14:58:54 #startmeeting metrics team 14:58:54 Meeting started Thu Dec 8 14:58:54 2016 UTC. The chair is karsten. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:58:54 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 14:58:58 let's go! 14:59:02 great! 14:59:09 agenda pad: https://pad.riseup.net/p/3M7VyrTVgjlF 14:59:27 what shall we add? 14:59:35 not that we'd need more topics, but what cannot wait until next week? 14:59:43 all fine. 14:59:50 I have nothing to add. 15:00:10 okay! 15:00:17 let's go then: 15:00:18 * UX project (linda) 15:00:29 helpful: https://people.torproject.org/~karsten/volatile/metrics-prototype-feedback-2016-12-08.pdf 15:00:30 (hope it's okay to assign that one to you) 15:00:38 Yes, it is. :) 15:00:48 What are your opinions on the homepage? 15:01:26 so, I think we saved sparklines for phase 2 or so. 15:01:27 I think you all know mine, and I think it's important to have the data be one click away. And I think the icons and the one word about each subpage is enough (i.e. do we need to explain 'about'?) 15:01:38 it's mostly a question of development hours. 15:01:55 though the question is whether the design should support them once we get there. 15:01:57 Oh, I see. I don't think that we need sparklines, per se. I think I wanted something there so that people can get straight to the different data from the first screen. 15:02:13 yes, and I love sparklines. 15:02:29 We don't even need sparklines. I thnk 3 boxes that say "user data, network data, onion services data" woudl be a better use of space rather than what we have currently. 15:02:35 karsten: I also love them. 15:03:10 hmm, plausible. 15:03:11 so maybe we go from six to nine "boxes", with three of them containing sparklines? 15:03:20 I think it also sends the more corrent message that the metrics page is mostly about the metrics, not evenly about every subpage (we don't certainly devote equal attention to all of them). 15:03:27 well, not sparklines, but links to data subpages, right? 15:03:33 karsten: yes 15:03:38 RaBe: and 9 seems to be too many. 15:03:44 only three? 15:04:01 the other topics are in the menu. 15:04:02 so, the original plan with these 6 boxes was to put in a sentence or two explaining pages. 15:04:03 we might start with the bigger graph boxes, and end up with smaller boxes for the less important stuff? 15:04:15 are we dropping that plan then? 15:04:23 which? 15:04:31 karsten: that was my suggestion, and to explain the data instead 15:04:33 are sources, tools, and research self-explanatory enough? 15:04:44 iwakeh: the current 6 boxes with explanations. 15:04:46 karsten: do the same thing for user, network, an onion data rather than the pages. 15:05:05 could work. 15:05:16 sources, tools, and research may not be, but I would argue that people can click on it if they want to, and most of the users would not be there for htat, but for the data. 15:05:20 yes. 15:05:30 right. 15:05:35 okay, let's do it. 15:05:41 Cool. 15:05:42 but without sparklines for now. 15:05:45 I wouldn't expect such a prominent about-box, anyway. 15:05:46 Yes. 15:05:55 iwakeh: exactly. 15:05:58 do we need icons? 15:06:03 sparks have to wait, sigh. 15:06:17 iwakeh: a bit. :) 15:06:22 karsten: we don't necessariy need them, but they might be good for visual communication 15:06:34 karsten: we don't need to do it if its stressful or if we need to get our own icons 15:06:55 karsten: and if we had a link to each of them with a short explanation, that removes the need for the data meta-page 15:07:10 karsten: I think you mentioned this at 28 15:07:16 I just pasted something on the pad. 15:07:29 ooh! 15:07:30 those are the categories I'd imagine. 15:07:37 Those seem like good thigns to have on the front page! 15:07:45 user: a person icon; network: a web; 15:07:58 iwakeh: right, I could imagine we can come up with something there. 15:08:03 and onions. 15:08:08 this seems to be more helpful than the subpages 15:08:18 especially since we're going to explain what research is when they click on that 15:08:21 etc. 15:08:24 yep. 15:08:38 Alright. 15:08:48 shall we move on to the next point? 15:08:51 dgoulet: woo, thanks! 15:08:58 or does anyone have anything to add? 15:09:07 next point sounds good! 15:09:08 i think i got it :) 15:09:13 I just added a short note to the pad. 15:09:22 karsten: thanks! 15:09:36 We're going to talk about making the about page flat 15:09:46 yep. 15:09:52 I was thinking it could be laid out more like the research page. Different headers but not links and stuff 15:10:00 yes, works for me. 15:10:08 this looked like a lot of content when RaBe and I talked about it, 15:10:12 And there is also mention of adding some headers or grouping the sources and tools somehow. 