Subject: KampalaMeetingLog-2017-12-21.txt Date: December 21, 2017 at 4:34:29 PM PST ---++ twiki_release on IRC on Freenode [15:00:09]  Mode is +nt [15:00:50]   Hi Harald and Peter [15:01:12]   hi HaraldJoerg & HideyoImazu-san! [15:01:21]   Hello world! [15:01:58]   print "Hello World\n"; [15:02:26]   and before that: [15:02:27]   As of today: say "Hello world"; :) [15:02:28]   print "Content-type: text/html\n\n"; [15:03:08]   what's new? [15:03:16]   switch to slack? [15:03:34]   I prefer that way [15:03:38]   ok [15:03:45]   Fine ---++ TWiki on Slack peterthoeny [3:03] print “Content-type: text/html\n\nHello World!“; himazu [3:05] I need to replace the boiler at home. It’s beyond its designed life time. haj [3:05] If you strictly follow the standards, it's “Content-type: text/html\r\n\r\nHello World!“; peterthoeny [3:05] ah, german perfectionist :slightly_smiling_face: haj [3:06] CGI.pm and friends do that for you, so you don't need to care peterthoeny [3:06] i can’t believe already shortly before xmas haj [3:06] This year I'm almost done with my xmas preparations peterthoeny [3:06] what’s new in japan and germany? himazu [3:07] not in Japan, but at home, the boiler is aging haj [3:07] I'm still enjoying not having a fulltime job :slightly_smiling_face: peterthoeny [3:08] you’ll be your own handyman to fix the boiler? himazu [3:08] no. that’s not allowed. peterthoeny [3:08] oh himazu [3:08] you need a license to deal with gas equipments peterthoeny [3:08] makes sense [3:09] @haj: enjoy your time off! [3:09] not much new on my side himazu [3:09] to properly order and avoid rip-off, you need to know the boiler’s spec and how it’s connected to various things at home peterthoeny [3:09] no blown rockets etc [3:10] shall we start with meeting? haj [3:11] Sure himazu [3:11] agreed peterthoeny [3:11] http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/KampalaReleaseMeeting2017x12x21 [3:11] 1. Feature Requests for Kampala Release 2. Extensions 3. Review Urgent and Not So Urgent Bugs 4. TWiki Release Discussion 5. Miscellaneous [3:11] 1. Feature Requests for Kampala Release [3:11] http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/WebChanges [3:12] no changes since last time [3:12] anything on your side? haj [3:12] I had planned to write some docs about that deployment stuff, but it still has many rough edges [3:13] I'm developing it in direction of application testing right now peterthoeny [3:13] ok haj [3:13] Creating a VM is a test fixture :slightly_smiling_face: peterthoeny [3:13] depending on timing we can use new or old build process for upcoming release [3:14] ---++ 2. Extensions [3:14] http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Plugins/WebChanges [3:14] i see one change [3:14] http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Plugins/MailerContrib by @haj haj [3:15] I fixed a rather trivial bugs... the new test infrastructure throws up dozens of low-urgency stuff peterthoeny [3:15] good to clean up code [3:15] anything else on extensions? haj [3:16] I've re-assigned one of the open "urgent" bugs to PatternSkin [3:16] But we can discuss that later peterthoeny [3:16] ok [3:16] ---++ 3. Review Urgent and Not So Urgent Bugs [3:16] http://develop.twiki.org/do/view/Bugs/WebChanges [3:17] http://develop.twiki.org/do/view/Bugs/Item7430 - Item7430: DONTNOTIFYCHECKBOX no longer works [3:17] that’s the one you meant i suppose haj [3:17] I notice that I'm responsible for the last twenty entried or so [3:17] Ah, yes [3:17] The challenge is that the feature is still documented, but pretty badly [3:19] If we want to keep the "quiet save" stuff, then a hidden control would be a viable path to re-introduce the feature [3:19] The dontnotify parameter is still evaluated by save [3:20] BTW: That's one of the things I'm testing with my new approach peterthoeny [3:20] does it make sense to go back to the old ui of only one save button, plus a checkbox for quiet save? haj [3:20] We've discussed that three years ago, but I'm not sure how to interpret the outcome peterthoeny [3:21] but then, is DONTNOTIFYCHECKBOX support necessary? there have been a number of releases without it (even though documented) haj [3:21] Anyway, since skins and core have different release cycles, the save program would still need to evaluate both [3:22] I don't know if it is necessary, but it is documented peterthoeny [3:22] ah, at KampalaReleaseMeeting2014x02x06 we decided to replace “Quiet save” button with previously used checkbox [3:23] i would agree with this, however i don’t think this is a showstopper for new release haj [3:23 PM] True - that could be downgraded to "normal" peterthoeny [3:23] ok, let’s do that [3:24] if time permits, fix patternskin to use checkbox & single save button [3:25] @haj: i have seen that you reviewed a number of bugs, thank you! [3:26] any item you’d like to discuss? haj [3:26 PM] I'm trying to walk through the ReleaseBlockers peterthoeny [3:27] ok, good haj [3:27] I'm somewhat lost at the items that are 4 or 6 years old [3:27] I've decided to downgrade a few of the 3-year-old peterthoeny [3:28] indeed haj [3:28] ...and to give up on the insecure dependency with Perl 5.20 [3:29] For Item7829 I've a patch, but would like to test with some more LoginManager combos peterthoeny [3:29] ok [3:30] ah, the “Confirmation email after registration contains “0" as login name” haj [3:30] Yep.  