10:00:14 #startmeeting General IRC meeting 8 December 10:00:14 Meeting started Wed Dec 8 10:00:14 2010 UTC. The chair is chris. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 10:00:14 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 10:00:34 #topic Introductions 10:00:58 Zeno Tajoli, CILEA - Italy 10:00:59 * chris is Chris Cormack 3.4 RM 10:01:15 * magnus Magnus Enger, Libriotech, Norway 10:01:39 * jwagner Jane Wagner LibLime/PTFS 10:02:17 Colin Campbell PTFS-Europe 10:03:01 Doug Kingston - English Folk Dance & Song Society (efdss.org) 10:03:19 Thomas Dukleth, Agogme, New York City 10:04:28 * kf Katrin Fischer, BSZ, Germany 10:04:31 chris_n and hdl about? 10:04:50 * slef = MJ Ray, worker-owner, software.coop 10:04:56 be a short meeting otherwise, which i dont mind :) 10:06:28 shall we jump to the 3.4 update and if they arrive we can do 3.0. and 3.2 after? 10:06:36 +1 10:06:37 +1 10:06:38 +1 10:06:43 sounds like a plan +1 10:07:10 ok 10:07:22 #topic Update on roadmap for 3.4 10:08:01 we are still on track, pushing lots of patches 10:08:25 but there are some big branches awaiting qa 10:08:55 i made some changes to bugzilla last week 10:09:12 added a new field, patch status 10:09:35 for any single patches on a bug, that need qa/signoff i have been setting that to needs signoff 10:09:40 chris: I wondered about the correct status after a patch has been signed-off 10:10:21 ill set it patch pushed when i push it 10:10:32 * hdl Henri-Damien LAURENT BibLibre 10:10:40 (sorry to be late) 10:10:50 it can go back to blank if we want, or we can add another status 10:11:11 for multipatches for a bug, i have been pushing new/awaiting_qa branches 10:11:15 Related to this: I've not linked the November patches list emails to bugs yet. Shall I? Does anyone find those batches of comments annoying? 10:11:22 to make it easier 10:11:51 they dont annoy me 10:12:16 me neither 10:12:17 me neither 10:12:36 ok, I'll continue, do this batch, then automate 10:12:57 #agreed slef to continue his work linking patches to bugs 10:13:38 meetbot++ :) 10:13:51 does anyone else have any general 3.4 questions before we move on to template toolkit update? 10:14:52 yes 10:15:19 how much in advance of the release schedule would you expect a feature freeze? 10:15:23 Do you have a plan for persistence and performance work ? 10:16:09 thd: 1 month and 2 week string freeze 10:16:17 hdl: no 10:16:26 which date would that be? 10:16:34 22 march 10:16:35 sometime in march? 10:16:36 ah 10:17:17 hdl: we do need to track down the memory leaks before we can continue with persistance tho, so hopefully someone will work on that 10:17:34 chris same question for circulation and all the RFCs... 10:17:52 (global RFCs) 10:17:57 #info feature freeze aimed for march 22, string freeze for 2 weeks after 10:18:18 hdl: i have no concrete plans if someone wants to make some, that would be good 10:18:24 hdl: global RFCs? 10:18:26 wow...8-) 10:18:37 im rm, not god 10:18:40 Ajax.. Circulation imrpovements. 10:18:47 :) 10:19:03 I dont expect you to do all the stuff. 10:19:12 hdl: By global do you mean affecting many modules? 10:19:25 But I raise those issues in order to raise attention on that. 10:19:43 So that we can all make efforts and join forces. 10:20:11 @quote add chris: im rm, not god 10:20:11 kf: The operation succeeded. Quote #110 added. 10:20:42 Community could try and set periodical meetings on those subjects and come who wants. 10:20:49 #action organise meetings on rfcs 10:21:12 #help someone needs to organise them, and by someone i mean anyone except me :) 10:21:26 :) 10:21:35 biblibre can take some... but not all 10:21:41 About circulation improvements. 10:21:50 It could be tested 10:21:58 it is on a branch 10:23:01 lets make some meetings for each of the performance rfc 10:23:25 i know there are people interested in them and then they can discuss specifics 10:24:08 Can you detail then ? 10:24:15 detail what? 10:25:49 detail what different meeting syou want 10:25:55 you propose. 