1 17:00:28 <stoney> #startmeeting
   2 17:00:28 <tota11y> Meeting started Fri Sep 20 17:00:28 2013 CET.  The chair is stoney. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
   3 17:00:28 <tota11y> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
   4 17:00:45 <stoney> #link agenda here: http://titanpad.com/MouseTrapAgenda
   5 17:00:49 <stoney> #link http://titanpad.com/MouseTrapAgenda
   6 17:01:02 <stoney> #topic rollcall
   7 17:01:11 <stoney> speak and be recognized! :)
   8 17:01:14 <stoney> here
   9 17:01:15 <joanie> yo
  10 17:01:24 <LoganH> Here
  11 17:01:25 <heidi> :-) Here!
  12 17:01:34 <stoney> alrightiy
  13 17:01:41 <stoney> #topic Updates
  14 17:02:00 <stoney> So the big news is that upstreaming is done
  15 17:02:05 <stoney> wuhoo!!
  16 17:02:06 <LoganH> Yay
  17 17:02:08 <heidi> Yea!!!!!
  18 17:02:14 <stoney> thanks all, great work!
  19 17:02:25 <stoney> thanks joanie for helping us through that!
  20 17:02:29 <joanie> you bet
  21 17:02:30 <heidi> Thank you Joanie for walking us through the process
  22 17:02:31 <heidi> :-)
  23 17:03:01 <stoney> in case anyone wants to read about it... here is a shameless plug for my blog
  24 17:03:04 <stoney> #link http://stoney-jackson.blogspot.com/
  25 17:03:29 <heidi> :-)
  26 17:03:33 <stoney> Other updates?
  27 17:03:35 <stoney> anyone?
  28 17:03:52 <LoganH> None here
  29 17:03:57 <stoney> ok
  30 17:04:17 <stoney> #topic Clean up old repositories
  31 17:04:27 <stoney> So I plan to delete mine
  32 17:04:43 <heidi> stoney: Delete yours where exactly?
  33 17:04:44 <stoney> Then I'll fork amber's for archival purposes
  34 17:04:50 <stoney> on github
  35 17:04:59 <heidi> Ah, OK
  36 17:05:05 <stoney> no work was ever done on mine
  37 17:05:12 <stoney> so I don't think that should be a problem
  38 17:05:33 <stoney> then I plan to fork ambers for archival.. .thoughts on names?
  39 17:05:34 <heidi> Ah right
  40 17:05:58 <stoney> mousetrap_summer2013?
  41 17:06:10 <stoney> (this will live on GitHub too)
  42 17:06:43 <heidi> fine by me
  43 17:06:45 <stoney> no opinions? or are people thinking ? :)
  44 17:06:50 <stoney> ok
  45 17:06:50 <LoganH> works for me
  46 17:07:06 <stoney> #action stoney will fork amber's to mousetrap_summer2013
  47 17:07:19 <stoney> after that amber can delete hers
  48 17:07:34 <stoney> #action stoney will delete his original fork
  49 17:07:43 <stoney> no problems there?
  50 17:07:59 <heidi> I think we're good
  51 17:08:04 <LoganH> Good
  52 17:08:15 <stoney> #action after stoney fork's amber's, amber may delete hers
  53 17:08:22 <stoney> ok
  54 17:08:33 <stoney> #topic Transfer/integrate development effort to GNOME
  55 17:08:38 <heidi> We should let John know as well
  56 17:08:51 <stoney> which part?
  57 17:08:53 <stoney> all?
  58 17:09:04 <heidi> #info SE students have as homework to download, install and report back on gnome3-wip
  59 17:09:22 <stoney> cool
  60 17:09:29 <stoney> how will they report back?
  61 17:09:36 * stoney thinks he has a guess
  62 17:10:12 <heidi> #info  Results are to be logged on https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708303
  63 17:10:12 <tota11y> 04Bug 708303: critical, High, ---, mousetrap-maint, NEW, System core dumps upon start up, every time
  64 17:10:22 <heidi> Had to go get the linnk for the bug :-)
  65 17:10:26 <joanie> uhhhh
  66 17:10:30 <joanie> how many students?
  67 17:10:34 <heidi> Six
  68 17:10:37 <joanie> that is going to result in lots of bugzilla spam
  69 17:10:41 <heidi> Ah, OK.
  70 17:10:48 <heidi> ScottC: Are you here?
  71 17:10:51 <joanie> if they as a group can try it
  72 17:10:55 <heidi> Yes.
