10:06:23 <praveenkumar> #startmeeting Atomic Developer Bundle Weekly Meeting
10:06:23 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Mar 21 10:06:23 2016 UTC.  The chair is praveenkumar. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
10:06:23 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
10:06:23 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'atomic_developer_bundle_weekly_meeting'
10:06:40 <dharmit> .fas dharmit
10:06:40 <zodbot> dharmit: dharmit 'Dharmit Shah' <shahdharmit@gmail.com> - shahdharmit 'Dharmit Shah' <shahdharmit@gmaill.com>
10:06:48 <praveenkumar> #info meeting agenda at https://titanpad.com/adbmeeting
10:06:48 <rtnpro> .fas rtnpro
10:06:49 <zodbot> rtnpro: rtnpro 'Ratnadeep Debnath' <rtnpro@gmail.com>
10:06:51 <bexelbie> .fas bexelbie
10:06:52 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
10:06:54 <bexelbie> .fas bex
10:06:55 <zodbot> bexelbie: sfarr01 'Steven Farr' <sfarr@bex.net> - lonelyibex 'fungo' <lonelyibex@gmail.com> - moko 'moko lee' <ibex@msn.cn> - bexhet '' <bexhet@hotmail.it> - genbex 'P Karthikeyan' <genbex@gmail.com> - rsandu 'Răzvan Sandu' <razvan.sandu@mobexpert.ro> - webexpert21 'Matt Wang' <webexpert21@126.com> - vibexie 'vibe xie' <vibexie@qq.com> - mcreps 'Merl Creps Jr' <merljr@bex.net> - neebex 'Thierry Harribey' (1 more message)
10:07:02 <praveenkumar> .fas kumarpraveen
10:07:03 <zodbot> praveenkumar: kumarpraveen '' <kumarpraveen.nitdgp@gmail.com>
10:07:04 <lalatenduM> praveenkumar: hey I though the meeting was 1:00 UTC
10:07:06 <bexelbie> .hello bex
10:07:07 <nshaikh> .fas nshaikh
10:07:07 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
10:07:07 <lalatenduM> thought
10:07:10 <zodbot> nshaikh: nshaikh 'Navid Ahmed Shaikh' <shaikhnavid14@gmail.com>
10:08:25 <dharmit> lalatenduM: 1000 UTC
10:08:26 <praveenkumar> lalatenduM: https://github.com/projectatomic/adb-atomic-developer-bundle/pull/285/files
10:08:53 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, it overlaps a ton of stuff and was artificially late for India
10:09:06 <lalatenduM> praveenkumar: dharmit ahh sorry I thought it was 1300 i.e. 1 PM utc
10:09:24 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: praveenkumar dharmit how do we expect US folks to join this meeting
10:09:29 <praveenkumar> #action lalatenduM update calendar invite.
10:09:50 <bexelbie> there is a calendar invite ... why have you ignored me so lalatenduM  :P
10:09:52 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: praveenkumar its 6:00AM in Boston
10:10:03 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, who from Boston attends regularly?
10:10:11 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: sorry I thought it was 1PM UTC
10:10:19 <lalatenduM> so 9AM Boston time
10:10:26 <lalatenduM> 6:30PM India time
10:10:39 <lalatenduM> somehow mistken by the timing
10:10:42 <lalatenduM> my mistake
10:10:50 <bexelbie> it is 6 am now
10:10:54 <bexelbie> when the new meeting time is
10:11:00 <bexelbie> is there a regular US attendee?
10:11:07 <bexelbie> when this was discussed last week, no one could name one
10:11:08 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: yes
10:11:15 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: dustymabe joins teh meeting
10:11:15 <bexelbie> therefore if the meeting is normally just IST and CET we can move it
10:11:55 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: we should not make the meeting time difficult for others to join :(
10:12:02 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, or for the majority to join
10:12:24 <bexelbie> It overlaps the OSAS meeting this week
10:12:50 <bexelbie> And I would presuem that at least some Indian attendees find 8:30 pm difficult to join
10:12:53 <nshaikh> bexelbie, lalatenduM : Can we cover the topic first and then discuss about the meeting in the rest of meeting.
10:13:03 <bexelbie> nshaikh, this meeting is about the meeting :P
10:13:07 <praveenkumar> We anyway send logs to our meeting and if we have any specific query with those folks we can ask them.
