17:03:48 #startmeeting 17:03:48 Meeting started Sat Apr 30 17:03:48 2016 UTC. The chair is Hauke. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:03:48 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 17:04:23 #action Overall Timeline for next weeks 17:04:47 this week is WBM in porto 17:04:54 and next weekend is wcw in berlin 17:05:05 i think jow is already in porto and felix will arrive tomorrow 17:05:18 so ideally they polish the mail to -hackers and -devel 17:05:38 then felix can send it and we are at that point public and launched 17:06:31 not sure what will happen next, we have been working towards that :-) 17:06:37 do we also want to send informations to other list exept -devel ? 17:06:46 yes 17:06:51 we should decide when we take down the access restrictions 17:06:57 now ?! 17:07:00 I want to do it rather sooner than later 17:07:08 yes I am fine with now 17:07:17 +1 17:07:19 I'm fine too 17:07:25 shall we quickly vote on that ? 17:07:33 +1 17:07:38 +1 17:07:39 I thinke we just did 17:07:40 +1 17:07:41 wait 17:07:43 +1 17:07:49 hauke needs to start the vote thing 17:07:51 :-) 17:08:00 blogic: jow_laptop which command? 17:08:16 Just note it with "#agreed" in the minutes 17:08:22 there is no dedicated vote thing 17:08:32 +1 17:08:45 #agreed taking down the access restriction for the website and co. 17:09:36 do we have a press release or something like that we can send to a more broder groupe? 17:09:46 http://piratepad.net/ArjcbcV6ck 17:09:47 Title: PiratePad: ArjcbcV6ck (at piratepad.net) 17:10:11 felix is working on the mail to -devel 17:10:24 it will be a mix of the 2 text sections 17:10:35 ok 17:10:40 I suggested that people put themselves on the signers list at the end of the docuemnt 17:10:47 we didn't want to impose somebody 17:11:32 As we don't have a draft of the -devel mail yet, there's no signer list yet, is there? 17:11:51 well it would be a mix of the 2 text passages 17:13:04 I think we should also send something to -users and to some communities using OpenWrt 17:13:12 erm yes 17:13:25 that could be that same mail as to -devel 17:13:28 -devel, -users, FF, ninux, WBM, ... 17:14:01 any other suggestion? 17:14:07 http://piratepad.net/eeJLCt008w 17:14:08 Title: PiratePad: eeJLCt008w (at piratepad.net) 17:14:31 why prpl ? 17:14:41 right now i think we should inform our communites 17:14:42 just to inform them 17:14:49 prpl is a lobby that has never contributed anything 17:14:54 companies should come later on 17:14:57 I think we should inform everybody how might be intrsted 17:15:04 yes 17:15:08 lets do a company list 17:15:35 and this should be all at the same time 17:15:40 yes 17:15:48 1 mail for community 17:15:55 and then one mail for companies 17:16:04 why different mails? 17:16:08 we do not want to create the impression that we intermingel the 2 things 17:16:20 some people from companies are already on the devel list 17:16:34 the mix between company and community interests caused headaches within owrt i think 17:16:38 we should handel them the same way as the communities 17:16:46 i dont agree 17:17:01 we stated very early on to first handle our communities 17:17:05 then the companies 17:17:11 we can vote on this i guess 17:17:25 please clarify 17:17:34 our rules say that we want to handle companies like communities so individuals from comapnies can interact 17:17:44 well 17:17:54 our rules say that companies should act like community members 17:18:08 and they are welcome to contribute under those same rules 17:18:08 when we inform -devel and so on also many companies are informed because they have people on the list 17:18:17 yes 17:18:38 and why not send them the same information as the communities? 17:18:38 if we inform companies using owrt/lede we need to inform them all 17:18:43 and the list would be very long 17:18:58 adding prpl to the list suggests a special relation which does not exist 17:18:58 for pepl I would only send something to their public list 17:19:12 and lets face it they will monotenize that implicit suggestion 17:19:12 *prpl 17:19:30 well i had my say 17:19:42 jow_laptop: was that clarification enough ? 17:19:44 I think they're going to get the message either way 17:19:58 they have a very bad record at getting the message 17:20:19 blogic: do you want to send them a different message? 