13:58 -!- jds2001 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora BugZappers meeting - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings/Agenda-2008-Jan-19
13:59 -!- petreu [n=peter@fedora/Standby] has quit ["( www.nnscript.de :: NoNameScript 4.02 :: www.XLhost.de )"]
13:59  * jds2001 just modified the agenda to including disucssing a time for future meetings
13:59 < jds2001> who's here?
13:59  * nirik is here. 
13:59  * j6k is new and here
14:00 < jds2001> poelcat: you around?
14:00 < poelcat> jds2001: ready to go :)
14:00 < jds2001> awesome, sorry for the time :/
14:01 < poelcat> jds2001: np. it worked today, not sure about future weekends
14:01 -!- owentl [n=owentl@c-68-57-34-186.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:01  * nirik is here today, but sometimes won't be on weekends... 
14:01  * spoleeba is here, but doesn't plan to be useful
14:02 < jds2001> ok, well we can discuss that at the end, I just pulled something out of my hat this time :)
14:03 < jds2001> anyhow, i posted some bugcounts on the agenda page - not that those numbers mean anything, just that's where we stand today.  If I can reliably automate it, I'll probably provide updates every day on my fedorapeople.org space for anyone that's interested
14:03 -!- fab [n=bellet@bellet.info] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:03 < nirik> would be nice to graph that stuff... mrtg/rrdtool/etc
14:04 < jds2001> yeah, im not quite smart enough :)
14:04 < poelcat> nirik: +1 or some kind of trending even if it is number in a table for now
14:04 < jds2001> though im sure i could figure it out...
14:04 < poelcat> and maybe color the rows triagers care about: NEW & NEEDINFO
14:05  * poelcat is trying to get some help inside RHT to create charts and graphs... will prod again on Monday
14:05 < jds2001> poelcat mentioned the need for some feedback on progress - so that's what i'm trying to do.  Not that progress for progress's sake is good either.
14:05 < nirik> I'd be happy to assist... basically we just need a way to gather numbers on a schedule (every hour?) and then feed them to rrdtool or something.
14:05 < nirik> yeah, knowing a difference is being made would sure be nice for morale. ;)
14:05 < jds2001> gathering the numbers is easy - bugzilla can spit them out in CSV
14:06 < poelcat> nirik: and to make people feel like it is worth spending time on
14:06 < nirik> yeah
14:06  * wolfy thinks every hour is way to often
14:07  * poelcat votes for weekly
14:07 < nirik> sure, we could do less often... once a day? doesn't matter.
14:08 < jds2001> i can figure out rrdtool, which i know isn
14:08 < jds2001> isn't hard, i've just never personally done it.
14:09 < jds2001> anything else on metrics?
14:09 < jds2001> guess not - on to the workflow proposal
14:09 -!- sdodson [n=sdodson@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/sdodson] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:10 < jds2001> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JonStanley/BugWorkflow
14:10 < poelcat> jds2001: looks good to me
14:10 < jds2001> k, i added transitioning to modifed once it hits CVS since i missed that before.
14:10 < nirik> so, ON_DEV is out?
14:11 < jds2001> unless someone convinces me otherwise
14:11 < jds2001> you can look at modified dates to catch deadbeats
14:11 < poelcat> jds2001: where is the link that explains the different states?
14:11 -!- ChitleshGoorah [n=chitlesh@fedora/ChitleshGoorah] has quit ["Konversation terminated!"]
14:12 < nirik> also, there is info on NEEDINFO and when it's closable,etc?
14:12 -!- ChitleshGoorah [n=chitlesh@fedora/ChitleshGoorah] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:12 < jds2001> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=bug_status.html#fixed
14:12 < jds2001> yes, i thought that i put 30 days
14:12 < jds2001> actually i didnt in there
14:12 < jds2001> i'll fix that
14:13 < jds2001> but that's after manual review, too, since you have the attachements-dont-revert-status bug
14:13 < poelcat> jds2001: it pretty much confirms how RHT uses bugzilla also complimented by flags (not described there)
14:13 < poelcat> that was one of your questions
14:13 < jds2001> ok, i dont think we need flags....
14:13 < nirik> ok, 30days sounds ok for needinfo, although what about needinfo (maintainer)?
14:14 < jds2001> i
14:14 < jds2001> i've not seen that used...
