14:00:08 <randomuser`> #startmeeting Docs Project Meeting - Agenda: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs_Project_meetings
14:00:08 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Feb 18 14:00:08 2013 UTC.  The chair is randomuser`. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:08 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:18 <randomuser`> #meetingname Fedora Docs
14:00:18 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_docs'
14:00:26 <randomuser`> #topic roll call
14:00:59 <Akash> hi
14:01:06 * Sparks 
14:01:12 * jjmcd 
14:01:14 * randomuser` splashes coffee about revivingly
14:01:25 <Akash> i m facing some problem with fedora 18
14:01:31 * pkovar is here
14:01:35 * bcotton ducks the hot coffeee
14:01:41 * LoKoMurdoK 
14:02:05 <Capesteve> hello
14:05:35 <randomuser`> okay, thanks for coming everyone
14:05:46 <randomuser`> #topic Follow up on action items
14:05:58 <randomuser`> I don't think we had any action items from last week
14:06:25 <randomuser`> #info no left over action items
14:06:36 <Capesteve> clap clap clap
14:06:49 <randomuser`> #topic Docs Infrastructure
14:07:27 <randomuser`> I saw we are CC'd on a trac ticket about koji tags
14:07:59 <Sparks> That looked like an old comment.
14:08:06 <Sparks> I was going to investigate further.
14:10:25 <randomuser`> i'll just paste the conviently included link in the email from trac into the channel...
14:10:32 <randomuser`> #link https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5214
14:10:43 <randomuser`> #info Sparks to investigate further
14:11:15 <randomuser`> Sparks, once we have tags and such set up, do we have something in place to use our src.rpms?
14:12:08 <Sparks> Well, we'll just need new instructions for Publican
14:13:09 <randomuser`> /web.git/d
14:13:47 <randomuser`> but what replaces it - something is unpacking these RPMs, indexing them, etc correct?
14:14:07 <Sparks> Yes, Publican on the backend
14:14:09 <randomuser`> do we have a plan for that, and for our EOL guides?
14:14:37 * Sparks is assuming that rudi will take care of such things
14:15:15 <randomuser`> okay, fair enough
14:16:09 <randomuser`> it just occurred to me that we'd have to either 1) package up all the guides for dead releases, or 2) have a docs.fp.o/archive
14:16:13 <Sparks> he was the one who posted all the legacy documentation before
14:16:23 <pkovar> publishing all our EOL guides looks like a lot of extra work
14:16:24 <Sparks> probably #1
14:16:54 <randomuser`> pkovar, that's what i was thinking
14:17:31 <pkovar> not sure if anybody would be willing to do that...
14:18:05 <Sparks> pkovar: rudi did it last time
14:18:38 <randomuser`> hmm
14:18:47 <pkovar> hmm, ok. maybe it can be automated somehow....
14:19:34 * randomuser` notes that moving stale guides to a subfolder would cut search traffic to stale information
14:19:49 <randomuser`> but perhaps the actual implementation does not have room for such things
14:21:24 <randomuser`> anyway, a lot of pieces to fit together and not much for the group to actually do to make it happen, so
14:21:39 <randomuser`> #topic beat assignments
14:22:16 <randomuser`> I got some responses back on emails to beat writers, yay
14:23:31 <randomuser`> but, quite a few beats will be left without a writer
14:23:58 <randomuser`> the bacon chocolate cupcake recruiting incentive is still in effect
14:24:09 <jjmcd> That isn't unusual.  I typically had to write a lot of beats
14:24:26 <randomuser`> I suspected as much
14:24:44 <jjmcd> Problem with that is they don't get the attention they deserve
14:25:01 <randomuser`> that is my concern
14:25:50 <randomuser`> I plan on working up some scripts to churn out raw changelogs, etc, but that still takes a lot of time
14:26:09 <jjmcd> Did you look at docs/tools
14:26:23 <jjmcd> there is a prog, checkBeat, that looks at the repos
14:26:45 <jjmcd> A bit clumsy, could use a lot of work, but it does help a lot
14:27:24 <randomuser`> i got a couple one-liners to grab new packages last time around that are now in the release-notes.git/README
14:28:17 <randomuser`> #info more beat writers would be nice
14:28:32 <randomuser`> #topic Outstanding BZ tickets
14:28:52 <randomuser`> #link http://tinyurl.com/lbrq84
14:28:59 <randomuser`> we have some bugs
14:29:03 <jjmcd> Sorry I wasn't following 885071 more closely.  We are in a position to fix that properly
14:29:16 <jjmcd> All we need to do is decide it is time to push an update rpm
14:29:29 <randomuser`> jjmcd, anything we/I can do to help?
