19:19:03 #startmeeting ansible core irc meeting 19:19:03 Meeting started Tue Nov 30 19:19:03 2021 UTC. 19:19:03 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 19:19:03 The chair is bcoca. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 19:19:03 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 19:19:03 The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_core_irc_meeting' 19:19:51 so 2 items, skiping typehinting since we just got today a firm proposal and need time to read 19:20:04 That's early right? Or are my time zones off? 19:20:04 #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/71734 19:20:07 @felixfontein ? 19:20:18 I thought I had 40min 19:20:36 i was 20 late ... took me longer to cook lunch than i realized 19:20:54 crap, yeah, I am 1 hour off :) 19:21:11 im 6yrs off, so no worries 19:23:27 Oh, I was an hour off too 19:23:37 am i 1h early then? 19:23:43 yay DST 19:24:06 my calendar shows you are correct, I was wrong 19:24:22 gotta move somewhere without DST, it's always the same time for me 19:24:26 #topic open floor 19:24:45 k, no one showed for the existing item ... so will close in 5 is nothing is brought up 19:25:03 Well, in case I miss the next meeting +1 on type hints, since it seems like we're punting to next week 19:25:12 I'll put it in the proposal too 19:25:58 pretty sure the question wont be type hints, but 'which implementation, scope and how we introduce em' 19:26:19 yeah, it's all in there 19:27:32 "yes, have some" 19:28:24 my only caveat to current proposal is 'lets just do core controller code for now' 19:29:36 but as stated above, postpoining discussion till everyone had time to read and digest that proposal 19:29:37 that's in non-goals at the bottom 19:29:40 right? 19:29:41 * nitzmahone is fine with that too, but we need to say "we're not accepting type annotations on non-controller code" then 19:30:05 Well, I had a little section about non-controller core code 19:30:07 oh, controller only, I misread what you said bcoca 19:30:49 #info https://github.com/ansible/proposals/issues/202 19:30:54 for those that need the text from the logs 19:30:56 The proposal should be clarified to note that ansible-test already has type annotations, to avoid potential confusion. 19:31:06 Given where the most consumption of our APIs takes place, core module_utils would be of the most use to non-core devs 19:31:54 (and also keep us honest ;) ) 19:32:00 nitzmahone: defining the 'public api' is a discussion on it's own, module_utils is probably the part we can all easily agree on, but it mostly is designed to execute on remote and then has the pyhon2 restriction (for now) 19:32:07 Stating ansible-core should be specific enough for us, but someone else reading it might think that includes ansible-test. 19:32:38 mattclay: agreed, but that is confusing even internally since ansible-test is in middle of 'moving' to be a devtool vs core tool 19:33:00 'controller runtime code' 19:33:20 ^ i hope that is satisfactory term? 19:33:59 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:35:44 k, with that i'll close the meeting, for once we had core quorum ... but no one else ... 19:35:47 #endmeeting