterthoeny:peterthoeny: thanks for fixing Item6366 - please mark as ready for merge
[10:39am] peterthoeny:peterthoeny: any other bug items to look into?
[10:39am] peterthoeny:and before that:
[10:39am] peterthoeny:peterthoeny: that means, those items did not go into the prev release notes
as fixed bugs?
[10:40am] peterthoeny:now at: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/SevenDaysFeedbackPeriod
[10:40am] peterthoeny:what do you think of reducing the 14 days to 7 days?
[10:40am] SopanShewal1:Item6331:  Engine  WYSIWYG mode destroys CSS code  -this is also closed
[10:41am] peterthoeny:ok, so please mark as ready for release
[10:41am] peterthoeny:thanks sopan for fixing this!
[10:41am] SopanShewal1:sure
[10:41am] peterthoeny:reason to reduce review period: we are a small and supportive team
[10:42am] SopanShewal1:ok.. about reducing 14days to 7 days... is that required peter?
[10:42am] peterthoeny:7 days is enough time to review, and gives incentive to implement when idea
and energy is hot
[10:42am] peterthoeny:no, this is not required, this is a proposal
[10:44am] peterthoeny:pete, what is your take?
[10:44am] peterthoeny:sopan, do you think it is better to keep at 14 days?
[10:44am] SopanShewal1:i think 14 days is good time.. 7 days would be very small. time
[10:44am] PeterJones:Sorry i have to get back Im on something
[10:45am] peterthoeny:ok pete, before you go, quick thumbs up/down?
[10:45am] peterthoeny:on 14 => 7 days?
[10:46am] PeterJones:Im ok with 7 days
[10:46am] SopanShewal1:i am for 14 days peter
[10:46am] peterthoeny:i am trying to find a way where it is possible to checkin code more quickly
[10:47am] peterthoeny:for example, QuerySyntaxInSearchFormat  and QuerySyntaxWithArraySize are ready
to checkin (code and doc), but only 7 days passed
[10:48am] SopanShewal1:i think code is last thing when it comes to discuss feature or any new API
[10:48am] peterthoeny:i'd like to find a way to finish the work more quickly and move on to the
next feature
[10:48am] SopanShewal1:dummy code is suppose to be part of discussion
[10:48am] peterthoeny:dummy code?
[10:49am] SopanShewal1:Peter - 14 day or some % developers agree.. then checkin should be done
[10:49am] SopanShewal1:i mean psuedo code
[10:49am] peterthoeny:hmm, i prefer good doc over pseudo code to describe a feature
[10:51am] SopanShewal1:ok
[10:51am] peterthoeny:so you prefer that developers wait for 14 days before contributing the work?
[10:52am] SopanShewal1:i think if some % of developers agree to the proposal.. contributors
should checkin the code
[10:52am] SopanShewal1:no need to wait
[10:52am] peterthoeny:i think 14 days makes sense if there are 10+ people involved
[10:52am] SopanShewal1:in case.. no one take any objection.. then 14 day sounds good rule
[10:52am] peterthoeny:we are only a handful, so a go ahead after a shirt time would be ok
[10:52am] peterthoeny:since we trust each other
[10:53am] peterthoeny:but with 14 day rule we have to wait
[10:53am] peterthoeny:can you explain "no need to wait"?
[10:53am] SopanShewal1:brb - 2 mins...
[10:53am] peterthoeny:ok
[10:56am] SopanShewal1:back
[10:57am] SopanShewal1:if majority of active developers agree  for the proposal.. i think waiting
for 14 days does not make sense.. the code should go in the repository
[11:00am] peterthoeny:agreed
[11:00am] peterthoeny:but what is the process for "quick-accepting" a proposal?
[11:00am] peterthoeny:currently we have to wait for 14 days
[11:00am] peterthoeny:that is our current process
[11:00am] peterthoeny:that is what i am trying to fix
[11:01am] peterthoeny:what process change do you propose?
[11:01am] SopanShewal1:ok.. i am ok.. since we are small community
[11:02am] SopanShewal1:if the community grows.. then we might have issues when some bad code goes
in the repositories.. efforts will be required to clean the bad code
[11:03am] peterthoeny:but, sopan, we can't arbitrarily abandon our current process
[11:03am] peterthoeny:that is why i propose this process change
[11:04am] SopanShewal1:ok.. i am ok with 7 days rule
[11:04am] peterthoeny:or if you have another proposal, please bring forward
[11:05am] peterthoeny:ok, now i understand your concern: bad code in repository
[11:05am] peterthoeny:for large community this is a valid concern
[11:06am] peterthoeny:i think we have covered that that anybody may revert a checkin if quality is
not met or process is not followed
[11:07am] peterthoeny:sopan, anything you like to add or change on 
http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/SevenDaysFeedbackPeriod ?
[11:09am] peterthoeny:sopan, still there?
[11:09am] SopanShewal1:hello
[11:09am] SopanShewal1:nope
[11:09am] SopanShewal1:i think let us add revert of checkin in the proposal..
[11:09am] SopanShewal1:else looks good
[11:11am] PeterJones:Any comments on http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/RollbackAttchmentVersion
[11:12am] peterthoeny:ok, i will add some language on reverting
[11:13am] peterthoeny:how about something like: "community members with svn checking right may
revert checkins done by other members that do not meet the quality standard or release process"
[11:14am] SopanShewal1:this sounds good
[11:14am] peterthoeny:time check: +75 min
[11:14am] peterthoeny:we should wrap up soon
[11:14am] peterthoeny:pete: checking...
[11:14am] PeterJones:Yes lets wrap up.
[11:15am] peterthoeny:pete: looks good
[11:15am] peterthoeny:please add the spec
[11:15am] peterthoeny:e.g. user interface
[11:15am] peterthoeny:on how to revert an attachment
[11:15am] PeterJones:Ok and I have added to http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/CloneTopicLinkUnderMore
[11:16am] peterthoeny:pete: on clone topic, please change the doc part at the top, e.g. above
"discussion"
[11:17am] peterthoeny:the idea is to be able to look at the proposal and quickly understand what it
is about (not scan the whole page with all discussion)
[11:17am] peterthoeny:to summarize on process change:
[11:17am] peterthoeny:1. i will add language on reverting checkins
[11:18am] peterthoeny:2. process change 14 => 7 days is accepted by release meeting
[11:18am] peterthoeny:anything else?
[11:18am] peterthoeny:---++ 4. Miscellaneous
[11:19am] peterthoeny:anything?
[11:19am] SopanShewal1:none - from my side
[11:20am] peterthoeny:if not, let's close the meeting
[11:20am] SopanShewal1:thx..
[11:20am] peterthoeny:i will post the log and update the meeting minutes topic
[11:20am] peterthoeny:thanks sopan and pete
[11:20am] PeterJones:Ok see you
[11:20am] SopanShewal1:gr8 day.. bye
[11:20am]  PeterJones left the chat room. (Quit: Java user signed off)