17:20:22 but that is just my PoV 17:20:24 companies, that is 17:20:27 no 17:20:41 same text but separate email 17:20:59 basically send the email once to communities and once to companies 17:21:10 ok with me 17:21:33 that sounds okay to me. first broadcast message to community members and contributors 17:21:41 yes 17:21:46 second broadcast message with same content to legal entities 17:21:52 yep 17:21:55 ok vote? 17:22:06 +1 17:22:08 +1 17:22:08 +1 17:22:08 +1 17:22:12 +1 17:22:20 +1 17:22:39 #agreed first broadcast message to community members and contributors, second broadcast message with same content to legal entities 17:22:39 +1 17:23:18 nevertheless we need to discuss how to handle prpl 17:23:31 do we have a date when we want to need the mails? 17:23:35 lets do that as last point in the meeting ? 17:23:36 prpl is also on the agenda 17:23:47 Hauke: monday 17:23:47 yes talk about prpl later 17:23:58 in the spirit of leaving no burned bridges we need to be aware that they're essentially organizing a summit around a project which is about to lose a fair number of contributors 17:24:03 ok 17:24:51 ok, whats next .. 17:24:54 mission statement 17:24:59 yes, I really do hope that I'll be able to finish all material on monday together with felix 17:25:11 #topic Infrastructure 17:25:27 i would like to thank jopw at this point 17:25:37 he did most of the work on the infrastructure part 17:25:42 *jow ;) 17:25:51 very nice work, btw 17:25:52 I also want to thank him 17:26:24 jow_laptop: do you have new information? 17:26:27 i thik we are mostly done and in good shape 17:26:27 yes 17:26:30 I think this is your topic ;-) 17:26:40 first of all I'd like to once again welcome thess 17:26:58 Hi 17:27:24 he did offer some of his precious time to help out with administration and already received access to most of our servers 17:27:55 so thess will be able to do thing on the servers if I am getting hit by a bus 17:28:02 I don't know how precious my time is, but I am glad to be on-board to help 17:28:27 I just finished the buildbot setup more or less 17:28:44 for the moment we're doing continuos builds based on lede source.git master branch 17:28:49 the final urls are; 17:28:58 http://phase1.builds.lede-project.org/waterfall 17:28:59 Title: BuildBot: LEDE Project (at phase1.builds.lede-project.org) 17:29:03 http://phase2.builds.lede-project.org/waterfall 17:29:04 Title: BuildBot: LEDE Project (at phase2.builds.lede-project.org) 17:29:22 what does phase1 and 2 stand for? 17:29:29 phase1 builds targets along with base and kernel packages, images and sdk 17:29:59 phase2 builds all different package architectures from all external feeds to populate the shared package repositories 17:30:26 ok 17:30:36 imagebuilder and sdk as well as opkg in installed images will use the repositories populated by phase2 17:31:06 is it documented who has access to which part of our infrastructure 17:31:26 it is internally documented yet and I'll put the document online asap, most likely until monday 17:32:13 Hauke: the list has server name, function, owner, people with access, contact person 17:32:14 #action jow puts documentation online about who has acces to which part of the infrastructure 17:32:18 the document describes who is paying for a given machine and who is admainstrative contact for a given server, service etc. 17:32:45 ok that is good, so In case of a problem I know whom to contact 17:32:49 as it contains no really sensitive information we can likely maintain it publicly 17:33:01 it will likely be yet another asciidoc file in web.git 17:33:23 I've started to look at the requirements for backups and deploying gitolite for access control 17:33:46 Additionally, I can update jow's document as I get more familiar with the environment 17:33:48 especilly for the build bots that would be nice as they broke very often in OpenWrt 17:33:50 I need to say this. why do so many people use until when they mean before ? 