15:00:42 <JustinClift> #startmeeting Gluster Weekly Community Meeting
15:00:42 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May 21 15:00:42 2014 UTC.  The chair is JustinClift. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:42 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:00:51 <JustinClift> Roll call
15:00:57 * hagarth is here
15:01:02 * Humble here
15:01:18 <JustinClift> Etherpad link: http://titanpad.com/gluster-community-meetings
15:01:19 * purpleidea is here but also in a real life meeting
15:01:20 <glusterbot> Title: TitanPad: gluster-community-meetings (at titanpad.com)
15:01:26 * dbruhn is here
15:01:56 * ndevos is there too
15:02:20 * xavih is here
15:02:51 <JustinClift> #topic Action items from last meeting(s)
15:03:08 <JustinClift> "JustinClift to discuss with hagarth + Mgmt if a new approach to prioritisation is needed"
15:03:25 <JustinClift> It's er... "in progress".  I only started looking at this today.
15:03:39 <JustinClift> Emailed hagarth to setup a time. ;)
15:03:42 <hagarth> JustinClift: sure, let us sync up later this week.
15:03:54 <JustinClift> hagarth: Cool. :)
15:04:04 <JustinClift> "JustinClift to hook some Jenkins slaves into build.gluster.org"
15:04:37 <JustinClift> I'm still working on it.  There have been multiple things getting in the way (finally finished those off today).
15:05:03 * JustinClift has a time already set aside with Luis Pabon on Thurs (8pm) to pick his brain about doing this
15:05:50 <JustinClift> We should probably setup a NetBSD slave box too - there's a Jenkins port - in order to automatically test on NetBSD as well
15:05:58 <JustinClift> "JustinClift to locate next Etherpad to try. Must be reliable and not require accounts for ppl"
15:06:31 <JustinClift> Didn't get to it, so will need to do it over the next week.
15:06:42 <JustinClift> Using TitanPad again as initial fallback
15:06:58 <JustinClift> (maybe it'll be more reliable now, 6 weeks after the initial problems)
15:07:11 <hagarth> JustinClift: is hosting an etherpad on gluster.org a possibility?
15:07:34 <JustinClift> hagarth: John Mark veto'd that when it was suggested initially
15:08:08 <JustinClift> hagarth: Though, we could try that as long as it's all fully automatic. (eg minimal/no maintainence burden)
15:08:19 <JustinClift> Lets try the public ones first, and see how that goes
15:08:24 <hagarth> JustinClift: sounds good
15:08:31 <JustinClift> Moving on...
15:08:39 <JustinClift> #topic 3.5.1
15:08:46 <JustinClift> "hchiramm: How's the documentation for 3.5.1 going?"
15:08:59 <Humble> JustinClift, half done.. \o .. hopefully, I will finish it soon.. \o/ :)
15:09:08 <hagarth> Humble: what all are pending atm?
15:09:28 <Humble> DRC, libgfapi ..etc
15:09:36 <ndevos> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?hide_resolved=1&id=glusterfs-3.5.1
15:09:38 <glusterbot> Title: Dependency tree for Bug 1071800 (at bugzilla.redhat.com)
15:09:45 <ndevos> the bugs in NEW state need work :)
15:09:52 <JustinClift> ndevos: Cool, I was just looking for that
15:10:23 <Humble> gfid-access , rdma-cm ..etc are pending on feature owner..
15:10:27 <Humble> hagarth, ^^
15:10:49 <hagarth> I think we need to wrap this up pretty soon.. there are one or two ugly crashes in 3.5.0 which have been already merged in 3.5.1
15:11:00 <hagarth> it would be good to have 3.5.1 out soon
15:11:08 <JustinClift> Humble: Are the ones depending on feature owners that you're worried about?
15:11:21 <hagarth> gfid-access is mostly a developer oriented enhancement, do we need that in admin-guide
15:11:25 <Humble> JustinClift, yes
15:11:34 <hagarth> rdma-cm has some content in doc/
15:11:57 <kkeithley> +1 for getting 3.5.1 out soon. We need stuff that's in its gfapi for nfs-ganesha-2.1, which just released their first RC.
