19:00:00 <nitzmahone> #startmeeting Ansible Core Public IRC Meeting
19:00:00 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Dec  1 19:00:00 2020 UTC.
19:00:00 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
19:00:00 <zodbot> The chair is nitzmahone. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:00:00 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
19:00:00 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_core_public_irc_meeting'
19:00:03 <nitzmahone> bam
19:00:07 <nitzmahone> #chair jborean93
19:00:07 <zodbot> Current chairs: jborean93 nitzmahone
19:00:15 <briantist> 👋
19:00:21 <felixfontein> hi :)
19:00:25 <nitzmahone> #info agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/570
19:01:11 <Shrews> o/
19:01:43 <nitzmahone> hey all!
19:02:22 <nitzmahone> #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72699 (argspec defaults for bool opts)
19:02:46 <felixfontein> I mainly put this on the agenda because I have no idea why the behavior was not like that before
19:03:33 <felixfontein> before default=None and default=False were essentially identified for the sanity checks, but not for argument spec processing
19:04:21 <nitzmahone> Yeah, at a glance that seems like a good catch- +1 from me
19:05:30 <felixfontein> the default change in the modules should not be visible, I checked that it has no effect for these modules, but I will extend the changelog fragment
19:06:21 <nitzmahone> Yeah, I think I'm good to merge that even as-is, not sure the CL needs an update if there's no visible change
19:07:17 <nitzmahone> Any other controversy on that one? Seems pretty straightforward
19:08:04 <nitzmahone> Assuming not
19:08:11 <Shrews> if you don't think the CL is necessary, merge away
19:08:12 <felixfontein> the main advantage of having a CL entry is that if it starts behaving differently (for whatever reason), it's easier to see what could have caused it. at least if you're only looking at the changelog, and not at the commit history for the module's file
19:08:41 <nitzmahone> Sure- if you want to clarify that, go for it and we'll get it merged
19:09:04 <nitzmahone> #topic BaseFileCacheModule warning (https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/570#issuecomment-732417395)
19:09:18 <felixfontein> I'm happy without it as well, I just wanted to expand on that point :)
19:09:22 <resmo> o/
19:09:24 <nitzmahone> #agreed core team to merge validate-modules change in #72699
19:09:27 <felixfontein> (I can use git log ;) )
19:10:08 <briantist> happy to answer any additional questions on the `BaseFileCacheModule` topic
19:10:21 <nitzmahone> briantist: the folks that know the most about the cache plugin stuff (and that wrote most of it) are both out today, so might be better to punt this one til they're around
19:10:32 <nitzmahone> (bcoca and shertel)
19:10:35 <briantist> 😭
19:10:46 <briantist> sure that's ok
19:11:02 <nitzmahone> At a glance, I agree with you, but there might be a reason for the current behavior that I don't know about
19:11:17 <briantist> sure, makes sense, if anyone else has other questions or comments on it, I might be able to clarify for the next meeting
19:11:26 <felixfontein> I would guess the reason is that users are informed that the cache file could not be found, which usually should only happen on the first run (or when they manually delete it)
19:12:21 <felixfontein> though .v() instead of .warning() probably suffices for that
19:12:28 <nitzmahone> I think shertel's back for Friday's meeting
19:12:30 <briantist> yeah but it's not actionable; the file is about to be created. In automated runs where we alert on warnings, it ends up being a flaky thing
19:12:49 <briantist> yeah `.v()` would be better
19:13:18 <briantist> is the next meeting on Friday? I thought it was Thursday
19:13:21 <nitzmahone> Yeah, +1 on .v() also
19:13:39 <nitzmahone> It is, I can't read a calendar apparently
19:13:42 <felixfontein> so far it has been Thursday :)
19:13:50 <felixfontein> maybe nitzmahone is thinking of weekend already ;)
19:13:53 <nitzmahone> Either way, shertel should be back :D
19:14:06 <briantist> 😅ok sounds good, I'll attend the next one too
19:14:13 <nitzmahone> (many meetings on my calendar with "core" in them ;) )
19:14:30 <nitzmahone> OK, that's it for the agenda, so
19:14:33 <nitzmahone> #topic open floor
19:15:32 <nitzmahone> will close in 2m if no new topics
19:16:08 <felixfontein> I have more PRs for review, if you want I can paste some ;)
19:16:09 <shertel> briantist: I am out today, but there's a PR about that https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/57646
19:16:15 <shertel> I'll take another look on Thursday
19:16:55 <nitzmahone> dangit, shoulda obfuscated  s h e r t e l  ;)
19:17:09 <felixfontein> :)
19:17:26 <shertel> heh :p
19:17:32 <briantist> heh, sorry about that, thanks for the link :)
19:17:54 <nitzmahone> felixfontein: I'm buried, but go for it if there's stuff you want feedback on
19:18:06 <felixfontein> nitzmahone: ok :)
19:18:06 <felixfontein> https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72697
19:18:16 <felixfontein> https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72625
19:18:45 <felixfontein> and then there's always https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72248 ;)
19:19:13 <nitzmahone> that's the controversial one :D
19:19:30 <felixfontein> hehe true :)
19:19:50 <felixfontein> the other two should be less controversial
19:19:57 <nitzmahone> I might have some comments for a couple of the others, so thanks for sharing :D
19:20:19 <felixfontein> hehe thanks!
19:20:27 <nitzmahone> NP! Anything else for today?
19:20:27 <felixfontein> I have some more, but I think they mainly need attention from the other matt
19:20:51 <felixfontein> from my side, I think no
19:20:54 <nitzmahone> Heh, I wouldn't anticipate much feedback on those until the AZP cutover is done (starting today for ansible/ansible)
19:21:09 <felixfontein> nitzmahone: I know, that's why I didn't write out the nick ;)
19:21:49 <nitzmahone> OK, last call, going once
19:22:00 <nitzmahone> going twice
19:22:26 <nitzmahone> Thanks all- 'til next time!
19:22:30 <nitzmahone> #endmeeting