19:01:16 #startmeeting Ansible Core Meeting 19:01:16 Meeting started Tue May 23 19:01:16 2017 UTC. The chair is thaumos. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:01:16 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 19:01:16 The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_core_meeting' 19:01:25 #chair thaumos 19:01:25 Current chairs: thaumos 19:01:27 hello 19:01:32 #chair jtanner 19:01:32 Current chairs: jtanner thaumos 19:01:50 * jtanner has to walk away for a sec 19:01:56 kk 19:02:12 * akasurde waves 19:02:31 #chair akasurde 19:02:31 Current chairs: akasurde jtanner thaumos 19:02:54 thaumos, good to see you again 19:03:03 you too 😃 19:03:40 o/ 19:04:00 holy moly 19:04:04 #chair funzo_ 19:04:04 Current chairs: akasurde funzo_ jtanner thaumos 19:04:12 #chairs 19:04:24 #chair funzo 19:04:24 Current chairs: akasurde funzo funzo_ jtanner thaumos 19:04:42 funzo is trying to hide 19:04:53 :) always 19:04:54 he likes to have fun 19:05:24 yeah, and spittake coffee out of his nose 19:05:55 these ansible folks just don't know how to behave 19:06:02 no sense of propriety 19:07:36 stiff upper lip and pinkies extended whilst drinking tea 19:07:46 #topic Open Floor 19:08:25 no agenda? 19:08:26 thaumos, my last meeting point about having "Easyfix" like tags to welcome new-comers like me 19:08:48 Nothing today, @jtanner 19:09:01 ah yes, thanks akasurde 19:09:30 #topic open discussion around having a low-hanging fruit tag 19:10:02 So jtanner, do we have any pointers for low hanging fruit stuff. People, like akasurde, would love to be involved, but may be overwhelmed with our very extensive issue list. 19:10:22 sadly anything like that we tend to solve and close quickly 19:10:22 thaumos, People who are learning Python or Ansible try to find issue which are easy to fix, we can avail that opportunity to them 19:10:36 So akasurde suggested a tag/label, but there has to be other things for him to grab. 19:10:39 if it is easy .. it does not linger 19:10:50 stay away from core bugs and stick to modules 19:10:58 translation, close/won't fix, right bcoca? 19:11:01 #chair bcoca 19:11:01 Current chairs: akasurde bcoca funzo funzo_ jtanner thaumos 19:12:28 thaumos: well, those even faster 19:12:34 So akasurde, I suggest looking through labels and picking what you define as easy related to what you're interested in. 19:12:39 but if its something we can fix in 5 mins .. normally gets done in triage 19:12:39 bcoca 😉 19:13:08 I am talking in terms of general public, not just me 19:13:08 also, easy != simple, easy is subjective as it takes in user's experience and knowledge 19:13:16 so what is easy for me, might not be easy for otehrs 19:13:25 and viceversa .. like spelling ... 19:13:34 like College students or people who started with programming might want to get their hand dirty 19:13:37 eaxactly the point I was trying to make 19:13:59 We have the easyfix tag... just haven't applied it to much 19:14:03 so to be precise, any simple fixes get done quick, backlog probably have very few things that have a simple fix 19:14:14 ^ those get done by core or contributors pretty quickly 19:14:30 abadger1999: cause 'easyfix' issues dont live long enough ... 19:14:44 and perhaps they should... 19:14:56 we purpusefully would have to STOP fixing them 19:15:06 People at sprints are looking for easyfix bugs right now :-) 19:15:07 umm... 19:15:08 bcoca +1 19:15:20 the list will just continue to get larger. 19:15:21 well ... move to FIFO instead of LIFO for triage 19:15:32 abadger1999: wtih 1000+ issues i bet there are a few, but not 10 or more 19:15:35 There was a short talk about purposefully not fixing easyfix bugs in the python.org tracker. 