15:12:05 <hagarth> Humble: sure, please contact Raghavendra G for rdma-cm
15:12:05 <Humble> hagarth, there are some more like changelog geo rep ..
15:12:16 <Humble> hagarth, 4 bugs are pending on him
15:12:24 <JustinClift> Humble: Would you be ok to email gluster-devel with the bullet point list of what's still outstanding, and they one's you're worried about?
15:12:38 <Humble> he has promised he will complete it .. but its almost one week now..
15:12:41 <Humble> hagarth, ^^
15:12:50 <hagarth> Humble: an email on gluster-devel would be helpful
15:12:51 <Humble> JustinClift, yeah.. give me one more day..
15:12:57 <JustinClift> Sure
15:13:00 <Humble> hagarth, sure..
15:13:01 <hagarth> so that others can chip in too
15:13:06 <Humble> yep
15:13:28 <ndevos> Humble: just put the feature owners on CC too ;)
15:13:31 <hagarth> how about sending a daily reminder/nag on pending bugs for 3.5.1?
15:13:42 <JustinClift> #action Humble to email gluster-devel with the bullet point list of docs still outstanding for 3.5.1, and the ones he's concerned about
15:13:43 <lalatenduM> hagarth, ndevos +1
15:13:46 <pk1> like I do it for spurios failures :-P
15:13:53 <ndevos> hagarth: yeah, that might be good too :)
15:13:54 <Humble> a mail to feature owners are already sent one week back ..
15:14:11 <hagarth> ndevos: the ball is in your court now ;)
15:14:11 <JustinClift> pk1: It's effective :)
15:14:22 <pk1> JustinClift: :-)
15:14:35 <JustinClift> Moving on...
15:14:38 <JustinClift> ndevos: How are the non-documentation patches for 3.5.1 going?
15:14:38 <ndevos> hagarth: oh, thanks! :D
15:15:14 <ndevos> JustinClift: I think one is waiting for inclusion in master
15:15:29 <ndevos> and there are 2-3 others that need a review in release-3.5
15:15:57 <JustinClift> ndevos: Would you be ok to email gluster-devel with their details, to help get eyes on them
15:16:19 * lpabon here
15:16:21 <ndevos> JustinClift: yes, I got that AI already
15:16:28 <JustinClift> ndevos: :)
15:17:04 <JustinClift> ndevos: k, what's your ETA then? :)
15:17:21 <ndevos> JustinClift: for the email? later today
15:17:38 <JustinClift> Nah, I'm meaning for 3.5.1 :)
15:17:54 <JustinClift> (obviously depending on docs stuff)
15:18:11 <hagarth> should we aim for sometime next week?
15:18:13 <ndevos> JustinClift: I hope to get a beta out tomorrow, that should get tested a little before a final release
15:18:41 <JustinClift> k.  Yeah, that'll help the people that are experiencing crashes
15:18:44 <ndevos> hagarth: next week suits me
15:18:53 <JustinClift> Cool.
15:18:54 <hagarth> ndevos: cool, thanks!
15:19:10 <ndevos> and, when the beta is out, the associated bugs should get moved to ON_QA too ;)
15:19:32 <hagarth> ndevos: right
15:19:34 <kkeithley> the bugs with fixes actually in the beta
15:19:42 <JustinClift> #info 3.5.1 beta for tomorrow, if positive testing results + all docs ready then release next week
15:19:48 <purpleidea> 079222
15:19:50 <ndevos> kkeithley: yes, of course ;)
15:20:04 <kkeithley> just me and my keen eye for the obvious
15:20:18 <JustinClift> Moving on
15:20:19 <kkeithley> ;-)
15:20:23 <JustinClift> #topic 3.4.4
15:20:29 <pk1> what did purple idea say?
15:20:31 <JustinClift> kkeithley: How are the patch reviews for this going?
15:20:37 <JustinClift> pk1: Wrong window
15:21:38 <hagarth> what's the tracker bug for 3.4.4?
15:21:42 <kkeithley> just need http://review.gluster.org/#/c/7583/ reviewed.  Seems like people are waiting for lalatenduM's patch on master. It's legitimate to fix something on a branch and (logically) merge to master too though.
