19:00:00 <nitzmahone> #startmeeting Ansible Core Public IRC Meeting 19:00:00 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Dec 1 19:00:00 2020 UTC. 19:00:00 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 19:00:00 <zodbot> The chair is nitzmahone. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:00:00 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 19:00:00 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_core_public_irc_meeting' 19:00:03 <nitzmahone> bam 19:00:07 <nitzmahone> #chair jborean93 19:00:07 <zodbot> Current chairs: jborean93 nitzmahone 19:00:15 <briantist> 👋 19:00:21 <felixfontein> hi :) 19:00:25 <nitzmahone> #info agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/570 19:01:11 <Shrews> o/ 19:01:43 <nitzmahone> hey all! 19:02:22 <nitzmahone> #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72699 (argspec defaults for bool opts) 19:02:46 <felixfontein> I mainly put this on the agenda because I have no idea why the behavior was not like that before 19:03:33 <felixfontein> before default=None and default=False were essentially identified for the sanity checks, but not for argument spec processing 19:04:21 <nitzmahone> Yeah, at a glance that seems like a good catch- +1 from me 19:05:30 <felixfontein> the default change in the modules should not be visible, I checked that it has no effect for these modules, but I will extend the changelog fragment 19:06:21 <nitzmahone> Yeah, I think I'm good to merge that even as-is, not sure the CL needs an update if there's no visible change 19:07:17 <nitzmahone> Any other controversy on that one? Seems pretty straightforward 19:08:04 <nitzmahone> Assuming not 19:08:11 <Shrews> if you don't think the CL is necessary, merge away 19:08:12 <felixfontein> the main advantage of having a CL entry is that if it starts behaving differently (for whatever reason), it's easier to see what could have caused it. at least if you're only looking at the changelog, and not at the commit history for the module's file 19:08:41 <nitzmahone> Sure- if you want to clarify that, go for it and we'll get it merged 19:09:04 <nitzmahone> #topic BaseFileCacheModule warning (https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/570#issuecomment-732417395) 19:09:18 <felixfontein> I'm happy without it as well, I just wanted to expand on that point :) 19:09:22 <resmo> o/ 19:09:24 <nitzmahone> #agreed core team to merge validate-modules change in #72699 19:09:27 <felixfontein> (I can use git log ;) ) 19:10:08 <briantist> happy to answer any additional questions on the `BaseFileCacheModule` topic 19:10:21 <nitzmahone> briantist: the folks that know the most about the cache plugin stuff (and that wrote most of it) are both out today, so might be better to punt this one til they're around 19:10:32 <nitzmahone> (bcoca and shertel) 19:10:35 <briantist> 😠19:10:46 <briantist> sure that's ok 19:11:02 <nitzmahone> At a glance, I agree with you, but there might be a reason for the current behavior that I don't know about 19:11:17 <briantist> sure, makes sense, if anyone else has other questions or comments on it, I might be able to clarify for the next meeting 19:11:26 <felixfontein> I would guess the reason is that users are informed that the cache file could not be found, which usually should only happen on the first run (or when they manually delete it) 19:12:21 <felixfontein> though .v() instead of .warning() probably suffices for that 19:12:28 <nitzmahone> I think shertel's back for Friday's meeting 19:12:30 <briantist> yeah but it's not actionable; the file is about to be created. In automated runs where we alert on warnings, it ends up being a flaky thing 19:12:49 <briantist> yeah `.v()` would be better 19:13:18 <briantist> is the next meeting on Friday? I thought it was Thursday 19:13:21 <nitzmahone> Yeah, +1 on .v() also 19:13:39 <nitzmahone> It is, I can't read a calendar apparently 19:13:42 <felixfontein> so far it has been Thursday :) 19:13:50 <felixfontein> maybe nitzmahone is thinking of weekend already ;) 19:13:53 <nitzmahone> Either way, shertel should be back :D 19:14:06 <briantist> 😅ok sounds good, I'll attend the next one too 19:14:13 <nitzmahone> (many meetings on my calendar with "core" in them ;) ) 19:14:30 <nitzmahone> OK, that's it for the agenda, so 19:14:33 <nitzmahone> #topic open floor 19:15:32 <nitzmahone> will close in 2m if no new topics 19:16:08 <felixfontein> I have more PRs for review, if you want I can paste some ;) 19:16:09 <shertel> briantist: I am out today, but there's a PR about that https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/57646 19:16:15 <shertel> I'll take another look on Thursday 19:16:55 <nitzmahone> dangit, shoulda obfuscated s h e r t e l ;) 19:17:09 <felixfontein> :) 19:17:26 <shertel> heh :p 19:17:32 <briantist> heh, sorry about that, thanks for the link :) 19:17:54 <nitzmahone> felixfontein: I'm buried, but go for it if there's stuff you want feedback on 19:18:06 <felixfontein> nitzmahone: ok :) 19:18:06 <felixfontein> https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72697 19:18:16 <felixfontein> https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72625 19:18:45 <felixfontein> and then there's always https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/72248 ;) 19:19:13 <nitzmahone> that's the controversial one :D 19:19:30 <felixfontein> hehe true :) 19:19:50 <felixfontein> the other two should be less controversial 19:19:57 <nitzmahone> I might have some comments for a couple of the others, so thanks for sharing :D 19:20:19 <felixfontein> hehe thanks! 19:20:27 <nitzmahone> NP! Anything else for today? 19:20:27 <felixfontein> I have some more, but I think they mainly need attention from the other matt 19:20:51 <felixfontein> from my side, I think no 19:20:54 <nitzmahone> Heh, I wouldn't anticipate much feedback on those until the AZP cutover is done (starting today for ansible/ansible) 19:21:09 <felixfontein> nitzmahone: I know, that's why I didn't write out the nick ;) 19:21:49 <nitzmahone> OK, last call, going once 19:22:00 <nitzmahone> going twice 19:22:26 <nitzmahone> Thanks all- 'til next time! 19:22:30 <nitzmahone> #endmeeting