16:00:38 #startmeeting IRC Support SIG (2010-08-19) 16:00:38 Meeting started Thu Aug 19 16:00:38 2010 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:38 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:38 #meetingname irc-support-sig 16:00:38 The meeting name has been set to 'irc-support-sig' 16:00:38 #topic init process 16:00:45 who all is around for meeting? 16:00:46 * dcr226 16:00:49 16:00:55 16:01:00 * zmore 16:01:38 * EvilBob 16:02:11 ok, lets go ahead and get started in... 16:02:16 #topic Week in review 16:02:26 http://fedora.theglaserfamily.org/ircstats/fedora-weekly.html 16:02:58 http://fedora.theglaserfamily.org/ircstats/fedora-social-weekly.html 16:03:15 * DiscordianUK is happy to note I fell to 7th place this week 16:03:18 since our last meeting there have been: 3 people kicked/banned by operator action, and 11 people who were caught by the bot flood protection. 16:04:09 one of those was an outburst following a kick/ban in social 16:04:12 anything folks would like to note from this last week? 16:04:22 Yep 16:04:40 It's been quite a busy week 16:05:14 yeah, busy but pretty typical... 16:05:19 and we're seeing a fair number of people still wanting stuff from F14/rawhide 16:05:37 yeah, that will only increase I suspect... ;) 16:05:44 ok, moving along... 16:05:47 #topic Feedback Processes 16:05:48 It's bound to yes 16:05:57 There has been some more discussion of this on the list... 16:06:13 * fcami knocks on the door 16:06:13 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/irc-support-sig for anyone who wishes to subscribe 16:06:31 sounds like folks are interested in trying trac for feedback items... 16:06:38 do feel free to contribute fcami 16:06:45 * fcami gets a seat 16:06:56 do feel free to contribute $ANYONE 16:07:05 * dcr226 thinks trac might be a sledgehammer to crack a wallnut fwiw 16:07:11 I like the idea of Trac 16:07:15 trac seems to have the majority support 16:07:25 well, it has advantages and disadvantages... 16:07:36 I agree with dcr226 but 16:07:37 I've already stated why I think trac is a good idea on the mailing list - mainly for organization / tracking (no pun intended) / history keeping purposes 16:08:07 most often we get no feedback of any kind. ;) Interspaced with occassional flamewar/blowup feedback, then quiet again. ;) 16:08:32 yeah and the new list is very quiet 16:08:46 DiscordianUK: post something? :) 16:08:55 for the sake of posting? 16:09:03 of breaking the quietness 16:09:12 Not my style 16:09:47 So I'll +1 trac 16:09:55 nirik: can you briefly touch on the disadvantages to using trac 16:10:20 and is there another solution that may be better suit that anyone knows about 16:10:26 fwiw, I had a particularly angry user pm me last week, the situation was diffused by letting him flame for 30 minutes or so without response, then I gave positive feedback on how to reduce the chances of him getting upset. there was no need for anything further than that 16:11:26 and I actually think that under the banner of "being an op" we should possibly focus more on being able to deal with $angry_user than find inventive ways to queue it for someone to deal with 16:11:29 Sometimes there are issues you don't know about 16:11:30 EvilBob: sure... I guess most of them revolve around how we want to set it up... do we want to try and keep tickets private or mail them to the list when they are added, etc. 16:11:57 DiscordianUK: +1 16:12:05 On #centos for example people get very confrontational with a guy who's blind 16:12:18 Until he tells them that 16:12:23 dcr226: somewhat agreed, but sometimes people want to 'speak to your supervisor' or can't be really talked to by the person who took the action... 