10:25:57 i dont want any 10:26:08 I think the branches from biblibre need a qa session 10:26:09 i thought you did 10:26:28 #action organise a qa session for biblibre branches 10:26:31 the rfc's that still need work is perhaps a different thing 10:26:31 I think that chris was stating that those interested in holding topic meetings are encouraged to organise them 10:26:36 We take it. 10:27:01 sorry I misunderstood. 10:27:29 I thought idea was to split performance issues into idetified parts. 10:27:34 identified... 10:28:16 for instance javascript/Plack or data persistence.... 10:28:22 they mostly have, circ improvements, ajax, persistence etc 10:28:45 and i encourage people interested in them, to talk to each other 10:29:07 ok.. was also to check that we would not miss any, just to have the beginind of a list of identified issues. 10:29:36 sounds like a wiki page ;-) 10:29:45 i dont think missing them is too much of a worry, its not a finite topic 10:30:08 chris: should we make a call for volunteer on each subject ? 10:30:12 and we wont get all of them done for 3.4, people adding more as they think of them 10:30:22 chris: but having no lists doesnot help organisign work. 10:30:37 i didnt say no lists 10:30:47 i said we dont need an exhaustive list 10:31:11 chris: fine for me. 10:31:15 #idea have volunteers to coordinate discussion on each of the performance rfc 10:31:47 * Brooke will go over the meeting minutes and put summat up on the wiki for Mondayish. 10:31:51 is there a label/category for performance rfcs? 10:32:15 http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/RFCs_for_Koha_3.4 10:32:17 slef: One can easily be added. 10:32:24 #action Brooke will go over the meeting minutes and put summat up on the wiki for Mondayish 10:34:24 ok, anything else? or shall we move on? 10:35:09 #action thd to add a category for performance related rfc 10:35:14 ok, moving on 10:35:21 #topic template toolkit update 10:35:22 slef: I took categories from bugzilla where no such category had been created in the component assignment nature of bug assignments. 10:35:30 that page hdl gave the url to looks like it should be split into several pages with more details 10:36:09 chris hall, has been doing a lot of work and has a script that can convert html::template::pro files to template::toolkit ones 10:36:18 we ran into some issues with variable names 10:36:33 magnus: agreed. 10:36:38 in h::t::p you can have somethin like foo-bar as a variable name 10:36:50 in tt it needs to be a valid perl variable name 10:37:08 so we have been fixing those in the original templates too 10:37:17 we are now in the testing phase 10:37:39 #link http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Template_toolkit_test 10:37:43 we will try and test that too. 10:37:46 kf has been doing some testing 10:37:55 thanks. 10:38:11 sorry, phone call 10:38:18 we ran into some issues with umlauts, which we havent figured out the solution to yet, but i am sure its something we just missed setting 10:38:32 Is there a way you propose to organise parts of templates ? 10:38:44 thats outside the scope of the changes for 3.4 10:39:12 so it'll be a similar organisation? 10:39:15 this is purely a replacement of the templating engine 10:39:27 yes, where similair = exactly the same 10:39:47 once that is working flawlessly 10:39:53 then we can start moving things around 10:40:14 and making use of the extra features we get with tt 10:40:49 that may happen before 3.4 is released, but i doubt it, there is a lot of other things to do 10:41:17 but once its changed, it should be possible for people to start reorganising 10:41:33 With ongoing works on Acquisitions, it could be good if ppl could get an idea of a best practise. 