The actual reason for the issue is that USERINFO for "other" user ids is blocked per configuration peterthoeny [3:31] looking at release blockers: [3:31] http://develop.twiki.org/do/view/Bugs/ReleaseBlocker [3:31] 4 items, all 3-4 years old, e.g. were ignored in prev release [3:32] one is the checkbox, which is now “normal” [3:32] i think we can ignore bulk reg for upcoming release [3:33] i can look at file permission of BackupRestorePlugin haj [3:33] Maybe I can use my new test env for a test case for bulk registration peterthoeny [3:33] not sure about TWikibug:Item6739: Using MapIP2SID causes Perl “Can’t locate” error haj [3:34] I can hardly believe that MapIP2SID is still viable in production peterthoeny [3:34] indeed haj [3:35] At home, maybe, but elsewhere it's a security nightmahre peterthoeny [3:35] i think we can degrade to “normal” haj [3:36] At least, the error log is pretty descriptive peterthoeny [3:36] ok, let’s do “normal” haj [3:37] Maybe it's an easy fix, but again testing isn't so easy [3:37] You can verify that it doesn't croak, but actually check whether MapIP2SID works needs at least two different client IP addresses peterthoeny [3:39] yup [3:39] i changed prio of the two items we discussed [3:39] ---++ 4. TWiki Release Discussion [3:39] ok, where do we stand? [3:40] on release blockers we are good [3:40] what release is it? 6.0.3 or 7.0.0? [3:41] let’s look at new features: [3:41] http://develop.twiki.org/do/viewauth/Bugs/ReleaseNotes?type=* [3:43] actually, question is: 6.0.3, 6.1.0, or 7.0.0 [3:44] what do you think? [3:44] i think the feature list does not warrant a 7.0.0 haj [3:45] I'd say 6.1.0 is justified because it now doesn't pepper your error log with warnings in Perl 5.22 to 5.26 himazu [3:45] I second to haj peterthoeny [3:45] lot’s of smaller enhancements haj [3:46] The only feature I've added is the PSGI stuff, and I guess so far I'm the only user peterthoeny [3:46] one new core plugin TWikiSheetPlugin, which is noteworthy [3:46] i was hoping to add the http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiAppInstaller haj [3:47] BTW: I am optimistic that the VM deployment automation will allow performance comparisons between Apache cgid, Apache mod_perl and PSGI peterthoeny [3:47] well, actually add the TWikiAppsPlugin to the TWiki core distribution [3:47] but if we release before year end this will not happen himazu [3:48] maybe we will wait for that? [3:49] to motivate Peter more? peterthoeny [3:49] ok, so just on existing feature list + no warnings for new perl + base for psgi i agree to call this a 6.1.0 [3:50] that is the question, better to release next week with what we have, or sometimes in jan with an initial app installer (with only one app for reference) ? [3:50] what do you think? [3:51] i have some time next week, so can do either [3:51] what is better for the community project? haj [3:52] I can't say which is better himazu [3:52] I’m leaning toward waiting haj [3:52] Current Linux distributions ship with new Perl versions since fall this year, yet we had only one inquiry in Support himazu [3:52] assuming Peter is reasonably confident about his delivery of TWikiAppsPlugin soon haj [3:53] Error logs really, really look bad in new versions peterthoeny [3:53] i am confident for a simple initial version [3:54] so @himazu for postpone, me neutral with slight favor to postpone, @haj? haj [3:54] Postpone is just fine [3:55] I can fire some more bug items when my test suite is running :slightly_smiling_face: peterthoeny [3:55] ok, decided to postpone, we to do for me to create initial app installer plugin next week [3:55] i recall that we decided in a prev meeting to raise the required perl version [3:56] this requires some work: change the docs, and change the required perl in the code haj [3:56] What's the Perl version of current Fedora / Red Hat releases? peterthoeny [3:56] anybody up to do that task? [3:56] we decided the version, i forgot, let me check… himazu [3:57] 5.10 haj [3:57] We decided 5.10, which is a decade old or so peterthoeny [3:57] found it, in 2017-09-21 meeting we decided to raise required perl from 5.8 to 5.10.1 [3:57] yup haj [3:57] But it is still available with Perlbrew peterthoeny [3:58] i wish redhat would be faster in using newer perl versions haj [3:58] 5.10 is still extremely shaky with Unicode [3:59] In my opinion, the build and packaging stuff would be a more urgent topic for the next versions than any additional features peterthoeny [3:59] yup, meaning if someone needs better support they can run twiki on a newer perl haj [4:00] Testing and developing Perl code with Unicode with Perl 5.10 to 5.26 is almost impossible peterthoeny [4:00] so, @haj do you have time to look at build and packaging while i work on app packager? haj [4:01] That would take some time peterthoeny [4:01] time check: +60 min haj [4:01] ...and, of course, some sort of agreement about the packaging target peterthoeny [4:02] yes, realistically we use old build process for 6.1.0 haj [4:02] I would opt against a CPAN style package: These are for developers, not for consumers [4:02] For 6.1.0 there's no other choice peterthoeny [4:02] yes, package should be easy for web admins not familiar with perl and cpan haj [4:02] Other packaging might need reorganization in SVN (or better, move to Git) peterthoeny [4:03 PM] i am all for git, but is a topic for later haj [4:03] I'm rather familiar with Debian packaging, which was abandoned after 4.1.0 [4:03] BTW: For all "my" extensions, I run Git and SVN in parallel peterthoeny [4:03] cool haj [4:04] All you need to do is to exclude the "meta" files from being included in the other source control [4:04] That allows me git branching which is extremely useful for "immature" stuff peterthoeny [4:05] ok [4:05] shall we close the meeting? anything else? haj [4:06] I don't have anything else peterthoeny [4:06] @himazu? himazu [4:07] nothing from me peterthoeny [4:07] ok, let’s close the meeting [4:07] i’ll post minutes and logs as usual [4:08] thank you @haj & @himazu! ttyl himazu [4:08] ttyl! haj [4:08] TTYL