15:21:43 <glusterbot> Title: Gerrit Code Review (at review.gluster.org)
15:22:04 <kkeithley> tracker for 3.4.4 is tracker BZ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095324
15:22:06 <glusterbot> Bug 1095324: unspecified, unspecified, 3.4.4, kkeithle, ASSIGNED , Release 3.4.4 tracker
15:22:23 <hagarth> kkeithley: will review that tomorrow
15:22:43 <kkeithley> thanks
15:22:57 <ndevos> kkeithley: is that the cppcheck one?
15:23:02 <kkeithley> yes
15:23:22 <ndevos> okay, cool, I might be able to pick that for 3.5.1 too then
15:23:38 <JustinClift> kkeithley: That IANA brick ports thing... who would know?
15:23:39 <kkeithley> for 3.5.1 there is http://review.gluster.org/#/c/7605/
15:23:41 <glusterbot> Title: Gerrit Code Review (at review.gluster.org)
15:23:58 <kkeithley> I'm pretty sure we're already using ports above 45152 in 3.4.x
15:24:04 <hagarth> JustinClift: IANA ?
15:24:16 <kkeithley> Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
15:24:25 <hagarth> yes kkeithley is right, we switched to IANA compatible scheme from 3.4.0
15:24:36 * ndevos thought so too
15:25:13 * Humble recall  IANA via  1095595
15:25:16 <pk1> kkeithley: We need to pull xavih patch as well
15:25:18 <kkeithley> so I'm going to close it as not a bug, we're not updating 3.3, and I wouldn't want to make a change like that from 3.X.3 -> 3.X.4 anyway
15:25:42 <JustinClift> kkeithley: No worries. ;)
15:25:44 <kkeithley> pk1: which patch is that? would you please update the tracker?
15:26:21 <pk1> http://review.gluster.org/6736
15:26:22 <glusterbot> Title: Gerrit Code Review (at review.gluster.org)
15:26:41 <hagarth> pk1: this has been merged in both master and release-3.5 right?
15:27:00 <pk1> hagarth: yes. This is for 3.4?
15:27:16 <JustinClift> pk1: That's the 3.5 patch.  Is there a 3.4 one?
15:27:19 <pk1> hagarth: I was debugging one bug submitted by a user. Seems to be this
15:27:29 <pk1> JustinClift: We need to port it.
15:27:48 <JustinClift> pk1: Are you ok to do it in time for 3.4.4?
15:27:51 <hagarth> pk1: I see, might be good to add the bug to the tracker and backport this patch.
15:28:00 <xavih> pk1: it's already ported: http://review.gluster.org/6737
15:28:02 <glusterbot> Title: Gerrit Code Review (at review.gluster.org)
15:28:12 <pk1> xavih: yes it is :-)
15:28:13 <xavih> it needs to be merged
15:28:35 <JustinClift> Ahh cool.  That's looking ready.
15:29:10 <JustinClift> k, Moving on
15:29:14 <JustinClift> #topic Failing regression tests progress update
15:29:20 <hagarth> JustinClift: one question on 3.4.4
15:29:24 <JustinClift> np
15:29:27 <JustinClift> Go for it
15:29:40 <hagarth> what's the likely schedule for 3.4.4?
15:29:47 <JustinClift> Good point
15:29:55 <JustinClift> kkeithley: eta for 3.4.4?
15:30:21 <kkeithley> Those two bugs... As soon as I get the changes reviewed
15:30:55 <hagarth> kkeithley: I will review both tomorrow
15:31:26 <JustinClift> #action hagarth to review the last few patches for 3.4.4 tomorrow (22nd May)
15:31:30 <kkeithley> xavih: I cloned the BZ   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1099955.  ¿would you please resubmit http://review.gluster.org/6737 against the new BZ? Thanks
15:31:32 <glusterbot> Bug 1099955: high, unspecified, ---, vbellur, NEW , self-heal process can sometimes create directories instead of symlinks for the root gfid file in .glusterfs
15:31:44 <xavih> kkeithley: sure
15:31:45 <JustinClift> #action kkeithley to release 3.4.4 this week if the patches are good
15:31:58 <xavih> kkeithley: I'll do it just after the meeting
15:32:08 <kkeithley> thanks
15:32:08 <JustinClift> If the patches need work though, next week is fine.. ;)
15:32:33 <JustinClift> k. Moving on attempt 2
15:32:40 <JustinClift> "Failing regression tests progress update"
15:32:59 <pk1> JustinClift: my favorite topic :-)
15:33:33 <JustinClift> The regression tests are now in *much* better shape, thanks to pk1, Raghavendra G, and others
15:33:57 <pk1> JustinClift: Vijai also sent a mail about the consistent failing test case.
