16:58:48 <ahf> #startmeeting network team meeting october 19 2020
16:58:48 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Oct 19 16:58:48 2020 UTC.  The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:58:48 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:58:57 <ahf> nice that last week i said it was the team meeting of october 31
16:59:01 <ahf> wonder what i was thinking
16:59:05 <ahf> anyway, hello!
16:59:13 <dgoulet> ahf: clearly you have your costume already
16:59:15 <dgoulet> hello
16:59:16 <ahf> our pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep
16:59:16 <nickm> hello everybody!
16:59:49 * nickm is dressed as a defcon 1992 attendee, but I won't tell you which :)
16:59:53 <asn> o/
17:00:03 <ahf> :o
17:00:13 <nickm> is gaba around? :)
17:00:28 <ahf> oh, i got 3 and 1 mixed around
17:00:50 <ahf> i think EOY campaign is happening today, so i imagine there is tons of meetings in the org
17:00:53 <ahf> unsure if gaba is here
17:00:56 <ahf> https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/core/-/boards
17:01:05 <ahf> how are we doing with our board?
17:01:30 <nickm> doing okay; I've got a few things piled up in needs_review, but I think folks will get to them this week
17:01:38 <dgoulet> I will update that heavily on my side, things are a bit out of date there
17:01:47 <nickm> I moved a bunch of my backlog stuff to icebox, to make room for arti
17:02:02 <ahf> sweet
17:02:10 <nickm> also, there's an gitlab milestone for arti "milestone 3" now in case anybody cares :)
17:02:38 <ahf> very nice. i guess you can also experiment a bit with using some of those features a bit more dynamically now that it is a from scratch project
17:02:44 <asn> im working on #40157 (alongside with dgoulet)
17:02:56 <ahf> tor#40157
17:02:58 <asn> seems like we cant have multiple assignees
17:02:58 <ahf> cool!
17:03:05 <asn> so dgoulet gets the ticket right now
17:03:16 <dgoulet> asn: take it, I'll switch to #40158
17:03:20 <dgoulet> switch myself*
17:03:28 <asn> thanks
17:03:28 <gaba> o/
17:03:30 <gaba> im around now
17:04:15 <ahf> hello gaba
17:04:27 <ahf> asn, dgoulet: we good on reviewer assignments?
17:04:41 <asn> yeah
17:04:44 <asn> they have been assigned today
17:04:51 <asn> the assignments have been assigned
17:05:01 <ahf> very nice
17:05:26 <ahf> anything that have changed for 0.4.4 in terms of new things coming in?
17:05:48 <dgoulet> 044 ?
17:06:09 <nickm> nope; but i have upcoming discussion questions that are related
17:06:13 <ahf> looks like no new tickets
17:06:14 <ahf> ack
17:06:59 <ahf> nothing new about CoreTorReleases?
17:07:14 <nickm> looks like we hit freeze last week, I think?
17:07:27 <ahf> isn't this one of the things we can move to be once a month too? i don't think we have had any updates to that item on our meeting agenda except for when dgoulet found the off-by-2 recently
17:07:31 <ahf> yep! last week
17:07:50 <nickm> yeah, I think that can be monthly unless somebody objects
17:07:58 * ahf moves it to monthly
17:08:30 <ahf> okay
17:08:33 <ahf> Discuss anything related to Sponsor 61 for the week. https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40143
17:08:58 <ahf> i think dgoulet is deep into this one now with asn on it too
17:09:05 <ahf> anything we need to discuss for our team in this meeting?
17:09:36 <gaba> s61 seems to be fine for this week
17:10:48 <dgoulet> yup I'm good
17:10:57 <ahf> ok. it seems like it's moving. i still have some loose ends with the flashflow follow up, but they are on my todo for this week
17:10:57 <mikeperry> yeah main things for this week are the tickets asn and dgoulet mentioned
17:11:01 <mikeperry> we just discussed them
17:11:05 <ahf> ah, perfect
17:11:07 <ahf> thank you mikeperry!
