16:58:51 <nickm> #startmeeting weekly network team meeting, 22 October 2018
16:58:51 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Oct 22 16:58:51 2018 UTC.  The chair is nickm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:58:51 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:58:57 <dgoulet> o/
16:59:11 <gaba> good morning!!
16:59:29 <ahf> o/
16:59:34 <ahf> hello hello
16:59:38 <asn> hello
16:59:41 <nickm> mikeperry: ping?  looks like we're missing an update from you?
17:00:07 <nickm> hi ahf and dgoulet and gaba and asn!
17:01:14 <nickm> so, let's start with our roadmap
17:01:19 * juga around
17:01:40 <gaba> For the roadmap just a reminder that sponsor 8 is a priority
17:01:45 <nickm> looks like last week we mainly did the sponsor 19 report and a bunch of bugfixes for 035
17:01:47 <gaba> I'm trying to sort out the roadmap by priority
17:01:58 <gaba> take the stuff at the top first *if possible*
17:02:02 <ahf> yeah
17:02:03 <gaba> hi juga!
17:02:55 <gaba> last week was also bug fixing and mike working on the padding stuff
17:02:59 <asn> gaba: btw, me and dgoulet, identified a pretty important HSv3 issue (#27838). we added it to the roadmap because it's something to be done in 035 timeframe and it's not reflected in the roadmap.
17:03:13 <nickm> so, looking at the roadmap for me, I see the first thing with my name on it is "merge existing memory patches", which I'll try to work on
17:03:14 <gaba> yes, I saw it. I was going to ask about that one.
17:03:18 <gaba> ok
17:03:27 <ahf> nickm: is that the mmap() ones?
17:03:39 <gaba> if for some reason anybody thing that priorities should be different please talk to me
17:03:44 <nickm> ahf: mmap and maybe cleaning up #27359
17:03:50 <ahf> ack
17:04:14 <nickm> ahf: I don't know what the current status is there, so if you want to tell me what to do next on those patches (revise mine, update cyberpunks's, or merge the two) i'd appreciate that
17:04:23 <gaba> also, there stuff related to the reports done, please add how much time it took you. It is ok to add it to actual points with your name on it
17:04:27 <nickm> does everybody else have a clear next step on the roadmap?
17:04:43 <ahf> nickm: i'm gonna take a look, yes
17:04:45 <dgoulet> I do (expecting ahf to update me soon :)
17:04:59 <nickm> dgoulet: wrt #25502 ? Sounds good
17:05:02 * asn added points to the s19 report
17:05:18 <dgoulet> nickm: yes
17:05:39 <nickm> one good place to start there is with a breakdown of the work and a plan, unless there is one already
17:05:55 <dgoulet> nickm: that is what ahf is doing I believe
17:05:59 <nickm> great
17:06:04 <nickm> catalyst: are you around today?
17:06:05 <ahf> ye
17:06:11 <catalyst> nickm: yes
17:06:37 <asn> i did an estimation for the hsv3 roadmap item, and it was replaced with ?????????.
17:06:40 <nickm> mikeperry, catalyst, ahf, asn: do you have a clear next task on the roadmap?
17:06:59 <ahf> nickm: yep
17:07:06 <asn> my big thing is row=87 which lacks a ticket.
17:07:14 <asn> aka "Review current WTF-PAD branch"
17:07:18 <asn> and also make a ticket for it
17:07:19 <catalyst> nickm: 035 bugs, then bootstrap reporting stuff
17:07:26 <ahf> i'm gonna modify the #25502 entry in the roadmap tonight with the new tickets
17:07:27 <asn> the WTF_PAD branch is currently being revised by mike.
17:07:31 <ahf> so we can try to do estimates for those
17:07:49 <gaba> thanks ahf
17:08:01 <ahf> right now #25502 is too meta for us to estimate anything there
17:08:27 <nickm> catalyst: great-- and same note about a breakdown of work and a plan.  You're listed as working with Teor there, but it's also okay to pull me in on this one; I don't have enough sponsor8 stuff right now.
17:08:40 <catalyst> nickm: ok, thanks
17:09:27 <asn> ok i made a ticket for the wtf-pad review/merge (#28142)
17:09:30 <nickm> gaba: can you reach out to mikeperry about the stuff here?  He was sick the last couple of mondays, I think, but we should be keeping in touch
17:09:33 <nickm> asn: woo!
