16:58:43 <ahf> #startmeeting Network team meeting 11 january 2020
16:58:43 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jan 11 16:58:43 2021 UTC.  The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:58:43 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:58:49 <ahf> hello hello all
16:58:56 <ahf> new pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2021.1-keep
16:59:21 <dgoulet> o/
16:59:23 <ahf> short announcement: next arti hackathon will be the 21st of January at 13:00 UTC
16:59:37 <ahf> we have a few more people joining, so that is gonna be interesting!
16:59:44 <asn> love it
16:59:46 <asn> looking forward
17:00:08 <nickm> Oh, also next monday is MLK day, which is a US holiday
17:00:32 <nickm> I'm not planning to work then, but I don't have anywhere to go, so I'll be glad to stop by for a meeting if people have one
17:00:34 <ahf> ah, that is good to know, so you will be out that day and mike i guess
17:00:46 <nickm> or we can resched for tues
17:00:46 <ahf> nah, let's take the things on our thursday sync if there is anything then?
17:00:52 <ahf> or we can do our meeting tuesday
17:01:01 <nickm> the thursday sync is replaced by the arti hackathon I think?
17:01:16 <ahf> no, actually, i can't do tuesday next week because that is where i have my long peer code session with maria
17:01:42 <nickm> ah ok
17:01:43 <ahf> yeah, let's just skip next week then?
17:01:48 <gaba> o\
17:01:51 <ahf> s/peer/pair/
17:02:41 <ahf> ok!
17:02:45 <ahf> how are folks doing with their boards?
17:03:01 <ahf> i know we just started so maybe people are still syncing up
17:03:01 <dgoulet> well been first day back so I will say "stable" :)
17:03:08 <ahf> yeah, that is my state too
17:03:10 <ahf> but it looks correct
17:03:42 <nickm> I'm a little lost about 0.4.5, but my board is fine.
17:03:56 <ahf> lost in what ways?
17:04:06 <nickm> we can talk about it when we get there :)
17:04:09 <ahf> ack
17:04:24 <ahf> okay, so we have reviewer assignments
17:04:45 <ahf> asn, and dgoulet: our gitlab got upgraded over the holidays, so we now have a "Reviewer" field
17:04:50 <asn> wow
17:04:54 <ahf> so you can have both an assignee and a reviewer on MR's
17:04:55 <asn> im not ready for this
17:04:58 <asn> interesting
17:05:08 <dgoulet> oh really!
17:05:16 <asn> so i guess they have an official workflow now
17:05:17 <ahf> unfortunately, geko found out that tickets where you are reviewer on does not show up in your MR's list on Gitlab
17:05:28 <ahf> but it means we no longer have to move things back and forward
17:05:38 <ahf> you can now do queries such as Reviewer = @ahf
17:06:00 <ahf> so, when you delegate, if you use that, i will update our queries in the pad to use Reviewer=@person queries instead
17:06:58 <ahf> we can talk about this when you start delegating and i can clean up the pda
17:06:58 <ahf> ok!
17:07:08 <nickm> sounds okay to me.  I'll miss the stuff appearing on the MR list, but it won't take long to make a new link
17:07:13 <ahf> okay, 0.4.5 is next
17:07:23 <ahf> nickm: yeah, i am gonna open a ticket with upstream if one could toggle that somehow
17:07:48 <ahf> it's odd because the submitter is not the assignee by default, so i am not sure what the difference is with having both assignee and reviewer
17:09:10 <ahf> ok
17:09:14 <ahf> 0.4.5
17:09:21 <ahf> nickm: you were lost?
17:10:03 <nickm> yeah, I see a bunch of 045 tickets and I don't know if i'm supposed to be making prpogress on any... there is a pretty big backlog there.
17:10:24 <nickm> right now we have 18 oppen issues in 045-stable, right?
17:10:41 <ahf> yes, that is what i count too
17:10:59 <ahf> 16 without backports
17:11:31 <nickm> Let's say we need to get these all fixed in a final rc that comes out... hm, when?
17:11:48 * ahf moves tor#40048 out of 0.4.5
17:12:16 <nickm> The rc probably has to come out in the first week of February, so that TB can pick it up for 10.5a11
17:12:35 <nickm> so that means we need all this stuff fixed by around the end of the month.
17:12:40 <nickm> (or otherwise addressed)
17:12:42 <nickm> can we do that?
17:13:17 <ahf> i have two that i think i can solve and 1 mystery that i havent been able to reproduce
17:13:20 <ahf> i think that is possible
17:13:30 <dgoulet> yeah we can pull it off I think,
17:13:44 <dgoulet> and we must get the v3 fixes in 045 and likely stables (unclear at this moment)
17:14:12 <ahf> ya
17:15:14 <nickm> ok
17:15:22 <nickm> I have comparatively little stuff in 045 at the moment...
17:15:29 <nickm> so if anybody needs to offload, I'm here
17:15:42 <nickm> my only request is that we should not wait till its too late
17:16:15 <nickm> asn: is your 045 stuff under control?
17:16:17 <ahf> ya, i can prioritize my stuff this week easily
17:16:54 <dgoulet> 045 blitz time indeed
17:17:08 <ahf> ya, if we blitz it this week we should be good. that is a good idea
17:17:21 <asn> nickm: yes i think so
17:17:22 <ahf> ok!