17:34:18 stintel: maybe its yet another germanism 17:34:59 jow_laptop: Bulgarians do it too. /end off-topic 17:35:02 Hauke: I plan to put the buildbot master configs online as well 17:35:17 that is nice 17:35:19 Hauke: the configs evolved quite a bit and contain almost no "secret source" anymore 17:35:26 preferably in a git repo 17:35:52 Hauke: but I need to factor out secret information yet - certain credentials like rsync upload keys are yet hardcoded in the config and need to be moved into external files 17:36:05 Hauke: so that we can push the remaining non-secret parts unmodified to git 17:36:33 ok that would be nice so if someone wants to replicate the setup 17:37:07 I do not see the "broken packages" link in the build bots any more 17:37:28 Yes, I noticed that 17:37:37 yes, thats a differnece compared to the openwrt setup 17:37:58 the openwrt setup used a soon-to-be-deprecated public_html functionality of buildbot 17:38:04 that was a nice feature, but take your time 17:38:13 while I developed the lede system to simply upload the logs to the rsync server 17:38:20 you cna find the broken package logs here: https://downloads.lede-project.org/snapshots/faillogs/ 17:38:21 Title: Index of /snapshots/faillogs/ (at downloads.lede-project.org) 17:39:02 ok 17:39:32 anything else regarding infrastructure? 17:39:37 yes, some final remarks 17:39:38 regarding build bots 17:40:04 we're already hitting resource constraints so I'll prepare a list of things we could use sponsoring for 17:40:18 the most important part is mirror space for downloads 17:40:21 that would be nice 17:40:45 we could do with 3-5 more servers 17:40:55 but we als oneed further build capacity, some decent machine to host git on (away from the io constrained system atm) 17:41:27 and we need to start figuring out how to deal with the project domain 17:41:53 I'd like to hand it over to a proper registrar but someone has to own and pay it 17:41:55 spi? they do nothing but that is ok for such things 17:42:29 would be an option 17:42:44 lets gather ideas over the next week and then do this in the next meeting ? 17:42:49 ok, but lets defer that and talk about it at the next meeting 17:42:51 yes 17:42:52 how much mirror space would we need exactly? I talked with someone who is willing to offer a mirror on a 10gig link in Belgium 17:43:07 stintel: around 800GB 17:43:25 #action talk about domain registrar in next meeting 17:43:29 I'll ask him if ~1TB is possible 17:44:08 that would be great 17:44:10 i also plan to ping a few universities 17:44:42 I think if we say that we need that and do not act stupid then it should work 17:44:54 I think so as well. 17:45:15 final remark regarding the infrastructure: the basic auth should be gone now 17:45:23 if you still see one, ping me 17:45:42 ok 17:45:48 action item for me during the next two weeks: grant thess access to the remaining services 17:45:50 patchwork is in the making 17:46:03 and then only bug tracking is the big TBD 17:46:12 publish (high level service) documentation 17:46:24 #action jow:during the next two weeks: grant thess access to the remaining services 17:46:50 should we talk about bug tracing in the next meeting? 17:46:58 yes 17:47:07 i want to test ride mantis 17:47:09 #action next meeting: bug tracing 17:47:11 failed to do so this week 17:47:15 there's nothing new to discuss here 17:47:50 ok anything else about infrastructure? 17:48:12 do we want to do staging trees now? 17:48:22 jump in the agenda ;-) 17:48:40 yes, infra done 17:48:56 #topic Staging trees 17:49:07 I very much prefer them 17:49:12 me to 17:49:34 I think anyone here knows the problem with pushing stuff to the repo only to discover that something was overlooked, accidentally committed etc. 17:49:35 would also make it possible to publish work in progress stuff 17:49:55 yes ;-) 17:50:01 within an own staging tree one can force-push revert, squash stuff until it looks clean and then merge that to the master in one go 17:50:13 yay 17:50:18 additionally you're free to host it wherever it can be cloned by people 17:50:26 so even on github ;) 17:50:44 yes 17:50:57 I would like to see them on git.lede-projects.org 17:51:05 I'm wondering if having "official" staging trees (as branches of source.git) makes sense 17:51:06 so they are not spread arround 17:51:07 jow_laptop: when can we start publishing lede stuff on github? :P 17:51:11 And if so, how to organize them 17:51:33 Noltari: once the mail is out to -hackers i guess 17:51:37 so monday/tuesday 17:51:38 from my side I only want to know whether we want to provide some kind of "officially endorsed" trees, think "http://git.lede-project.org/~jow/source.git" or should contributors organize their own hosting? 