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