17:01:11 #startmeeting 17:01:11 Meeting started Thu Sep 14 17:01:11 2017 UTC. The chair is pollo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:01:11 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 17:01:12 shall we start? 17:01:20 #topic Roll Call 17:01:23 o/ 17:01:25 \o 17:01:25 o/ 17:01:27 hello 17:01:28 Please say hello if you are here for the meeting! 17:01:29 o/ 17:01:42 is here 17:01:52 meanwhile, please have a look at the proposed agenda: http://deb.li/8eyj 17:02:54 is everyone ok with the agenda? 17:02:56 post mortem. well that's a cheerful start :) 17:03:19 yes 17:03:27 highvoltage: one has to die to be reborn 17:03:28 yup 17:03:48 #topic DebConf17 post-mortem 17:04:00 I suggest we follow the order on the agenda 17:04:17 Comments on the Voctomix setup? 17:04:27 it worked. 17:04:33 appeared stable 17:04:33 we keep being bad at monitoring disk space 17:04:36 shutting down recording for the evening was a little messy 17:04:48 stop/start-all-the-things is a bit low level for volunteers 17:04:58 #info voctomix: we need some solution for monitoring disk space 17:05:19 #info voctomix: we need some easier way to shut down recording for the evenings 17:05:20 working tallly lights were useful 17:05:24 it would've been nice to have tally lights sooner (maybe not directly related to voctomix but fits there best among the post mortem options) 17:05:28 paddatrapper: indeed 17:05:57 #info voctomix: tally lights should be part of our kit from the start 17:06:04 ack 17:06:12 I think tally lights is a nice sprint goal btw :d 17:06:21 well we have lights now 17:06:37 tumbleweed: we have cables for all of them? 17:06:41 although there's always work to do 17:06:48 so does that mean we want a talloy light signal from the front of house (stage) box? 17:06:50 pollo: sure, we've always had - but not very long 17:06:54 Hello 17:07:04 in the past, we obviously had a machine at each camera 17:07:14 RattusRattus: seems to be the new setup yes 17:07:16 that's drifting off-topic 17:07:19 indeed 17:07:28 anything else for vocto? 17:07:46 I think there was one point where a/v got desynced on one of the voctos 17:07:55 the whole p in p thing (see mailing list) 17:08:11 of course you notice that in the middle of a talk so you just restart stuff and can't really debug 17:08:46 that's it for me 17:08:57 #info voctomix: we should keep an eye on a/v desync 17:09:14 did anyone work out why it lost a v sync? 17:09:15 wouter wants us to make recordings in not-mpeg2 17:09:34 wouter wants us to make recordings in the final format, so he can just cut, not transcode 17:09:49 is there a simple setting in vocto for that? 17:09:59 this is outside vocto, it's our recording script 17:10:03 ah, ok 17:10:14 we chose to record fairly high quality, and transcode down to something smaller later 17:10:15 would the machines be able to encode vp9 in real time though? 17:10:26 that doesn't fit with sreview's design, which was for fosdem 17:10:42 moving on to new cameras? 17:10:45 yes 17:10:47 Comments on the new cameras? 17:10:58 +1 :) 17:11:00 they're nice 17:11:04 They worked well 17:11:09 shutting down when closing the lid is dumb 17:11:15 good. lenses are pretty nice especially for their size. CCD in low light is good 17:11:29 #info cameras: we are happy with our purchase 17:11:48 (someone should work through the menu to look whether we can turn off this behaviour) 17:12:00 sometimes it seems like some of them were set incorrectly and they were focussing on anything else except what they were pointed to. not sure what setting caused that but it might be nice to add it to training for camera operators to check for it 17:12:10 #info cameras: we should check if we can disable shut down on lid closure 17:12:22 (the only thing I know is that pulling out the eyepiece disables the behavior) 17:12:29 lulz 17:12:38 #info look for spot / matrix auto focus settings 17:13:03 highvoltage: some operators played with the cameras and didn't reset them 17:13:32 anyway, yes, more training 17:13:37 anything else for the cams? 17:13:40 next: audio 17:13:44 Perhaps morning check should include camera setup with audio and batteries 17:13:56 probably 17:13:58 so lessons lernt re av techs. 17:14:13 Lessons: don't use them :) 17:14:15 #info cameras: we should include batteries and cameras setup in the morning check 17:14:23 (.oO these things have IP interfaces, we sohuld be able to configure them with ansible) 17:14:24 we (I) need to be more forcefull when it comes to what mix we get out from the house desk 17:14:27 Comments on audio! 