10:41:54 even fuzzy or blur. 10:42:10 thats certainly something that you would want owen involved in 10:42:22 along with jquery upgrades etc 10:42:52 #idea organise something with owen about tempalte reorganisations 10:44:53 so thats where we are now, with more testing, we should be ready to switch to tt early in the new year, outstanding patches to templates i will apply to the old templates and use the script to upgrade them to tt 10:45:59 chris : it could be good if all the big branches could get in before 10:46:09 but after fair warning ill expect new ones to be tt not h::t::p 10:47:01 one is readyish, it has had qa and some feedback provided, if you wanted to respond to the questions in that feedback then that branch could be merged 10:47:32 perhaps colin could organise a qa meeting 10:47:42 the one owen and Frederic sent comments on ? 10:47:58 galen signed off on, and sent comments 10:48:07 Or is it about reports ? 10:48:14 that other one is only partially qa 10:48:16 d 10:48:36 maybe colin could organise some meetings and try and rope in some volunteers to help qa 10:49:24 I didn't cath Galen was waiting an answer from me. 10:49:34 yes probably need to generate a strategy to attack some of these 10:49:35 s/cath/catch/ 10:50:11 hdl: yep, im pretty sure there were a few questions and a couple of changes he wanted you to check 10:51:06 #action hdl comment on gmcharlt email and branch 10:51:40 #topic update on biblibre branches 10:51:49 we have kinda started this already :) 10:52:21 indeed. 10:52:27 was there anything else you wanted to add hdl? 10:52:45 Just say that there are many bug fixes done also on those. 10:53:12 And that in my opinion, the more we wait for integration, the more we will have duplicat efforts. 10:53:43 And we had very little feedback on the qa progress. 10:54:26 So idea of kf before to organise meetings could be good. 10:54:56 Instead of having 12 branches to cope with, I would have only 3 and that would be a great step. 10:55:26 i only have i think 32 at last count 10:55:44 Could we agree on having a meeting around that ? assuming people are ready to spend time testing. 10:57:02 if so, i can rais an action 10:57:18 i suggest you propose a time and see how that goes 10:57:36 there are other branches 10:57:56 like the 2 analytics ones and others 10:58:03 that need qa too 10:58:38 #action propose a meeting around qa branches. 10:58:59 2 analytics ? 10:59:04 (but that was already said. 10:59:05 ) 10:59:16 I think that is only one 10:59:35 (new/awaiting_qa/analytical_records) 10:59:43 thats one 10:59:50 there is work kf has been doing too 10:59:57 tajoli: I have seen two patches for analytic records 11:00:09 I will continue to try and take into account any feed back 11:01:54 #topic update on the 3 words 11:02:00 I simply add unimarc (461/463 ) support 11:02:12 (its midnight here, i have to do training tomorrow so moving along) 11:02:16 k, still not dawn here, so bear with me. 11:02:48 tajoli: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=4506 11:02:49 04Bug 4506: enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, katrin.fischer, NEW, Add support of record linking by record control number in $w 11:03:38 We worked on a three words tag cloud 11:03:52 from stuff discussed at KohaCon then opened up over the list 11:04:23 we got pretty good feedback 11:04:51 I then hybridised the new words with an old mission statement 11:04:59 and then sent that puppy out for feedback 11:05:22 so tag cloud is here 11:05:31 http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/File:Zecloud2.png 11:05:43 #link http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/File:Zecloud2.png 11:05:44 Mission is 11:05:48 The mission of the Koha project is to produce and maintain an 11:05:49 evolutionary and revolutionary free open source Integrated Library System. 11:05:49 Through collaboration, our communityhopes to offer a fresh, dynamic, 11:05:49 reliable catalogue that sets the benchmark in usability, quality and innovation. 11:05:50 We seek to emancipate users from the morass of proprietary data and orphaned 11:05:50 products and empower Koha users to share their strengths in a stable, welcoming, 11:05:50 and nurturing environment. 11:05:50 We value the cooperation of enthusiastic librarians, generous software 11:05:51 developers, transparent support providers and all people of integrity who share 11:05:51 our commitment to freedom and participate in the spirit of solidarity. 