10:13:29 <lalatenduM> nshaikh: praveenkumar bexelbie also just one week for lazy consensus for a community meeting is very less
10:13:55 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, everyone felt that was enough - we can leave it open longer to see if anyone objects over email
10:14:09 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: ok, I am going to reply
10:14:25 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, perhaps you should let dusty reply if it is a problem for him
10:14:27 <lalatenduM> you guys can go ahead with the meeting
10:14:50 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: I will do what I should do :)
10:15:01 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, you just said you dont think the meeting should be moved and tha tyou are going to object
10:15:07 <bexelbie> so perhaps we should just postpone to the old time
10:15:09 <bexelbie> and revert the PR
10:15:14 <bexelbie> pending further community discussion
10:15:18 <nshaikh> bexelbie, +1
10:16:00 <praveenkumar> bexelbie: +1 and make sure we have input from people who have issue by next week.
10:16:17 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: we cant change the time for today's meeting as it has started , + I thought the new proposed time is 1PM UTC (my mistake)
10:16:17 <bexelbie> cool - then shall we do this again at 1pm UTC today?
10:16:29 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, we can absolutely change the time to the old time today
10:16:35 <bexelbie> there is nothing preventing us from doing so
10:16:43 <bexelbie> and as you have said we did not allow enough time for consensus
10:16:48 <bexelbie> so the meeting hasn't actually been moved
10:16:55 <bexelbie> right now we are just a bunch of folks in an IRC room :)
10:17:07 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: actually it has , praveenkumar has merged teh PR :)
10:17:17 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: lets continue with teh meeting
10:17:21 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, he merged it incorrectly apparently as not enough time was allowed
10:17:27 <bexelbie> and we are now missing input from the community
10:17:28 <lalatenduM> and change it through the process
10:18:09 <bexelbie> ok
10:18:14 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: lets take opinion from curent chairs
10:18:50 <lalatenduM> dharmit: praveenkumar nshaikh bexelbie , how many of you in favor of continuing the meeting now
10:19:00 <lalatenduM> did I miss anyone?
10:19:05 <nshaikh> +1 continue the meeting
10:19:28 <praveenkumar> +1 let's continune
10:19:35 <dharmit> Continue
10:19:44 <praveenkumar> rtnpro: ^^
10:20:05 <rtnpro> +1 from me
10:20:08 <lalatenduM> Cool, majority is in favor of continuing the meeting
10:20:08 <bexelbie> I am mixed in my opinion so either 0 or -1 based on the lack of proper input from the community for moving the meeting time.  lalatenduM has been very persuasive
10:21:15 <lalatenduM> from me current timing is -1, but just for today's meeting +1
10:21:26 <lalatenduM> I will send teh mail with my suggestion
10:23:06 <praveenkumar> Alright then lets continue today meeting (whatever we have in agenda)
10:23:11 <praveenkumar> nshaikh: you want to go first?
10:23:38 <nshaikh> praveenkumar, we have topics at https://titanpad.com/adbmeeting
10:23:51 <nshaikh> #topic ADB next release
10:24:00 <nshaikh> lalatenduM, ^
10:24:21 <lalatenduM> nshaikh: yes, this week we will do a release
10:24:30 <nshaikh> okay
10:24:30 <lalatenduM> I willstart building the box today
10:24:50 <praveenkumar> lalatenduM: we have to make sure adb-utils also go latest in these box.
10:25:04 <nshaikh> should the new box builds get some hammer from our CI job? dharmit
10:25:12 <lalatenduM> praveenkumar: ack
10:25:48 <bexelbie> relevant to what praveenkumar said, should we formally say that release means all three?
10:25:57 <bexelbie> ADB, adb-utils, and vagrant service-manager?
10:26:04 <dharmit> nshaikh: doable. the topic I've put up in the etherpad should discuss the very same question.
10:26:21 <nshaikh> dharmit, cool.
10:26:32 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: =1
10:26:34 <praveenkumar> bexelbie: +1, because ADB should have all latest stuff inculded with release.
10:26:35 <lalatenduM> +1
10:26:47 <praveenkumar> s/inculded/included/
10:27:24 <bexelbie> What needs to be done in order to get an ADB out the other side? whta goes first, etc. (granted vsm just rides along the side, but it can still be put in the list)
10:28:31 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: if it is included in adb i.e. a RPM , it shoudl be in http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/atomic/x86_64/adb/
10:28:47 <bexelbie> do we have a build plan/release list or something similar
10:28:55 <bexelbie> that way we know what gates on what and what needs to run first?