17:51:39 Title: git.lede-project.org Git (at git.lede-project.org) 17:51:54 jow_laptop: either 17:52:08 we should offer them on the lede server but allow people to use anything they want 17:52:10 jow_laptop, usually having branches instead of separate repos makes more sense 17:52:21 neoraider: not sure 17:52:31 jow_laptop, what system do we use to manage Git privileges? Gitolite? 17:52:31 would just create a huge monster tree with 100 branches 17:52:35 neoraider: you mean for mergability? 17:52:52 you can have multiple remotes in your local git tree 17:53:00 neoraider: yes, thess and me are working on deploying gitolite 17:53:09 I would prefere an extra repo so it is clear that this is unofficial 17:53:10 Hauke: yes 17:53:32 I think we should maybe have some target specific staging trees where different ppl can work at the same time and them let each user have its own repo hosted somewhere else 17:53:33 i will put the lantiq/ralink/mediatek/ar71xx tree on github 17:53:49 then* 17:54:21 and accept board support patches for those targets on that tree 17:54:29 and merge stuff from the mailing list to the same tree 17:54:51 so we would have one tree per target? 17:54:57 no 17:55:05 i will have a tree on my account where i stage stuff 17:55:10 i dont want 4 trees 17:55:28 so there will be a blogic.git with ar71xx lantiq,... branches? 17:55:34 i think anyone should decide for the subsystems that he maintains how to handle it best for his work flow 17:55:40 no 17:55:46 I think the natural way is tree per user, not tree per target or some other technical definition 17:55:54 there will be a staging.git in my account with one staging branch 17:56:05 yes I wuld also prefere one repo per user 17:56:12 Hauke: i will do it in a way that reduces workload for me 17:56:34 and then when we merge we need to see about the merge order 17:56:49 so i would like to contine having the target stuff i maintain flow via my trwe 17:57:11 Hauke: as an example if you have LTQ patches you can send me a PR via github or email 17:57:34 ok 17:57:58 with ar71xx we need to see how to handle it. i will continue doing it with felix until we find a dedicated maintainer 17:58:01 personally I think we should only define the process for final master merges at this point 17:58:07 right now the issue is that i do not have access to datasheets 17:58:23 jow_laptop: yes 17:58:24 how secondary staging trees are organized is something we all need to figure out 17:58:47 I already sense some very different ideas and viewpoints here 17:58:49 ok, how do we request a staging tree at lede-project.org? 17:59:04 right now i think we should simply allow people to merge their staging trees whenever they think they are good 17:59:15 blogic: agree 17:59:18 It might make sense to have both private and public repos as does github 17:59:30 thess: I think we cna do that as soon as we have gitolite in place 17:59:45 right now its all ad-hoc unix permission ssh nginx stuff 18:00:03 ok, so we will implement the staging tree when gitlotite is in place? 18:00:09 Hauke: yes 18:00:28 ok so we have master and staging 18:00:39 anyone can throw stuff into staging as he pleases 18:00:50 and then before merging it to master we can do cleanups etc 18:00:55 ? 18:01:00 what is staging? A yet-to-be-created git.lede-project.org/staging.git ? 18:01:11 that is what i am asking 18:01:14 blogic: one staging or multiple? 18:01:31 staging - your private workspace 18:01:38 ok 18:01:39 good 18:02:38 oh 18:02:43 one small thing, fixes ... 18:03:06 stintel: good idea for the beginning lets just implement per committer reposeorires when gitlotite is there, and figure out the process later 18:03:06 if we get fixes etc then we should be able to put them straight to master 18:03:49 blogic: agree 18:04:18 Hauke: I am confused. weird completion fail ? 18:05:12 ok to summarize: 18:05:20 stintel: yeah ;) 18:05:39 - we'll provide per user repositories where people can stage stuff according to their needs, be it remotes, brnaches, whatever 18:05:54 - at this point in time we do not specify any policies for staging -> master merges 18:06:25 - we'll try to finish the gitolite stuff asap 18:06:48 yes - familiarizing myself with it as we speak 18:07:08 afree 18:07:13 agree 18:07:35 agreed 18:07:38 ok 18:08:26 ok 18:08:33 +1 18:09:08 One could use github for now and add an additonal named remote to your private clone for merging 18:09:48 thess: that is what i do 18:10:53 github, or gitlab is also a possibility afaik 18:11:42 next topic? 