16:57:50 <ahf> #startmeeting network team meeting, 1st of march 2021
16:57:51 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Mar  1 16:57:50 2021 UTC.  The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:57:51 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:57:54 <ahf> hello hello
16:58:06 <ahf> our pad is at: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2021.1-keep
16:58:26 <ahf> david is afk for a bit and will miss the meeting, but otherwise we can get started
16:58:38 <asn> hello all
16:58:44 <ahf> hello asn
16:58:46 <nickm> hihi
16:59:57 <ahf> let's get started. it's first meeting of the month
17:00:17 <ahf> are people doing alright with roadmappy work?
17:00:31 <nickm> i think so, roadmappy-wise
17:00:34 <asn> all good here
17:00:50 * ahf hopes to crunch through his ios things this week and end this so he can get ~2 days back per week after outreachy and this is done
17:00:54 <ahf> great
17:01:02 <ahf> remember this week is where we need to do peer review submissions
17:01:06 <nickm> the outreachy interns have been great this time around
17:01:25 <nickm> ahf: when is peer review due? Friday?
17:01:30 <ahf> friday the 5th
17:01:53 <ahf> nickm: yes, they have. i am so impressed and it has also been so much fun to be part of. i am gonna miss that
17:02:18 * asn writing status report
17:02:30 <ahf> and we also have the hackathon on thursday. let me know if i need to do antyhing different than i usuall do. not many have signed up this time i think
17:03:02 <ahf> dennis jackson will join us
17:03:14 <nickm> all: If you asked me for peer feedback and I did not just message you to say I am on track, I have completely forgotten about doing your peer feedback.  Please remind me :)
17:03:17 <ahf> and we plan on recording the first 1h of the session this time, so we have it for future need
17:03:24 <ahf> ack!
17:04:43 <ahf> anything we need to talk about around 0.4.6-freeze and 0.4.5-post-stable ?
17:04:58 <ahf> i think we looked a bit at it thursday, so maybe not so much needed to do here? david did some clean up
17:05:02 <nickm> 045-post-stable is all fine, and okay with me.  Better check in with dgoulet about that after
17:05:19 <ahf> i will poke him later when he returns. he is afk for a bit
17:05:19 <nickm> 046-freeze has unassigned tickets IIRC
17:05:32 <nickm> we should see if any are truly necessary for the freeze, and assign them if so
17:06:35 <ahf> hm, yes
17:06:41 <ahf> 9 issues
17:07:35 <ahf> perhaps we should spend a short amount of time post-hackathon on thursday to quickly go over those 9 issues?
17:07:44 <ahf> it will take forever here on irc and take 10 min in audio
17:08:05 <asn> post-hackathon we are usually wrecked
17:08:13 <asn> but we can try
17:08:18 <nickm> ok
17:08:30 <asn> should we try to find a time on wednesday for a quick mumble call?
17:08:35 <asn> not sure...
17:08:42 <asn> perhaps post-hackathon is easier logistics!
17:08:49 <ahf> i don't want to allocate more meetings to people right now, we have so many meetings going on right now
17:08:54 <asn> agreed
17:08:56 <asn> sounds good
17:08:57 <ahf> people are doing interviews and prep for interviews
17:09:07 <ahf> and last time we managed to get a bit done post hackathon, but i agree it's not ideal
17:09:24 <asn> sounds good let's do it
17:09:28 <ahf> ack, good good
17:09:49 <nickm> let's also look at those tickets independently and maybe take ones we think that we should do.
17:10:02 <ahf> yes, i think that is a good point
17:10:15 <ahf> if there are some we can see now we absolutely need to do and want to take lead on, just assign them
17:10:32 <ahf> ok
17:10:40 <ahf> anything we need to talk about regarding: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/wikis/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases
17:10:45 <ahf> we talked a bit about it thursday already
17:12:05 <nickm> I have a discussion item to check in whether we still think 0457 is necessary  before Mar 16
17:12:23 <nickm> also TB just updated their release schedule, so we should check whether we should change any of our dates
17:12:25 <ahf> we can take that now if it fits
17:12:40 <nickm> ok
17:12:50 <asn> what's on march 16?
17:13:04 <nickm> 046 freezes on 15 March
17:13:23 <nickm> and we should do a set of releases to fix the DoS in TROVE-2021-001
17:14:16 <ahf> and you are thinking of waiting with until ~mar 16 ?
17:14:24 <asn> i think that's ok?
17:15:13 <nickm> I think so too but I want dgoulet's opinion about the stuff he's been fixing in 045.
17:15:27 <nickm> once he's back he can let me know :)
17:15:36 <ahf> i have no strong objections to that. i think the relevant people have info on TROVE, but maybe dgoulet can prod you if he thinks otherwise?
17:15:53 <nickm> ok
17:15:53 <ahf> yeah, please let him know. he is not in the channel, but he can read the meet logs in meetbot via http
17:16:06 <nickm> ack
17:16:26 <ahf> ok, so next item is "team issues"
17:16:29 <ahf> we have a new one!
17:16:34 <ahf> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/issues/17
17:16:58 <nickm> it's a great idea; does it have an owner?
17:17:05 <ahf> it's from juga, it seems like it's an open discussion still, but if people have things they want to throw in, we should do so
17:17:47 <ahf> i think maybe figuring out the goal is before getting an owner? what should this lead to? we want a wiki entry on what we think of stuff like this?