11:06:47 If you have better words, or this is highly offencive in your language, I'm all ears for change. 11:09:06 Some benign word is offensive in some possible language or if pronounced the wrong way :) 11:09:19 i like it 11:10:02 noble moto 11:10:04 Is their a definition of opaque support providers? 11:10:16 s/their/there/ 11:10:25 +1 (and sorry, I'm gone now... for some reason I'd booked this meeting as an hour) 11:10:31 I'd assume there could be as a footnote or supporting document someplace. 11:10:55 +1 11:11:19 Mission -> Vision -> Planning -> Less argument is the theory 11:12:45 Brooke: I think that the intended meaning of transparent is clear to me but I am not certain it would be clear to everyone. 11:13:18 i propose that discussion on the wording be continued at a later date 11:13:24 +1 11:13:31 I'm limited in construction in that Mission statements are meant to be wee things. Again, I'm willing to add supporting documentation linking what it means as things evolve 11:14:04 i think transparent sounds good, lets "operationalize" it later, if we feel like it 11:14:49 id like to thank brooke for working on this 11:14:55 and move on to 11:14:57 mostly bob 11:15:01 and you guyses 11:15:12 #topic action items from the previous meeting 11:15:19 im not sure we had any? 11:15:50 anyone remember differently? certainly we didnt note any in the minutes 11:15:52 I did not mean to suggest that transparent was not fine or not the best choice. 11:16:38 I have an issue to reintroduce. 11:17:02 Or rather further postpone to the mailing list. 11:17:14 fire away 11:17:56 At the last meeting I proposed to reintroduce the delayed ballot process on upgrading the software license. 11:18:15 ... with apologies for falling ill. 11:18:24 #action thd to reintroduce the ballot process on the software license to the mailing lists 11:18:31 no apologies needed 11:18:39 its not like it was something you can stop :) 11:18:44 gmcharlt wisely suggested deferring to the mailing list. 11:19:06 I could have seen the doctor sooner and had less of an infection to combat. 11:19:18 However, I avoid doctors when I can. 11:20:27 I think that last month was not appropriate for reintroduction with problems over RFCs and development conflicts taking much of my time to help resolve. 11:21:03 I will take the issue up for restarting the ballot process on the mailing list this month. 11:21:10 ive action pointed it now, so you have too :) 11:21:17 to even 11:21:39 #topic times for next meeting 11:22:16 Wednesday 5 ? 11:22:42 * magnus works for me 11:22:46 that would be ok for me, time? 11:22:49 20 PM ? 11:22:51 For me better after 6 11:23:09 * kf back 11:23:19 20:00 GMT? 11:23:34 +1 11:23:36 or 22 GMT 11:23:56 who are we being nice to this time? 11:24:09 it was nice for europe this time 11:24:11 perhaps us? 11:24:13 apparently not europeans 11:24:14 or india :) 11:24:27 americans and new zelanders iirc. 11:24:39 Whichever time, can we get reminder emails to the listserv? There are very few people here today. 11:25:06 * magnus gotta run 11:25:09 Or same time ? 11:25:23 chris: I have a quick question on how we progress bug 5332 11:25:24 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5332 enhancement, P3, ---, gmcharlt, NEW, Add batch reversion capability to bin/commit_biblios_file.pl 11:25:26 22 is good, me thinks 11:25:33 * jwagner pleads sleepily for a different time :-) 11:25:45 #action jwagner to send reminder emails 11:26:07 dpk: can it wait until the meeting finishes? 11:26:08 Me? I thought that was the meeting organizer? 11:26:17 its anyone 11:26:22 and you volunteered 11:26:24 yes 11:26:50 * jwagner looks up definition of "volunteered" 11:27:13 #agreed next meeting is 22:00 UTC Wednesday 5 January 11:27:16 done 11:27:23 jwagner: i thought that was an american habit. 11:27:24 jwagner: There is a special meaning in the Koha community. 11:27:30 OK thanks folks 11:27:33 have to run now 11:27:40 #endmeeting