17:14:51 #info audio: using in house tech is generally a bad idea 17:14:53 venue techs suck 17:15:00 ^5 17:15:10 lazy venue techs suck 17:15:13 (mandatory shit, sorry :( ) 17:15:13 * tumbleweed would like better audio monitoring in our stream monitoring (i.e. visualisation). But that's vague 17:15:16 didn't we only have the venue tech because we were contractually obliged? 17:15:23 I'm sure some venue techs actually want their output to be good 17:15:25 I should also walk the rooms at start of day / after lunch and wash the desks 17:16:03 #info audio: having some audio monitoring for the stream monitoring would be nice 17:16:23 #info audio: morning check should include a check of the sound desks 17:16:31 #info re venu sound - we need room mix and seporate video stream mix (a foldback mix or similar) 17:16:57 tumbleweed: I searched for a while, but apparently displaying a vu-meter without wanting to screw around with actual gui widgets is something really hard to do for some reason 17:17:19 RattusRattus: we do currently have two outputs though? 17:17:22 olasd: yeah, I'm guessing we have to hack something with GTK/something and gstreamer 17:17:24 some normalisation bounding accross all rooms as part of a monitor process in the noc would be good as well 17:17:24 anything else on audio? 17:17:39 paddatrapper: yes we have 2 outputs. 17:17:55 paddatrapper: we do; we need to insist that the venue does if we use its hw 17:17:56 RattusRattus: I'm not sure I understand what that means 17:18:02 RattusRattus: ah yes 17:18:09 * wouter waves 17:18:14 I think but am not sure that we didn't in the staffed room (or if we did it was pre-fade) 17:18:19 sorry about being late, trains failed 17:18:58 RattusRattus: yeah I'm not sure what he sent us 17:18:58 pollo: it would be nice to have average vu monitoring for each stream, and alarms if we drift too far out of that normalised level 17:19:18 ah, yeah, basically what tumbleweed asked for but more fancy 17:19:20 paddatrapper: /me will better document what we need in terms of mix 17:19:31 Comments on review system? 17:19:36 pollo: ack - I type too slow 17:20:02 it seemed to do the job? I didn't interact with it enough 17:20:12 ^^ me too 17:20:18 RattusRattus: I may be able to look into vu monitoring - need to implement something similar at work at some point 17:20:27 I played with it a little and it seems ok, albeit things that wouter knows about and will be fixed 17:20:43 tumbleweed: re: audio monitoring: FOSDEM had a setup where we monitored something in prometheus for that 17:20:49 richih would know more 17:20:49 it'd be nice to make sure it doesn't try to kill the network next year 17:21:31 olasd: was it a bandwith limit or a cpu one, I can't remember? 17:21:38 could blame the rest of us for not warning wouter what resources he was sharing with streaming 17:22:01 I'm not assigning blame, just stating things 17:22:20 sticking with postmortem - did we have much in the line of random talks / short notice? 17:22:36 I know we struggled with having enough people. 17:22:38 there were some that we just didn't record 17:22:46 #info review: we should try to have separate machines for network and review 17:22:47 if sreview killed the network, that was only because the MPEG2 files were so big 17:22:55 please try to stay on topic 17:23:04 if needed we will add points at the end of the postmortem 17:23:08 'k 17:23:18 nothing else on my end 17:23:19 which is yet another reason to switch to something else 17:23:33 * tumbleweed doubts another format would have helped there, but move on 17:23:42 I maxed out the bandwidth 17:23:48 that was just the "files are huge" issue 17:23:49 Comments on ansible setup? 17:24:02 ansible is slow 17:24:04 but it works well 17:24:04 ansible is nicer than fai 17:24:06 don't think that would have happened with smaller files 17:24:11 * tumbleweed still wants to do more cleanup to our ansible 17:24:24 tumbleweed: cleanup is one of those things that's never finished :) 17:24:26 wouter: and the doing cutting on the wrong machines problem. And doing it way too parallel 17:24:39 olasd: I'm pretty sure there is a setting that keeps 1 ssh connection open instead of opening 1 for each command 17:24:40 wouter: and just generally, ramping up the parallelism too fast 17:24:45 pollo: it's on by default 17:24:58 mmm, yes, I suppose I could have looked at not overdoing it a bit more, true 17:25:03 still slow 17:25:07 #info: ansible is nice but slow 17:25:10 I spent quite a bit of time on a voctomix session that would simplify the desktop