16:12:24 * dcr226 is sitting it out, because someone's gonna have to set trac up and maintain it - for maybe 3 reports a month 16:12:43 dcr226: well, thats not a big deal, I can do that end of it... 16:12:50 nirik, no, but we can ask in -ops who's prepared to be the "shoulder to cry on" 16:13:13 Don't look at me 16:13:16 there's usually >1 op floating about at any one time 16:13:24 I would think any trac ticket be required that the user include their IRC nick for reference 16:13:28 Normally yes 16:13:37 +1 EvilBob 16:13:42 as such I think it would need to be kept private to prevent stigma 16:13:56 * dcr226 is more than happy to ignore pm flames for 30 minutes, to then point someone at the "maximizing irc support" wiki 16:13:59 EvilBob: I would want them to include a fair bit of info... nick, logs, what they would like to see happen from their feedback, etc. 16:14:39 I think PM on complaints should be avoided 16:14:48 EvilBob: +1 16:15:00 I avoid pm's with people I don't know 16:15:15 It's rude and bad netiquette 16:15:17 * dcr226 steps out of the topic and doesn't vote. I _want_ a process, but don't want to cause anyone un-needed work 16:15:18 if one op should know about it all ops should know about it IMO 16:15:18 I redirect people who sent me pms to #fedora 16:15:51 aka "keep it in channel" 16:16:06 I will have to ask about the privacy plugins for trac. I know there is one, but not sure what all it can do... 16:16:09 EvilBob, I'd be happy to share the log afterwards, I just think that people just need to get stuff off their chests sometimes. and talking to a non-responder gives them the ability to do so 16:16:23 * dcr226 really does can-it now 16:16:35 well the #fedora channel is not the place for most complaints IMO, #fedora-ops is better for that to prevent disruption of the support channel 16:16:38 That's reasonable 'keep it in channel and then you get the benefits of peer review of my answers' 16:16:39 dcr226: couldn't we have them /msg fedbot then? ;) 16:16:50 yikes 16:16:54 * nirik notes he won't answer. ;) 16:17:04 nirik, Heh 16:17:53 Oh fedbot 16:18:00 nirik, in actual fact, I'm pretty sure, with some pre-defined responses, 90% of the complaints would go away ;-) 16:18:11 * DiscordianUK remembers that needs to be discussed 16:18:35 a tuple of "uh huh, yeah, I understand" would probably do it :) 16:18:52 I'd be ok with trying trac, but I think I would lean toward making it public. If it's private I agree it might save stigma for some people, but then no one could search/learn from previous issues, only a small group would comment again which I think is bad. 16:19:09 dcr226: eliza bot! 16:19:15 precisely 16:19:24 i was just thinking that nirik 16:19:39 "how does being mad at nirik for banning you make you feel?" ;) 16:20:03 nirik: I understand your point, I guess my issue was publishing to the list 16:20:32 We're about transparency 16:20:32 EvilBob: yeah... I suppose we could not have it do that and only add a cc on the list once it's been looked at? 16:20:41 ie, some of it might be junk/notabug 16:20:41 thank you for your responce but your a whinney ass. pull up your big girl panties and get a life 16:20:47 nirik: if the list only gets a notice of the ticket with no additional text that would be acceptable I hink 16:20:53 Southern_Gentlem, Heh 16:21:11 not sure it can do that, but if there are only a few tickets ever it should be easy to just manually note to the list. 16:21:44 nirik: Right on 16:21:50 we could also track meeting items or other stuff we need to get done in there I suppose. 16:22:11 I think we need to vote on ml/trac and get something implemented, this has taken too long to get moving so far as it is 16:22:48 dcr226: well, we already have a mailing list. ;) 16:23:02 Indeed 16:23:07 nirik, with no feedback as yet ;-) 16:23:10 and on that note I think we should have a moratorium for a few months to shake out the bugs before adding any additional ops 16:23:26 so, proposal: ask for a trac instance. Feedback and meeting items can go there. List can be notified to comment on feedback tickets that are needing feedback. 16:23:33 +1 16:23:45 I don't agree with the moratorium on ops 16:23:50 +1 to get something moving, and at least we'll learn/adapt/junk where needed 16:24:01 (my +1 was for nirik) 16:24:03 however +1 for trac 16:24:19 any negative votes/objections to that? 16:24:28 trac +1 16:24:34 #agreed will ask for a trac instance. Feedback and meeting items can go there. List can be notified to comment on feedback tickets that are needing feedback. 16:24:36 sorted :) 16:24:43 trac +1 with privacy notes 16:25:00 trac +1 with privacy notes 16:25:31 EvilBob: I disagree on that. I think we can add ops and they could help us with setting up stuff/shaking bugs out. I think new perspectives are good to add in and could help us jaded people set up something better. 