14:14 < nirik> it gets used on maintainers that ignore bugzilla a lot...
14:14 < jds2001> but i guess it would be caught in the manual review phase.
14:14 < nirik> yeah.
14:15 < poelcat> i created a summary of the proposed state flow for triagers at the bottom of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JohnPoelstra/TriageIdeas1
14:15 < jds2001> there's this handy search down in the bottom of bugzilla called 'My Bugs' :)
14:15 < jds2001> i would advise maintainers to use it :)
14:15 < jds2001> poelcat: +1
14:15 < nirik> I think if we could gather a summary of weekly/monthy activity and post a 'maintainers that need assistance with their bugs' it might be helpfull...
14:15 < nirik> sure, you can lead a maintainer to bugzilla, but you can't make them click. ;)
14:16 < nirik> so I like the workflow overall... +1 from me.
14:16 < owentl> workflow looks good to me  +1
14:18 < jds2001> cool, on to bug days.
14:18 < owentl> I like the idea of the weekly/monthly 'maintainers that need assistance' report too..might help with awol maintainers?
14:18 < jds2001> owentl: yep.  I think it's somewhat there though
14:18 < jds2001> let me look
14:19 < nirik> in general, I don't think bug days are usefull personally.
14:19 < nirik> I would rather have some kind of 'triage class' to help people learn...
14:19 < poelcat> "bug week" instead?
14:19 < poelcat> nirik: +1
14:19 < owentl> nirik: +1
14:20 < jds2001> nirik: +1
14:20 < jds2001> owentl: status is at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackageStatus
14:20 < poelcat> we could do audio with asterisk provided by infrastructure
14:20 < nirik> problem is that it's hard to get people all together, and even if you do get a push on a bug day, it's not sustainable... rather it would be better to always have bug triage going on, IMHO. ;)
14:20 < jds2001> yep
14:21 < nirik> perhaps a signup on the wiki and when we got enough people we do a class/teaching session?
14:21 < jds2001> we also need some sort of 'signup' that states who handles what kinds of bugs
14:21 < poelcat> nirik: i think you raise some really good points... I think sustainability is *key* as we think about how to build and relaunch this
14:21 < nirik> yeah, that would be helpfull.
14:22 < jds2001> just so we can identify gaps, not necessarily exclude extra triagers on a specific component
14:22 < nirik> yep. Bugs keep flowing in, we need to handle the incoming and ideally start working on the backlog.
14:22 < spoleeba> nirik, comment on triage class... id like to have an open enrollment week just before or just after a release goes out..when pretty much everyone in the project is focused on training new people
14:22 < nirik> yeah, good idea.
14:22 < spoleeba> nirik, triage being a part of it
14:23  * poelcat thinks "open enrollment" for health insurance :)
14:23 < poelcat> jds2001: i think this points to needing to finish the wiki pages
14:23 < spoleeba> nirik, id like how we do training to imply that people are making a commitment to help out for a full release
14:24 -!- wolfy [n=lonewolf@fedora/wolfy] has left #fedora-meeting ["If you must choose between two evils, pick the one you've never tried before!"]
14:24 < spoleeba> nirik, err i mean 6 month period
14:24 < nirik> that would be nice, but of course you can't force anyone to do anything.
14:24 < spoleeba> nirik, force.... != imply
14:24 < poelcat> jds2001: those could be the start or used for the training
14:24 < nirik> agreed.
14:24 < jds2001> and the whole thing here is that everyone can help - and every little bit of time is valuable
14:24 -!- stickster is now known as stickster_afk
14:24 < jds2001> you dont have to be me who has no life :D
14:25  * poelcat thinks asking for a 'committment' might be a little unusual... do we do that anywhere else in Fedora?
14:25 < spoleeba> poelcat, every volunteer group..asks for a commitment
14:25 < spoleeba> poelcat, if we arent asking for a time based commitment..then we suck
14:26 < spoleeba> poelcat, you dont demand it...
14:26 < poelcat> spoleeba: examples?
14:26  * poelcat has never seen one stated
14:26 < spoleeba> poelcat, fire fighters :->
14:26 < jds2001> oh, we can't say "you *will* help out for a full release or we'll come EAT ALL YOUR CHEESE!!"? :)
14:27 < poelcat> spoleeba: examples in *Fedora* ?
14:27 < spoleeba> poelcat, we dont have then.. because our volunteer management sucks
14:27 < poelcat> spoleeba: how about other open source projects?
