22:01:25 #startmeeting 22:01:25 Meeting started Wed Jan 5 22:01:25 2011 UTC. The chair is chris. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 22:01:25 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 22:01:39 #topic Introductions 22:02:05 chris cormack, catalyst, RM 3.4 22:02:06 * nengard = Nicole C. Engard, Documenation Manager/ByWater Solutions 22:02:16 * magnus = Magnus Enger, Libriotech, Norway 22:02:16 * hdl Henri-Damien LAURENT, BibLibre, RMaint 3.0 22:02:18 Thomas Dukleth, Agogme, New York City 22:02:22 richard anderson, katipo 22:02:26 * cait = Katrin Fischer, BSZ, Germany 22:02:27 RHCL = Rolling Hills Consolidated Library, Greg Lawson 22:02:34 Colin Campbell, PTFS Europe Ltd 22:02:38 Lee Phillips Butte Public Library Montana USA 22:02:46 * sekjal = Ian Walls, ByWater Solutions 22:02:55 Daniel Grobani, Samuel Merritt University, Oakland, CA 22:02:55 * wizzyrea liz rea, nekls 22:03:18 Reed Wade. Catalyst 22:03:38 gregg lind , Renesys, remote in minneapolis, (python, js) other mathy stuff 22:04:22 MJ Ray, worker-owner, software.coop UK and elsewhere 22:04:24 @seen chris_n 22:04:24 chris: chris_n was last seen in #koha 1 hour, 44 minutes, and 7 seconds ago: * chris_n hands his potatoes to owen 22:05:13 Ricardo Dias Marques, author of installation guide of Koha 3.0 in openSUSE 11.0 and contributor/approver to Portuguese (pt-PT) translation, Portugal 22:05:22 first item on the agenda was to be 3.2 update, ill shelve that for now in the hope chris_n gets back before the meeting ends 22:05:55 ok, lets move on, anyone who hasnt introduced themselves, feel free to do so at anytime 22:06:06 #topic Update on 3.0 22:06:20 hdl: over to you 22:06:37 I am desperately late. 22:06:49 An congratulates chris n for being on time 22:07:08 But am still willing to release the last 3.0.7 22:07:27 hdl++ :) 22:07:39 do you have a date in mind for that? and that will be the end of life release for 3.0.x eh? 22:07:48 Yes. 22:08:09 #action hdl to release 3.0.7 and post and end of life announcement 22:08:09 But there should be some barckporting of 3.0 bugfixes and features over 3.2 22:08:31 Since there have been some improvements there. 22:08:36 For overdues. 22:08:55 #idea we should backport features from 3.0.x to master and then to 3.2.x where applicable 22:09:28 or forward port as the case may be :) 22:09:38 chris: Concerning the end of life of 3.0.x ... Couldn't a "door" be opened if someone wants to be the "Release Maintainer" for 3.0.x ? (and no, I'm NOT proposing myself for the job, eheh...) 22:09:59 ricardo: do you see any value in maintaining 2 stable branches? 22:10:12 all i can see is confusion resulting 22:10:37 and duplication of work 22:10:38 chris: There are always some people that prefer to stay in their version, and not "risk" an upgrade. So, I guess that I see value in that 22:10:40 ricardo: the latest release of 3.0 would just to be a clean end. 22:11:08 3.2 is assumed to be stable enough. 22:11:14 yep, they can stay on 3.0.x but i dont think we should keep releasing versions to it 22:11:16 ricardo: I don't think it's a good thing to stay too long on an old version 22:11:41 having 3 places to fix bugs, just means 3 times as much work 22:11:47 And actually is since there are more regula updates. 22:11:51 yup 22:11:53 chris: I'm only talking about ACCEPTING bugfixes for 3.0.x (not putting new featutres, of course) 22:12:01 s/featutres/features 22:12:16 Koha is a living entity... doesn't make sense to sit on one version forever (IMHO) 22:12:42 taking bugfixes from master to 3.0 would be getting more and more difficult. 22:12:46 It is already 22:13:13 hey Jo! 22:13:14 could we offer it for a group of users+developers to take up maintenance if they want? Just say that it's the end of koha-community's appointed RM because we think people should upgrade to 3.2 soon. 22:13:19 But I can leave the door open... 22:13:23 slef++ 22:13:25 hiya all 22:13:37 slef: we could do that 22:13:41 I don't think anyone will, but they can adopt it if they want. 22:13:50 i would strongly recommend people upgrade though 22:14:01 I would too 22:14:15 Yes, I think it's up to hdl to word his farewell as he thinks fit 22:14:16 so as long as we say 'i dont think this is a good idea, but if you really really want to, you can' 22:14:19 ;-) 22:14:23 *nod* 22:14:33 slef: Congrats and thanks on explaining my argument much better than I did (seriously!) :) 22:15:09 anything more on 3.0.x? 22:15:15 Problem would be to add foreign key on pushing to 3.0 maybe. 