15:10:13 so we divided it up. 15:10:18 karsten: oh, I see. 15:10:29 but I think a single page with sections might work even better. 15:10:33 RaBe: what do you think? 15:10:37 initially, we discussed the scroll down (in Berlin). 15:10:38 karsten: we can work on shortening the content? Or maybe having a table of contents with clickable anchors 15:10:54 i think we could merge most about pages, but perhaps separate the contact page? 15:11:16 it has so many sections by itself 15:11:21 ah, it will be shorter. 15:11:26 RaBe: I think that would be fair, since most websites have a separate contact page. 15:11:30 that is tor's contact page, the metrics contact page will be shorter. 15:11:38 RaBe: so it would meet most users' expectations. 15:11:39 ah, i see. 15:11:46 karsten: oh 15:12:02 well, I am indifferent on having a separate contacts page but all for making the about page flat 15:12:09 so then let's do one about page and bring the box on the right in, for easier navigation :) 15:12:20 RaBe: that sounds good. 15:12:24 +1 15:12:25 we can still directly link to that section of the page 15:12:40 yes, right. 15:12:49 fine. 15:12:53 RaBe: I would love each section to be semi-displayed all on one page, and have people click on it to show the text 15:12:55 so, we're doing the same on the source and tools page, do we? 15:13:11 single page with sections? 15:13:14 I'd say yes. 15:13:25 linda: theres this box on the right on the contact page - would that be fine? 15:13:33 RaBe: hmm, I think I was just thining of grouping the tools and sources a little (like how papers are grouped by topic in the research section) 15:13:36 RaBe: I think so 15:13:45 RaBe: yes the same format though 15:13:57 allright. so sections and grouping, no more sub pages :) 15:14:10 (except data... which we'll need to discuss) 15:14:10 karsten, iwakeh I think we need to work on how to group those things in a way that makes some sense 15:14:18 linda: agreed. 15:14:24 yep. 15:14:30 linda: let's do that as part of the content discussion though. 15:14:32 karsten: yeah 15:14:47 about the data 15:15:12 I don't mind having separate pages for it, but I would like all of the horizontal menu bar at the top to not have submenus 15:15:25 I think it's fine to have those tabs inside the data page once people get there? 15:15:36 I'm not too worked up about this one though, so I can let it go. 15:15:48 well, there are 3 levels: 15:15:51 1. Data 15:16:00 2. User access metrics 15:16:04 and data is just the massiv content we have. 15:16:05 3. By country 15:16:12 the tabs are for level 3. 15:16:20 i really do like the first sub menu level. we could add submenus for the about sections, source and tools groups, ... 15:16:26 the navigation bar brings you... where? level 1 or 2? 15:16:31 oh 15:16:34 i see.. 15:16:35 hmm. 15:16:50 And i didn't think the about section woudl be that long 15:16:57 RaBe: related to that suggestion, could users still click on About then? 15:17:02 And I did like how you could see what is on the page before you clicked on it 15:17:10 RaBe: assuming there's a dropdown for the sections in About? 15:17:21 i could enable this. for now, only user that have JS DISabled can click on about :) 15:17:28 I have been convinced ... 15:17:38 I think if peopel can click about or data, I wouldn't mind the submenus there 15:17:49 RaBe: alternatively, an "Overview" entry as first dropdown entry? 15:17:50 they seem to do a good job of quickly previewing the content of the page without someone going to it 15:18:44 the question is: do we WANT the users there? if "about" is clickable, but there'd just be six links (like there is now), i'd not add "overview". 15:18:47 also related: will there be a Data overview page? 15:19:00 RaBe: well, About would be one long page. 15:19:05 karsten: I mentioned that the home page woudl serve as the "overview" page 15:19:07 not one page with six links. 15:19:14 if theres a data overview page and we want the users to see it and not directly go to user metrics, we should add "overview", even when "data" is clickable 15:19:54 (in this case, i wouln't include "overview" for the flat about page) 15:20:12 ah, hmm, maybe we can remove one layer: 15:20:31 we could consider "User access metrics" as being on the same level (not layer) as News, for example. 