18:00:12 <felixfontein> #startmeeting Ansible Community Meeting
18:00:12 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Dec  8 18:00:12 2021 UTC.
18:00:12 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
18:00:12 <zodbot> The chair is felixfontein. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
18:00:12 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_community_meeting'
18:00:12 <felixfontein> #topic Agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/539
18:00:12 <felixfontein> acozine andersson007_ baptistemm bcoca briantist cyberpear cybette dericcrago dmsimard felixfontein geerlingguy gundalow gwmngilfen ikhan_ jillr jtanner lmodemal misc nitzmahone resmo samccann tadeboro cidrblock thaumos zbr: ping!
18:00:16 <felixfontein> #info Agenda: https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/539 / Topics: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics
18:00:19 <felixfontein> #topic Updates
18:00:40 <andersson007_> o/
18:00:50 <felixfontein> #chair andersson007_
18:00:50 <zodbot> Current chairs: andersson007_ felixfontein
18:00:54 <tadeboro> o/
18:00:59 * dericcrago waves
18:00:59 <samccann> o/
18:01:03 <felixfontein> #chair tadeboro dericcrago samccann
18:01:03 <zodbot> Current chairs: andersson007_ dericcrago felixfontein samccann tadeboro
18:01:48 <cyberpear> o/
18:02:16 <felixfontein> #chair cyberpear
18:02:16 <zodbot> Current chairs: andersson007_ cyberpear dericcrago felixfontein samccann tadeboro
18:02:26 <felixfontein> #info Ansible 5.0.1 has been released, Ansible 5.0.0 has been yanked and finally deleted
18:02:29 <felixfontein> #info Ansible 4.10.0 will be released next week and will be the final 4.x.y release
18:02:58 <acozine> o/
18:03:34 <felixfontein> #chair acozine
18:03:34 <zodbot> Current chairs: acozine andersson007_ cyberpear dericcrago felixfontein samccann tadeboro
18:03:51 <jillr> o/
18:05:02 <felixfontein> #chair jillr
18:05:02 <zodbot> Current chairs: acozine andersson007_ cyberpear dericcrago felixfontein jillr samccann tadeboro
18:07:14 <felixfontein> anyone has more updates? :)
18:07:39 <andersson007_> i myself haven't:)
18:08:36 <felixfontein> ok, I propose we first talk about semantic markup... there's not anything to decide (yet), but having some more voices on this would be great :)
18:08:42 <felixfontein> #topic Include semantic markup in plugin DOCUMENTATION strings
18:08:42 <felixfontein> #info Discussion: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/53
18:09:20 <felixfontein> background: right now we have markup like C(...), I(...), B(...), L(...,...), M(...), U(...) for module/plugin docs, which - at least the first three - is very formatting oriented, but not semantic
18:09:50 <felixfontein> right now we say that I() should be used for options or option=value pairs, and C() for option values; but some modules do it the other way around, or use I() or C() for both
18:10:49 <felixfontein> the proposal is to have O() for options or option=value, V() for values, E() for env variables; and besides that also introduce P(...#...) to create links to plugins (other than modules)
18:11:05 <felixfontein> and RV() for return values
18:11:39 <felixfontein> this would allow to format the docs more uniformly, and (with some extra semantic information) we can actually validate this and add links for options and return values!
18:12:36 <samccann> woot!
18:12:44 <felixfontein> the old C(), I(), B() will still be kept around, and can be used for 'regular' markup (C() for all kind of values / code-style / teletype text; I() for italics and B() for bold)
18:13:17 <acozine> +1 for semantic markup, I think it will make things much clearer, though it will involve some heavy lifting at first
18:13:25 <felixfontein> the main downside is that converting all existing docs to use this is a lot of work. but: it can be done iteratively, and once a module/plugin starts using the new ones, they profit from extra validation and improved documentation
18:13:43 <felixfontein> (so there's a carrot for collection maintainers :) )
18:13:44 <gundalow> +1 (We don't have to convert in one go though)
18:15:01 <remindbot[m]> @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting
18:15:17 <felixfontein> as for a timeline, this won't land in ansible-core before 2.14 (due to RH-internal roadmaps for 2.13 and dependent products that have already been finalized), so we (community) have some more time to discuss this and come up with a more specific / detailled proposal
18:15:43 <felixfontein> (and potentially also a more complete implementation; I've already started with that, but haven't continued with my additional proposals for O(), RV() and validation)
18:17:24 <andersson007_> +1 for semantic markup
18:21:21 <felixfontein> thanks for all the +1's :) I'm currently hoping for feedback especially for the extensions for O() and RV() I proposed in that issue (https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/53), feel free to add comments there
18:22:15 <felixfontein> I think the plan to advance this is to write down a more formal version of the proposal, so it can be discussed also internally at RH, and I plan to implement more parts of this so it's possible to see how the results could look like
18:22:56 <samccann> sounds like a plan stan
18:23:28 <felixfontein> I have a branch for community.dns to use semantic markup for its docs, and once I'm done with all the other antsibull PRs I plan to update it and publish that version on my docsite so it's possible to see the results again :)
18:23:58 <samccann> cool!
