Meeting 2016 01 15

Call for meeting

https://pumpit.info/pumpio/note/Q4glZS0gQnO12Kgr7WnQMQ

2016/01/15 20:00 UTC

Agenda

• Pump.io code development
• Making tests pass
• Other pending PR/bugfix proposals
• New release(s)? Roadmap
• Communication
• Log the channel (http://botbot.me/)
• Monthly meetings
• Community governance and sustainability
• Funding
• Node adoption (sponsoring, administering)
• Governance (non-profit status/application)

Summary

• Pump.io code development
• Making tests pass -> the PR will be merged
• Other pending PR/bugfix proposals -> after the tests pass, other PR will be reviewed
• New release(s)? Roadmap -> Next meeting we'll talk about this
• Communication
• Log the channel (http://botbot.me/) -> approved. LArjona will try to handle that.
• Monthly meetings -> approved. Let's try to meet the third Friday, at 20:00 UTC
• Community governance and sustainability
• Funding -> Next meeting we'll talk about this
• Node adoption (sponsoring, administering) -> LArjona will provide a list of 'up and running nodes', plus a template "factsheet" about the nodes (hardware, software, number of users, particularities) to be filled in, @evanpro will prepare an agreement for the adopters to sign when transferring the domain.
• Governance (non-profit status/application) -> approved to apply to Software Freedom Conservancy. @evanpro will send the initial application email to start the process.

Next meeting

The next Pump.io Community Meeting will be, hopefully, on Friday 2016/02/19 at 20:00 UTC

Log

The meeting took place in IRC #pump.io channel in Freenode.

Here is the log.

[21:00] <larjona> #############################################################

[21:00] <larjona> BEGIN LOG

[21:00] <larjona> #############################################################

[21:00] <larjona> Dear all, welcome to this pump.io community meeting!

[21:00] <larjona> Info URL:

[21:00] <larjona> https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/wiki/Meeting-2016-01-16

[21:00] <larjona> If anybody wants their nick redacted just say here or direct message to me.

[21:01] <larjona> First, as always, roll call meanwhile people is coming. Who's here? Say hello!

[21:01] -*- larjona is here ;)

[21:01] <xmpp-pump> [strugee] I'll be here in about 5 minutes

[21:01] <xmpp-pump> *** ssweeny is here

[21:02] <paron_remote> hello!

[21:02] <paron_remote> I'm here

[21:03] <larjona> ok, I'll serve some soup in this cold winter day, for the people coming early :)

[21:03] <larjona> (

[21:03] <larjona> ) )

[21:03] <larjona> .(--"("""--..

[21:03] <larjona> /, ..-----)..,\

[21:03] <larjona> | '''-----''' |

[21:03] <larjona> \ /

[21:03] <larjona> '. .'

[21:03] <larjona> jgs '--.....--'

[21:03] <Sazius> hello

[21:05] --> evanpro_ has joined #pump.io

[21:05] <paron_remote> hey, it's evanpro_ :)

[21:05] <evanpro_> hi all

[21:06] <larjona> hi evanpro_ welcome! we just began, saying hello

[21:06] <evanpro_> paron_remote: heya

[21:06] <evanpro_> I gotta grab a power cord, 2 sec

[21:06] <strugee> ok, I'm actually here now

[21:06] <larjona> welcome strugee

[21:06] <strugee> evanpro_, larjona, paron_remote: hey!

[21:06] -*- strugee restarts pumabot

[21:07] -*- evanpro_ waves at strugee

[21:07] <-> evanpro_ es ahora conocido como evanpro

[21:07] <paron_remote> larjona: nice ascii art coincidence, I'm microwaving soup for lunch :)

[21:08] <larjona> :)

[21:08] <larjona> Nemno?

[21:08] --> pumabot has joined #pump.io

[21:08] <larjona> welcome pumabot

[21:08] <-- jvalleroy left (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)

[21:08] <larjona> pumabot strugee++

[21:08] <pumabot> pumabot strugee has 2 points

[21:09] <strugee> so apparently pumabot never crashes but sometimes just randomly disconnects from IRC and doesn't reconnect

[21:09] <strugee> that shouldn't happen but if it does just ping me and I'll restart it :)

[21:09] <pumabot> http://i.imgur.com/DgG3CJD.jpg

[21:09] <strugee> pumabot: thanks

[21:09] <pumabot> it’s nothing

[21:09] <larjona> ok, so agenda is here: https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/wiki/Meeting-2016-01-16

[21:10] <larjona> first topic is "Pump.io code development" but I suggest to begin with "Communication" until Nemno arrives

[21:10] <evanpro> Hmm

[21:10] <larjona> or maybe evanpro can suggest where to begin

[21:11] <evanpro> https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/wiki/Meeting-2016-01-15

[21:11] <evanpro> Sorry, I just was looking up the page

[21:11] <larjona> pardon

[21:11] <evanpro> Let's talk communication first

[21:11] <evanpro> So, what is that first part? What's botbot.me?