15:20:43 karsten: I am a fan of removing one layer 15:20:48 just that there's not enough room in the navbar to display it, so we're using a dropdown. 15:20:53 so you'd add six menu items for the main menu? 15:21:03 my suggestion is to get rid of the "home" page, and have the users start off on the "data" overview page 15:21:15 And that data overview page would be the six boxes explaining all the data 15:21:24 i like that 15:21:38 * karsten is still parsing that.. 15:21:38 and people can just click on what they want from there, and they can read the other suppoting pages by clicking on the horizontal bar above 15:22:07 * linda waits for karsten 15:22:19 or can you rephrase? 15:22:21 RaBe: you understood I think 15:22:33 having 'data' as home is kind of odd. 15:22:49 karsten: currently, we have a "home" page where people land on 15:23:13 karsten: my suggestion was that people land on the "data" page, we fill that with the stuff we were going to put on the home page, and get rid of the "home" subpage 15:23:34 ah! 15:23:40 and rename Data to Home? 15:24:05 * karsten also sees the oddness here but is curious how this could work. 15:24:08 Leave home out. 15:24:10 I don't mind it staying it names "data" 15:24:32 I said that weirdly. Sorry. "I don't mind it remaining it named 'data"" 15:24:34 and move Data to the left? 15:24:39 karsten: yep 15:24:41 yeah, there won't be any home page, any link to that will be the data page 15:25:03 we remove a layer that way, and with a single click people will be at the graphs 15:25:13 and people will decide on which subcategory of metrics they wanted to see 15:25:14 we could still keep the layer 15:25:14 right, I think that could work. 15:25:30 if the user is on another page he can directly jump to user metrics 15:25:51 how so? via the navbar dropdown? 15:25:55 Or we can keep the submenus on the horizontal bar. I don't mind that for the data 15:26:07 (where's our shared whiteboard..) 15:26:14 karsten: lol 15:26:32 what was the alternative to submenus on the horizontal bar? 15:27:12 karsten: the only thing was to just pick a subpage to direct them to 15:27:31 but we didn't discuss how to get from a subpage to another (i.e. user metrics > traffic metrics) 15:27:38 right, ok. 15:27:39 I think the best thing would be to just have the submenus 15:27:45 yeah. 15:27:45 the sub menu layer? :) 15:28:04 in the horizontal menu bar, just for the data, yes 15:28:30 -> move Data to Home, make Home the Data overview page, remove old Home, keep dropdown in navbar 15:28:35 does that sound correct? 15:28:38 karsten: yes 15:28:43 cool! 15:29:00 if RaBe understands enough to have a second draft of the prorotype, I think we're good for now 15:29:14 I suppose we should discuss how to write content sometime.. but it doens't have to be now 15:29:20 agreed. 15:29:32 i think i got what you want :) 15:29:37 yay! 15:29:40 RaBe: ᕦ(^o^)ᕤ 15:29:40 we'll see next week... :D 15:29:43 hehe 15:29:45 ヽ(•◡•)ﾉ 15:30:01 Did we decide how we were all going to hack at the content? 15:30:10 that's part of the dev server topic. 15:30:12 I think. 15:30:27 oh! 15:30:28 are there topics remaining on the prototype/feedback? 15:30:35 I don't think so. 15:30:39 * linda passes mic to hiro 15:30:45 :) 15:30:53 RaBe: maybe you can try to make sense of the other comments there, and if anything remains unclear, bring it up next time? 15:30:59 hiro: keep the mic 15:31:00 sure! 15:31:03 :) 15:31:10 RaBe: thanks for working with us 15:31:17 * linda is a big fan of the website so far 15:31:19 - metrics-web dev server, approx. 5 min (hiro) 15:31:22 me too! 15:31:30 ok so I think we have a couple of choices 15:31:31 nice to hear :) 15:31:45 we can use github if that's easier because everybody has an account 15:31:45 RaBe: :) 15:32:00 hiro: true. what else were you thinking though? 15:32:03 and use github pages (if we do not really need php in this fase) 15:32:05 iwakeh: I think your preference was non-github? 15:32:10 we can use gitlab 15:32:13 gitlab 15:32:17 ;-) 15:32:27 and deploy to openshift or ec2 15:32:40 I am ok with both options 15:32:42 how much effort is that to set up? 15:32:55 gitlab? do we want to host it (I think we said no right?) 15:33:08 ah, not for this project. 15:33:16 not sure what other teams want to do with it. 15:33:23 but I'd say this is unrelated. 15:33:30 it's just for december. 15:33:32 yes there is actually a ticket open for a VM to have gitlab on tpo infra 15:33:33 * linda nods 15:33:42 but I think it will take longer for people to have that ready 15:33:46 right. 