15:34:04 <hagarth> what tests are the major offenders right now?
15:34:07 <JustinClift> I kicked off a 20 VM test just before this meeting started, and will collect results after it
15:34:23 <hagarth> should we send a weekly offending list on gluster-devel till the problem is fixed?
15:34:25 <pk1> hagarth: The one Vijai is working on
15:34:33 <hagarth> pk1: ok
15:34:34 <pk1> hagarth: daily please
15:34:46 <JustinClift> In the testing yesterday (before a new dependency problem showed up) it was all passing (100%)
15:34:54 <hagarth> pk1: will you be the owner for sending those nags?
15:34:56 <JustinClift> Though it was only a 10 vm test on master
15:35:29 <pk1> hagarth: Love to :-)
15:35:32 <hagarth> JustinClift: 100% pass sounds too good to be true ;)
15:35:37 <JustinClift> pk1: Good man
15:35:50 <hagarth> pk1: thanks
15:35:57 <JustinClift> hagarth: Well, I notice that Rackspace VM's seem to have good hours and bad hours
15:36:09 <pk1> JustinClift: They are mostly races, which are the kinds of bugs I love :-)
15:36:13 <hagarth> #action pk1 to send daily nag emails on gluster-devel for regression test failures
15:36:26 <JustinClift> So, if I start a bunch of VM's sometimes they can all pass.  But the exact same git commit can have massive failures a few hours later
15:36:34 <JustinClift> pk1: Yeah, so racy behaviour
15:36:58 <hagarth> JustinClift: might be good to record those races and keep sending them on gluster-devel.
15:37:29 <JustinClift> hagarth: So, we'll only really have a good "reliable" 100% after it's been all passing for at least a few days regardless of when it's run
15:37:40 <pk1> hagarth: this is the new offender. It has a core too. Something related to rebalance I think
15:37:59 <pk1> hagarth: tests/bugs/bug-884455.t
15:38:05 <hagarth> pk1: interesting
15:38:15 <JustinClift> hagarth: Yeah, definitely going to keep emailing gluster-devel with failure results that show up
15:38:22 * JustinClift has been trying to over the last few days
15:38:26 <hagarth> pk1: I recollect seeing this test fail before
15:38:45 <JustinClift> However the tests have been broken in the meantime for various reasons not related to them
15:38:52 <pk1> hagarth: Oh. Let me give an update when I get some more info
15:39:06 <JustinClift> eg new dependency introduced by latest mock, etc
15:39:26 <JustinClift> + breakage of the script (my own fault), etc
15:39:36 <JustinClift> Anyway, we're on the right trajectory now
15:39:55 <JustinClift> For the 2nd part of the Regression problem...
15:40:08 <JustinClift> I'm still working on getting Jenkins setup with slaves in Rackspace
15:40:31 * JustinClift has time set aside to chat with lpabon about it tomorrow evening, to pick his brains about it
15:40:53 <JustinClift> Was hoping for last week, but other non-gluster stuff took priority
15:40:57 <pk1> I have one proposal to make about the mempool masking memory corruptions issue, once this topic is over.
15:41:06 <hagarth> JustinClift: if you capture some notes, please circulate that. Even a few other community folks might be interested in providing slaves.
15:41:18 <hagarth> pk1: add it to the agenda, there are few more to be discussed
15:41:27 <JustinClift> hagarth: Yeah, I'll put it into a wiki page
15:41:51 <JustinClift> Um... I think that's it for this topic
15:41:59 <JustinClift> Moving on...