recipe in ansible, but then got horribly, horribly distracted 17:25:19 olasd: the tags definitely helped 17:25:24 yes, tags are good 17:25:28 #info ansible: we still have cleanup to do 17:25:35 we should get a PR mechanism 17:25:43 PR? 17:25:49 pull request 17:25:53 pull requests or public relations? ;) 17:25:55 right 17:25:56 with reviews and all 17:25:59 well that should happen in the next few $timeframes 17:26:06 and possibly CI, too? 17:26:06 when alioth gets replaced 17:26:12 Well alioth replacement intends to have that 17:26:14 salsa.d.o exists 17:26:17 (and hopefully tests, etc) 17:26:22 wouter: CI yes! 17:26:30 gitlab can do merg requests and CI :) 17:26:31 #info ansible: when alioth will be replaced, we will need to setup a PR and review workflow 17:26:43 anything else on ansible? 17:27:13 having DSA members around and willing to help was really nice 17:27:24 olasd: +1 17:27:36 #info ansible: we should try to have DSA members hang out more in the NOC 17:27:38 Comments on talk scheduling vs Video team? 17:27:59 there was some confusion initially about which talks needed to be recorded vs which didn't 17:28:04 that got fixed afterwards, but... 17:28:10 I think we've set a good precedent of saying no to recording ad-hoc talks and keeping up 17:28:15 some issues with BoFs not wanting to be videoed even though it was in a video room and no flags to say not 17:28:24 we might want to clarify that better next time 17:28:42 but overhead mics in the BoFs worked very well 17:28:42 #info talks: we should try to continue making clear that videod talks need to be scheduled in advance 17:29:00 the video/no video flag got hacked in but needs better website support 17:29:06 #info talks: we should try to clarify the videoed/not videoed status more 17:29:29 we still need to experiment a bit more on how to better record a BoF - but lets get talks done consitantly first 17:29:38 the video review field on the website wasn't used in the end 17:29:47 video review field? 17:29:53 video reviewer 17:30:08 that veyepar would have used 17:30:10 #info talks: the video reviewer field in wafer wasn't used 17:30:19 #save 17:30:24 I wasn't aware of that field 17:30:27 where is it? 17:30:39 in the talk submission 17:30:54 oh, okay 17:30:59 so I could have sent emails out to those people? 17:31:10 yes 17:31:13 sreview totally supports that, if we want to, I can do that next time 17:31:38 any wouter: any issues with things like sponsor loop / intro & outro credit roll? 17:31:40 I'm not sure it's the best way to go though, we already have a working workflow 17:31:45 Anything else wrt to talks scheduling? 17:31:51 (I hacked up a workflow that *doesn't* have the emails for debconf, in fact, but sreview wasn't set up to do it) 17:32:09 RattusRattus: that worked well, after I asked nicely 17:32:16 humans and practises are harder to modify than software ;D 17:32:24 true 17:32:33 Anything else for the post-mortem we missed? 17:32:40 People were slow to volunteer 17:32:43 the way we do sponsor loop in vocto is still shit 17:32:48 and having well-known and trusted reviewers is actually better than having speakers do it themselves 17:33:06 (it uses a quarter of a core for nothing) 17:33:06 #info we should try to have a more coherent approach to volunteering 17:33:15 our training schedule was also inconsistent 17:33:27 #info the way we do the video loop in vocto is wasteful for no reason 17:33:29 wouter: yes. and on the subject of review laptop for judit? 17:33:58 #info we should source a new laptop for judith 17:34:06 * tumbleweed dropped the ball on that, but we did get one offered 17:34:34 olasd: what's the reason that we need to do "stream of PNG files" for the sponsor loop again? 17:34:42 can't we just throw an already-encoded file at it? 17:34:51 wouter: gstreamer yadayada 17:35:11 um, yes, but if it's an actual problem, it would be nice if there were more details ;-) 17:35:31 it's offtopic for the meeting 17:35:36 fair enough 17:35:37 sprint goal! 17:35:40 anything else before we move to the sprints topic? 17:35:44 wouter: add as sprint goal 17:36:10 next topic! 17:36:11 #topic Planned sprints for the next year 17:36:17 As you all know, organising sprints take both time and effort. If we can agree on a general plan for the year, it will help us have a better idea of what needs to be done. 17:36:24 I think we should aim for 2 sprints: 17:36:25 ack. 17:36:33 Something before/after Cambridge mini-DC (Thursday November 23rd - Sunday November 26th) 17:36:39 Another one this winter 17:36:56 does that seem reasonable to everyone? 