15:33:49 hiro: I have heard such rumors and that network team wants to use it?.. 15:34:00 yep, that's why there is an open ticket :) 15:34:05 for the network team to try it out 15:34:07 cool. 15:34:19 okay, one more reason for us to try it out. 15:34:24 though without setting it all up. 15:34:43 I think we can use the public gitlab for December 15:34:50 yes. 15:35:05 okay, can you suggest a plan what we all need to do? 15:35:10 also for the ec2 instance. 15:35:25 yes so you will all need to create a gitlab account 15:35:32 ok. 15:35:40 one needs to create the project? 15:35:42 including RaBe, right? 15:35:43 on of us will need to create the repository, I can have that ready for you and share it with all 15:35:44 yes 15:35:47 yes including rabe 15:35:52 @_@ 15:35:58 hiro: sounds good if you create the repository. 15:36:05 Is the google doc so bad for doing the copy?... 15:36:12 if it's just for writing text.. 15:36:20 it also has comments and suggestion capabilities 15:36:22 well, at some point it'll have to be html anyway. 15:36:26 Should we decide if it is a private repo? 15:36:41 yes that's something that needs to be decided 15:36:46 karsten: true, but I thought we were just looking for a way to work on all the text together 15:36:46 if you want it private or not 15:37:00 karsten: I was thinking we just give the final text to RaBe 15:37:03 public would be fine with me. well, public read, not public write. 15:37:17 linda: ah. 15:37:30 our tpo gits are public , too. 15:37:31 that depends on how many hours RaBe will have left. 15:37:38 so, if we're moving the php prototype to gitlab, and you're filling the final content, karsten can you later adapt this for the actual server? or is it just for the visualization? 15:38:17 karsten: oh I see 15:38:17 well, I'll have to move this to the servlets and jsps we currently use. 15:38:28 * linda is now for moving to gitlab/whatever 15:38:35 but I don't expect major problems there. 15:39:43 okay, let's try gitlab then, unless there are objections/concerns? 15:40:03 * linda has no concerns 15:40:12 ok so the only thing I will need to know is how to get a EC2 instance under tpo account .. ? 15:40:16 especially since tor might move over to this.. i might as well try it out 15:40:41 hiro: let's get you an ec2 account to create one yourself, okay? 15:40:54 hiro: that is, access to tor's ec2 account. 15:41:07 ok 15:41:13 shall I open a ticket for that? 15:41:32 you can also fill me in about this after the meeting 15:41:42 hiro: yes. I'll create the account for you, but documenting this on trac seems good. 15:42:10 okay, anything else on this topic? 15:42:17 hiro: and sure, happy to talk more later. 15:42:17 I am good 15:42:23 i just thought... i'd suggest not to spent tooo many hours into this, because the static texts would mainly be just copy & paste for me, and we have three weeks max... 15:42:41 hmmmm 15:42:44 RaBe: hehe 15:42:58 RaBe: +1 15:43:02 well, RaBe, you did more of these projects than anyone of us. :) 15:43:31 i also could provide you with an ftp account if you want - however, the versioning then is just on my side :) 15:43:47 or can you push to a public git repo? 15:44:19 we should have an instance for us, in order to notice any update problems early. 15:44:47 * karsten doesn't feel strongly about this and also doesn't know what's most time-efficient. 15:45:00 * linda also doesn't feel that strongly about this 15:45:02 hmm, so you could work on that git, but updates are on the test page only when I "refresh" it... 15:45:12 that's fine. 15:45:14 RaBe: but you could accept pull requests. 15:45:26 right? 15:45:43 refresh on pull. 15:45:48 yep. 15:46:01 I guess I came in from the perspective that we just wanted a way to get the text done, but didn't think about how it would get from prorotyp eto deployment 15:46:02 yes, sure. but when i'm not working, nothing happens at the page :D 15:46:21 I think just for getting the text together, we should probably do it on a google doc.. so we don't flood rabe's repo/whatever with requests 15:46:34 that's what the ec2 prototype was for? 15:46:50 to see our content in the current pages. 15:46:50 hmm 15:47:12 yeah, seeing it in the current pages would be nice, too, but I think that it might be more work than it is worth 15:47:15 the pull requests can be very rare. 15:47:21 hmm, if it's just for the texts, just ping me when a section in the docs document is "ready" or needs to be updated... 15:47:31 just when we agree on the next version of content. 