18:12:08 #agreed user repositories where people can stage stuff according to their needs 18:12:38 #topic Mission statement 18:13:04 we currently have "Goals" listed on the front page 18:13:25 these should/might be extended and/or agreed on 18:13:37 I like them 18:13:57 me too 18:14:07 i would like to reorganize the front page 18:14:17 put the PR statement on the top 18:14:28 then name, goals, endorsement, about 18:14:37 and eventually drop about 18:14:49 or even drop it now in favour of the PR text 18:16:06 blogic: sounds good 18:16:07 I think as long as the PR statement is on the top, we don't need the "about" 18:16:20 maybe rename it to "Home" and have the goals there, add an About page at the end of the "menu" and keep there the name and about sections 18:16:36 About could be a separately mantained page for general historical reasons 18:16:42 At some time in the future, when LEDE is established etc, we might want to move the PR statement to a subpage, and revive the about section on top above a "news" section 18:16:53 thess: something like that, indeed 18:16:57 ok 18:17:06 i'll make those changes later today 18:17:12 and polish of a few other things 18:17:19 the procd config page still point to nowhere 18:17:52 at some place we should also put a standard documentation disclaimer stating that lede is largely openwrt compatible [at this point in time] 18:17:52 the Corporate Contact 18:18:03 the Corporate Contact mail is missing 18:18:30 Hauke: yes 18:18:47 are we done with the current opic ? then i would like to drop 2 lines on email 18:18:53 s/on/about/ 18:19:07 #topic Corporate Contact mail 18:20:15 blogic: ? 18:20:17 ok 18:20:33 so we currenlty have twitter and FB registered 18:20:42 both running on one of may mail accounts 18:20:56 i would like to ask felix to setup emails for the project domain 18:21:13 then point twitter and FB at that account 18:21:25 and also point the company contact at that account 18:21:35 then hand out imap to who ever wants it 18:21:47 so a simple shared mailbox 18:21:48 ? 18:21:51 yes 18:21:59 +1 18:22:10 +1 18:22:13 do we have google+? 18:22:13 +1 18:22:17 +1 18:22:20 Hauke: no 18:22:23 +1 18:22:26 +1 18:22:42 how do we disagree btw? -1 ? 18:22:53 probably 18:23:00 it is just a convention 18:23:04 what would you prefer ? 18:23:13 #agreed felix sets up a mail account for project admin and everyone intrested can get imap access 18:23:14 stintel: this is just an idea i had that seemed simpe 18:23:20 voice it in a way that a human reader would understand it 18:23:29 "no", "I disagree", "nak" would work 18:23:58 could someone setup official google + account? 18:24:18 we need that mail account for that purpose i guess 18:24:20 I need to leave now 18:24:23 yes 18:24:25 jow_laptop: thanks ! 18:24:31 jow_laptop: thanks 18:24:33 have on somewhat related comment: 18:24:35 jow_laptop: enjoy the sun 18:24:47 well +1 and -1 is less typing. but it's all fine by me. it's just a question that came to mind 18:24:59 I registered https://github.com/lede-project 18:25:00 Title: lede-project · GitHub (at github.com) 18:25:23 ah yes we have a github project aswell 18:25:24 please sne me your github handles if you want to be admin of this org, then you cna host your staging trees under its label if you like 18:25:35 next topic? 18:25:50 only prpl is left now i think 18:26:03 I am not a fan of -project or so in urls or usernames. but I guess we need to use what's available 18:26:04 #action send jow your github handles to get access to project account 18:26:17 stintel, well, it matches the domain 18:26:31 #topic Interaction with old OpenWrt project 18:26:43 i dont understand the topic 18:26:48 what aspect is meant ? 18:27:17 will most of you still work on openwrt? 18:27:26 ah ok 18:27:39 i plan to merge fixes in both for a while 18:27:50 and i plan to continue CC+2 support 18:27:54 difficult one for those of us who have no openwrt commit access 18:28:18 I'll likely play the community hotline for a while to come but will officially announce that I am not going to commit anymore 18:28:19 if I can commit to LEDE I will probably not send those changes to the OpenWrt ML anymore 18:28:22 stintel: for you: will you still send patches to OpenWrt? 18:28:39 +1 to stintel 18:28:47 if that is prefered, I can stil do it, but I am lazy 18:28:50