17:36:57 I called the guy behind https://linuxbe.com earlier this week 17:37:00 yes, totally 17:37:13 yes 17:37:19 he's a customer of mine, involved in the open source community, and a very nice guy overall 17:37:19 we should focus on the Cambridge one first 17:37:25 sooner 17:37:32 er, sure 17:37:45 I've only got short windows where I'm available (the joys of finals...), but yes 17:37:45 imho we can either have it before or after 17:38:03 so mini dc cambs.... is 2 days enough for a sprint (we can't setup in room until friday night anyway - and that is the same training room as last year) 17:38:24 RattusRattus: I think 4 days would be best 17:38:31 as we did in Paris 17:38:43 but will we have any space inside the ARM offices for more than two days? 17:38:52 (or more than four, yada yada) 17:38:52 ok so we can't sprint at Arm - they haven't the available rooms for 4 days 17:39:17 but I can ask arround cambs and get back (within 5 days) 17:39:18 any alternative sprint venues in/around ambridge? 17:39:23 RattusRattus: snap :) 17:39:28 * highvoltage wishes it was possible to remote sprint 17:39:32 * paddatrapper too 17:39:34 (not Ambridge, this isn't The Archers) 17:39:37 do we want to sprint before the min-conf or after? 17:39:39 if it's tacked onto the miniconf, 2 days is certainly better than nothing 17:39:43 highvoltage: your TZ isn't that far out that you could 17:39:49 but yes for travel a 4 day event makes a lot more sense 17:39:51 tumbleweed: ack 17:39:55 highvoltage: you totally can 17:40:12 pollo: the streaming master setup needs to happen before 17:40:21 hmm.. telepresence robot anyone? :) 17:40:24 so 4 days before the mini-conf then 17:40:31 tumbleweed: ah grea, then I'll be in, remotely 17:40:41 (it can happen out of the sprint, of course, but ideally the sprint would happen before) 17:40:52 #info action RattusRattus find space for 4 days before mini dc cambs? (is after ok?) 17:41:12 olasd: but that's pretty simple, right? (streaming) 17:41:12 might as well explore both options, i'd say 17:41:16 tumbleweed: yes 17:41:21 #agreed we will try to sprint 4 days before the Cambridge mini-conf (Thursday November 23rd - Sunday November 26th) 17:41:26 so, in the end, either works 17:41:33 olasd: I see that there is a fr mini conf the week before 17:41:39 yes 17:41:44 have we been asked to support that? 17:41:45 which is painful for me 17:41:50 no 17:41:54 (t yet) 17:42:06 #action pollo to flesh out the sprint details on a wiki page 17:42:16 so theoretically one *could* fit the sprint between the two, but that might be arduous timing-wise 17:42:16 do we want to talk about a possible winter sprint now? 17:42:47 probably a rough outline would be a good idea 17:42:59 RattusRattus: the venue has recording equipment (I think), so DC videoteam shouldn't be needed 17:43:18 olasd: are they going to record, do they want to publish videos, do they need a review workflow? 17:43:18 wouter: can you find out if we can tack a few days on at FOSDEM? or is that a stupid idea? 17:43:24 from what I can see, winter sprint would have 3 options: FOSDEM, SnowCamp or possible German mini-dc 17:43:26 olasd: ok 17:43:29 wouter: not my department 17:43:29 RattusRattus: that was exactly my idea, too :-) 17:43:49 olasd: Can you find out though? Might be nice to know that in time... 17:43:54 so, re: FOSDEM: 17:43:55 (that minidc is a track in a bigger event) 17:44:13 ok fine 17:44:18 I asked Jasper whether he was okay with us using his training center for two days before FOSDEM (without committing to anything yet) 17:44:34 before FOSDEM would work better for me 17:44:37 not only was he okay with that, he also suggested people could sleep there if they wanted to, not just for the sprint but for FOSDEM itself too 17:44:46 whoot! 17:44:52 that's nice 17:45:02 wouter: do you think we could get it for 3-4 days, or is that pushing? 17:45:03 he has a shower and a toilet and a kitchenette, but you'd have to bring an inflatable mattress and sleeping bag or similar 17:45:09 that is already 3-4 days :) 17:45:13 or did you mean before FOSDEM? 17:45:16 ha, including FOSDEM yes 17:45:16 I think I can speek for us all and say sign us up then! 17:45:28 +1! 