17:09:37 <gaba> still related with the roadmap but i added it to the meeting discussions is who can be available to help with sbws
17:09:45 <gaba> yes nickm
17:09:49 <nickm> asn: would you like me to work along with you on that too, or review it once you're done?
17:10:00 <nickm> gaba: okay; we'll get to that in discussions
17:10:09 <nickm> if no more on the roadmap, next topic is reviews?
17:10:14 <asn> nickm: it's gonna be in merge_ready after the review phase finishes.
17:10:22 <asn> nickm: so at that point, i think you will need to take a look too...
17:10:39 <nickm> asn: sounds fine!
17:10:46 <asn> i will probably be back-and-forth with mike before getting it to merge_ready
17:11:12 <asn> updated the ticket to be in needs_revision since mike has the mutex atm
17:11:12 <nickm> ack; please feel free to pull me in if you think there's any discussion where i'd be helpful
17:11:26 <asn> ack
17:12:03 <nickm> on reviews -- looks like almost everybody has 4-6.
17:12:20 <asn> btw i feel like we pumped up the estimation of #28142 in mexico but now it's back to 5-10
17:12:26 <asn> #28142 is a big thing.
17:12:35 <asn> i think we put it to 15 or so in mexico
17:12:41 <nickm> I think teor4 may be blocked on the travis sanitizer ones; I'll ask them at the patch party or sooner if they want to offload them.
17:13:03 <nickm> #28142 great; I was guessing wildly, but I'd be happy to have my guess be way off
17:13:08 <asn> this week's review round added 2-3 tickets to each person.
17:13:13 * catalyst can be backup for looking over heavy linker stuff
17:13:19 <nickm> Does #28142 get us a version of wtf-pad that actually pads?
17:13:29 <asn> it does pad, but not the way that mikeperry wants it to pad.
17:13:37 <asn> and thats why we have the extra 3 tickets
17:13:40 <asn> to be put on top of it
17:13:48 <nickm> ack
17:13:52 <asn> but still #28142... is lots of work.
17:13:58 <nickm> yeah, I hear you
17:14:25 <nickm> can/would you like to share it around at all?
17:14:35 <asn> share the work?
17:14:38 <nickm> yes
17:14:44 <asn> yes it can be shared for sure
17:14:49 <asn> but sharing review is weird
17:15:01 <asn> but im up for doing it if we figure out a way to do it
17:15:15 <asn> maybe we can split reviewing and testing
17:15:21 <asn> and one person tests the branch while the other person does review?
17:15:23 <asn> not sure
17:15:38 <nickm> hm. that might make sense.  Anybody interested in testing wtf-pad after its next round of revisions?
17:15:54 <asn> i think that mike found some bugs during testing last week, and now he is fixing them
17:16:01 <nickm> ack
17:16:10 <asn> there is also no real testing framework for it
17:16:14 <nickm> did mikeperry give you a planned ETA for his revisions?
17:16:17 <asn> this week
17:16:24 <nickm> ok
17:16:38 <asn> it's on #tor-dev from friday i think
17:16:43 <asn> but my backlog does not reach that far back...
17:17:00 <nickm> ack
17:17:12 <nickm> next topic is rotations...
17:17:20 <nickm> oh one last thing:
17:17:49 <nickm> catalyst: (thanks for the offer on the asan stuff! let's talk to teor4 when we see them)
17:18:20 <nickm> my offer to help out with reviews that folks are stuck with goes for everybody, so feel free to grab me or reassign hard review stuff to me without asking.
17:18:35 <nickm> rotations: we have ahf on triage and teor4 on CI
17:19:04 <nickm> gaba: we're about to ratify the rotations changes, right?
17:19:09 <gaba> yes
17:19:19 <gaba> we have one more week to comment/edit or ask questions about it
17:19:27 <gaba> proposal: https://pad.riseup.net/p/team_rotation
17:19:31 <ahf> ack
17:19:36 <gaba> It is a small change of reducing the rotating roles
17:19:40 <nickm> summary: the rotations become triage and CI, and everything else is "stuff everybody should spend a little time on"
17:19:50 <gaba> yes
17:20:15 <nickm> the triage and CI rotations now have specified minimum versions, so folks don't think that CI means "fix everything that is remotely broken by yourself"
17:20:16 <asn> just a note: there is no concrete proposal on that pad.