[21:11] <larjona> #TOPIC Communication

[21:11] <larjona> Log the channel (http://botbot.me/)

[21:11] <larjona> Monthly meetings

[21:11] <strugee> I'm fairly familiar with Nemno's work if they don't show up

[21:12] <larjona> botbot.me is a way to log channels, some freenode irc channels are subscribed, and publicly logged. People can look at the logs in the website

[21:12] <evanpro> That's great

[21:12] <evanpro> What would we need to do to get that started?

[21:13] <larjona> I think that any operator can subscribe to it, but I didn't want to do it without evanpro's consent

[21:13] <evanpro> I am definitely +1 on that

[21:13] <larjona> Ok so I'll deal with it; if I have problems, I'll come back to you by mail

[21:13] <evanpro> Maybe make sure we put it in the topic, like "This channel is logged at http://nameofserver/..."

[21:14] <evanpro> But otherwise this sounds great

[21:14] <larjona> yes, sure

[21:14] <strugee> larjona: it says they don't approve all channels

[21:14] <larjona> ok, we'll see

[21:14] <strugee> presumably they'll approve this one but if not we can also run it ourselves

[21:14] <evanpro> strugee: it also says that you can set it up yourself

[21:14] <evanpro> Right

[21:15] <larjona> Anyone against trying http://botbot.me first, and if problems, then try to selfhost?

[21:15] <evanpro> That sounds like the right way to go to me

[21:15] <larjona> fine

[21:15] <evanpro> +1

[21:15] <strugee> larjona: yeah that's what I was thinking

[21:16] <larjona> the other topic of communication is to agree in having monthly meetings from now on, instead of weekly meetings. Anyone against monthly meetings?

[21:16] <strugee> +1

[21:16] <Sazius> +1 on both issues

[21:16] <paron_remote> +1

[21:16] <paron_remote> to both

[21:16] <evanpro> I think that monthly makes more sense, yes

[21:16] <evanpro> +1

[21:16] <larjona> Ok, so I'll call for meeting again for mid-february

[21:16] <strugee> oh also btw pumabot's ++ functionality isn't just limited to nicks so you can do straw-polls and such

[21:16] <strugee> e.g.

[21:17] <strugee> monthly++

[21:17] <pumabot> monthly has 1 point

[21:17] <larjona> Next topic!

[21:17] <evanpro> Should we pick a day of the month to do it? ("Third Friday of every month")

[21:17] <evanpro> Not yet please!

[21:17] <larjona> (if I go very quickly, just say "larjona calm down" or "wait wait")

[21:17] <evanpro> wait wait!

[21:18] <larjona> I cannot promise I'm available every "third Friday of the month" but we can try

[21:18] <evanpro> OK

[21:18] <evanpro> I'm going to put this time in my calendar, repeating monthly on the third Friday

[21:19] <paron_remote> wait wait! don't scroll me! #vaguejokes

[21:19] <larjona> At this time? (20:00 UTC)

[21:19] <strugee> I only have a half-hour at this time, since it's lunch for me

[21:19] <larjona> mmm

[21:19] <larjona> strugee propose alternative time?

[21:19] <strugee> let's see

[21:20] <strugee> 23:00 UTC would work really well

[21:20] <strugee> if that works for people

[21:20] <larjona> Works for me. Sazius?

[21:20] <Sazius> that would be 1 AM for me, so no :-)

[21:21] <strugee> I can also get up early and make 15:00 UTC

[21:21] <strugee> if that doesn't work then this time is fine

[21:21] <Sazius> I'm still at work at that time :-)

[21:21] <larjona> I'm in the bus at 15:00 UTC

[21:22] <strugee> ok, let's stick with this time for now then

[21:22] <larjona> evanpro this time works for you?

[21:22] <paron_remote> so wait, third friday of month, at this time?

[21:22] <strugee> larjona: he said he was putting it on his calendar so presumably

[21:23] <strugee> paron_remote: yeah

[21:23] <larjona> the proposal is "Third Friday of the month, 20:00 UTC"

[21:23] <evanpro> This time works for me

[21:23] <larjona> ok, agreed, then

[21:23] <evanpro> +1

[21:23] <larjona> next topic?