22:15:29 chris not from me 22:16:04 #topic update on 3.4 22:16:31 Ok, work is progressing nicely 22:16:47 but we are developing a bit of a backlog of patches waiting signoff 22:17:05 167 currently 22:17:21 if you look at http://koha-releasemanagement.branchable.com/ 22:17:29 there are 3 links at the top, that are handy 22:17:43 top one is patches waiting signoff/qa 22:17:51 2nd one are patches signed off, waiting on me 22:18:05 and the 3rd one, are ones that have been pushed and need to be tested and closed 22:18:36 signoff/qa = signoff by QA? 22:18:36 128 in the 3rd state 22:19:34 not really, signoff or qa 22:19:55 i meant, signed off by someone or rejected for qa reasons 22:20:27 top link, a lot seem to be in status NEW? 22:20:37 this is quite confusing 22:20:45 status doesnt actually matter 22:20:46 I've been off, this is confusing me, I probably need to go reread some wiki page. 22:20:54 its patch sent, and patch status 22:20:55 signed off is approval 22:21:07 And qa would mean disapproval ? 22:21:07 take a look at 5423 22:21:30 sorry look at bug 5449 22:21:30 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5449 blocker, PATCH-Sent, ---, brice.sanchez, ASSIGNED, JSON malformed in Koha - Blocker with jQuery 1.4.x 22:21:31 signed off means someone has applied it successfully to their install of HEAD and has tested it 22:21:46 see the patch status, on the right, is set to Needs Signoff 22:21:56 from that state 22:22:01 there are 3 ways it can go 22:22:05 signed off 22:22:05 i think signed off is approval 22:22:08 does not apply 22:22:14 or failed qa 22:22:15 somebody said failed qa was a new status in the pull down - we don't have one for does not apply yet :) 22:22:50 we currently have 167 sitting at the point of having a patch sent, and awaiting one of those three actions 22:22:54 does that make sense? 22:23:10 #link http://koha-releasemanagement.branchable.com/ 22:24:08 maybe a better separation between signedoff and rejected for qa would help. 22:24:20 how do you mean? 22:24:35 you told that state 2 meant 22:24:42 signedoff/qa 22:24:47 that is 22:24:58 its passed qa and been signed off 22:25:17 if its signed off state 22:25:27 #link http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Sign_off_on_patches 22:25:37 what i meant is there are 167 patches that need to be either rejected or signed off 22:26:04 If signed off by someone who tested it then it has to pass qa am i right ? 22:26:21 small ones, im willing to sidestep signoff for, if i have to, but id rather that every patch has at least 2 sets of eyes 22:26:23 can someone who understands how that relates to branchable and bugs add a new first section "choose a patch to sign off" to that page, please? 22:26:24 send patch, attach to bug, change status to 'needs sign-off' - that's the status the patches in the long list are 22:27:20 hdl: often the signoff is good enough, if i dont think it is, i wont push it and note it still needs qa 22:27:51 what i dont think is feasible, is for colin to have to signoff on all those 167 (plus the new ones that come in everyday) by himself 22:28:04 got it 22:29:21 branches to merge are branches that passed qa ? 22:29:51 if the branch is awaiting_qa/something then no 22:29:55 if not then, yes 22:30:18 they are ones i need to test further myself 22:31:06 branches to merge is a note for me, so i dont forget :) 22:31:36 the new statuses should help us track them, before we used to just have patch-sent for everything 22:31:43 so was hard to know what state the patch was in 22:31:44 chris: all the 167 bugs that you talk about are not in branches are they ? 22:32:03 some might be, they will be noted on the bug if they are 22:32:09 for eg 5575 22:32:25 but the vast majority, no, they are a single patch 22:32:34 if they get signed off 22:32:41 i create a branch, test that branch 22:32:42 but some are quite old... 22:32:44 merge to master 22:33:01 the patch sent could need conflict solving 22:33:10 yes, some people will have to rebase their patches if they want them to apply, some nice people like owen have been rebasing peoples 22:33:26 yes, the person trying to sign off then has 2 options 22:33:35 work with the person who sent the patch to resolve the conflict 22:33:45 or set the status to patch wont apply, and note the conflicts 22:34:00 owen would you mind writing up a short tutorial on what you're doing to rebase other people's patches? If I had instructions I'd gladly help out 22:34:11 http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=4329 22:34:13 04Bug 4329: enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, jwagner, ASSIGNED, OPAC search by shelving location option 22:34:17 * nengard notices that owen isn't here ... 