15:47:43 I woudln't just mind sending the text to Rafe by next week and having him update it just before he shows us the version with the changes we talked about today 15:48:02 let's talk about dates, too. 15:48:10 hmm but how do we agree on the content? I would say google docs works for that just fine 15:48:16 karsten: sure 15:48:19 it seemed useful to have a few days to review the prototype and collect feedback. 15:48:21 I'll do the changes independently from the texts, so that should be fine 15:48:50 we'll probably have to finish content early next week, for RaBe to put it in, for us to review the result and collect thoughts for the thursday meeting. 15:48:55 (long sentence is long.) 15:49:25 tuesday for the next content revision? 15:49:41 * hiro is confused now if we still need ec2 + gitlab or not 15:49:41 wednesday new prototype, thursday meeting? 15:49:49 hiro: yeah, trying to figure that out.. 15:50:06 karsten: the schedule sounds good, irrespective of what we use 15:50:34 maybe if you need it just for text git might over complicate things 15:50:48 hiro: I guess we're trying to avoid the overhead for setting up the gitlab repo and ec2 instance. 15:50:58 i agree with that 15:51:32 hiro: sorry for bringing that up and canceling it now, it seemed like a good idea when we discussed that via email. :/ 15:51:44 unless you want gitlab + heroku (free dino will work) and you can set automatic deploys every time you push something 15:51:55 wont we need that for future updates? 15:51:57 yeah no problems :) I am ok w/ everything 15:52:14 future updates? 15:52:16 we have this https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1gYKznK4dxQcR-Pkz-6BP61AWBDUxz9Nq3klCJN1LQ/edit 15:52:21 乁(՞︿՞)ㄏ 15:52:29 at some point the new design and content will move over to servlets and jsps. 15:52:31 a staging option for maintaining? 15:52:39 so, metrics-web.git. 15:52:55 aha, ok. 15:52:56 which we can migrate over to something else than servlet+jsp, but not now. 15:53:35 okay! 15:53:45 shall we move on to the other topics? 15:53:54 +1 15:54:20 * metrics-lib release (karsten) 15:54:32 let's do it. but maybe not this week? 15:54:39 this week == until thursday. 15:54:44 not this week. 15:54:54 okay, let me bring that up next week again then. :) 15:54:58 uh 15:55:02 I don't know what happened 15:55:04 quickly solved. 15:55:09 hm? 15:55:09 but okay google doc? .. says the pad 15:55:16 lol 15:55:20 * linda slinks away 15:55:43 I'll update the doc to have screenshots of the prototype and stuff 15:55:50 wait, what is unclear now? 15:56:07 -> schedule: tue next content revision using Google doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1gYKznK4dxQcR-Pkz-6BP61AWBDUxz9Nq3klCJN1LQ/edit), wed new prototype, thu next meeting 15:56:14 is that not what we decided? 15:56:18 okay okay 15:56:19 got it 15:56:26 okay :) 15:56:28 next: 15:56:32 * GeoIP/ASN database update in Onionoo (karsten) 15:56:38 this is mostly about ASN. 15:56:46 I didn't hear concerns, so I'll just update, right? 15:56:48 #20889 15:56:53 yeah, that. thanks. 15:57:33 deploy away? 15:57:56 well, whoever is against should speak now, or remain silent forever ;-) 15:58:02 hehehe 15:58:12 they'll have a few more hours. 15:58:15 but yes! 15:58:32 * Onionoo mirror and operation (karsten) 15:58:58 was the dos on onionoo.tpo solved? 15:59:06 so, this is based on a discussion with weasel this week. 15:59:09 somewhat. 15:59:26 but the question was why we're not hosting two instances on tp.o hosts. 15:59:35 and drop the thecthulhu.com instance. 15:59:35 true. 15:59:44 both operated by you and me. 15:59:56 fine. 16:00:00 with dns round robin, each with their own varnish thing. 16:00:16 alright, let's move forward with that then. 16:00:33 might not happen this week, but I'll start with creating a ticket. 16:00:35 you mean each of us one, or we maintain both? 16:00:41 both maintain both. 16:00:46 in case of vacation etc. 16:00:59 ah, ok; no separation of power :-) 16:01:12 heh, no. 16:01:28 well, I think that's fine, isn't it? 16:01:42 yes, definitely. 16:01:53 the admins have more access anyway. 16:02:02 right. 16:02:08 okay, last topic: 16:02:10 * ExoneraTor translations (karsten) 16:02:15 #20867 16:02:21 I meant to look at that. 16:02:22 we have a lot of translations there. 16:02:39 and this is also relevant for the metrics website at some point. 16:02:46 the idea of making the english version binding is good. 16:03:17 which is why I'm glad there's a language picker. :) 16:03:31 :-) 16:03:49 okay, maybe comment on the ticket, and I'll move it forward. 16:03:57 ok. 16:04:08