16:25:49 (on the ops moratorium) 16:26:05 I intend to propose a trail op in Open Meeting 16:26:10 trial 16:26:32 DiscordianUK, do it 16:26:58 make it so 16:27:12 I shall 16:27:14 mock, engage warp 3? 16:27:51 ok, anything more on feedback? or shall we move on? 16:28:03 move on, its sorted from what I can see 16:28:03 next 16:28:13 #topic Fedora 14 Alpha coming up. 16:28:20 So, alpha will be out next week 16:28:24 \o/ 16:28:26 Oh remember to send people to the trac instance that are happy 16:28:30 I expect some increase in f14 questions. 16:28:35 Yep 16:28:38 EvilBob: totally agreed. 16:28:42 EvilBob, I will - I get loads ;-) 16:28:57 Still #fedora-qa till beta is what I think 16:29:17 +1 DiscordianUK , and the -ops need some time with python2.7 and systemd 16:29:18 oh, that reminds me of a trac disadvantage... they have to sign up for a fas account. (they would have to subscribe to the mailing list too, but that may be easier for some people) 16:29:29 Yeah -qa until beta has been our history 16:30:10 nirik: there is no guest accessability to file a ticket? 16:30:15 Especially systemd 16:30:27 EvilBob: nope. ;( You can view, but need an account to file. 16:30:37 yuck 16:30:37 nirik, think that might be a killer for the trac idea ;-( 16:30:41 OK moving on 16:31:17 we could always do a standalone trac not tied to FAS I would think 16:31:27 ok, anything more on f14a? 16:31:45 nirik, maybe a small wiki page with common issues that are likely to appear 16:32:06 rpmbuild --rebuild'ing f13 packages based on p2.6 are likely to fail for example 16:32:17 as will rpm --force 16:32:39 where can i made a suggestion for f14? 16:32:40 many python packages should rebuild ok... depends on the package if they needed changes for 2.7 16:32:47 the wiki page would be for #fedora ops to read through (for clarity) 16:32:49 rpm --force is always the wrong answer. ;) 16:32:57 true enough 16:33:16 raffairon, is it a request for an enhancement? if so, bugzilla 16:33:38 raffairon: the devel mailing list, the #fedora-devel channel, bugzilla.redhat.com 16:33:54 raffairon, what is your suggestion 16:34:01 Southern_Gentlem: Come on 16:34:09 this is not the time or place 16:34:17 we are in the middle of a meeting 16:34:31 you may be right but let the person finish his statement 16:34:47 He did not make a statement 16:34:54 he asked a question 16:34:58 * dcr226 has no more comments ref F14a 16:35:07 Next topic 16:35:12 raffairon: we can direct you after the meeting. ;) 16:35:17 * DiscordianUK moves next business 16:35:17 #topic Classroom Sessions 16:35:26 So, we haven't had any irc classes in a while. 16:35:33 I was going to look at signing up for some soon. 16:35:38 * dcr226 goes red and looks shifty 16:35:42 If others would like to do so also, please do. 16:36:17 I think some on new features in F14 would be good once those are clear 16:37:34 yeah. 16:37:44 anyhow, just wanted to note it. 16:37:48 #topic Open Floor 16:37:50 yep have to wait to see what floats or stinks 16:38:01 I have two issues for this 16:38:48 go ahead DiscordianUK 16:38:56 The first is nb has noted that that including fpaste in all f14 spins is more likely if fedbot can be moved to our infrastrcuture 16:39:25 DiscordianUK: yeah. Although I am not so sure this is a show stopper... 16:39:27 The infrastructure team would be happy to let existing fedbot ops access it 16:39:33 how does fpaste affect fedbot ? 16:39:40 dcr226: not at all. 16:39:47 Not fedbot 16:39:50 DiscordianUK, i think you are confused 16:39:56 I mean www.fpaste 16:40:16 DiscordianUK, fp.org is talking to Fedora unity about this 16:40:18 DiscordianUK: this is not an ops issue 16:40:27 okay right I apologise 16:40:32 EvilBob Southern_Gentlem +1 16:40:49 It is a Fedora Unity issue and it is being handled 16:40:49 except in the sense that we would all like to have fpaste available so we could better help people. ;) 16:41:10 The other issue is I note fcami has been with us now in -ops for a while 16:41:23 its default in the dvd, and not in the livecd's. so I'm assuming thats because someone's trying to save space on the live media? 