19:15:56 so that there would be some bugs that new contribs to upstream python would be able to jump onto. 19:16:04 jtanner: that is how i do triage 19:16:08 (short talk at pycon) 19:16:17 jtanner: but once 'triaged' we need to revisit 'backlog combing' 19:16:18 whenever I give talk on Ansible, people ask me how do they can contribute to Ansible 19:16:42 module are the easiest way in, then maybe other plugin types 19:16:43 so I can point them there or something like that 19:17:02 modules, inventory scripts, filter plugins, etc 19:17:03 but 'easyfix' .. wont live long, even if we in core stop fixing them, the 1000+ contributors will 19:17:43 bcoca, agreed 19:17:45 once the coverage reports go live, there's going to be lots of test targets to write 19:17:45 i've read an issue that looked 'easy to fix', then i realized there is already PR cause guy in switzerland saw the issue 1h before i did 19:17:53 Agreed, point them to the list of issues labeled module 19:18:13 thaumos, Cool 19:18:52 hello. I'd suggest testing existing PRs - no coding required (although helps to have git-fu). really helps to get PRs merged if there's lots of feedback to say stuff works. 19:18:58 #chair abadger1999 jhawkesworth 19:18:58 Current chairs: abadger1999 akasurde bcoca funzo funzo_ jhawkesworth jtanner thaumos 19:19:09 great point jhawkesworth 19:19:23 people forget that being qa/qe on pr's is contribution as well! 19:19:24 ^ also review, looking at other people's code, understanding it and finding flaws is a great way to learn 19:19:25 jhawkesworth, point noted 19:19:55 i think the crux of this discussion though is the intent to have -someone- mark easyfix bugs 19:20:26 i rarely know it's "easy" unless it's a clear traceback and even then it's not always easy in the end 19:20:52 jtanner, But typo, documenation can be always mark as "easy" 19:21:04 with little guidance people can fix them 19:21:05 i haven't seen much of those 19:21:09 they usually come in as PRs 19:21:35 however 19:21:39 docs_report is a label 19:21:45 there's a bunch of those issues 19:23:05 i just wouldn't count on getting more labels applied that can't be applied automatically 19:23:14 the queue is too deep 19:23:24 ok 19:23:35 maintainers can add certain labels to their module issues 19:23:41 i could add easy fix to that list 19:23:59 i dont expect taht even if we label easyfix, there will be any living longer than a day as there are MANY people actively developing ansible and creating PRs 19:24:13 depends on the module 19:24:17 you would have 1 issue and 10 devs competing 19:24:30 it really would depend on the module 19:24:36 #chair defionscode 19:24:36 Current chairs: abadger1999 akasurde bcoca defionscode funzo funzo_ jhawkesworth jtanner thaumos 19:24:40 jtanner: even in core, there are people spellchecking my comments in commits ... really, they send PRs right away 19:24:52 might be 'easy' but only if you have the hardware in teh case of some networking stuff for example 19:25:14 ^ i expect begginers to not have access to 100K worth of network appliances 19:25:15 bcoca: wasn't disputing that ... in fact, i think that's what i said was happening 19:25:24 re docs PRs 19:25:25 yeah I was going to say - come and tackle some windows powershell issues, but that requires non-free operating systems too. 19:25:38 jhawkesworth: but more commonly available 19:25:45 the point is 'easyfix' != will be fixed quickly 19:25:49 jhawkesworth: just not the target audience for pycon ... 19:26:04 defionscode: i dont see a universe in which that is true 19:26:24 ha 19:26:29 yep, not for pycon! 19:26:32 people really gravitate to the 'easy fix', sometimes even having 2 or 3 PRs for same fix in rapid succession 19:27:04 if people are targetting easyfix just to learn the ropes, we can create more contrived exercises to learn from 19:27:17 i'm sorry to be negative here, but i dont see how we'll ever be able to have a 'stack of easy to fix issues' available for people starting out 19:27:23 if it's about building resumes and github profiles, i don't know that we have time to mark a bunch of stuff to enable that 19:29:28 what about the inverse? a 'hardfix' or 'moderatefix' tag? 19:29:29 best to fix stuff that you need working. Its more motivating if you need it, after all! 19:30:14 ^ what he said 19:30:15 personally, I don't think a label is needed. I always operated on finding issues that I was interested in/had knowledge, and worked on them. 19:30:23 defionscode: that would just be a default label =P 19:30:37 thaumos same here 19:30:42 what's the point of working on them, if your PRs sit idle for weeks in the queue ? 