14:29:55 <jjmcd> Simply run d-p-r on the latest updates
14:30:07 <jjmcd> I don't even know where we are re:translations
14:30:19 <randomuser`> okay
14:30:38 <jjmcd> d-p-r 4 will put the RNs in the new place
14:30:50 <randomuser`> There are a few bugs that should be addressed, or not, then translated - push rpm after that?
14:30:55 * Sparks has something for this topic
14:31:08 <jjmcd> exactly
14:31:33 <randomuser`> Sparks, go ahead, please
14:31:42 <jjmcd> I've been looking for someone, anyone, to make a test run of d-p-r
14:32:09 <randomuser`> #info doc-publican-rpm needs testing!
14:32:29 <randomuser`> jjmcd, toss out the link again?
14:32:43 <Sparks> I think we should be reviewing and assigning any common docs tickets here to make sure they are being addressed.
14:32:56 <randomuser`> oh!
14:33:00 <Sparks> The tickets that are not filed against a guide.
14:33:01 <jjmcd> #link http://jjmcd.fedorapeople.org/Download/doc-publican-rpm/
14:33:16 <randomuser`> i agree, and you reminded me of correlating issue
14:34:21 <randomuser`> Sparks, can you give an example of such a bug and discussion?
14:36:34 <randomuser`> my thing was that ssh://git.fedorahosted.org/git/docs/owners.git is probably very stale
14:36:38 <Sparks> #link http://tinyurl.com/agh4mg6
14:36:48 <randomuser`> (default owners/qa assignments for docs bugs
14:37:04 <Sparks> Yeah, that should be gone through, too.
14:38:24 <randomuser`> I can tackle changing the owners file as long as we're all ok with my presumtiveness
14:38:49 <jjmcd> we can always beat up on you later
14:39:00 * Sparks thinks that the QA assignments should be the QA list
14:39:01 <randomuser`> all tickets to jjmcd by default!
14:39:09 <randomuser`> Sparks, +1
14:39:33 <pkovar> i think we should ask the current qa first
14:39:45 <randomuser`> I already moved the release-notes qa to that, and pinged karsten wade, incumbent contact, about his other assignments
14:40:06 <Sparks> pkovar: We really don't have a current qa
14:40:14 <randomuser`> as per his comments in many bugs, eg the one sparks linked
14:40:27 <Sparks> pkovar: There is one listed but I don't think I've ever seen the default stand up
14:40:44 <Sparks> pkovar: With the qa list then people can hop up and do it as they get time
14:42:00 <randomuser`> I think emailing the current contacts is a fair concession, and may spur their involvement, regardless of whether we change the default to docs-qa
14:42:54 <pkovar> i think that for some guides, like the sys admin guide, the assigned QA contact actually does the QA for the guide quite regularly
14:42:56 <randomuser`> assignments too; it doesn't make sense to me that IG bugs don't go to jack reed
14:43:24 <pkovar> that's why we should always ask first i guess
14:44:34 <randomuser`> proposal then: I will email everyone, and anyone that does not respond by next meeting will be bumped for a mailing list contact
14:45:00 * Sparks wonders if people actually know what they are supposed to be doing as a QA
14:45:31 <randomuser`> we have some qa guideline wiki pages, somewhere
14:46:41 <Sparks> yes
14:46:41 <pkovar> yep, i think we should have a look at them if we change the QA assignment policy
14:46:53 <randomuser`> pkovar, even where a qa contact is active, some qa activity might prove low hanging fruit for others
14:47:28 <randomuser`> #chair sparks
14:47:28 <zodbot> Current chairs: randomuser` sparks
14:47:29 <pkovar> makes sense
14:47:49 * randomuser` is afk for a moment
14:47:54 * bcotton prefers using the docs-qa mailing list as the default qa contact for all bugs, but that presents the "oh someone will take care of that" problem
14:49:14 <pkovar> i guess some guide maintainers will probably want to comment on our current QA workflow if / when we change the QA contacts for their guides
14:50:56 <randomuser`> it sounds like we have two distinct issues to address: list or individual as qa contact, and clarifying the qa process
14:51:37 <randomuser`> we might reach a wider audience on the list, anyone want to start a discussion there?