16:41:31 and has talked sense about issues that evolved 16:41:45 DiscordianUK, we're still on F14a I think 16:41:49 We need to have a policy in place for people getting "invited" to the channel 16:41:57 EvilBob: I thought we did. 16:42:11 perhaps a trac ticket being filed once that is in place 16:42:17 You can come and stay in the ops channel if you are an op in #fedora or someone vouches for you. 16:42:34 "someone" one being the issue I have 16:42:35 I discussed it before I invited him with those that were there 16:42:53 it should be discussed with everyone, there or not 16:42:55 someone should == an op 16:43:10 again "an" being one 16:43:23 trac will help in the future of this issue move on 16:44:00 right, thats been my understanding of our policy. We could change it of course... 16:44:01 I already have disagreed with any new ops being added at this time 16:44:02 -1 16:44:32 it has nothing to do with fcami other than timing 16:44:43 I do not believe we should refuse to add new ops 16:44:47 fcami: are you around? do you wish to be an op? or would you be fine continuing to just be a helper? 16:45:12 or I can ask him out of band... 16:45:23 * dcr226 notes he hasn't actually been nominated as yet (for people who aren't resident in -ops) 16:45:26 nirik: around, yes.. an op, yes, because at least once I was a bit helpless and got lucky the situation stayed under control. 16:45:42 on the other hand, I'd rather there be consensus on this. 16:45:49 fcami, there has to be 16:45:58 dcr226: just stating the obvious I believe. :P 16:45:59 ops are voted in 16:46:05 I nominate fcami as a trial (bot) op 16:46:12 ty. 16:46:31 -1, no offense fcami reason to follow if anyone's interested 16:46:34 so, lets have a week period for voting and discussion. ;) 16:46:38 ups 16:47:04 you're welcome to comment now if you like... 16:47:08 nirik, +1 16:47:16 but in the past we have taken a week to gather feedback and comments. 16:47:24 before voting. 16:47:25 Next meeting for a vote then 16:47:35 nirik, I'm happy to do what ever, now/ops/ml :) 16:47:35 seems reasonable 16:47:38 for a trail op or as full op 16:47:39 Shall we take it to the list then? 16:47:46 trial op 16:47:52 for 28 days 16:48:00 is my suggestion 16:48:05 28 days later? ;) 16:48:16 Nah 16:48:24 nirik, feels like that sometimes ;-) 16:48:41 as a trial op for 28 days and review in 4 weeks 16:48:42 #info fcami proposed for trial operator 16:48:51 #agreed will gather feedback and vote next week. 16:48:57 cool 16:48:58 Anything else for open floor? 16:49:05 I would like to nominate opsec as a trial op 16:49:24 EvilBob: ok. 16:49:24 Not sure he is interested but what the hell 16:49:34 EvilBob: yeah, can you inquire if he is willing? 16:49:44 I will 16:50:04 let me know and if he is we can start the feedback/gathering info thing... 16:50:31 I am starting to think this is not worth the time you guys are spending on it. 16:50:44 fcami, which whut? 16:50:50 nominating me. 16:50:58 fcami, it absolutely is 16:50:58 fcami: naw... it's not that much time. 16:51:02 :) 16:51:03 fcami, This is normal for voting on ops 16:51:06 anything else for open floor? 16:51:20 Sonar_Gal: I know the time is normal, I believe the benefits are not worth it. :) 16:51:23 +1 to fcami for trial op 16:51:50 +1 to opsec for trial op if he is interested 16:52:05 -1 to opsec, regardless of if he's interested 16:52:07 after all, I've been doing support for a while and there has only been one, or at the most two times I wish I had +o. so. 16:52:08 * nirik will hold his votes till next week. 16:52:22 fcami, chill, there's time for this 16:52:28 wilco. 16:52:37 +1 for fcami 16:52:42 -1 for opsec 16:53:03 This is going to the list 16:53:25 separate list topics please, save my head spinning 16:53:30 :-) 16:53:41 fcami: an op should never IMO +o for an issue they are involved in, another op should handle it 16:53:55 EvilBob: I was not involved in the problem. 16:53:57 He has no vote 16:54:12 * nirik will close the meeting in a minute if no new topics come up. ;) 16:54:51 did bacon get mentioned this meeting? 16:55:02 It just did 16:55:04 mock: it did now 16:55:10 \o/ 16:55:16 ha. 16:55:22 Thanks for coming everyone. 16:55:24 bacon was #1 16:55:32 #endmeeting