19:30:51 if its easy, its been fixed, if its moderate, its been fixed, if it is hard or hard to test .. that is why its in backlog 19:30:54 jtanner ha 19:31:09 dag: you get to complain about it 19:31:24 bcoca: :-) 19:31:30 dag: the fact that you say "weeks" instead of "months" shows major improvement! 19:31:40 jtanner: optimist ;-) 19:31:42 'xactly 19:31:55 dag: probably the first time anyone has called me that 19:32:00 one could _almost_ say years not that long ago 19:32:09 well, I am hunting core people for mine... 19:32:30 i've seen a similar requirement across other projects 19:32:47 #chair dag 19:32:47 Current chairs: abadger1999 akasurde bcoca dag defionscode funzo funzo_ jhawkesworth jtanner thaumos 19:32:48 s/hunting/hounding/ 19:32:52 but aside from the jokes, there's lots of stuff that sits, and the backlog is growing, not shrinking 19:32:58 and the ones that automerge don't necessarily copy the patch over to the release branches 19:32:59 dag: but to be fair, its the best way to get your stuff in 19:33:09 sits idle 19:33:26 dag: our close rate has grown enourmoouslly .. sadly not enough to keep up with the contribution rate 19:33:43 well, @dag, re: backlog, the goal is to have people work on that as a part of our irc meetings too 19:33:54 i think the testing framework had to improve before we could really begin work on mass PR merges 19:33:57 truth is.. more people want to cut code than review it and test it. result is lots of untested changes queued. 19:34:17 agreed with jtanner and jhawkesworth 19:34:21 jhawkesworth, I agree 19:34:21 thaumos: that's good 19:34:26 and when we test (weeks/months later) people are not always willing to readjust 19:34:34 dag: and some of your vmware patches are stuck because it's a PITA for me to find a place to test 19:34:44 and if you don't attend dag, they're all getting asigned to you 19:34:52 jhawkesworth: but even if people would review/test (because they need something) they cannot merge... 19:35:22 jtanner: then we need more vmware-enabled maintainers ;-) 19:35:39 dag: last time i went to the maintainers supermarket, they were fresh out 19:35:40 ha, the vmware struggle is real 19:35:44 ^ few and far between to find 19:35:52 dag: yes, cause random people saying +1 when they have not reivewed, dont konw the criteria and have not tested .. not useful 19:36:29 dag: and yes, we need more maintainers, but it is not a commitment most people are willing to make 19:36:53 bcoca, also, VMWare is paid :( 19:37:06 so we don't have something to test on 19:37:09 ... which gets back to whether or not we should even take in more modules 19:37:13 jtanner: I am sure if we had a forum to ask, maybe people would step up 19:37:30 an ansible specific forum? 19:37:52 it's true that more maintainers doesn't equate more quality, but less maintainers surely does not help 19:38:11 jtanner: there is no forum now for this, except maybe a broad mailinglist mail 19:38:31 it would be nice to have maybe circle around a technology 19:38:49 you want module topic communities 19:39:01 yes, something like that 19:39:42 not sure how that would work technology-wise, but now everything is centered around a bug or a feature 19:39:50 or a doc 19:40:04 hmm module topic communites is an interesting concept 19:40:19 the Windows WG is nice to get some progress, and it's something people could join and monitor before making commitments 19:40:27 for e.g. vmware stuff I don't see that 19:40:44 but has the windows wg grown membership? 