19:29:18 <sumpfralle> #startmeeting
19:29:18 <MeetBot> Meeting started Tue Mar  6 19:29:18 2018 UTC.  The chair is sumpfralle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:29:18 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
19:29:40 <sumpfralle> should we collect topics?
19:30:35 <TheSnide> #topic Status of Snide
19:31:14 <sumpfralle> (we are not moderating, or? - just go ahead?)
19:31:43 <TheSnide> well, i sortof had to disapear for a while
19:32:10 <TheSnide> it made quite sad to be honest, but:
19:32:32 <TheSnide> - there wasn't much activity at the time anyway (sorry for the ones active)
19:32:50 <TheSnide> - I don't use munin anymore productively
19:33:32 <TheSnide> - I also had a serious lack of time, and had to focus on other things
19:34:08 <TheSnide> I also realised that I was a spof of the whole project.
19:34:10 * doublehp-munin-last waves
19:34:34 <TheSnide> as, I'm mostly the only one that can release things.
19:35:25 <doublehp-munin-last> I just come to thank Lars for working on the project; I hope you will publish fixes.
19:35:25 <TheSnide> which wasn't an issue in the past, as I can be summoned to release things in a timely manner. But this isn't sustainable for the project.
19:36:17 <TheSnide> Then, since a while, Lars took peacefully over. First by replying to comments on github, then doing more and more things.
19:36:28 <TheSnide> So, *HUGE* thanks to him.
19:37:09 * sumpfralle thinks it is not really a "take-over", just cleaning up a bit
19:37:18 <dipohl> TheSnide: what about ssm?
19:37:28 <TheSnide> So, for the future, I'm here to help in case it is needed, but I don't think i can commit to drive things
19:38:03 <dive_> I have a host that once existed (and was deprovisioned) a while back, but now exits again - the problem is that my munin graphs for it aren't updating now. should i just rm -rf /var/lib/munin/<that host> ?
19:38:24 <TheSnide> dipohl: basically he disapeared also. IIRC, he has a completely new job and might be quite hairy for him to help.
19:38:50 <h01ger> dive_: we are in a meeting currently. please postpone your question for an hour or so. sorry.
19:38:57 <sumpfralle> TheSnide: I would be very happy, if you would still enjoy to do a bit of perl/internal/core development things (at least reviewing - but better developing), since personally I am not able to do this on my own.
19:39:24 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: well.. I can review, that's no issue.
19:39:28 * sumpfralle feels stupid and blind when writing perl code
19:39:50 <sumpfralle> good!
19:40:12 <TheSnide> On the coding part, have a look at the rewritten code from 2.999.
19:40:37 <sumpfralle> yes, I ignore the stable-2.0 branch with regards to internals completely
19:40:40 <TheSnide> I tried to make it as little Perlish as possible. Looks much more like C then Perl in fact.
19:40:46 <sumpfralle> :)
19:41:21 <sumpfralle> TheSnide: thus your status can be described as "interested and helpful, but not a driving factor" - correct?
19:41:21 <TheSnide> As all the complex & clever tricks that 2.0 used are removed, and delegated to SQL.
19:41:54 * dipohl is also no Perl programmer, but has some experience with C (dating 20 years ago though ;)
19:41:56 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: indeed. There's also some legal issues that need sorting out prior to code contrib.
19:42:28 <dipohl> #topic Munin 2.999
19:42:39 <TheSnide> dipohl: to be honest, if you know C (even a little), you should really be able to read & understand 2.999 codebase
19:42:48 <TheSnide> if not, well. i failed :D
19:42:59 * sumpfralle this raises my hopes, as well
19:43:51 <sumpfralle> regarding 2.999/2.0: personally I would postpone the 2.999 a bit (next week?), since I would like to focus on infrastructure and release
19:44:04 <sumpfralle> using 2.0 as a start for a maintenance release
19:44:08 <sumpfralle> your thoughts?
19:44:09 * TheSnide has now a job which is also about "Development mentoring". So he knows the power of "dumbed-down" coding.
