Time/Place
This meeting is a hybrid teleconference and IRC chat. Anyone is welcome to join...here's the info:
- Time: 11:00am Eastern Standard Time US (UTC-5)
- U.S.A/Canada toll free: 866-740-1260, participant code: 2257295
- International toll free: http://www.readytalk.com/intl
- Use the above link and input 2257295 and the country you are calling from to get your country's toll-free dial-in number
- Once on the call, enter participant code 2257295
- IRC:
- Join the #duraspace-ff chat room via Freenode Web IRC (enter a unique nick)
- Or point your IRC client to #duraspace-ff on irc.freenode.net
Attendees
- Andrew Woods
- Nick Ruest
- Unknown User (acoburn)
- David Wilcox
- Andy Wagner
- Kevin S. Clarke
- Michael Durbin
- Osman Din
- Stefano Cossu
Agenda
- Committer team and processes
- Useful queries: Affects 4.x Unresolved, and Scheduled 4.0.1 Unresolved
- JIRA clean-up
- OR2015 Proposals
- Recent mailing list threads
- Islandora/F4 update
- Transform
Minutes
- Committer team and processes
- Andrew: Fedora 3 committers group isn't relevant to Fedora 4, so we should transition to Fedora 4-based committers group. Good to review the processes and re-evaluate.
- Esme: Do we need a separate PMC group? Or is the committers group we're talking about be the PMC group?
- Aaron: In Apache groups with large numbers of committers, the PMC group is the key people responsible for releases. Given the size of the Fedora 4 project, probably not necessary.
- Andrew: Introducing a new group may be confusing. Maybe we should look at role of PMC responsibilities and make sure we incorporate those into the committers group.
- We should setup a wiki page that defines the committer responsibilities:
- Reviewing and merging pull requests
- Reviewing received JIRA tickets and promoting appropriate tickets to open status
- Kevin: Islandora committers do this as a group - would we do that in the weekly committers call, or individually?
- Andrew: Many tickets are uncontroversial and can be opened by committers individually, but we could review and discuss them and any controversial tickets in the weekly call
- Rotating release manager, with at least two committers to review each others work and get more people familiar with the release process.
- We should get a 4.0.1 soon – volunteers?
- Esme: I'll help with that.
- We should get a 4.0.1 soon – volunteers?
- We should setup a wiki page that defines the committer responsibilities:
- JIRA clean-up
- Andrew: We've recently moved from Pivotal to JIRA. If there are any Pivotal tickets you think should be migrated, please go ahead and create them in JIRA now.
- Using the existing Fedora JIRA spaces, so there are quite a few legacy tickets. Many of them are valid, but they probably will not be worked. Should we keep them? Move them out of the way?
- Mike: Should we decide how to deprecate tickets so people know we shouldn't work them?
- Nick: In Islandora closes them with WONTFIX status.
- Kevin: Maybe we should give them a label.
- Andrew: They should have a 3.x-trunk version, so that should be enough to identify these tickets for future review.
- Esme: Since there are a bunch of tickets, maybe we should just announce to the mailing list that we'll bulk close them all.
- Andrew: We should be clear not to make people think the team is going to work 3.x tickets. Does it make sense for someone else to send out the email?
- Nick: It doesn't have to be Andrew.
- Andrew: Two recent JIRA tickets should be addressed in the short term, hopefully before the release (esp. 1272):
- Esme: We've seen this at UCSD and may have time to work on it in the next couple of weeks.
- Esme: maybe we should just use a System property instead of the ObservationManager?
- Andrew: We've recently moved from Pivotal to JIRA. If there are any Pivotal tickets you think should be migrated, please go ahead and create them in JIRA now.
- OR2015 Proposals
- Andrew: Is anybody putting together a proposal, or think there should be one?
- Mike: UVa will make a proposal based on local implementation.
- Nick: Might put in a Fedora 4/Islandora implementation proposal. But might not since we will have just started.
- David: You should put in a proposal.
- Andrew: Considering LDP proposal, and Tech Working Group assessments and outcomes.
- Stefano: Could be good to have a Fedora 4 use cases panel, similar to CNI panel.
- Mike: That could be a good fit for UVa, and help report more timely work.
- Islandora/F4 update
- Nick: Officially start on Jan 19th, with Danny Lamb from DGI and Nick from York.
- Looking forward to working with Camel.
- Will check in with Andrew bi-weekly to keep him in the loop.
- Fedora 4 interest group will reposition itself to be the home of the implementation project. Goal is to have a generic use case for Fedora 3 to 4 migration.