17:20:21 <gaba> I will do the work on team observer that was proposed and we still have stable roles as the assigner of reviews and stable release mantainer.
17:20:26 <asn> the summary that nickm just gave is a good proposal fort me tho.
17:21:05 <nickm> Can somebody turn what we have there into a consensus proposal?
17:21:06 <ahf> do we want triaging to look at coverity and create tickets for some of them if they can be clustered? we have had some weeks where there suddenly was 20 new coverity issues opened, but most weeks there is not that much
17:21:31 <nickm> sure, unless it's obvious who should fix them
17:21:36 <ahf> ack
17:21:37 <gaba> I an convert it into a proposal adding soem text at the top but I assumed it was fine :)
17:22:06 <asn> it looks like a bunch of info
17:22:07 <nickm> gaba: I don't think I understand what is actually the proposal either; when I summarized it above, I was secretly trying to confirm my understanding :)
17:22:16 <gaba> oh
17:22:27 <gaba> ok. I will try to summarize it
17:22:31 <gaba> and send it back to the mailing list
17:22:31 <asn> thx
17:23:18 <dgoulet> speaking of, resolving our current sekrit thread about committers and the stable role of stable release maintainer would be great and in turn expose it to net team for comments :)
17:23:39 <nickm> +1
17:24:03 <gaba> that is the other thing we have on the list for today. The idea is to have dgoulet merge code into master for a few subsystems.
17:24:06 <nickm> gaba: I tried to write a summary at the top for you, but there's still a lot of internal discussion that could use cleaning up for the proposed version
17:24:15 <gaba> yes. I will clean it up.
17:24:16 <gaba> thanks!
17:24:20 <nickm> np; thanks to you!
17:24:24 <dgoulet> gaba: and latest response from asn also for him to imo :)
17:25:24 <asn> yep replied to the thread today. sorry for taking me a while :)
17:25:44 <nickm> dgoulet, asn: I'm fine with the stuff that you wrote on the thread; if somebody turns it into a concrete proposal and sends it to network-team, let's agree to it?
17:25:46 <dgoulet> nickm, gaba: I'm happy to volunteer to start the stable maintainer discussion on the net team if you like, I'm also happy to sit out, as you wish. I personally just want to get the ball rolling on that role :D
17:25:52 <dgoulet> nickm: +1
17:26:06 <asn> sounds good.
17:26:10 <gaba> yes please dgoulet.
17:26:13 <asn> dgoulet: you want to write the Concrete Proposal?
17:26:18 * asn concrete proposal is the phrase of the day
17:26:26 <dgoulet> ok so I'll do both, the "master merger" and the stable ...
17:26:27 <nickm> two suggestions for the proposal:
17:26:29 <nickm> keep it simple
17:26:32 <dgoulet> +1
17:26:33 <asn> +1
17:26:50 <nickm> make sure that it's written so that if one of you is overloaded, the world doesn't block.
17:27:05 <dgoulet> sounds good, I'll get the ball rolling!
17:27:12 <nickm> we all have a lot of other stuff on our plates and the coordination issues here might take longer than we expect
17:27:18 <nickm> ok, thanks dgoulet !
17:27:50 <nickm> first discussion topic is sbws ; juga nees an additional person
17:27:57 <nickm> juga: what kind of help do you need exactly?
17:28:08 <gaba> the idea is to have somebody else other than teor
17:28:19 <gaba> that can help juga with any issue related to what she is working on
17:28:32 <juga> nickm, gaba, i think 1 person could be enough
17:28:42 <juga> not sure teor has time for it (or who else)
17:28:44 <gaba> not specifically right now but in general with this
17:28:59 <juga> mainly i think someone should be reviewing code or
17:29:13 <juga> some main questions like last week
17:29:37 <gaba> any volunteers?
17:29:41 <juga> i've added in the pad, what about 1h/week? for someone to review bwauth stuff?
17:30:08 <nickm> code review shouldn't be too hard; I don't know if  I know what kind of questions you have in mind
17:30:20 <nickm> the code in question is sbws code, and that's in python?
17:30:28 <juga> yes
17:30:33 <ahf> yeah, is it python code in sbws or is it C code in tor?