19:44:47 <dipohl> I would be very happy when I can continue to use stable 2.0
19:44:56 <dipohl> it's sufficient for my needs
19:45:05 <h01ger> sumpfralle: please say "#chair dipohl" so her topic changes work
19:45:07 <TheSnide> I can do the releases. that would be ok for the very short term.
19:45:15 <sumpfralle> #chair dipohl
19:45:15 <MeetBot> Current chairs: dipohl sumpfralle
19:45:21 * sumpfralle thanks
19:45:34 <dipohl> #topic Munin 2.999
19:45:36 * h01ger would like a 2.999.7 release very much
19:45:56 <TheSnide> and, we could (should) have a group that can relase
19:45:59 <TheSnide> release.
19:46:06 <sumpfralle> yes, please!
19:46:19 <TheSnide> also, i'd *REALLY* like to move to "tag-only" release in 2.999
19:46:22 <sumpfralle> ok - let's stick to 2.999 (I am also interested in that)
19:46:40 <sumpfralle> in "git" terms?
19:46:46 <sumpfralle> (thus: no maintenance afterwards)
19:47:13 <sumpfralle> that sounds reasonable for a pre-release
19:47:20 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: yup, a "git tag -s 2.999.whatever" and be done with it.
19:47:28 * sumpfralle agrees
19:47:33 * dipohl +1
19:47:39 <TheSnide> i know that debian doesn't really like that
19:48:02 <sumpfralle> it is in experimental - and probably it should stay there for a bit of time :)
19:48:05 <TheSnide> so, as i love debian (and debian folks), i always released the tgz :)
19:48:39 <sumpfralle> #chair /TheSnide
19:48:39 <MeetBot> Current chairs: /TheSnide dipohl sumpfralle
19:49:32 <TheSnide> #info TheSnide will continue to release the 2.0.x and we'll group-release the 2.999.x ones
19:50:16 <dipohl> #topic epel-package
19:50:17 <sumpfralle> #chair TheSnide
19:50:17 <MeetBot> Current chairs: /TheSnide TheSnide dipohl sumpfralle
19:50:22 <TheSnide> #info TheSnide will continue to release the 2.0.x and we'll group-release the 2.999.x ones
19:51:05 <dipohl> Munin Package in Fedora is /orphan/
19:51:20 <TheSnide> #info the 2.999.x ones will be released in "git tag -s" mode
19:51:31 <dipohl> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/munin/overview/
19:51:43 <sumpfralle> what can be done about that? By whom?
19:51:56 <TheSnide> about the GPG key. It is currently done with mine. I guess we might/should move to a group one ?
19:52:28 <sumpfralle> or just use different keys? I do not know common approaches.
19:52:41 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: neither do it.
19:52:47 <TheSnide> s/it/i/
19:53:37 <sumpfralle> TheSnide: maybe send a quick question mail to the list - maybe someone has an idea?
19:53:45 <sumpfralle> dipohl: what could we do
19:53:47 <sumpfralle> ?
19:54:01 <TheSnide> h01ger is usually quite aware of the topic
19:54:21 * sumpfralle welcomes input from holger after the meeting?
19:54:39 <TheSnide> s/topic/matter/
19:54:57 <TheSnide> and, yes, let him reply asynchronously
19:55:02 <h01ger> i'll live with git tag releases if thats all i get
19:55:24 <dipohl> I have no experience with building packages for Fedora, but started reading about it today and activated my fedora member account
19:55:26 <h01ger> ah, fedora. no idea.
19:55:42 <h01ger> i assume new releases might help
19:55:45 <TheSnide> h01ger: nope, more about "gpg key" for the group instead of "mine personal"
19:55:52 * sumpfralle thinks holger answered to "gpg keys"
19:55:55 * sumpfralle expected that
19:56:06 <h01ger> group gpg keys are a terrible idea, IMO
19:56:20 <TheSnide> h01ger: see... i knew you had some expertise
19:56:37 <sumpfralle> meta: are we strict with 30 minutes or do want to spend more time?