17:18:05 <ahf> i have the feeling we have different ideas about this, but we have some uniform thoughts about things like using yubikeys and such
17:20:08 <ahf> i can take ownership on it, but figuring out what we think is useful to get as a result is key i think
17:20:22 <nickm> ok
17:20:37 * asn has no strong opinions on this topic
17:20:54 <ahf> i will ask some questions on the ticket and poke @tpo/core for some feedback
17:21:03 <ahf> unblocking this now and moving to next item
17:21:23 <ahf> no new items from other teams
17:21:36 <ahf> ok, discussions! woh
17:21:58 <ahf> [1 Mar] [nickm] Which of our CI builders are unreliable? I keep seeing stem failures. Are they real? Should we do anything?
17:23:01 <ahf> i had a bit of a hard time parsing this one, but i think the important parts is it does seem like our stem tests are flaky. i don't think we have multiple builders enabled right now, so i don't think it's the builders themselves here
17:23:32 <ahf> do we have a ticket with the errors that are usually happening? it doesn't happen very often to me when i retry builds with different images
17:23:50 <nickm> I don't think so.  Next time we see this issue, let's open a ticket?
17:24:58 <ahf> yes, please, and assign it to me
17:25:04 <asn> sounds sensible
17:25:14 <nickm> ack
17:25:23 <ahf> i think while CI is still a bit flaky with the disk issues and such, just open an issue with a link to the failed build and assign it to me if you see something
17:25:53 <ahf> ok, the next item on the discussion list is the one where i think nickm wants to hear dgoulet too, so i will skip that as we talked about it above
17:26:00 <ahf> [1 Mar] [nickm] Proposal: Triage-Bot should not assign reviewers to Merge Requests that are labeled with "Needs Revision" or "Merge Ready".
17:26:22 <ahf> i am fine with that, people just need to remember to remove those labels
17:26:25 <nickm> I can talk rationale there, if you want.
17:26:47 <nickm> But the issue is that my review queue is full of tickets that don't actually need review right now :)
17:26:50 <ahf> i think i see it - it is to reduce assignee list?
17:26:51 <ahf> yeah
17:26:55 <ahf> that makes entirely see
17:27:08 <ahf> please create a ticket to ahf/triage-ops and i will do it! while we are at this
17:27:11 <nickm> ok
17:27:13 <ahf> we talked about thursday to have a list of labels to ignore
17:27:22 <ahf> you had some thoughts on this, maybe add that to the ticket too?
17:27:31 <ahf> we talked about this for issues, nor MR's
17:27:49 <nickm> yeah, that was for triage, not MRs.
17:27:49 <ahf> this was for milestone handling
17:27:52 <ahf> yep
17:27:58 <nickm> let's talk through that one after the meeting?
17:28:03 <ahf> wfm
17:28:04 <ahf> ok!
17:28:11 <ahf> [1 Mar [nickm] Any prep we should do for this week's arti hacking?
17:28:33 * asn is trying to find a useful one-day project
17:28:36 <ahf> i think we should run it like the last times, but we did talk about recording the intro so we have it for future use too
17:28:54 * ahf wants to return to the bridge project
17:29:23 <nickm> I'm feeling like refactoring something, but I'm not sure what.  Possibly making something more testable.
17:29:48 <nickm> Also there is now a (not stable) API in tor-client: it would be cool to add stuff to it, if you have ideas.
17:30:43 <ahf> sweet
17:31:08 <ahf> i should hear kushal where he is on the compression work with lifting that into a crate on its own, i haven't followed up on that since last time
17:32:26 <jnewsome> does arti have a syscall sandbox yet? that might be fun to look into. or tokio. or testing. or... :-D
17:32:30 <ahf> anything i have to do? i was gonna send out a reminder email to tor-internal@ tomorrow
17:32:45 <asn> ahf: i dont think so
17:32:46 <nickm> jnewsome: I don't want to do a syscall sandbox at this phase, but it could be neat
17:32:58 <nickm> later
17:33:07 <nickm> jnewsome: testing would be awesome but in many cases it will need refactoring
17:33:21 <jnewsome> yeah, that is often the bulk of the work with testing
17:33:24 <nickm> jnewsome: I want to get tokio done soon; if it isn't done by thursday, that's a great idea
17:34:33 <ahf> what is the tokio goal? to switch to it? or to have it as a secondary async runner? i don't know if it's a bit like if tor had support for both libevent and libuv ?
17:35:04 <nickm> I want to support both async_std and tokio for now.
17:35:23 <nickm> I don't know which  should be primary; let's figure it out again after we've got them both working
17:35:36 <asn> interesting
17:35:54 <nickm> Fortunately, tokio and async_std both expose some version of the futures API, so in theory there is not a _lot_ of stuff that we'd need to isolate
17:36:05 <ahf> ok
17:36:11 <nickm> and I _think_ that the async-std-specific parts of the code are currently isolated in tor_rtcompat
17:36:17 <ahf> but htey both come with their own TcpStream and so on, right?
17:36:28 <nickm> yeah
17:36:30 <ahf> like libuv have tcp/ip connection functions but libevent just uses fd's
17:36:31 <ahf> ok
17:36:31 <nickm> IIRC
17:36:39 <ahf> very interesting
17:36:47 <ahf> you are gonna hack at this before thursday?
17:36:48 <nickm> the APIs are much more similar than libevent vs libuv, for the parts that arti needs
17:36:51 <nickm> maybe, depends on time
17:37:07 <ahf> ack! very cool.
17:38:01 <ahf> ok folks, i  think we are done with our loooong monday meeting
17:38:13 <ahf> we have no s61 sync today, as that was earlier over bbb
17:38:21 <ahf> see you all on the other irc channels o/
17:38:25 <nickm> peace all!
17:38:27 <asn> cheers o/
17:38:29 <ahf> #endmeeting