[21:24] <evanpro> Next topic!

[21:24] <larjona> Which topic do we pick now? code development? or sustainability?

[21:24] <larjona> strugee you're in a hurry isn't it?

[21:24] <strugee> larjona: I have to go to class in ~10 minutes

[21:24] <larjona> #TOPIC Pump.io code development

[21:24] <larjona> Making tests pass

[21:24] <larjona> Other pending PR/bugfix proposals

[21:24] <larjona> New release(s)? Roadmap

[21:24] <strugee> so Nemno's fix-the-test PR is done from my standpoint

[21:25] <evanpro> That's awesome

[21:25] <evanpro> And I assume the tests pass?

[21:25] <strugee> I haven't merged it because it seems like he wanted to do a rebase before

[21:25] <evanpro> Oh

[21:25] <strugee> evanpro: Travis is green on the PR branch

[21:25] <evanpro> Niiiiiiiiice

[21:25] <larjona> https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/pull/1136

[21:25] <strugee> https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/pull/1136#issuecomment-171472359

[21:26] <strugee> there's some followup issues that will need to be filed but overall it's good

[21:26] <evanpro> That's great news

[21:26] <paron_remote> \o/

[21:27] <strugee> also we have a style definition checked into the tree

[21:27] <strugee> it's a bit lax atm but can be tightened further in the future :)

[21:27] <strugee> \o/

[21:27] -*- larjona in the phone

[21:27] <evanpro> That's great too

[21:27] <evanpro> So, he's going to rebase, and then it gets pulled?

[21:28] <evanpro> Great

[21:28] <strugee> yep

[21:28] <evanpro> Anything else for this topic?

[21:28] <strugee> after that gets merged I was going to start going through the old PRs and merging them if they pass tests

[21:29] <strugee> evanpro: yeah

[21:29] <strugee> I've got more

[21:29] <evanpro> Cool

[21:29] <evanpro> What's next?

[21:29] <evanpro> Be careful with the big i18n PR

[21:30] <strugee> so the version of Connect we're on has a version spec for qs that's too lax and it breaks on a generic install/upgrade atm

[21:30] <evanpro> OK

[21:30] <strugee> so as soon as we migrate away from the forks Nemno is maintaining we should do a release to fix that

[21:30] <strugee> it's non-trivial since we have to upgrade Connect to 2.x but it shouldn't be a huge deal

[21:31] <evanpro> Well, that's a good point

[21:31] <strugee> that's all I have

[21:31] <evanpro> I think Connect is what's keeping us below 0.10.x

[21:31] <evanpro> Getting that upgraded means we can look at more recent versions of NodeJS

[21:31] <strugee> evanpro: tests pass on 0.10 and 0.12

[21:31] <evanpro> \o/

[21:32] <strugee> Zombie's keeping us from Node 4.x

[21:32] <evanpro> So they should work on 4 and 5 then

[21:32] <evanpro> Ohhhhh

[21:32] <evanpro> Sad face

[21:32] <strugee> Zombie 4.x requires iojs or compatible, Zombie 2.x doesn't work on Node >0.12

[21:32] <Sazius> hopefully we can keep 0.10.x compatibility though, since that's what's on Debian stable :-)

[21:33] <evanpro> Right

[21:33] <strugee> according to Nemno the actual code works on 4.0 though

[21:33] <strugee> Sazius: yeah I spent an hour or so looking into what's in various distros and there are a bunch with 0.10

[21:33] --> angelo1 has joined #pump.io

[21:34] <evanpro> Node moves fast

[21:34] -*- strugee has togo

[21:34] <strugee> *to go

[21:34] <strugee> I'll read the logs later :)

[21:35] <evanpro> All right

[21:35] <evanpro> Let's talk roadmap at the next meeting

[21:35] -*- larjona still in the phone, sorry

[21:35] <evanpro> No problem

[21:35] <pumabot> stay positive evanpro

[21:35] <evanpro> Hmm

[21:35] <larjona> I'm here now

[21:35] <evanpro> I'm not sure what you mean, pumabot

[21:35] <larjona> I'll read the log later about the code-development point

[21:36] <larjona> So, where are we?

[21:36] <Sazius> are we ready for the next topic "Community governance and sustainability" ?