18:24:41 <felixfontein> well... should we talk about something else? when looking at the topics I thought 'making meetings more async' and 'repository instead of issue for Changes impacting collection contributors & maintainers' would be interesting, though we've already talked about them in the past...
18:24:49 <felixfontein> is anyone interested in talking about them again, or about something else?
18:25:18 <samccann> quiet day ;-)
18:25:26 <felixfontein> indeed :)
18:25:40 <felixfontein> probably everyone is busy working on something and happy that everyone else does the same ;)
18:26:14 <samccann> on the async - it might be interesting to 'track' how long it takes to close out/finish something if it's async only.  like will we move forward quickly enuf
18:27:01 <felixfontein> I guess it depends on how tight we sead the voting deadlines on them :) though another interesting stats might be "how many actually voted?"
18:27:11 <felixfontein> #topic How to make meeting / discussion process more inclusive and asynchronous?
18:27:14 <felixfontein> #info Discussion: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/38
18:27:19 <felixfontein> when we talk about it even a little, we can change the topic ;
18:27:20 <felixfontein> )
18:27:39 <samccann> hehe yep
18:28:10 <felixfontein> I hope that the async discussions will have more active folks than this meeting here ;)
18:29:29 <samccann> ok looking at that issue - seems Greg wants some more votes. Have we put this out on 'the usual suspects' like bullhorn, reddit, mail lists etc?
18:30:01 <remindbot[m]> @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting
18:30:28 <felixfontein> I'm not sure whether it's more him waiting for more votes, or votes waiting for his more formal version of the proposal :)
18:30:51 <samccann> omgosh I think GREG is spying on us now!  lol
18:31:06 <andersson007_> if nobody else has opinion on https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/51, i'll try to create a summary in the issue tomorrow or on Friday (i.e. options for (maybe async) voting)
18:31:07 <samccann> i deliberately didn't use your name so's not to ping you if you were busy
18:31:24 <gwmngilfen> Greg is in my keywords :)
18:31:38 <felixfontein> #chair gwmngilfen
18:31:38 <zodbot> Current chairs: acozine andersson007_ cyberpear dericcrago felixfontein gwmngilfen jillr samccann tadeboro
18:31:59 <samccann> lol too funny
18:32:01 <dericcrago> guess we'll have to start using `gerg` then :P
18:32:08 <felixfontein> andersson007_: that would be a great idea - I think having a (or multiple) concrete proposals would allow us to move forward
18:32:23 <andersson007_> felixfontein: agreed
18:32:26 <gwmngilfen> I believe it has gone out to reddit and the bullhorn, yes. More opinions is very welcome, but I'll get a draft of the doc ready soon(tm) :)
18:32:28 <felixfontein> samccann: or 'grep' :D
18:33:03 <felixfontein> gwmngilfen: it looks like people are already preparing for the async part, considering how active the last few meetings have been :)
18:33:13 <gwmngilfen> dericcrago: Or I need to disable read-receipts :)
18:33:27 <acozine> we were chatting about this in the DaWGs (docs) meeting yesterday - about encouraging async activity, I mean
18:33:51 <gwmngilfen> Anyway, I am on solo-bedtimes tonight as my wife is out, so phone is going away now ;)
18:34:06 <acozine> what would folks think about having a "PR of the day" or "proposal of the day" or "issue of the day" in the chat?