15:42:08 <JustinClift> #topic Other items
15:42:12 <JustinClift> 3.6
15:42:16 <JustinClift> Who's is that?
15:42:20 <hagarth> JustinClift: me
15:42:27 <JustinClift> Go for it
15:42:36 <hagarth> Revised Feature freeze for 3.6 was planned for today
15:43:03 <hagarth> but have got requests from a few feature owners to move the schedule
15:43:17 <hagarth> I am in favor of moving the entire 3.6 schedule by 2 weeks or so
15:43:21 <hagarth> any thoughts on that?
15:43:43 <hagarth> this will give more time for all of us to get whatever we want into 3.6.
15:43:46 <JustinClift> Lets do a month instead, and give people some time to focus on the docs instead of pushing too hard?
15:44:11 <hagarth> JustinClift: that sounds reasonable to me too
15:44:33 <ndevos> hagarth: is there a list of things that is still missing?
15:44:40 <pk1> hagarth:, JustinClift +1
15:45:13 <hagarth> ndevos: don't have one ready, but let me update the planning36 page to reflect current status
15:45:26 <ndevos> hagarth: okay, that works too
15:45:41 <JustinClift> #action hagarth to update the planning36 page to reflect current status, new schedule
15:45:57 <msvbhat> hagarth: But it should be released before next downstream version. Right?
15:46:26 <hagarth> msvbhat: we bother only about community/upstream schedules here :)
15:46:34 <JustinClift> So, we're good with 1 month push back for 3.6 schedule?
15:46:42 <JustinClift> No objections... ?
15:47:15 <hagarth> don't see any
15:47:21 <JustinClift> #agreed 3.6 schedule will be pushed back 1 month
15:47:41 <JustinClift> Moving on
15:47:45 <JustinClift> "NetBSD & OS X Port maintainers"
15:47:50 <JustinClift> Who's is that?
15:48:19 * hagarth again
15:48:24 <JustinClift> Go for it
15:48:45 <hagarth> I am considering adding NetBSD & OS X port maintainers for GlusterFS
15:49:03 <JustinClift> What's a "port maintainer" ?
15:49:19 <hagarth> port maintainers will work with our regular releases to ensure that the respective ports of GlusterFS also arrive on time
15:49:38 <JustinClift> Ahhh.  Interesting idea.
15:49:49 <hagarth> they will also manage/merge patches necessary to keep the ports in a stable state
15:49:56 <JustinClift> Manu would be the logical choice for the NetBSD one.
15:50:09 <hagarth> yes, Emmanuel Dreyfus is the obvious candidate for NetBSD.
15:50:20 <pk1> NetBSD should be manu? OSX should be harsha?
15:50:36 <hagarth> Harshavardhana and Dennis would be the obvious ones for OS X
15:50:52 <JustinClift> Yeah.  Dennis mentioned he probably won't be around as much for a while though
15:51:04 <JustinClift> eg he's relocating country to work at a start up
15:51:18 <JustinClift> So Harsha :)
15:51:27 <hagarth> JustinClift: right, however I think he deserves this recognition too for all the heavylifting that he did.
15:51:55 <hagarth> my preference would be too have them both for OS X.
15:52:13 <JustinClift> Recognition definitely well deserved for both of them
15:52:25 <hagarth> I will send out a note on gluster-devel on this if we do not have objections on this one.
15:52:25 <JustinClift> Ask them I guess :)
15:52:30 <JustinClift> Yeah
15:52:35 <hagarth> JustinClift: sure
15:52:51 <hagarth> OK, that's all around this one
15:53:00 <JustinClift> No worries.  It's a good idea. :)
15:53:14 <JustinClift> Moving on...
15:53:15 <JustinClift> "Engaging Community Developers for patch review?"
15:53:20 <JustinClift> That's mine
15:53:53 <hagarth> go ahead
15:54:27 <JustinClift> It's just an idea in the back of my head... do we have many people outside RH who are significant contributors in deeply knowledge gluster areas yet?
15:54:36 <JustinClift> (sorry, took time to type)
15:54:55 <JustinClift> eg Gluster development really needs a bunch of in depth experience in some areas
15:55:14 <pk1> JustinClift: To encourage may be we should gear up dev documentation first.