17:30:35 <ahf> ok
17:30:39 <juga> i hope to get to tor code soon too
17:30:50 <juga> ahf: correct
17:30:58 <juga> i mean, both
17:31:06 <ahf> i can try to be helpful with the tor code, i don't think right now is a good time for me to learn a new codebase so close to the end of s8
17:31:07 <catalyst> i can review Python code, but i'm not sure i have enough context to review the design
17:31:35 <catalyst> (nor do i really have the time to acquire the context before sponsor8 ends)
17:31:51 <juga> sounds good, let's see what teor says
17:31:58 <gaba> ok, thanks
17:32:30 <gaba> next topic? hackweek preparation
17:33:14 <gaba> Just a reminder that we are starting to prepare it and please comment on it when you have a chance. https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-hackweek-2019.1-keep
17:33:16 <ahf> \o/
17:33:37 <gaba> It seems that everybody is ok with the week before fosdem
17:33:57 <mikeperry> (ugh, I messed up my alarm for this meeting... sorry)
17:35:26 <ahf> gaba: assuming it's gonna be in brussels i think
17:35:38 <gaba> or close by. that is the other thing we are looking at
17:35:40 <ahf> there are people who needs to go to fosdem if we aren't doing it in brussels :-P
17:35:40 <dgoulet> big hub for travelling
17:35:43 <ahf> yep!
17:36:02 <gaba> if you have suggestions on where to do it close to brussels please add it to the pad
17:36:21 <nickm> gotta find someplace with cheap & easy travel and lodging...
17:36:25 <gaba> yes
17:36:41 <ahf> do we want to do the wilmington thing where a lot of us are in a big airbnb and the rest takes a hotel nearby?
17:36:42 <gaba> brussels may be easy travel but not so much about cheap on lodging
17:36:45 <arma1> we might be able to get kuleuven to offer meeting space
17:36:50 <ahf> there are many hotels there because of the EU hq
17:37:00 <gaba> kuleuven ?
17:37:14 <asn> nice idea
17:37:20 <arma1> the university in leuven, which is a suburb of brussels. they do anonymity research.
17:37:30 <gaba> oh, i see
17:37:31 <gaba> cool
17:37:37 <ahf> perhaps an airbnb there would also be cheaper than brussels city?
17:37:39 <arma1> https://www.kuleuven.be/english/
17:37:48 <gaba> yes
17:37:54 <ahf> then we can move into brussel city on the friday for those staying for fosdem
17:37:58 <arma1> http://homes.esat.kuleuven.be/~cdiaz/
17:38:18 <gaba> I'm going to talk with jon this week and start looking at possiblites around this
17:38:28 <arma1> (last link: https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/cosic/ )
17:39:05 <ahf> that sounds like a good idea, arma1
17:39:13 <nickm> it's a cheap train ride leuven<->brussels
17:39:19 <dgoulet> yah
17:39:20 <ahf> gaba: are you keeping metrics in mind here too if they wanna do a parallel meeting with us?
17:39:30 <ahf> both karsten and irl expressed interest in that
17:39:35 <asn> i suggested bruges because it's nice, but i think leuven is realistic and we might get a free meeting space. ;)
17:39:44 <gaba> I'm going to talk with them ahf
17:39:50 <gaba> as you suggested that today
17:40:24 <ahf> cool!
17:40:34 <gaba> thanks!
17:40:52 <nickm> let's see, any "want help with"s for today?
17:41:15 <nickm> I've been letting people know I'm not on enough roadmap stuffed for right now so you should feel free to pull me in
17:41:58 <nickm> I want suggestions on that publish/subscribe API proposal.  Mainly, should I build it, or revise it?  We can revise it post-build or post-merge, but now would be easiest -- so please have a look.
17:42:11 <nickm> anybody else need help or have a discussion topic?
17:43:28 <gaba> i already brought everything i had to discuss
17:43:36 * dgoulet is good
17:44:31 <nickm> if nothing else -- let's call the meeting, and see each other online!
17:44:45 * nickm waits another 30 sec :)
17:44:48 <gaba> bye! o/
17:44:51 <asn> thanks! :)
17:44:59 <ahf> o/
17:45:05 <juga> thanks
17:45:24 <nickm> cheers all!
17:45:25 <nickm> #endmeeting