14:27 < nirik> well, package maintainers commit to maintaining their packages for as long as they do until they orphan them.
14:28 < spoleeba> nirik, implied commitment of atleast one release
14:28 < nirik> right, but in any case this is getting off topic...where are we here?
14:29 < spoleeba> nirik, sorry
14:29 < poelcat> if we want to do training we need good docs :)
14:29 < nirik> spoleeba: we did write up a draft 'package maintainer responsibilities' thing, but it wasn't ever pushed thru...
14:29 < nirik> poelcat: agreed.
14:29 < jds2001> nirik: does it still exist?
14:30 < nirik> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MaintainerResponsibilityPolicy
14:31  * nirik notes from the Extras, it's been there a while. ;) 
14:31 < jds2001> yep
14:31 < jds2001> it seems to be pegged to a release too, which is good imho
14:32 < jds2001> anyhow good training without good docs is impossible
14:33 < poelcat> we're making progress
14:33 < jds2001> yep
14:33 < poelcat> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers was put on a serious diet :)
14:34 < nirik> cool... yeah, the wiki changes have been great. Keep it up. ;)
14:34 < poelcat> i think we need to focus on making sure each sub page focuses on one topic (two MAX)
14:34 < poelcat> otherwise each page starts to look overwhelming
14:34 < jds2001> and that they're easy to find when you're looking for info on that topic
14:35 < poelcat> jds2001: is there a page that has simple queries to find bugs that need to be triaged?
14:35  * nirik nods
14:35 < jds2001> not that i know of.
14:35  * poelcat envisions a single wiki page secitoned off by simple to advanced queries
14:35 < jds2001> i can make some and make them public.
14:35 < poelcat> something for everyone
14:35 < poelcat> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/FindingBugs
14:35 < jds2001> oh, i was just gonna do some named queries in my acct and make them public
14:36 < nirik> another way I was thinking of is to have someone watching #fedorabot and triaging as things come in...
14:36 < poelcat> might be a place to start
14:36 < poelcat> thought FindingBugs is more of a narative or tutorial for newbies
14:36  * poelcat still thinks a query page would be easier to maintain
14:36 < jds2001> we also need a section on finding dupes, which i saw mentioned in one of your pages
14:36 < poelcat> FindingBugs is a spin off from one of the exsiting pages, but needs to be hacked down
14:38 < jds2001> nirik: i watch #fedorabot occasionally, but agree that someone needs to watch it.
14:38 < poelcat> i'm trying to keep a running map of the wiki pages here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JohnPoelstra/TriageIdeas1
14:39 < jds2001> we probably need to trim down what's in #fedorabot though
14:39 < nirik> yeah, I have been watching it for a while... it's sometimes interesting... like the pulseaudio bug filed by linus, or the obviously wrong component on a few pirut bugs.
14:39 < poelcat> jds2001: or fork the bot to zero in on what triagers need?
14:39 < poelcat> jds2001: yeah, it is hard to parse
14:40 < jds2001> yes, the bot is hosted by mozilla though
14:40 < nirik> we could probibly get it into another channel with a different output
14:40 < poelcat> then you could have a channel that filters out the noise by only showing NEW bugs
14:40 < jds2001> and ones that aren't package reviews
14:40 < poelcat> which would be quieter
14:40 < nirik> not sure it's hosted by mozilla... it's run by one of the bugzilla upsteam developers.
14:41 < nirik> it also gets a flood on updates pushes.
14:41 < poelcat> and a triager could say something in the channel when they grab a bug to triage
14:41 < jds2001> yeah - does anyone know who is responsible for that?
14:41  * nirik is on too many channels already, but oh well. 
14:41 < nirik> jds2001: yes, it's mkant.
14:41 < jds2001> heh me too
14:42 < nirik> I have been trying to catch him... he set me up as an admin on it, but it's ignoring my commands. ;)
14:42 -!- Lovechild [n=david@about/unixlove/Lovechild] has quit ["Ex-Chat"]
14:42 < jds2001> lol
14:43 < nirik> in any case, I think the bot could be a valuable tool...
14:43 < jds2001> absolutely.
14:44 < jds2001> next thing is building community and outreach that obviously need to wait til we have good docs, but say we did today....