22:34:18 heres one i prepared earlier 22:34:43 #action nengard to ask owen about a tutorial on rebasing others patches 22:34:43 nengard: git am -3 is your friend 22:35:35 it tries to merge and let you solve conflict if there is. 22:35:44 And then you can use git mergetool 22:36:47 hokay 22:37:04 so the plan for january, lets get needs signoff under 100 :) 22:37:20 :) 22:37:25 why not... 22:37:36 jan 22 is the halfway mark for 3.4.0 22:37:43 Lets have also some deep work done on persistence 22:37:44 * Brooke shudders. 22:38:25 early feb, we should be merging the template toolkit work, all things going well 22:38:56 i will give lots of warning for that though 22:39:08 thats all i have on 3.4.x ... any questions? 22:40:13 I donot see the remove items branch in your plan. 22:40:22 Is it in ? 22:40:38 does it have a bug number? 22:41:04 basically if its not attached to a bug that i can track, chances are i will miss it 22:41:23 its vitally important that everything has a bug, even if that just contains a link to the branch to pull 22:41:26 What about a persistence meeting, we agreed that we could have one at the beginning of the year. 22:41:58 yep thats up to someone to organise, theres still time for things to get in, code freeze wont be until april 22:42:01 * gregglind perks up at persistence, which could mean lots of thigns 22:42:23 #action someone organise a meeting to talk about persistance 22:42:37 http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5579 22:42:38 04Bug 5579: enhancement, P5, ---, gmcharlt, NEW, Remove items from biblioitems.marcxml 22:43:26 if there are patches ready for that, set it to patch-sent and needs signoff and attach the patches or link to the branch 22:43:39 and then it will be in the queue 22:43:47 * nengard prefers patches attached (if it matters) 22:44:11 * jcamins agrees with nengard, at least when it's only one. 22:44:12 sometimes thats not feasible, if its 12 patches etc 22:44:32 i understand 22:44:34 ok, we should push on, still have lots of agenda 22:44:49 no chris_n still, so will leave that 22:45:41 #action chris_n send an email to the devel list if there is anything we need to know about 3.2.x 22:45:54 #topic Koha Mission/Community Guidelines 22:46:04 nengard: you added this? 22:46:15 Brooke gave us her three words summary last time 22:46:19 I thought we should move ahead with that 22:46:32 and use these two documents to start creating something a bit more official 22:46:43 i like the idea 22:46:51 at kohacon10 people complained that we had no 'official' rules/guidelines/codes etc 22:47:37 I know the ubuntu on is creative commons 22:47:47 so we can take it and change Ubuntu to Koha and start with that if we want 22:47:56 did anyone find the licensing on the Debian one? 22:48:22 easiest way would be to email them and ask id imagine, i think its under their web license 22:48:37 but i dont think we need to use their words 22:48:41 just their ideas 22:49:02 well as the one who ends up doing most of the writing, i'm all for copying and changing a few things to meet our needs 22:49:03 the debian one is commendably short :) 22:49:09 instead of using it as a guide and writing it fresh 22:49:16 well, brooke would probably write it 22:49:19 eh brooke 22:49:27 * Brooke gulps. 22:49:34 :) 22:49:35 I will try. 22:49:41 what's wrong with using what it says and editing it? 22:49:58 I would hardly expect the Debian document to not have a sufficiently free copyright license unless it is meant to serve as a legal document in which case any copyright license would be moot. 22:50:13 whats wrong with using its ideas and writing it in our words 22:50:48 the work involved 22:51:10 it would mean copy paste edit... Which is not a good software desing 22:51:16 Yes, writing is work. 22:51:20 reuse templates is good 22:51:51 okey dokey, if someone wants to write it great, i'm just trying to move us forward instead of waiting around for someone else to do the work :) 22:52:04 * Brooke might just be someone else. 22:52:09 great 22:52:28 I'm just saying, it melted me pea sized brain when I looked at both side by side. 22:52:30 nengard++ Brooke++ 22:52:34 clearly I just need to try harder. 