  73 17:10:58 <joanie> and one person can report back for the group
  74 17:11:01 <joanie> in a single comment
  75 17:11:06 <heidi> Ah, OK.
  76 17:11:07 <joanie> that would be more appropriate
  77 17:11:17 <heidi> Logan, this is where you come in as project manager.
  78 17:11:31 <LoganH> Can do :)
  79 17:11:40 <heidi> LoganH: Your team should focus on the installation and you should focus on collecting the information from both teams.
  80 17:12:14 <LoganH> Okay heidi, I will do that
  81 17:12:23 <heidi> #cation  The entire SE class will report to LoganH on installation success/failure and LoganH will post on Bugzilla
  82 17:12:32 <heidi> #action The entire SE class will report to LoganH on installation success/failure and LoganH will post on Bugzilla
  83 17:12:34 <heidi> Can't' type!!
  84 17:12:36 <heidi> :-)
  85 17:12:40 <LoganH> :)
  86 17:13:07 <stoney> are they trying to confirm the bug?
  87 17:13:13 <joanie> keeping the bugzilla comment strictly relevant to the bug
  88 17:14:09 <heidi> Yes, the goal is for them to confirm the bug
  89 17:14:26 <heidi> And to identify if there are any different error messages.
  90 17:14:47 <stoney> what information do they need to provide to confirm? joanie ?
  91 17:15:04 <joanie> if it segfaults or not would be helpful ;)
  92 17:15:17 <joanie> btw, on a machine without a camera, it doesn't
  93 17:15:19 <stoney> so just a "yes/no"
  94 17:15:27 <joanie> sure
  95 17:15:30 <stoney> lol
  96 17:15:38 <joanie> but a summary of those as a single comment
  97 17:15:41 <stoney> so... no camera => works fine
  98 17:15:43 <stoney> :)
  99 17:15:44 <heidi> I've asked them to produce a debug report as well.
 100 17:15:45 <joanie> and perhaps environment
 101 17:15:50 <heidi> If it seg faults
 102 17:15:58 <joanie> stoney: no, it tracebacks but doesn't call the offending code
 103 17:16:17 <stoney> IC
 104 17:17:27 <stoney> what should we, do we, do with the foss2serve wiki stuff related to mousetrap?
 105 17:17:32 <heidi> Right So the first task is to get it running :-)
 106 17:17:42 <stoney> absorb it, ignore it?
 107 17:17:43 <heidi> Then we can move on to the other bugs filed.
 108 17:17:48 <heidi> ?
 109 17:18:15 <stoney> there are wiki pages on foss2serve about mousetrap
 110 17:18:20 <joanie> the foss2serve stuff might be relevant still for class use and for pointing to say in presos?
 111 17:18:26 <stoney> should we continue to use them?
 112 17:18:33 <joanie> but future updates could point to the upstream resources
 113 17:19:01 <joanie> i.e. because the wiki serves educational purposes and grant-funder purposes, right?
 114 17:19:12 <joanie> the foss2serve wiki
 115 17:19:22 * stoney looks to heidi
 116 17:19:40 <heidi> My understanding is that we don't want to update the install instructions on the gnome wiki until we're ready for the gnome3-wip branch to be merged.
 117 17:20:01 <heidi> So we need the foss2serve instructions and hints for current students working on the project, or so I think?
 118 17:20:29 <heidi> As Joanie said, we need some educational space to help students along.
 119 17:20:43 <stoney> ok... so I've always struggle with this for other projects I work on...
 120 17:21:30 <stoney> joanie: where do you develop new documentation pages while develop on the code base proceeds ?
 121 17:21:40 <joanie> funny you say that
 122 17:21:42 <heidi> My understanding is that the instructions on the gnome wiki are for those who want to build and install the project from scratch.
 123 17:21:49 <joanie> I'm currently updating orca's way out of date documentation
 124 17:21:49 <heidi> Right, yes.
 125 17:21:54 <heidi> :-)
 126 17:22:05 <joanie> so in short: nowhere
 127 17:22:06 <stoney> so it's not done in lockstep?
 128 17:22:10 <stoney> ah
 129 17:22:13 <stoney> yummy
 130 17:22:14 <joanie> it should be
 131 17:22:20 <joanie> but, life... ya know?
 132 17:22:43 <joanie> but there's docs and there's docs
 133 17:22:47 <heidi> :-)
 134 17:22:52 <joanie> I'm talking about end user docs like Amber did
 135 17:22:56 <stoney> I get that it probably should be done later as the code fluctuates, but it seams that it should be subject to version control, issue tracking, etc.