15:55:28 <JustinClift> So I'm just wondering if there's strategies we've used previously to attract those people
15:55:32 <JustinClift> So that we can repeat it :)
15:55:38 <JustinClift> pk1: Agreed
15:55:39 <pk1> JustinClift: One more thing we can do is what golang community does,
15:55:43 <Humble> also update "AUTHORS" file in source ..
15:55:55 <hagarth> JustinClift: we certainly do have folks like xavih, bharata rao & Mohan who are very knowledgeable wrt glusterfs
15:56:00 <JustinClift> Humble: We have a MAINTAINERS file that's equiv now don't we?
15:56:13 <pk1> JustinClift: Publish bugs that experienced developers can help new devs to fix.
15:56:26 <hagarth> pk1: nice idea!
15:56:39 <pk1> hagarth: Thats what golang does
15:56:45 <JustinClift> hagarth: Cool.  I'm wondering if we can copy whatever approach worked for them, and repeat it :)
15:56:47 <ndevos> we have the extras/who-wrote-glusterfs.sh (or something) script, maybe we should blog post about contributions on a release?
15:56:56 <hagarth> ndevos: absolutely!
15:57:00 <Humble> afaict, MAINTAINERS and AUTHORS are different .. Isnt it ?
15:57:15 <JustinClift> ndevos: That's a really good idea
15:57:34 <JustinClift> Humble: What should be in the AUTHORS file?
15:57:45 <JustinClift> You mean like a list of all contributors ever?
15:57:50 <Humble> yep ..
15:57:54 <hagarth> JustinClift: AUTHORS will be something like that.
15:58:02 <ndevos> JustinClift: yes, that is what AUTHORS in Wireshark does
15:58:05 <JustinClift> Yeah, don't see why not
15:58:15 <hagarth> pk1: how about each sub-maintainer publishing and curating their list of easy to solve bugs?
15:58:35 <pk1> hagarth: Yeah that is what I was wondering we should do
15:58:47 <JustinClift> Humble: Do you want to update the AUTHORS file?
15:58:53 <ndevos> pk1, hagarth: and backports! http://www.gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Backport_Guidelines
15:58:54 <Humble> I can do
15:58:54 <glusterbot> Title: Backport Guidelines - GlusterDocumentation (at www.gluster.org)
15:59:00 <pk1> hagarth: I did that with some of our colleagues at redhat and worked wonders
15:59:11 <JustinClift> Humble: If you can script it btw, then by all means so that (and add the script to contrib/ or something)
15:59:24 <hagarth> pk1: please publish that on gluster.org and send out a note on mailing lists
15:59:31 <JustinClift> #action Humble to update AUTHORS file
15:59:36 <hagarth> ndevos: awesome!
15:59:38 <JustinClift> hagarth: Make an action for it :)
16:00:10 <hagarth> #action sub-maintainers to publish and curate easy to solve bugs for more community involvement. pk1 to lead by example.
16:00:11 <hagarth> ;)
16:00:15 <JustinClift> :)
16:00:54 <pk1> hagarth: yes sir!
16:01:05 <JustinClift> ndevos: Does either of those above cover the "maybe we should blog post about contributions on a release" concept?
16:01:18 <ndevos> pk1: I didnt know there exist easy afr bugs?
16:01:21 <lalatenduM> I think we should publish names of developers for features when it is released
16:01:33 <pk1> ndevos: believe me there are!
16:01:44 <JustinClift> lalatenduM: As part of Release Notes or similar?
16:01:51 <pk1> ndevos: most of them are logging related. So shouldn't be a big deal
16:01:57 <hagarth> slight OT, should we add a page for developers and prominent community users on gluster.org?
16:01:58 <ndevos> JustinClift: not really, are you not familiar with the 'who wrote linux $version?' posts?
16:02:00 * kkeithley wonders....  if they're easy, why aren't they already fixed?