14:51:46 * Sparks thought we clarified the QA process months ago
14:51:59 <bcotton> we did
14:53:00 <pkovar> i know  that workflow didn't seem to work for some guides
14:53:11 <Sparks> pkovar: Which guides?
14:53:25 <pkovar> so some guides ended up using their own processes
14:53:43 <pkovar> IG, IQSG, SAG, and some others i think
14:53:44 <Sparks> It sounds more like people didn't want to do the work.
14:53:50 <pkovar> well, many
14:54:14 <Sparks> The process works.  If the people don't want to do the work then that's a different excuse.
14:54:32 <pkovar> i think they just had different opinions over how we should approach the docs QA
14:54:53 <randomuser`> pkovar, they didn't bring them up at the time, that I recall
14:55:09 <Sparks> Yes, they wanted to do half the work, not verify the changes, not verify the markup, and let it run out the door.
14:56:23 <pkovar> randomuser`: IIRC, we were discussing the workflow for a long time, and not everybody agreed
14:56:33 <pkovar> but the workflow was approved
14:56:44 <pkovar> but not followed by everybody
14:57:05 <randomuser`> perhaps the majority of that discussion was before my involvement, then
14:57:17 <pkovar> if there are people not following the process for a reason, maybe the process should be updated / changed / adjusted
14:57:42 <randomuser`> pkovar, do you yourself have concerns about the process, or is this a concern-by-proxy?
14:57:47 <Sparks> I really don't want to go down this road again only to end up at the same point.
14:58:08 <pkovar> or at least i expect some comments on the current workflow from them if we change the contacts
14:58:30 <Sparks> Because changing the contacts means they can't hide any longer?
14:58:52 <pkovar> randomuser`: i know i had some concerns, i would have to re-read the discussion though
14:59:35 <Sparks> pkovar: Don't re-read the discussion.  Read the procedure and post any concerns you have to the Docs list.
14:59:37 <pkovar> i think we should email the list to see what are maintainers' opinions on that
15:00:10 <randomuser`> If the apparent lack of activity on bugs, and guides in general, is due to resistance to imposed processes, I think we should certainly revisit those processes
15:00:25 <pkovar> if there are any suggestions re: workflow improvements etc.
15:00:36 <pkovar> that people want to share
15:01:30 <Sparks> randomuser`: And we're over our time.
15:01:35 <randomuser`> the list would probably be the best place for that; no reason to take the group's time to discuss potential, unstated concerns
15:01:40 * randomuser` nods
15:02:04 <randomuser`> #info anyone with concerns on docs process should mail the docs list about it
15:02:13 <randomuser`> #topic Free Play
15:02:20 <randomuser`> anything we haven't covered?
15:02:39 * quaid approves of himself being replaced in any way as QA or other contact for Bugzilla
15:03:08 <randomuser`> quaid, are you sure we can't talk you into something more involved? :)
15:04:26 <quaid> randomuser`: only if you don't want any work done :)
15:04:33 * quaid just being honest with himself
15:04:40 * randomuser` chuckles
15:05:08 <randomuser`> okay, it looks like time to wrap this up
15:05:12 <randomuser`> going once?
15:05:29 <nb> so what is the status of the building docs in koji thing?
15:05:51 <Sparks> nb: Still in progress
15:07:07 <randomuser`> going twice
15:07:16 <Capesteve> bye
15:08:03 <randomuser`> #endmeeting