18:35:08 <acozine> I know i pay more attention outside of meeting times if someone posts a direct question
18:36:31 <samccann> is there a way to put that as the chat channel topic each daY (and would people notice lol)
18:37:51 <felixfontein> hmm, someone has to pick these issues/PRs anyway
18:38:35 <andersson007_> and vote on them:)
18:39:22 <samccann> lo
18:39:24 <samccann> lol
18:39:53 <samccann> I'm thinking for this channel, we could post whatever issues are 'hot' at the moment - things that we want to get more votes/comments on
18:40:20 <felixfontein> btw, if anyone has time to review https://github.com/ansible-community/antsibull/pull/354, would be really glad :)
18:40:20 <github-linkbot> https://github.com/ansible-community/antsibull/pull/354, | open, created 2021-12-08T07:57:28Z by felixfontein: Fix docs build errors; improve RST generation  
18:41:50 <samccann> I'll test taht out after this meeting
18:41:58 <samccann> s/taht/that/
18:42:35 <felixfontein> thanks!
18:45:00 <remindbot[m]> @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting
18:46:08 <acozine> yeah, I was just thinking maybe folks aren't joining the conversation because they aren't here at meeting times and they don't look at the meeting agendas
18:46:51 <acozine> it might not work, but maybe if we give them some pointers to "here's a topic we're discussing and we want to include your opinion" then we'll get more async voices
18:47:35 <felixfontein> it's definitely worth a try!
18:48:19 <gwmngilfen> Would be pretty easy to bot that
18:49:03 <acozine> Gwm (non-work): that would be nice, especially if we could set the bot to post at different times of day
18:49:07 <felixfontein> acozine: thanks for your feedback on https://github.com/ansible-community/antsibull/pull/353 !
18:49:12 <andersson007_> maybe based on `next_meeting` label
18:49:12 <acozine> as in, Monday it posts at noon GMT
18:49:19 <acozine> Tuesday at 11:00 GMT
18:49:28 <gwmngilfen> Its barely a bot, more of a cronjob :)
18:49:32 <acozine> and so on, so that every TZ gets a shot at being the first to see something
18:50:08 <acozine> felixfontein: you're welcome - a lot of it is outside my knowledge, but I can always hunt for typos!
18:50:46 <gwmngilfen> Matrix is very easy to script, as it's an http protocol
18:51:23 <bcoca> he, i would argue that irc is much simpler than an http protocol
18:51:34 <gwmngilfen> So a script to query GH, select 1 from the results, and post it to a room is trivial
18:51:57 <felixfontein> bcoca: there are a lot more HTTP libs around than IRC libs though, in case you don't want to hand-write that part :)
18:52:18 <gwmngilfen> Well both are. But clearly *I'd* write it for Matrix :)
18:52:38 <felixfontein> :)
18:52:41 <felixfontein> obviously ;)
18:53:21 <bcoca> felixfontein: i would argue that is also a - against http
18:54:12 <bcoca> gwmngilfen: and that in the end is the real criteria, whatever the one doing teh work needs > everyone else's opinion
18:54:40 <andersson007_> should we use another label, say, called "voting" when we think we discussed topics enough?
18:55:02 <felixfontein> bcoca: I'd guess the more common HTTP libs usually have a lot more battle testing than IRC libs, which would be a +
18:55:05 <acozine> andersson007_: is that even possible?
18:55:17 * acozine is joking, I promise
18:55:35 <andersson007_> one label for pinging folks when opinions are needed and the other one for topics that are ready for voting
18:55:38 <andersson007_> acozine:
18:55:39 <felixfontein> acozine: adding the label, or discussing too much? :D
18:55:40 <andersson007_> :)
18:55:42 <bcoca> acozine: i was about to say, the only criteria for a 'discussed enough' is when everyone agrees with me
18:56:02 <samccann> heh
18:56:09 <acozine> heh, I meant discussing too much, we're pretty good at adding lables
18:56:11 <acozine> labels
18:56:18 <felixfontein> #topic open floor
18:56:28 <felixfontein> before we completely forgot we're still in a meeting :)
18:56:38 <acozine> heh
19:01:57 <felixfontein> ok, I guess that's it then for today :)
19:01:58 <felixfontein> #endmeeting