17:11:33 <ahf> i see no new issues in https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/issues and i don't think any of them needs discussion today
17:11:42 <mikeperry> for flashflow, sbws, and things, we will need to decide which should count and come from s61. we can do that in Nov planning meeting
17:11:52 <ahf> i think we should move this item maybe also to monthly and then have people note if they have something there they want discussed in a meeting?
17:11:57 <ahf> mikeperry: yep
17:12:44 <dgoulet> ssounds good
17:12:56 <ahf> folks please give an ack so i know if you think it is a good idea or a horrible idea 8)
17:13:34 <asn> sounds good
17:13:40 <nickm> no objection
17:13:45 <ahf> excellent!
17:14:17 <ahf> we have a big list of issues for other teams: https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/core/-/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&label_name[]=For%20Anticensorship%20Team
17:14:52 <ahf> i am unsure who added it to the list? it seems like we have a few things for the anti-censorship team here
17:14:57 <ahf> some are with sponsors some are without
17:15:14 <nickm> some are probably more urgent than others; I think in all cases I asked the anticensorship team how urgent they considered them
17:15:28 <ahf> i think the urgent ones is the one s30 one i have
17:15:36 <nickm> probably only the 'Bug' ones are in scope for 045 at this point
17:15:42 <gaba> i added that list. I think the stuff there is already resolved as you are working in the more urgent s30 stuff
17:15:54 <gaba> still good to check this list every week
17:16:35 <ahf> okay. i think i will look at it during the meeting and then if there is no changes to it, then i think i will skip it - sounds good?
17:16:42 * ahf tries to avoid having things each week added
17:16:55 <gaba> yep
17:16:57 <ahf> otherwise we are back to 30 min. of every-week-tasks i nthe meetings and less time for the open discussions
17:17:16 <ahf> ok
17:17:46 <ahf> okay
17:17:51 <ahf> we are at discussion point:
17:17:53 <ahf> [For Oct 19] I'd like to talk about the freeze and pending stuff.  Specifically, I didn't finish prop315 till friday.  Should we defer it or put it in? -nick
17:18:09 <ahf> prop#315
17:18:25 <nickm> Also thinking about prop 318, and the metricsport code
17:18:30 <ahf> i think that is fine to get in? i think we are hoping a bit to get the metricsport code in
17:18:34 <ahf> even though we are a bit late there
17:18:38 <ahf> ya
17:18:46 * ahf is cool with it
17:18:53 * asn is OK with it
17:19:07 <nickm> okay.  So everything that is currently having an assigned reviewer is in-scope for 0.4.4?
17:19:14 <asn> ok
17:19:16 <asn> thats the rule
17:19:24 <nickm> okay by me
17:19:27 <nickm> err,
17:19:29 <ahf> sounds good - maybe not as a rule but in this case it sounds good
17:19:29 <nickm> in-scope for 0.4.5
17:19:33 <ahf> yeah for 045
17:19:45 <ahf> otherwise we will have a big backports conversation right away :-P
17:20:10 <dgoulet> agree
17:20:20 <ahf> excellent
17:20:48 <ahf> [For Oct 19] What else do we do for the 0.4.5 freeze? -nick
17:20:56 <ahf> i guess that is related to what we just talked about
17:20:59 <ahf> or is there some additions here?
17:21:30 <nickm> In the old situation, we would take everything that was in the 045 milestone but not done and triage it
17:21:38 <nickm> and we'd mark things 045-should and 045-must
17:21:42 <nickm> do we still want to do it like that?
17:22:27 * dgoulet not a fan. "MUST" should be in the milestone imo and the rest out :)
17:23:07 <nickm> okay, so "MUST" for 045-final (045-release?) and everything else out?
17:23:24 <ahf> i think the should option is a bit vague too maybe at this time? doing a pass for must and maybe putting it in the milestone sounds smart?