16:02:09 <lalatenduM> JustinClift, part of release notes
16:02:12 <JustinClift> ndevos: No, I'm not
16:02:24 <lalatenduM> Check Ceph's release notes for reference :)
16:02:45 <pk1> kkeithley: Priority :-(
16:02:49 <ndevos> JustinClift: http://lwn.net/Articles/507986/
16:02:50 <glusterbot> Title: Who wrote 3.5 [LWN.net] (at lwn.net)
16:02:52 <lalatenduM> pk1, it would be great help to guys like me :)
16:03:17 <hagarth> kkeithley: experienced developers' affinity for a bug is inversely proportional to the ease of its fix ;)
16:03:29 <lalatenduM> +1 for bugs for beginners
16:03:39 <JustinClift> #info we should include feature owner info (eg promo for each author) in our release notes.  Eg for 3.6.
16:04:27 <hagarth> JustinClift: I am keen on showcasing our users and developers on gluster.org, but we could take it offline.
16:04:27 <lalatenduM> JustinClift, it is another way to appreciate devs
16:04:29 <JustinClift> We have some "typos needing fixing" bugs that need doing.  Good for people learning git and gerrit first time I reckon
16:04:51 <JustinClift> lalatenduM: Yeah, I'm fully agreeing with anything along these lines :)
16:04:52 <raghug> hagarth: you hit the nail on the head :)
16:04:54 <pk1> JustinClift: Yes. Logging bugs can also go in there.
16:05:11 <kkeithley> I usually try to slip those "easy" things into bigger fixes when I can.
16:05:27 <JustinClift> #action hagarth to start discussion on showcasing Gluster users and developers
16:05:37 <hagarth> JustinClift: cool
16:05:51 <JustinClift> k, is there anything I've missed under this bit so far before we move on?
16:05:58 <ndevos> pk1: those bugs should get the EasyFix keyword in bugzilla, it makes it easier to find bugs that way
16:06:08 <pk1> ndevos: +1
16:06:15 * JustinClift didn't know that was a thing
16:06:17 <JustinClift> ;)
16:06:26 <pk1> JustinClift: I had a suggestion to make...
16:06:30 <ndevos> lalatenduM: ^ maybe a note for your bug triaging guidelines :)
16:06:53 <hagarth> pk1: go ahead before we pick up the last topic
16:06:55 <lalatenduM> ndevos, agree
16:07:02 <JustinClift> #action JustinClift We should consider a "Who Wrote GlusterFS" thing, similar to https://lwn.net/Articles/507986/
16:07:04 <glusterbot> Title: Who wrote 3.5 [LWN.net] (at lwn.net)
16:07:17 <pk1> JustinClift: We should run regressions without mempool
16:07:35 <pk1> it is masking memory corruptions is my feeling
16:07:55 <JustinClift> k, I don't know what a mempool is yet.  If you tell me how to run regressions without it, I'm happy to do so. :)
16:08:12 * JustinClift realises this could make him look stupid ;)
16:08:33 <JustinClift> Anyone object to us trying it?
16:08:47 <hagarth> pk1: how do you plan to do it - > have some magic flag that converts mempool to gf_calloc ?
16:08:55 <pk1> I can send a patch which will set mempool count to 1 in case of DEBUG builds. We need to run the builds with that flag for regressions
16:09:37 <hagarth> pk1: ok, sounds like a good idea
16:09:41 <pk1> mem_get will do calloc if the pool is full
16:09:59 <hagarth> pk1: once we have more slaves, we can run regressions with & without this flag
16:10:12 <JustinClift> Sounds like a plan :)
16:10:15 <pk1> hagarth: Yes. Future item then
16:10:29 <JustinClift> pk1: ETA for when you can send that patch?
16:10:40 <pk1> JustinClift: its a one liner.
16:10:44 <JustinClift> When?
16:10:51 <pk1> JustinClift: tomorrow
16:10:57 <pk1> India time
16:11:13 <lalatenduM> pk1, excellent idea
16:11:27 <JustinClift> #action pk1 to submit mempool disabling patch tomorrow
16:11:38 <JustinClift> pk1: All good. :)
16:11:45 <ndevos> pk1: does that not also require building the packages with --enable-debug or something like that?
16:11:46 <pk1> JustinClift: yes :-)
16:11:57 <hagarth> one more topic for today?