22:53:01 slef undoubtedly has some ideas around it also 22:53:03 brooke: i'm happy to help too 22:53:11 hooray, I'll need it. 22:53:17 (not that you'd need it, mind you) 22:53:18 ...or that 22:53:20 :) 22:53:33 collaboration > flying solo 22:53:38 ^^ truf 22:54:04 sorry, distracted by the cricket highlights... Bell century :-) 22:54:15 #action brooke with the help of wizzyrea and others to start on a draft code of conduct/ social contract thingy 22:54:18 well I am with Nic- no sense in reinventing the wheel 22:54:38 Which debian one is being considered? 22:54:41 Ubuntu and Debian are reliable sources 22:54:52 links were in the agenda - which i don't have open :) 22:55:02 #link http://www.debian.org/social_contract 22:55:12 http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct 22:55:15 #link http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct 22:55:29 if you do the #link bit brooke it formats nicely for the minutes 22:55:36 just fyi 22:55:36 Personally, I like the e-democracy.org rules, but I suspect some things like the anti-mailbombing limit will be a bit harsh. 22:55:38 yessir. 22:55:50 Well, now, you see, the social contract isn't a code of conduct. 22:56:03 nope they are different beasts 22:56:07 So what are we trying to do here? 22:56:16 Both? One or the other? 22:56:25 i think both 22:56:26 i think woudl be nice to have both 22:56:27 I think we're doing both 22:56:30 plus a mission statement 22:56:30 and I suspect 22:56:33 based on talks at kohacon 22:56:40 that one will morph into 22:56:44 mission statement = social contract 22:56:51 i disagree 22:56:53 almost a vendory type affirmation 22:56:58 your mission is what you want to achieve 22:57:09 what's the point of the koha project 22:57:18 The social contract is what debian wants to achieve. 22:57:28 *nod* 22:57:33 okay then 22:57:52 anyway maybe we should move this to its own discussion? and move on, on the agenda? 22:58:16 sounds like there are enough interested parties to make sure something is done 22:58:18 from working with other orgs, it has been useful to remember that these sorts of docs can be draft/iterate, and tend not to be as complex as the ylook. 22:58:35 So, we're looking for both. Collect more examples by next meeting? 22:58:58 slef: that couldnt hurt 22:59:06 gregglind: good point 23:00:00 #link http://pages.e-democracy.org/Rules 23:01:05 ok, im gonna move on, people can continue this discussion post meeting 23:01:21 #topic Koha Newsletter automation 23:01:26 nengard: you're up again 23:01:31 nope, that's slef 23:01:46 he's trying to make my life easier :) 23:01:49 but it's his ideas 23:02:01 i thought you wanted to reduce it to bi-monthly 23:02:23 I do - and I am - slef thought he could make it stay monthly with some automatiion 23:02:39 ah hi... this is something I mentioned here a few weeks ago and we decided to bring it through a meeting 23:02:42 righto 23:03:25 to see if the change is worth it to have monthly newsletters continue 23:04:10 First question, do people prefer monthly newsletters? 23:04:47 Do we want to ask who "people" are? Who the target audience is, or is imagined to be? 23:05:04 and prefer over 'what' 23:05:04 nengard: who's the target audience? 23:05:11 all of you ... i thought :) 23:05:15 perhaps a straw pole on the koha list? 23:05:16 * Brooke consults her bylctionary for the definition of "is" again. 23:05:18 jransom: prefer over bi-monthly 23:05:21 I read it 23:05:22 i prefer it over weekly or quarterly 23:05:28 i read it too 23:05:34 i like monthly 23:05:35 but I like the daily on Twitter too 23:05:43 its a good summary of everything i might have missed 23:05:51 more spontaneous 23:05:57 if we shifted to the 24th of the month, you could have a 3.2.x release in each one ;) 23:06:10 I don't mind doing it monthly if people start sending me content more - i'm not a fan of teeth pulling 23:06:19 and nagging to get articles 23:06:29 I'm find with shifting the date too 23:06:43 fine with 23:06:48 i could write a regular article 23:06:53 state of 3.4 23:06:54 completely understyands nicole aversion to 'being the mother' 23:06:55 for each one 23:07:11 good way to put it jo - i never ever want to be a mother 23:07:34 is there away to gather stuff that isnt so time sensitive 23:07:46 that's what slef was talking about 23:07:50 a way to gather info automatically 23:07:54 So third question here... would contributors be willing to set up a blog feed or category just for articles? 23:07:54 like posts to the Koha Daily...used in the newslatter 23:08:02 letter 23:08:25 "the Koha Daily" = some paper.li site? 23:08:27 I like the blog feed idea alot 23:08:58 I would like to see RSS of some of our cohort on the newletter 23:09:39 the Koha daily I believe is a twitter feed, isnt Nicole? 