17:23:31 <dgoulet> +1
17:23:40 <nickm> should we have 045-release distinct from 045-final?
17:23:46 <nickm> or use 045-final for this?
17:24:20 <ahf> what would the difference be? 045-release is for first alpha?
17:24:21 <dgoulet> 045-final is the stable release?
17:24:25 <dgoulet> so what would be 045-release?
17:24:35 <nickm> I'm thining one for stable, and one for post-stable
17:24:46 <dgoulet> ah
17:24:47 <nickm> in the past we've used "final" for both
17:25:01 <dgoulet> I would be fine with a post-stable milestone for all our backports :)
17:25:04 <ahf> 045-stable and 045-post-stable then i think is better
17:25:07 <dgoulet> which could also have a End date of EOL
17:25:10 <ahf> otherwise i will not remember any of this
17:25:14 <dgoulet> yeah
17:25:19 <nickm> stable and poststable are okay by me
17:25:22 <dgoulet> +1
17:25:26 <nickm> I can create them postmeeting if nobody objects
17:25:31 <dgoulet> final is confusing.. -stable is very meaningful
17:25:34 <dgoulet> awesome
17:25:46 <nickm> Shall I also move "must" candidates into -stable?
17:25:52 <nickm> or should we talk about what is a "must"?
17:26:02 <ahf> maybe do a must pass at the upcoming thursday meeting?
17:26:04 <nickm> in the past, must = "security, regressions, or crashes"
17:26:11 <nickm> that would work too
17:26:13 <dgoulet> yeah lets use that
17:26:14 <dgoulet> and do a pass
17:26:22 <ahf> let's do that. it is way faster when we do audio than in irc things
17:26:32 <ahf> we usually do these passes at the time it takes to find a way to do them over irc
17:26:34 <ahf> excellent!
17:26:35 <nickm> we put "new technical debt" into "should"; I think we should think about what we want to do with that.
17:27:00 <nickm> similarly "bugs that are not security,  regression, or crash"
17:27:04 <ahf> isn't arti the solution to the tech debt problem? :-P
17:27:07 * ahf hides
17:27:08 <dgoulet> :)
17:27:25 <ahf> but yes, good idea to think a bit about that one if we stop doing should
17:27:28 <nickm> aww, thank you ;)
17:27:34 <nickm> C tor will exist for years even in the best arti scenario, and we shouldn't make it worse :)
17:27:38 <ahf> yeah
17:27:39 <ahf> agreed
17:28:23 <ahf> ok
17:28:29 <ahf> [For Oct 19] When to do next stable backport releases? Any opinions? -nick
17:29:00 <nickm> any thoughts there?
17:29:12 <nickm> it's been a month since
17:29:29 <dgoulet> I would think "soon" sounds like very good idea
17:29:32 <ahf> i have none :o but i also didn't get through all the tickets you looked at for backporting. if that is in a good shape then we can do it from now on?
17:29:46 <nickm> ahf: what do you mean?
17:30:19 <ahf> i meant i have no thoughts here because i didn't go through the big list of backport tasks you went over ~2 weeks ago (i think). if that is in a good state, then i guess we can do them at any point from now on?
17:31:12 <nickm> ah
17:31:19 <nickm> ok
17:31:28 <nickm> i'll start looking at that then :)
17:32:13 <ahf> ok
17:32:18 * ahf is looking at the todo list
17:32:40 <ahf> looks good
17:32:48 <ahf> do we have anything else?
17:32:48 <nickm> i'm out of issues
17:33:17 * asn same here
17:33:18 * dgoulet is good
17:33:19 <ahf> asn, dgoulet, gaba: all good?
17:33:25 <asn> ya
17:33:37 <ahf> excellent, then let's end it now and it sounds like we have at least one thing to do on thursday!
17:33:45 <ahf> see you all on the irc
17:33:47 <ahf> #endmeeting