14:45 < nirik> I think we should hit the developer community hard... they already have the permissions and some of them might be willing/eager to assist with packages not their own.
14:45 < jds2001> i wish that inode0 could be here, he's off judging a lego robotics competition
14:45 < jds2001> but he said to 
14:45 < jds2001> "find a way to invade my campus
14:45 < jds2001> "
14:46 < jds2001> for those of you that dont know him, he works at iowa state university.  There are students that are not developers and are captivated by the notion of opensource, but they don't know how to get involved.
14:47 < jds2001> finding them and telling them what to do and where is the problem.
14:47 < nirik> yeah, I think this would be an excellent way to start getting involved.
14:48  * poelcat smells some "extra credit" assignments 
14:48 < owentl> do they have a computer club?  maybe a meeting w/ them or something?
14:48 < nirik> also, we could look at some outreach to lugs in general...
14:49 < nirik> also, some of the regulars on #fedora could be asked to step up and help. ;)
14:49 < jds2001> they have a lug, but those type of people are not the ones that need to be found.
14:50 < jds2001> nirik mentioned another idea - the current maintainer community
14:50 < nirik> yeah, I think there are some folks there that will help... especially if they see it's making a difference.
14:51 < jds2001> goes back to the metrics need
14:51 < jds2001> next quick item is AWOL's - what to do about them?  I'm not really sure of the scale of the problem, either.
14:52 < jds2001> I
14:52 < nirik> I think the first step we should look at is just generating a report to fesco/fedora-devel...
14:52 < nirik> and not say awol, but say 'these maintainers are not processing their bugs very quickly... they could use some help'
14:53 < jds2001> sure :)
14:53 < nirik> there are some maintainers that are very bad about dealing with bugzilla.
14:53 < poelcat> is this really within the scope of triage?
14:54 < poelcat> or is this tied to the "backlog" problem?
14:54 < jds2001> it's defintely in the scope of 'user experience'
14:54 < drago01> also does processing means responding or actually fixing bugs?
14:54 < nirik> I think this is something triage can point out...how bad the problem is, and what package groups it's hitting hardest.
14:54  * poelcat has a hard stop at 15:00 EST
14:55 < jds2001> it may be somewhat tied to teh backlog problem - i.e.  a psychological demotivator to not do anything since they'll never get out from underneath the backlog
14:55 < nirik> drago01: could be either. Fixing things and not closing bugs, or just not doing anything at all.
14:55 < jds2001> ok, so next meeting - what day/time works
14:55 < drago01> ok
14:56 < owentl> weekends are bad for me
14:56 < nirik> the pulseaudio maintainer said he doesn't really look at bugzilla until the end of a cycle... and someone steped up to help him handle bugs, so thats the kind of thing I think would be nice.
14:56 < nirik> weekdays are likely to get more folks.
14:56 < poelcat> how about evenings?
14:56 < poelcat> on a weekday
14:56 < jds2001> k.....Wednesday's at noon EST
14:56 < jds2001> poelcat: evenings would be even better for me.
14:57 < nirik> I think that might hit the epel meeting... let me see.
14:57 < owentl> +1 for evenings
14:57 < nirik> looks like right after, so it would work.
14:57 < nirik> evenings are usually ok for me as long as it's monday/tue/wed.
14:58  * poelcat is pretty flexible... Wed @ 12 EST works 
14:58 -!- hircus [n=michel@adsl-75-60-174-17.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:58 < owentl> I can do Wed @ noon too
14:58 < hircus> sorry, just joined
14:59 < jds2001> oh, no problem.  I'll post the log in a bit
14:59 < nirik> hircus: we are talking about next meeting time... wed at noon was proposed.
14:59 < hircus> nirik: yes, got that part. noon EST or UTC?
14:59 < jds2001> noon eastern 17:00UTC
15:00 < hircus> I can make that, for one hour
15:00 < nirik> that will conflict with epel meeting in summer... but is ok for now, as it's doing 18:00UTC for winter.
15:01 < poelcat> will we have enough new stuff to talk about by this wed? or should we skip a week?
15:01 < nirik> we can always do a short meeting if there isn't much...
15:01 < poelcat> good point
15:02  * poelcat has to run... thanks to everyone who came
15:02 < nirik> FYI, there is a small list of people in fedorabugs that are not in cla_done. We will need to get them to sign the cla or remove them if we decide for sure cla is required.