23:09:58 Maybe we should run two straw polls? One asking readers if they mind if it becomes bi-monthly; and one asking contributors if they'd set up a feed for contributions? 23:10:26 slef there is the yahoo pipe already that does have a lot of content 23:10:37 not newseltter specific, but koha specific 23:10:37 Or maybe the IRC cabal of me and nengard should just do whatever we think best? ;-) 23:10:52 ++ 23:11:04 nengard: mirrored at http://owu.towers.org.uk/planets/koha/ and http://owu.towers.org.uk/planets/koha/index.rss IIRC 23:11:22 slef i'm up for working with you :) 23:11:23 cabal +1 23:11:28 +1 23:11:48 in the mean time everyone send me something for a january newsletter 23:11:51 * Brooke was promised initiate status for acquiring candles. 23:11:54 oh sorry, IRC cabal of me nengard and wizzyrea because we need stuff installed ;-) 23:11:55 and we'll stay monthly as long as i can keep content coming 23:12:27 i'll move publication to the 25th of the month instead of the 15th 23:12:34 so you have until the 23rd to get me content 23:12:42 23rd your local time zone) 23:12:53 Waring about depending upon non-free Yahoo pipes. 23:13:04 here is a tidbit- inspite of the disaster Butte migrated to 3.2.1 23:13:04 nengard: That's great... That way we can have the "Koha Monthly Newsletter Christmas Special" on the 25th of December! ;-) 23:13:09 thd - i'm not depending on it - i'm using it as a tool 23:13:17 give me something else that works as well and i'll use it 23:13:18 :) 23:13:38 ricard - the 25th of december issue will need to be done by the 15th of the month! :) 23:13:39 #action newsletter moved to 25th, slef and nengard to work on ideas to make it less onerous 23:14:04 nengard: just keep a backup of the feeds and I can throw up an aggregator if Yahoo Pipes ever goes wrong. 23:14:05 okay I gotta go deal with movers... hugs to all 23:14:14 cheers 23:14:14 slef - no prob! 23:14:16 Bye Lee! 23:14:17 #topic action points from last meeting 23:14:33 #link http://librarypolice.com/koha-meetings/2010/koha.2010-12-08-10.00.html 23:14:49 meetings on rfc? still to be organised? 23:15:00 ditto the biblibre qa session? 23:15:17 the page is up, but no one stepped up 23:15:35 paul will call for a meeting soon i think 23:15:53 thanks Brooke for that 23:16:22 thd: you added the category for performance related rfc? 23:16:47 yes 23:16:52 tick 23:16:59 It has been there a month now. 23:17:16 I am typing the last words for a koha list message to restart the ballot process for copyright license upgrade. 23:17:19 hdl did his task and that branch has been merged 23:17:38 number 6, is meetings again 23:17:42 thd: can you post the link ? 23:17:50 excellent thd 23:17:53 thd++ 23:18:01 hdl: I will post the link when I have sent the message. 23:18:03 and jwagner sent out the reminder email 23:18:07 (fot the record) 23:18:22 thd: link to the performance rfc 23:18:51 its a category hdl 23:19:13 oh yes. 23:19:28 hdl: I could not really find a proper performance RFC but I applied the category to one RFC about circulation. 23:19:59 hokay 23:20:09 #topic time and date for next meeting 23:21:48 3rd feb? 10:00 utc 23:22:53 Chinese New Year (Xin-Mao) 23:23:03 otherwise I think it's OK for me 23:23:05 2nd Feb would be better for me 23:23:15 Groundhog Day :) 23:23:24 2nd is ok 23:23:34 2nd also seems ok 23:23:41 any objections to the 2nd ... or the time? 23:23:46 (it is a wednesday) 23:24:04 No objections from me. 23:24:08 +1 23:24:30 (though I can't promise I'll actually manage to wake up for it) 23:24:35 :) 23:25:16 can't keep my eyes open... 23:25:33 yeah that will be me next meeting 11pm nz time 23:26:04 ok, if there are no objections 23:26:12 Is there already some agenda proposal for the next meeting? 23:26:24 #agreed next meeting is at 10:00UTC 2nd Feb 23:26:52 #action ricardo has just volunteered to set up the page for the meeting 23:26:52 thanks everyone 23:26:59 chris-- 23:27:01 ;-) 23:27:11 its easy, copy todays 23:27:22 http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/IRC_Meetings 23:27:31 chris: LOL! OK, eheh... 23:27:36 and then change the dates, and blank of the agenda 23:27:44 i'm on it actually 23:27:50 cool 23:28:14 who wants to send out the reminder ? 23:28:15 magnus: So, will you edit it? Great, thanks! 23:28:32 * ricardo sighs with great relief ;-) 23:29:25 good night 23:29:38 #action someone send out a reminder email about the meeting 23:29:40 Good night hdl. Sleep well ! 23:29:42 #endmeeting