17:01:15 <gaba> #startmeeting Network meeting July 13th
17:01:15 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jul 13 17:01:15 2020 UTC.  The chair is gaba. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:15 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:01:16 <phw> :)
17:01:29 <gaba> Hi! o/
17:01:32 <gaba> pad here: http://kfahv6wfkbezjyg4r6mlhpmieydbebr5vkok5r34ya464gqz6c44bnyd.onion/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep
17:01:46 <nickm> hello all!
17:01:55 <nickm> hi ahf, gaba, Caitlin !
17:02:45 <nickm> i guess we're starting with the shiny kanban at https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/core/-/boards
17:02:54 <gaba> we are
17:03:28 <ahf> looks good
17:04:28 <dgoulet> o/
17:04:35 <gaba> o/
17:04:42 <gaba> we are looking at the board dgoulet
17:04:47 <gaba> https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/core/-/boards
17:04:59 <gaba> caitlin: do you have stuff assigned in that board?
17:05:12 <gaba> what is your username in gitlab?
17:05:18 <Caitlin> c
17:06:14 <nickm> I'll put tpo/core/chutney#40002 in the "doing" column there
17:06:19 <nickm> there
17:06:25 <gaba> ok
17:06:26 <gaba> thanks
17:06:44 <gaba> anybody blocked with anything?
17:06:47 <nickm> Caitlin: we  use the doing/next labels to track what we're working on now
17:06:48 <nickm> not i
17:06:59 * ahf is not blocked
17:07:27 * dgoulet is not blocked
17:07:33 <gaba> ok
17:07:53 <gaba> reviews: how are we doing with the ones for this week?
17:08:03 <dgoulet> all assigned iirc
17:08:55 <nickm> dgoulet: could you assign torspec!1 too?
17:09:55 <dgoulet> yes
17:09:59 <nickm> thanks!
17:10:08 <dgoulet> done
17:10:43 <gaba> on 0.4.4 final there is still 7 tickets without asignee. They are all in the icebox so not sure waht is the sitaution with them.
17:11:10 <nickm> those are all 044-can, so we don't have to do them
17:11:17 <gaba> ah, ok
17:11:18 <nickm> we can pick them up as we move ahead.
17:11:20 <nickm> if we want
17:11:26 <nickm> or not do them at all and still release 044
17:11:33 <nickm> (assuming I am right about them all being 044-can)
17:12:06 <gaba> ahf: you have a lot in your list of 0.4.4 tickets. Are you ok with all that? https://gitlab.torproject.org/dashboard/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&assignee_username=ahf&milestone_title=Tor%3A%200.4.4.x-final
17:12:13 <gaba> yes, they are all -can nickm
17:12:29 <ahf> no, but i haven't gotten through and removed some of them yet, but i did merge a few of them into a single ticket last week
17:12:36 <gaba> ok
17:12:36 <ahf> i will go through the list before we meet thursday
17:13:13 <gaba> ok, do anybody have anything else for today?
17:13:38 <dgoulet> yeah quick announcement
17:13:40 * ahf good
17:13:45 <dgoulet> I opened 2 tickets last week in Teams page
17:13:48 <dgoulet> so that is a thing :)
17:15:06 <ahf> cool
17:15:22 <ggus> dgoulet: i've updated the ticket with new fallback dirs. Just one relay was offline and i'll check this week again.
17:15:43 <gaba> sounds good to me. About renaming master to main. dgoulet: do you want to go through all the repos in core and do it? or should it be done differently
17:16:07 <dgoulet> ggus: yeah I saw, superb!
17:16:17 <dgoulet> gaba: I do not have that power
17:16:30 <Caitlin> where is the discussion about renaming from master branch
17:16:41 <dgoulet> gaba: I think each project will have to do it
17:17:20 <nickm> tpo/core/team#2
17:17:54 <gaba> dgoulet: each project inside core?
17:18:11 <gaba> caitlin: the issues dgoulet is bringing are here: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/issues
17:18:37 <Caitlin> which people have objected to the default branch name of master?
17:18:50 <dgoulet> gaba: I mean each git repository, the maintainers need to do it, I have commit access on only a very few set of repo :S
17:19:07 <nickm> ours in particular? nobody yet, but lots of projects are shifting.
17:19:11 <gaba> mmm, that makes me wondering who is the mantainer of which repo
17:19:22 <Caitlin> i heard the news about github and i don't think that is reason alone to take this change
17:20:03 <nickm> So, if enough projects make the change, the only projects still using a "master" branch will be really old ones, and ones that want to signal a general "f your feelings" attitude that we don't go for.
17:20:07 <gaba> i personally support this change and i think it is something that can be done and help support inclusive not harmful language
17:20:36 <ahf> we can it on all of tpo/core/* if we want. i'm +1 on it too
17:20:42 <ahf> maybe other teams will follow
17:20:50 <dgoulet> yeah I'm very +1
17:21:06 <gaba> dgoulet: does this mean there are many of the project at core that you can do it? chutney, tor, specs, anything else there in core?