10:29:26 <bexelbie> it would also make it easier to offload release management to someone if we wanted to free up time for lalatenduM and praveenkumar
10:29:26 <lalatenduM> service-manager can be released separately as it a vagrant plugin
10:29:41 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: for ADB it is just me
10:29:49 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: as it is part of teh SIG
10:29:50 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, true - but often we should gate a vsm push until the ADB out
10:30:06 <bexelbie> lalatenduM, then perhaps we should start the docs so we can address that SPOF at some point
10:30:15 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: agree
10:30:31 <bexelbie> but if no one knows what the voodoo that you do is then no one can help
10:31:19 <praveenkumar> bexelbie: yes, we all can build different component on CBS (hope all have required permission) and then lalatenduM create vagrant box.
10:31:23 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: actually most of the communication is plublic i.e. centos-devel and container-tools
10:31:53 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: but I need to create a central doc
10:31:59 <bexelbie> I know, but asking someone to learn by trawling through the lists in hopes they will become your backup is a bit of a disincentive
10:32:22 <bexelbie> +1 doc the process in a sufficient level of detail to allow for a hand off or spof alleviation
10:33:39 <lalatenduM> bexelbie: ack
10:35:21 <nshaikh> #action: Lala to document the release process document for ADB vagrant box.
10:35:39 <nshaikh> are we good on the topic? should we move to next one ?
10:36:05 <praveenkumar> yes, also we will keep update titanpad about AI for everyweek.
10:36:21 <nshaikh> praveenkumar, thats logged in the meeting logs.
10:37:10 <praveenkumar> nshaikh: yes but it would be easy when next time we open pad and directly check AI/Blocker
10:37:17 <nshaikh> praveenkumar, okay.
10:37:40 <praveenkumar> #topic feedback on existing flow for CI
10:37:57 <praveenkumar> #link https://github.com/projectatomic/adb-atomic-developer-bundle/issues/195
10:38:03 <dharmit> I think I've already commented on the issue seeking feedback from nshaikh praveenkumar lalatenduM.
10:38:58 <praveenkumar> #action praveenkumar nshaikh lalatenduM to provide feedback for CI effort (#195)
10:38:58 <dharmit> I can summarize it here. But it's there in the README and it'd waste everyone's time. So, if you guys can take a look and discuss it on the issue, it'll be super helpful.
10:38:58 <lalatenduM> dharmit: the comments was from Feb 10
10:39:17 <lalatenduM> dharmit: is that updated recently?
10:39:17 <dharmit> lalatenduM: I modified the comment two days back.
10:39:25 <lalatenduM> dharmit: ok
10:39:26 <dharmit> Yep. :-)
10:40:30 <praveenkumar> Anyone have anything else to discuss
10:40:32 <praveenkumar> ?
10:40:44 <dharmit> That issue and, if required, having more issues & pr around this should help us have more CI hammer around ADB box. ;-)
10:41:08 <praveenkumar> dharmit: Ack
10:41:14 <bexelbie> dharmit, are there command sother than #build?
10:42:36 <dharmit> bexelbie: That can be configured. If we want something else, we can change it in the config.
10:42:55 <bexelbie> dharmit, cool - I am mostly looking toward a proposal for how we will document commands for committers and maintainers
10:43:08 <bexelbie> if no one can trigger the CI it may as well not exist :)
10:44:00 <dharmit> bexelbie: Actually centos-ci user will immediately comment on the PR if the person raising the PR is not in admin list (again configurable item). And then an admin can trigger the build.
10:44:30 <dharmit> bexelbie: I'll check for the non-admins.
10:44:48 <bexelbie> dharmit, then we should probably have some docs so that non-admins know what to expect and admins no what to do :)
10:44:54 <bexelbie> s/no/know/
10:45:24 <dharmit> bexelbie: Yep. I'll come up with those. Maybe we will need to add some points to the contributing doc for it.
10:46:26 <bexelbie> dharmit, +1
10:47:30 <praveenkumar> We are already 15 mins over so I am going to end this meeting and we can carry our discussion later.
10:47:43 <praveenkumar> #endmeeting