16:11:58 <lalatenduM> hagarth, I was thinking why we are not testing debugs builds , where code is full of gf_asserts :)
16:12:07 <pk1> ndevos: Yes. Thats the part where JustinClift comes :-)
16:12:20 <ndevos> pk1: I dont think JustinClift realized that bit ;)
16:12:26 <hagarth> lalatenduM: limited CI infrastructure is the primary reason
16:12:27 <JustinClift> @%@#@@$@#$!!!!
16:12:28 <JustinClift> Heh
16:12:43 <JustinClift> Nah, I'm cool.  Let me know what needs to be done, etc.
16:13:03 <pk1> JustinClift: I will send out a mail on gluster-devel about the commit.
16:13:10 <hagarth> need to drop pretty soon .. are we discussing "Gluster Forge project for bug-upsting and release-engineering scripts?"
16:13:15 <JustinClift> pk1: Will there be some way to verify that mempool is disabled in builds when we're running tests?
16:13:28 <JustinClift> pk1: Lets that that offline
16:13:29 <pk1> JustinClift: I will elaborate in the mail
16:13:30 <JustinClift> Moving on
16:13:44 <JustinClift> "Gluster Forge project for bug-upsting and release-engineering scripts?"
16:13:48 <ndevos> that last topic is mine
16:13:52 <JustinClift> Go for it :)
16:14:04 <ndevos> I've discussed it with lalatenduM before, but we did not really come to a conclusion
16:14:25 <JustinClift> Er... what's bug-upsting?
16:14:25 <hagarth> JustinClift: we definitely could host a forge repo if we do not have anything ready for these scripts
16:14:26 <ndevos> we have some small scripts to help with the bug checking and updating
16:14:51 <ndevos> JustinClift: bug-updating :)
16:14:55 <JustinClift> Ahhh
16:15:23 <ndevos> like the script I've used to close the 180 (or 280?) bugs last month
16:15:45 <hagarth> ndevos: sure, let us get them over to forge.
16:15:46 <JustinClift> Yeah, chuck it on Forge somewhere
16:16:00 <ndevos> does anyone knoe if there is a project on the forge or elsewhere that we should re-use?
16:16:18 <hagarth> JustinClift: you do have one project on forge for something similar right?
16:16:31 <hagarth> JustinClift: scripts from b.g.o?
16:16:52 <JustinClift> Hmmm... I'm not sure.  I have a few things on there but am only remembering the regression and /opt/qa ones
16:16:57 <JustinClift> It's possible
16:16:59 <ndevos> one project on the forge can have multiple git repositories, it might make sense to keep it all together
16:17:04 <lalatenduM> hagarth, thats for regression tests I guess, JustinClift
16:17:10 <hagarth> lalatenduM: right
16:17:15 <JustinClift> If not, lets create a new one.  Make the owner the glusterfs-infra group I guess
16:17:19 <hagarth> we can have one more then
16:17:24 <lalatenduM> JustinClift, +1
16:17:50 <ndevos> lalatenduM: a new project? like bug-zappers or something?
16:17:55 <JustinClift> #action ndevos to get the bug-updating and release-engineering scripts onto the forge
16:18:07 <lalatenduM> ndevos, yes, not sure abt the name
16:18:21 <ndevos> anyone has a better name?
16:18:25 <lalatenduM> ndevos, lets keep it generic, so that we can add other scripts later
16:18:28 <JustinClift> ndevos: Takea look through the forge later, and see what you can find.  Make a new one if not, etc.
16:18:38 <JustinClift> "bug-maintainance-tools" ?
16:19:13 * ndevos really doesnt care that much
16:19:36 <JustinClift> I'm sure you'll think of something.
16:19:41 <JustinClift> Just make sure the name is in English. ;)
16:19:51 <lalatenduM> JustinClift, +1 :)
16:19:53 <JustinClift> k. moving on...
16:20:04 <JustinClift> Anyone have anything else?
16:20:14 <lalatenduM> ndevos, will think abt it and will let u know if I find a good name
16:20:23 <ndevos> lalatenduM: please do :)
16:20:34 <JustinClift> ...
16:20:40 <JustinClift> #endmeeting