15:02 < jds2001> cya peters-tx 
15:02 < nirik> have for poelcat
15:02 < nirik> fun even
15:02 < jds2001> poelcat even :)  evil tab :)
15:03 < jds2001> let's talk about that if you've got a sec
15:03 < jds2001> i dont think that CLA is strictly required.  It *is* something that's quite useful to have, since you pretty much need it to do anything else.
15:04 < jds2001> anyone can report a bug, no CLA needed for that.
15:04 < nirik> currently it's not required for fedorabugs... but it could be if we decide it should.
15:04 < hircus> without the CLA, the only thing you can't do is commit the change yourself, right?
15:04 < jds2001> well, i can't commit changes either - i'm not a sponsored packager :)
15:04 < nirik> the problem is that if they are not in cla_done and submit some work to a HOWTO or work on docs for something we couldn't use them.
15:04 < hircus> nirik: ah, the copyright assignment
15:04 < nirik> yeah.
15:05 < nirik> so does bugzilla have a 'anything you submit here is free' thing?
15:05 < jds2001> not that i'm aware of.
15:05 < hircus> not explicitly, I think, though that would be a reasonable interpretation
15:05 < nirik> http://www.redhat.com/legal/legal_statement.html
15:06 < nirik> linked from 'terms of use' at the bottom of bugzilla pages.
15:07 < nirik> so I think anything someone does in bugzilla is fine, the cla would just be needed if we wanted to make sure other materals are ok to accept
15:07 < jds2001> By displaying, publishing and making available for download and use by others any content, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials ("Content") you give Red Hat a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through the web site. You agree that this license includes a right for Red Hat to make such Content available to other companies,
15:07 < hircus> ah. the Rights in Content
15:08 < jds2001> i think to make that very clear we require CLA
15:08 < nirik> ok, I am fine with requiring the cla... we need to contact the people who haven't done it in fedorabugs and also the list of pending people.
15:09  * mmcgrath notes there's also a http://fedoraproject.org/legal/
15:09 < nirik> we might want to get a ack from fesco on it too in case anyone objects there.
15:10 < jds2001> can we make fedorabugs require either cvsextras or a sponsor from fedorabugs?
15:10 < nirik> cvsextras already automagically gets you fedorabugs.
15:11 < jds2001> right, and they have a sponsor there
15:11 < hircus> I guess Jon means a way to get in without needing cvsextras
15:11 < nirik> fedorabugs does require someone to sponsor.
15:11 < jds2001> oh, OK - it just has no sponsors :)
15:12 < jds2001> we should come up with guidelines, then.  Like was mentioned at fudcon, we dont want a high barrier to entry
15:12 < nirik> I guess it doesn't have sponsors, but it does require approval
15:12 < jds2001> we also dont want to approve everyone that we dont know, since they can do damage that we can't easily fix.
15:13 < nirik> yeah... there are 39 pending right now.
15:14 < jds2001> can you make me a sponsor or administrator, whichever you want?  I think that only sponsors get mail of pending memberships, so that might make more sense.
15:14 < nirik> I don't think I can... ;( let me see.
15:14 < jds2001> i thought you were an administrator of fedorabugs
15:15 < nirik> yeah... right now it has no sponsors. Not sure what needs to be done to make that happen...
15:16 < jds2001> mmcgrath: any ideas?
15:16 < nirik> I can puzzle it out and come up with some options.
15:16 < jds2001> k
15:16 < jds2001> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugControl is what Ubuntu does - i'm not sure that stringent of a policy makes sense
15:17 < mmcgrath> jds2001: I'm not actually an admin for that group so if you want to change some default behavior or something, you'll have to talk to them about it :)
15:17 < nirik> there is a 'needs sponsor' checkbox... not sure if that will do what we want tho. ;)
15:17 < jds2001> no, how does one (who can) make a sponsor?
15:18 < jds2001> we're just wondering about the workings of FAS, not asking you to do something with it :)
15:18 < nirik> well, you request it, and an admin approves it. But right now there aren't any sponsors in that group.
15:19 < nirik> oh wait... whats your fas username jds2001 ?
15:20 < jds2001> jstanley
15:20 < nirik> nice... BOOM... traceback. ;)
15:20  * jds2001 watches FAS go poof
15:20 < nirik> let me check with abadger1999 or anyone else who knows FAS.
15:26 < jds2001> cool