17:17:27 <asn> but im also kinda catching up to it
17:17:35 <asn> but i think it should be ok
17:18:10 <ahf> this is slightly related to our releases page on gitlab:     https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/wikis/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases
17:18:14 <ahf> is that looking OK?
17:18:39 <nickm> I think so
17:18:57 <ahf> ok
17:19:24 <ahf> we have 15 tickets in the backport category: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&label_name[]=Backport
17:19:28 <nickm> Would it make sense for us to add an "anticipated release date" list, like TB has at https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/tor-browser/-/wikis/Release-Schedule
17:19:32 <ahf> maybe we should ignore that for now given the 0.4.5 part is coming up?
17:19:40 * ahf looks
17:20:03 <nickm> like, "let's try to do this release around this date"?
17:20:14 <dgoulet> yeah that is how I interpret somehow our release dates lol
17:20:22 <dgoulet> just for the public, non-fixed is ... a bit harsher
17:20:39 <ahf> i am not sure i understand - so we change it from our "strict" date to a more fluid thing?
17:20:51 <nickm> err, I was thinking that we would say something like
17:21:28 <nickm> "aim for around 30 Jan; aim for around 15 Feb"
17:22:00 <dgoulet> ah for all minor versions?
17:22:12 <ahf> ohh, hmmm, i think we can do that, but i am unsure if people care much for the rc's for specific future dates?
17:22:12 <nickm> or "aim for around 15 Jan; around 30 Jan, around 15 feb"
17:22:19 <nickm> I think it's for our own planning
17:22:26 <ahf> we can do that
17:22:27 <nickm> so we can see how it syncs up with our schedule and with TB
17:22:34 <ahf> yeah
17:22:38 <nickm> ok. I'll try adding it in for 045 and see what we think
17:22:45 <ahf> sounds good!
17:23:13 <ahf> were people OK with ignoring the backports list at least for now while we have 0.4.5 coming up?
17:24:05 <dgoulet> fine by me but my I do think a series of stable "soon" might be good especially considering the potential v3 fix backported
17:24:58 <nickm> ack
17:25:27 <ahf> dgoulet: yes
17:25:37 <ahf> dgoulet: maybe we should put our heads together next week on that when the 0.4.5 blitz is over
17:25:42 <ahf> and maybe crunch through the backports list
17:25:56 <dgoulet> sure sounds good strategy to me
17:26:27 <ahf> should you and i try to do that? you are here on monday, no?
17:26:32 <ahf> it's a US specific holiday
17:26:59 <dgoulet> I'm there yes
17:27:01 <dgoulet> US specific one
17:27:29 <ahf> oki, let's do a sync on that on monday then! and see if we can create a lot of prep branches for it and then nickm can check in on it afterwards
17:27:30 <ahf> cool
17:27:32 <nickm> are we okay with this plan: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/wikis/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases#upcoming-release-dates ?
17:27:43 <nickm> I'vee chosen Jan 13 and Jan 25 because they are a little before TB alpha dates
17:28:07 <nickm> tbb-team -- do those dates respectively give you enough time to get a release candidate into the alpha coming out on the upcoming day?
17:28:16 <nickm> *I've
17:28:54 <ahf> it looks nice, nickm
17:29:09 * sysrqb looks
17:31:16 <sysrqb> nickm: that schedule looks reasonable
17:31:50 <nickm> ok.  So an rc on the 25th gives you enough time to put it in the alpha that you're doing on the 26th?
17:32:59 <sysrqb> i see. probably not, i was thinking that would go into the alpha version on 2021-02-05
17:33:23 <nickm> ok, so how much lead time do you need between our release and yours?
17:33:24 <sysrqb> we start building a3-4 days before the release date
17:33:32 <sysrqb> 3-4 days
17:33:58 <nickm> working days or calendar days?
17:34:32 * nickm adjusts the page
17:34:34 <sysrqb> for an alpha, roughly calendar days
17:34:45 <nickm> ok.  i've edited the page. does it look workable for you now?
17:35:05 <sysrqb> we usually begin building stable on Wednesday, when the release is scheduled on the following tuesday
17:35:39 <sysrqb> we can work with 22nd
17:36:12 <sysrqb> thanks
17:36:14 <ahf> cool
17:36:27 <ahf> man i have lost my tabs
17:36:47 <ahf> ok! we hvae no new "team" tickets
17:37:08 <nickm> sysrqb: thanks to you; and looking forward to an era of actually planning our stuff on the network team :)
17:37:16 <ahf> we got tor#40228 from the anti-censorship team
17:37:37 <ahf> it's under s30, but there is a workaround iirc
17:37:43 <ahf> ya
17:37:45 <ahf> so not urgent
17:37:56 <nickm> sysrqb: (this means fwiw that there is a tor rc coming out tomorrow, so please try to get it in your next alpha?)
17:38:10 <nickm> sysrqb: (if we miss one of your alphas it disrupts our testing)
17:38:36 <ahf> ok, we have the usual reminders, nothing new there. we talked about the new "Reviewer" field that we all have to get used to on gitlab
17:38:55 <ahf> i see nothing in bold. anything we need to discuss that we have missed/forgotten?
17:39:39 <sysrqb> nickm: understood, that sounds good.
17:39:59 <nickm> ahf: not from me :)
17:40:08 * dgoulet is good
17:40:35 <ahf> okay! good to be back with everybody, looking forward to get 2021 started with tor things <3
17:40:39 <ahf> let's chat in the other channels
17:40:43 <ahf> #endmeeting