19:56:46 <dipohl> i have time
19:56:47 <h01ger> if sumpfralle does the releases, he should sign them with his key.
19:56:48 <TheSnide> so, let's just use our private personal keys.
19:56:57 * sumpfralle agrees
19:57:07 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: i have about 5min extra time, sorry
19:57:43 <TheSnide> #info whoever releases, use his own private gpg key
19:57:57 <sumpfralle> regarding rpm: I would join dipohl for the topic
19:57:59 <dipohl> h01ger: no package was build for 2.0.34
19:58:22 <dipohl> so I don't have much hope that 2.0.35 will change a thing there
19:58:38 <TheSnide> dipohl: i guess you just have to build it yourself. then submit it, and ... then i don't know
19:58:39 <sumpfralle> dipohl: we will push them with our contribution :)
19:58:52 <sumpfralle> #topic infrastructure
19:59:03 <sumpfralle> there is demo.munin-monitoring.org
19:59:06 <sumpfralle> who has access?
19:59:14 <sumpfralle> (it is not updated right now?)
19:59:16 <sumpfralle> I can help
20:00:45 <sumpfralle> maybe TheSnide reached his time limit?
20:01:01 <sumpfralle> does anyone know something about access to the hosts / services?
20:01:18 <sumpfralle> (gallery, demo, trac, readthedocs)
20:02:05 <dipohl> AFAIK ssm and TheSnide have access
20:02:20 <dipohl> I don't know if Nicolai and be0rn also..
20:02:51 <sumpfralle> ok - then let us postpone this to the next meeting (or maybe someone is sending an email in between ...)
20:03:03 <sumpfralle> let us do another six minutes? I have two more topics?
20:03:09 <dipohl> email would be better to reach nicolai
20:03:11 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: I have
20:03:32 <sumpfralle> do you think it is reasonable to share access to demo with me?
20:03:41 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: indeed.
20:03:48 <sumpfralle> I will send you my ssh key
20:03:53 <sumpfralle> thank you!
20:03:59 <sumpfralle> #topic communication
20:04:14 <sumpfralle> are the IRC channel and the munin-user list our main channels of communication?
20:04:22 <dipohl> yes
20:04:26 <TheSnide> sumpfralle: yes
20:04:28 * sumpfralle thinks so
20:04:40 <sumpfralle> good
20:04:41 <sumpfralle> #topic IRC meetings
20:04:51 <sumpfralle> should we have another one next week same time?
20:04:57 <TheSnide> dipohl made an attempt to revive the mailing list, but wasn't hugely succesful
20:04:58 * dipohl +1
20:05:07 <sumpfralle> (in the long term I would prefer another day - but maybe discuss that later)
20:05:19 <sumpfralle> I think, the munin-user list works OK
20:05:29 <sumpfralle> some requests - a bit of discussion
20:05:33 <sumpfralle> (or do you mean another list?)
20:05:35 <dipohl> sumpfralle: Wednesday is/was the usual day
20:05:42 <sumpfralle> ah - ok
20:05:51 <TheSnide> i don't like it being on sf.net, but i do not think it would be wise to change that
20:05:52 <sumpfralle> the wiki in github said Tuesday
20:05:52 <sumpfralle> I will change that
20:05:55 <sumpfralle> Wednesday is better
20:06:37 * sumpfralle feels OK with sf and would not like to change it, too
20:06:39 <dipohl> sumpfralle: see channel topic
20:06:49 <sumpfralle> yes, that confused me a lot :)
20:06:56 <TheSnide> see channel topic after the meeting
20:06:58 <sumpfralle> ok - thus: next week, Wednesday, 7:30 pm?
20:07:02 <TheSnide> k
20:07:16 * dipohl confirms
20:07:27 <sumpfralle> great!
20:07:30 <TheSnide> ok, i have to go now :'(
20:07:36 <sumpfralle> we are closing
20:07:38 <sumpfralle> have fun!
20:07:39 <TheSnide> thx all!
20:07:50 <sumpfralle> yes, it was a pleasure!
20:07:59 <sumpfralle> #endmeeting