[21:36] <evanpro> Yes

[21:36] <paron_remote> yep

[21:37] -*- paron_remote not doing much this meeting other than saying "yes" and "yay" ;)

[21:37] <larjona> #TOPIC Community governance and sustainability

[21:37] <larjona> Funding

[21:37] <larjona> Node adoption (sponsoring, administering)

[21:37] <larjona> Governance (non-profit status/application)

[21:37] <evanpro> Can we change the order, and put funding last?

[21:37] <larjona> ok

[21:38] <evanpro> That way, we'll know what we need funding for, if anything

[21:38] <evanpro> So, node adoption

[21:38] <evanpro> I can speak to that

[21:38] <larjona> go

[21:38] <evanpro> I had a couple of people come forward to transfer sites to them

[21:39] <evanpro> I have two things I need to do to make that happen

[21:39] <evanpro> One is just having a list of sites that are up to be transferred

[21:39] <evanpro> And the other is having some kind of agreement in place that says what the responsibility is for running such a site

[21:40] <larjona> Some people expressed interest here: https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/wiki/Community#pumpmins-pump-node-admins

[21:40] <larjona> and we have http://pumpstatus.jpope.org/dashboard/checks to check if sites are up or down

[21:41] -*- larjona not sure if it was "Which sites are up" or "up to be transferred". If the second, not sure what does it mean-.

[21:41] <evanpro> I think that's "up and working"

[21:42] <xmpp-pump> *** ssweeny took it to mean "sites that are candidates to be transferred"

[21:42] <evanpro> This is great https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/wiki/Community#pumpmins-pump-node-admins

[21:43] <larjona> ok, I can make that list (or review the pumpmins list in the wiki).

[21:43] <evanpro> Most of the sites are relatively easy to administer

[21:43] <evanpro> Unfortunately, identi.ca is not

[21:43] <evanpro> So, I'm going to take it as a task to get together an agreement for transferring a site

[21:44] <larjona> great evanpro

[21:44] <evanpro> I think selling the domain name and data for US, given an agreement to a few restrictions

[21:45] <larjona> do you need somebody to help? maybe johnsu01 or bkuhn know or know somebody with experience in that kind of things?

[21:45] <evanpro> Like:

[21:45] <evanpro> I have a couple of templates

[21:45] <bkuhn> See my name getting mentioned, Sadly, I have no time to help on pump.io today, but do ping me next week if there's something specific I can do. As always, would love to see pump.io apply to Conservancy. ;)

[21:45] <pumabot> http://i.imgur.com/fbhidqE.jpg

[21:45] <evanpro> 1. If you want to stop running the site, you give me a chance to buy it back for the same price.

[21:46] <bkuhn> And no CLA please. will put that in there too. :)

[21:46] <evanpro> 2. Be nice to the users and don't exploit them.

[21:46] <evanpro> 3. Keep code up to date.

[21:47] <evanpro> I think I can put those in reasonable language.

[21:47] <larjona> Fine, we can review the advancements in this topic next meeting, or you can ping if you have it before

[21:48] <evanpro> Awesome

[21:48] <Sazius> sounds pretty reasonable

[21:48] <larjona> I'll mail you with the (reviewed) list of servers

[21:48] <larjona> (I'll mail evanpro)

[21:49] <larjona> any other thing about node adoption?

[21:49] <Sazius> I think any potential pumpmin would also be interested in some things

[21:49] <Sazius> e.g. what are the resources needed, and e.g. are there any "hairy" situations when you need more expertise than just restarting services :-)

[21:50] <Sazius> database breakage etc., any repair scripts to run or something like that?

[21:50] <evanpro> Right

[21:50] <evanpro> Cool beans

[21:51] <larjona> I can prepare a template to be filled in for each server, about the current conditions? Hardware, software, number of users, particularities to be taken into account. Then attach the "dossier" to the agreement? ("this is how it works now")

[21:51] <evanpro> Great idea!

[21:51] <larjona> ok, I'll do it

[21:51] <evanpro> So, let's talk about governance

[21:51] <Sazius> for example, I'm running my own instance, but I have no idea if I could run a bigger instance

[21:52] <Sazius> ok

[21:52] <larjona> #TOPIC Governance (non-profit status/application)

[21:52] <larjona> (or whatever)

[21:53] <evanpro> BRB

[21:54] <evanpro> I have to break at the top of the hour

[21:55] <evanpro> We've talked about joining SFC or something similar

[21:55] <evanpro> Which seems great

[21:55] <paron_remote> yes (and bkuhn just said again he'd be happy to have pump)

[21:56] <evanpro> I don't think I see a big reason to start something on our own

[21:56] <bkuhn> I can't speak for the whole Eval Committee... but Evan served on it in the past and he knows the folks there will probably be fans. :)

[21:56] <bkuhn> (agin, I have to stay idle is :)

[21:56] <evanpro> Heh

[21:57] <evanpro> OK everyone stop name-checking B****** K***

[21:57] <larjona> What needs to be done? Can we (the community: users, selfhosters, programmers) help?