 136 17:23:11 <stoney> oh... I'm talking about the wiki
 137 17:23:16 <heidi> So if I understand, its OK to keep some development documentation on foss2serve?
 138 17:23:21 <heidi> Hey john!
 139 17:23:25 <joanie> it's fine to heidi
 140 17:23:31 <heidi> OK, thanks.
 141 17:23:38 <john> hey heidi
 142 17:23:40 <joanie> stoney: and then you put it in the README, etc.
 143 17:23:49 <stoney> ok
 144 17:23:50 <heidi> Ah, got it!
 145 17:23:55 <stoney> cool
 146 17:24:11 <stoney> Moving on?
 147 17:24:31 <stoney> #topic bugzilla.gnome.org - Needs more attention from us
 148 17:24:41 <stoney> And what I mean by that...
 149 17:24:57 <stoney> I know I haven't been watching any bugs
 150 17:25:17 <stoney> Is there a way to watch all new and existing bugs for MouseTrap?
 151 17:25:29 <heidi> Right! I've been looking for that and couldn't find it.
 152 17:25:40 <stoney> meaning get emails whenever something happens?
 153 17:25:43 <joanie> lemme pull up the proper address
 154 17:25:46 <joanie> one sec
 155 17:25:50 <stoney> cool
 156 17:25:51 <heidi> I believe that you should be able to set yourself up to "watch a bug.
 157 17:26:09 <heidi> I just can't figure out how.
 158 17:26:10 <joanie> bugzilla.gnome.org
 159 17:26:14 <joanie> be sure you are logged in
 160 17:26:19 <joanie> the preferences link
 161 17:26:23 <joanie> then email preferences link
 162 17:26:46 <joanie> at the bottom of the resulting page there is an entry to "Add users to my watch list"
 163 17:26:50 <joanie> you want to add.....
 164 17:27:00 <joanie> mousetrap-maint@gnome.bugs
 165 17:27:15 <joanie> (yes, I know that's not a valid email address)
 166 17:27:17 <joanie> (just do it)
 167 17:27:34 <stoney> sweet!
 168 17:27:35 <LoganH> I just tried and it errors
 169 17:27:41 <LoganH> Bugzilla was unable to make any match at all for one or more of the names and/or email addresses you entered on the previous page.
 170 17:27:55 <stoney> worked for me
 171 17:28:00 <LoganH> new_watchedusers:
 172 17:28:02 <LoganH> mailto:mousetrap-maint@gnome.bugs did not match anything
 173 17:28:19 <LoganH> Nvm.. Firefox copied the mailto:
 174 17:28:25 <stoney> aha! :)
 175 17:28:31 <heidi> :-)
 176 17:28:36 * joanie rolls her eyes at LoganH
 177 17:28:37 <joanie> (kidding)
 178 17:28:46 <stoney> lol
 179 17:28:52 <LoganH> :)
 180 17:28:53 <stoney> thanks joanie
 181 17:29:00 <joanie> you bet
 182 17:29:13 <stoney> from there... I was reading through the bugs
 183 17:29:30 <stoney> I noticed that some sound awfully familiar
 184 17:29:32 <joanie> some might be dups
 185 17:29:33 <joanie> yeah
 186 17:29:36 <stoney> right...
 187 17:29:42 <joanie> for now, I would focus on the current stuff
 188 17:29:48 <heidi> Yes, OK
 189 17:29:50 <joanie> and then close out the others later
 190 17:29:54 <stoney> OK
 191 17:29:56 <stoney> good
 192 17:30:04 <joanie> be sure they are indeed dups
 193 17:30:12 <joanie> hey, on a related note....
 194 17:30:23 <joanie> stoney: don't tar up your patch
 195 17:30:24 <LoganH> #info To add yourself to follow bugs, log-in to bugzilla.gnome.org, click preferences>email preferences, and add "mousetrap-maint@gnome.bugs" to the "Add users to my watch list" box.
 196 17:30:26 <joanie> please and thank you
 197 17:30:43 <stoney> it was too big... what should I have done?
 198 17:30:54 <joanie> attach it as-is as a patch
 199 17:31:00 <stoney> it was too big
 200 17:31:02 <joanie> be sure you check the "patch" checkbox
 201 17:31:38 <stoney> hm... I thought I had done that... but it yelled at me for being too big... that I should split them up
 202 17:31:48 <joanie> then you should split them up :)
 203 17:32:10 <heidi> :-)
 204 17:32:13 <stoney> but it's like a measly three files... with newlines changed...