17:45:33 so we would sprint during FOSDEM too? 17:45:37 yes 17:45:37 no, I don't think so 17:45:46 we would be at FOSDEM -- at least, I know I would be 17:45:48 sorry before FOSDEN not during 17:45:50 I have other things to do during FOSDEM 17:46:06 so that means a 2 day sprint then 17:46:09 but I can certainly ask him if we could use his venue for a week rather than four days 17:46:15 but a sprint for a few days before would work 17:46:27 haven't asked yet, but I'm sure if he has nothing else scheduled he'll be okay with that 17:46:38 #agreed a sprint before FOSDEM seems to be the prefered winter sprint option 17:47:01 (also, for those of you who don't want to camp out, he told me there's a B&B "within meters" from his venue, so...) 17:47:04 wouter: if need be I'm sure we can give him some money for the venue too 17:47:16 he might be offended at that ;) 17:47:27 I think that wraps up the sprint topic for me 17:47:35 anything else is just conjectures atm :D 17:47:39 right 17:47:59 #topic DC17 recordings 17:48:06 Should we keep the large VP8 files, even though we have VP9 ones that are smaller and technically the same quality? 17:48:30 my original reasoning for keeping both was that I know everyone can do VP8, I wasn't so sure about VP9 17:48:47 now that I haven't gotten any complaints, I'm planning on dropping VP8 for next year 17:48:47 hide the VP8 ones see if people complain? 17:48:58 that's actually fairly easy, since they're all in git-annex 17:49:30 but I might want to copy them elsewhere anyway, just in case 17:49:46 tumbleweed: you did update the website to point towards the VP9 ones rather than the VP8 ones, right? 17:50:04 so can we agree we should try deleting them to see if things break? (with a backup copy) 17:50:37 not sure I really see the point though 17:50:42 it's not like we're running out of space on apu 17:50:55 wouter: no, I didn't 17:50:56 but I can 17:50:58 at least not when last I checked 17:51:08 to me it just looks messy 17:51:14 and not very user friendly 17:51:16 olasd: is it worth doing the dual source option for the web video player that we had for streaming 17:51:21 to automatically use the lq versions 17:51:59 tumbleweed: that might be a good idea... 17:52:00 I don't know if we can do that with static sources 17:52:11 ah, ok 17:52:12 and I can't commit to finding out 17:52:16 :P 17:52:25 I've been intending to find out 17:53:09 #action tumbleweed to replace the webplayer links to VP9 and try to make dual source with lq happen 17:53:18 anything else? 17:53:36 not from me 17:53:46 #topic Training videos project 17:54:11 well, we have been having a nice discussion on the ML 17:54:14 * olasd raises ENOTIME and waits for next subject 17:54:24 I don't think we should discuss the specifics of it 17:54:36 if we're going to do that during sprints though, we will need cameras to be available 17:54:37 but I wanted to point it out for people who missed out 17:54:54 which would kinda conflict with setting up for a miniconf at the same time (if we're trying this at cambridge) 17:54:57 wouter: the full set of hardware is tiny 17:55:04 so really I don't see that as an issue 17:55:14 olasd: I think you misunderstand what I'm trying to say :) 17:55:16 * RattusRattus will commit to having most documentation finished before mini dc cambs 17 so there is atleast something to use as a base 17:55:19 olasd: +1 17:55:45 wouter: well, setting up for a miniconf uses 2 cameras and 2 tripods 17:55:46 if we're setting up cameras for the cambridge miniconf, then we cannot also use those same cameras for recording videos with them easily 17:55:51 yes 17:55:55 RattusRattus: I can help with that until the start of November 17:56:04 ah, yes, I suppose you could bring more than two cameras :-) 17:56:06 I'm saying that bringing 4 cameras or 2 is pretty much the same 17:56:11 gotcha 17:56:14 paddatrapper: thx. will take that offline and chat later 17:56:17 it's easier to bring 4, that case has wheels 17:56:26 :) 17:56:26 :-) 17:56:43 #topic Next Meeting 17:56:44 olasd: do I assume from that you will be driving to miniconf? 17:56:52 weee, next meeting 17:57:00 October 12th, from 17:00 to 18:00 UTC? 17:57:03 (in 1 month) 17:57:05 sounds good 17:57:07 +1 17:57:11 RattusRattus: depends on what needs to be done for minidc Toulouse 17:57:16 (wasn't there supposed to be an AOB thing first, though?) 17:57:36 (not that I have something, but...) 17:57:37 olasd: 'k 17:58:00 #agreed next meeting will be on October 12th, from 17:00 to 18:00 UTC 17:58:02 sounds goo 17:58:06 #topic AOB 17:58:06 s/$/d 17:58:10 pollo: goo has sound? ;) 17:58:15 slosh slosh 17:58:22 wouter: yup :) 17:58:23 let's keep the option of rescheduling if that ends up the same day as a team meeting 17:58:27 yeah 17:58:34 (please :D) 17:58:51 how about the following day? ;) 17:59:10 well, Thu seemed to be a very consensual day 17:59:17 we'll see in Oct 17:59:22 #endmeeting