19:40:57 and would it work if nitmahone wasn't running it? 19:41:02 i didnt even know about it 19:41:05 (BTW I noticed vmware has lots of own ansible modules in their github, made by the same contributor that created some of the upstreamed ones) 19:41:06 #ansible-vmware 19:41:12 #ansible-aws 19:41:14 there are talks about SIG's for module groups... We just are very slim on attendance imo 19:41:16 i dont _think_ I saw it on the community page on docs 19:41:26 jtanner: no, because nobody would be able to merge anything 19:41:29 ? 19:41:29 if the core team tried to manage a community for each module topic/subtopic, they'd litterally do nothing else 19:41:32 yeah that's a pretty deep level of desire 19:41:48 jtanner: maybe you need more core people, from the community ? 19:41:55 maybe that's what we need to focus on 19:41:57 dag: we talked with them, that is how we eneded up with current modules 19:42:17 the counter question: why does the community need the core team? 19:42:28 dag: we expanded core, 1/2 of those disappeared after a few weeks, it did bringclosed PRs up a bit, but very short time 19:42:36 its a lot of work 19:43:05 jtanner: mostly to keep a cohesive direction 19:43:16 jtanner: issue triage, moderating, authority, ... 19:43:18 some would argue we also keep the quality and standards up 19:43:20 that sounds like playing BDFL for modules 19:43:39 and with 1000+ modules, we can't do that 19:43:42 jtanner: well, instead of Dictator .. comitee 19:43:55 which is why i want to removve 900+ modules 19:44:12 we'll just merge 900+ more after that 19:44:33 have to stop the merging if you want the git rm to stick 19:44:34 i still would like to see a package manager specifically for ansible modules 19:44:36 make it pip like 19:44:41 we all would 19:44:55 I don't think that will help TBH 19:45:00 ansible package manager ? 19:45:11 dag: true, it won't make the bugs magically fixed 19:45:16 it will not make Ansible feel more rigid, or give a better experience 19:45:28 it will become harder to know what works, and what not 19:45:32 but it does defer the PRs to another repo in which someone else can press the green button instead of the core team 19:45:38 what's old and what's new, people would fork more 19:45:57 jtanner: that's because only a very close-knit group can actually do something 19:46:06 ansibot could be made more helpful 19:46:09 i'm with you ... but i'd hesitate to say that all modules in devel "work" right now 19:46:28 but with so few maintainers, even vmware-stuff does not get merged (and it has 3 maintainers IIRC) 19:46:33 right, the idea is that there'd be a minimal set of modules shipped, think python core libs, and then everything else is managed separately 19:46:34 dag: i'm always looking for new bot features to write 19:46:41 just need suggestions and concensus 19:46:55 I think we need this discussion in London (well-moderated) ;-) 19:47:09 yes, that's part of the plan in London 19:47:14 along with proposal process. 19:47:27 you just have to prevent it from getting timeboxed and assert that an action item is made 19:47:38 this will be a hard topic (lots of opinions, no solutions) 19:47:39 otherwise it'll be another "we'll keep thinking about this ..." 19:48:53 maybe something to prepare/discuss informally Tuesday evening 19:49:13 over a beer 19:49:35 @dag, we all have lots of opinions, all the time. 19:49:49 so to echo what jtanner said, and close this out. 19:50:10 #action thaumos to make sure that discussing SIGs, labels, and proposal process is a part of the London contrib conference discussion 19:50:39 #Open Floor 19:50:44 ugh 19:50:48 #topic Open Floor 19:50:58 anything quick for 10 mins 19:51:00 ? 19:51:24 * jhawkesworth gotta go - till next time all 19:51:30 * thaumos waves bye 19:51:34 buhbye 19:51:35 o/ 19:54:22 alright 19:54:25 that's all folks! 19:54:29 #endmeeting