17:21:06 <nickm> Caitlin: yeah, I don't think this is a "must do or else" thing, but we all seem to think it's a better idea to do it than not.
17:22:27 <dgoulet> gaba: well the repository are still on git.tpo so I can on few, torsocks, tor and spec would be the one I can iirc
17:22:36 <gaba> oh right
17:23:00 <gaba> maybe you can change the ones you have control over and then add a list of others to the ticket? i can contact people after that if needed
17:23:13 <dgoulet> gaba: kind of perfect topic/announcement for all hands :P
17:23:19 <gaba> yes :)
17:23:25 <nickm> I think (as noted on the ticket) we should figure out migration stuff
17:23:37 <nickm> there will be scripts and web stuff that breaks here, and we should be ready to follow up
17:23:39 <dgoulet> yeah renaming master will affect many things in tor.git...
17:23:45 <dgoulet> we need to be caferful
17:23:48 <nickm> we may need help with the admin team to e.g. redirect gitweb
17:24:08 <nickm> we may need to grep through our web stuff and wiki for urls
17:24:41 <dgoulet> yeah much work
17:25:05 <Caitlin> can we weigh the benefits vs issues arisen from renaming master branches? there's what dgoulet said, probably the most obvious, that it may cause more changes we haven't considered. and post-migration where internal stuff has moved to gitlab, maybe "a bit more" change is permissible to have
17:25:06 <gaba> ok
17:25:19 <gaba> maybe we can start with tor.git and create a checklist of how to migrate
17:25:23 <Caitlin> but i'm failing to see what's harmful about a word used in a purely technical context
17:25:23 <gaba> to help other projects
17:25:41 <nickm> Caitlin: first read anything written by a person who doesn't like it
17:25:46 <dgoulet> from my perspective, the pain outweighs the benefits in the long run so I'm fine with it
17:25:58 <ahf> Caitlin: if you are looking for just a good sole technical reason, then main is shorter and you have to type it all the time
17:26:05 <Caitlin> i'm asking for a resource to read, nickm
17:26:08 <Caitlin> ahf: that's fair
17:26:16 <gaba> caitlin: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-01.html
17:26:23 <Caitlin> gaba: thanks i'll look
17:26:35 <nickm> Caitlin: ah, that I can't find for you.  I've read a bunch, but don't have a canonical resource
17:27:03 <nickm> generally speaking, from a sociolinguistic perspective, when vocabulary shifts, using the older vocabulary tends to signal stuff that you might or might not want to signal
17:27:49 <nickm> if there is in fact a widespread shift to "main", then sticking with "master" can signal either "i don't see anything wrong with the old name", or "i actively dislike the people making the arguments for the new name"
17:28:05 <nickm> qv change in vocabulary used to refer to various groups of people over the 20th century
17:28:58 <nickm> anyway .. we ready for next topic?
17:29:49 <ahf> ye
17:30:05 <gaba> yes
17:31:28 <nickm> (what is the next topic?)
17:31:40 <gaba> anybody has anything else?
17:31:42 <nickm> maybe tpo/core/team#1 ?
17:31:58 <gaba> yes, we can talk about this one here
17:32:33 <ahf> i quite liked the response you had on pre-supported versions
17:32:51 <ahf> i can see the value as a downstream or a user that follows the project but not as much as we do because we work on it
17:32:59 <dgoulet> thing is that finding that ^ is the same as finding the exact version? ..
17:33:08 <nickm> not necessarily?
17:33:24 <nickm> if we find that something was definitely there in, we don't need to check where it came from before that
17:34:15 <ahf> the frustrating part with finding the release is the big code movement boundary, right?
17:34:34 <nickm> I think code movement and refactoring confuse people
17:34:49 <nickm> once you can't find the source of the code in your first "git blame", you're in trouble
17:35:15 <dgoulet> righty
17:35:26 <dgoulet> that is basically it yes
17:36:03 <ahf> yeah, i recursively walk through git blame sometimes
17:37:26 <nickm> let's see whether arma says anything there additionally
17:38:53 <dgoulet> sounds good
17:39:03 <dgoulet> I would indeed know the reasons for this to exists
17:40:28 <gaba> sounds good
17:40:34 <gaba> it seems we are done with the meeting today?
17:40:39 * dgoulet is good
17:40:42 * ahf good
17:41:08 <nickm> it was especially important long ago when when we didn't have an official set of supported releases, and we had to do our backports on an ad-hoc basis
17:41:30 <nickm> but we no longer decide what to backport by reading the changelog.
17:41:34 <nickm> (i'm good)
17:41:43 <dgoulet> nickm: ah!! that does make sense
17:43:24 <gaba> #endmeeting