[21:58] <evanpro> https://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/

[21:58] <evanpro> Seems simple

[21:58] -*- larjona reading

[21:59] <evanpro> I can send an email right now

[21:59] <evanpro> Should we look at other similar groups, like ASF?

[22:00] <Sazius> I would definitely vote for SFC

[22:00] <evanpro> http://incubator.apache.org/

[22:00] <larjona> Anybody against trying Conservancy first?

[22:01] <evanpro> No problem there

[22:01] <pumabot> stay positive evanpro

[22:01] <evanpro> !!!!

[22:01] <larjona> +1 for SFC

[22:01] <evanpro> Whose bot is this and why does it keep telling me to stay positive?

[22:01] <evanpro> pumabot, who are you?

[22:01] <larjona> pumabot evanpro++

[22:01] <pumabot> pumabot evanpro has 1 point

[22:01] <larjona> it's strugee's bot

[22:01] <evanpro> OK

[22:02] <larjona> very sensitive, it says to me to stay positive some times too

[22:02] <Sazius> I think it reacts to some keywords, like "problem" ?

[22:02] <larjona> yes

[22:02] <evanpro> Ah

[22:02] <evanpro> "No problem" is a pretty positive statement

[22:02] <Sazius> problem

[22:02] <Sazius> hmm, no reaction...

[22:02] <evanpro> No problem

[22:02] <pumabot> stay positive evanpro

[22:02] <evanpro> !!!!

[22:02] <Sazius> no problem

[22:02] <pumabot> stay positive Sazius

[22:03] <Sazius> ah, it wants the whole phrase :-)

[22:03] <evanpro> All right

[22:03] <larjona> it understands ironic style :)

[22:03] <Sazius> so, try SFC first, or ... ?

[22:03] <larjona> ok so please evanpro, send the first application, and we'll see what happens. If you need help for draft anything, I can try to help

[22:04] <paron_remote> Sazius: I don't think there's any urgency to co-apply to anything else

[22:04] <paron_remote> and it might make things confuisng

[22:04] <larjona> And Bradley said next week he maybe can help too

[22:04] <paron_remote> let's keep it simple and apply to SFC and see what happens

[22:04] <Sazius> paron_remote: I agree, just giving everyone a chance to chime in :-)

[22:05] <paron_remote> :)

[22:05] <Sazius> "The application process is somewhat informal. New applicants should write an initial inquiry email to <apply@sfconservancy.org> with a very brief description of their project and a URL to their project's website. We'll send back initial questions (if any), and after those questions are answered, we'll send the full application materials."

[22:05] <Sazius> from: https://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/

[22:06] <larjona> I asked "anybody against...?" and nobody replied. strugee and Nemno are not here, but I think we can take this as an agreement. In any case,this will not be "done" in one month, and we'll review the process next meeting. Ok?

[22:06] <Sazius> yeah, we can always step back after the initial email

[22:06] <Sazius> in case there is opposition

[22:06] <larjona> so, moving to "Funding"?

[22:07] <Sazius> OK for me

[22:09] <larjona> evanpro?

[22:10] <larjona> Maybe finish the meeting and talk about funding next meeting? (it's 10 minutes past the hour). I can go on for some minutes more, but I don't know the other people.

[22:10] <Sazius> he did mention having to leave soon

[22:12] <larjona> ok, so let's finish then, unless somebody have other topic...

[22:13] <larjona> Any other topic?

[22:13] <= División entre *.net y *.split. Los usuarios salieron: evanpro

[22:13] <larjona> oh

[22:14] <larjona> ok, some tea for everybody

[22:14] <larjona> or coffee, or hot milk, or whatever

[22:14] <larjona> )

[22:14] <larjona> (

[22:14] <larjona> ncf )

[22:14] <larjona> _.-(-.

[22:14] <larjona> (@`---'/.

[22:14] <larjona> (' ._.' )

[22:14] <larjona> `-..___..-'

[22:14] <larjona> and ending the meeting

[22:15] <larjona> #############################################################

[22:15] <larjona> END LOG

[22:15] <larjona> #############################################################