 205 17:32:18 <stoney> sure, I'll try
 206 17:32:24 <joanie> thank you
 207 17:32:36 <joanie> I think there may be other files that have them too, but not positive
 208 17:32:37 <stoney> at that point, it seams easier to comment in a command :)
 209 17:33:10 <stoney> I just blasted it with a "find . -type f -exec dos2unix "{}" \;"
 210 17:33:24 <stoney> those were the only three it found
 211 17:33:28 <joanie> hmmmm
 212 17:33:31 <stoney> at least on the new branch
 213 17:33:37 <stoney> not the old stuff
 214 17:33:47 <joanie> ok maybe that's it
 215 17:34:09 <stoney> should I do the same for master?
 216 17:34:13 <joanie> no
 217 17:34:21 <joanie> I'll look later
 218 17:34:28 <joanie> and if you missed stuff I'll comment
 219 17:34:36 <stoney> great thanks!
 220 17:34:55 <stoney> In the meantime, I'll try to split the patch too.. .just for practice :)
 221 17:35:05 <joanie> cool
 222 17:35:37 <stoney> I also noticed that someone had contributed a patch for fixing some of the opencv stuff...
 223 17:35:47 <stoney> I felt like an idiot for not seeing earlier
 224 17:36:01 <joanie> if it's still relevant, check it out
 225 17:36:28 <joanie> but don't feel like an idiot. getting up to speed on any upstream project is hard
 226 17:36:34 <joanie> more so when it was abandoned
 227 17:36:45 <stoney> cool
 228 17:37:23 <stoney> that could be a fun exercise... checkout the version the patch applies to... apply it... test it
 229 17:37:25 <heidi> And that patch is dated Jan 2012
 230 17:37:29 <heidi> So might be out of date.
 231 17:38:00 <stoney> right... but s/he was updating opencv to the newer version (not the python3 bindings)
 232 17:38:29 <stoney> anyway, it's worth a shot
 233 17:38:30 <joanie> if it is still relevant (not yet done in your branch), update it and apply it to your new branch
 234 17:38:39 <stoney> well..
 235 17:38:48 <stoney> I think some of it has been done...
 236 17:39:00 <joanie> was anything missed?
 237 17:39:02 <stoney> I'm wondering if s/he knows something we don't...
 238 17:39:05 <stoney> exactly.
 239 17:39:11 <joanie> my point is, see what the contributor contributed
 240 17:39:17 <stoney> right
 241 17:39:26 <joanie> if and how it applies (in the english sense of that word; not git)
 242 17:39:29 <joanie> and go from there
 243 17:39:30 <heidi> Yes.
 244 17:39:36 <joanie> I wouldn't bother with master
 245 17:39:55 <heidi> #action Stoney will investigate the opencv patch to see if and how it applies
 246 17:40:00 <stoney> I'll see what I can glean
 247 17:40:05 <stoney> right :)
 248 17:40:06 <heidi> :-)
 249 17:40:18 <heidi> Have I mentioned how much I like working with you stoney??
 250 17:40:27 <stoney> :)
 251 17:40:38 <stoney> Ok...
 252 17:40:50 <stoney> #topic Most Wanted List
 253 17:40:58 <stoney> So we have new bugs posted
 254 17:41:18 <stoney> check the dates, and aim for those (?)
 255 17:41:30 <heidi> Yes.
 256 17:41:48 <stoney> is this where your class comes in heidi ?
 257 17:41:54 <stoney> :)
 258 17:42:03 <heidi> The SE class is also in the process of creating a more formal set of requirements for the project.
 259 17:42:09 <heidi> So they'll be spending some time on that.
 260 17:42:27 <heidi> And we'll have some questions for the community about how things should work and priority of requirements.
 261 17:42:56 <heidi> We'll get a clean set of questions and then ask for input.
 262 17:43:05 <stoney> ok
 263 17:43:25 <stoney> Any thing else for today?
 264 17:43:45 <stoney> I've got my marching orders
 265 17:43:47 <stoney> others?
 266 17:43:57 <heidi> I say this as students may not be able to jump into bug fixing with all their time as they'll be doing requirements, etc.
 267 17:44:08 <stoney> right :)
 268 17:44:47 <stoney> OK, so same time next week?
 269 17:44:57 <heidi> Sounds good!
 270 17:45:01 <LoganH> I will gather info from the SE class and comment on that most recent bug
 271 17:45:05 <LoganH> Sounds good
 272 17:45:11 <stoney> OK
 273 17:45:19 <stoney> Thanks again everyone!
 274 17:45:25 <stoney> See you next week!
 275 17:45:29 <stoney> #endmeeting