Meeting 2016 05 20

Call for meeting

Friday 2016/05/20 at 20:00 UTC

Agenda

Feel free to add to this before the meeting!

(Note from @strugee: also feel free to remove items covered in the last meeting)

• Pump.io code development
• Release of 0.3.1, and Roadmap
• connect-auth
• utml
• Release procedure (e.g. signing?)
• Community governance and sustainability
• Node adoption (sponsoring, administering)
• Adoption of non-node related websites (e.g. OpenFarmGame, ih8.it)
• Governance (non-profit status/application)
• Funding
• Other stuff

Summary

• 0.3.1 becomes 1.0.0 and it will be released in June
• After that, components/dependencies will be updated
• We'll try to finish the Conservancy application ASAP, because the process after sending is not short either.
• We'll try to finish the spreadsheet with data about E14N and node adoption 'contracts' in two weeks.
• Reports about OS/node combinations, and migrations tests (to git master) are welcome.

Log

[22:01] <larjona> #############################################################

[22:01] <larjona> BEGIN LOG

[22:01] <larjona> #############################################################

[22:01] <larjona> Dear all, welcome to this pump.io community meeting!

[22:01] <larjona> Info URL:

[22:01] <larjona> https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/wiki/Meeting-2016-05-20

[22:01] <larjona> If anybody wants their nick redacted just say here or direct message to me.

[22:01] <larjona> First, as always, roll call meanwhile people is coming. Who's here? Say hello!

[22:01] -*- larjona is here ;)

[22:01] <xmpp-pump> *** strugee is here

[22:02] <paroneayea> hi

[22:03] --> evanpro joined #pump.io

[22:03] <evanpro> Hey

[22:04] <larjona> hi! we just began and we are in the roll call

[22:04] <evanpro> OK

[22:04] <evanpro> I'm here!

[22:05] <larjona> Ok if somebody comes, say hello :)

[22:05] <larjona> let's go to the first topic

[22:05] <evanpro> OK

[22:05] <larjona> #TOPIC Pump.io code development

[22:06] <evanpro> Is strugee here?

[22:06] <larjona> yes

[22:06] <evanpro> Sorry, that's what happens when I come in late

[22:06] <larjona> here we have:

[22:06] <larjona> Release of 0.3.1, and Roadmap

[22:06] <larjona> connect-auth

[22:06] <larjona> utml

[22:06] <larjona> Release procedure (e.g. signing?)

[22:06] <strugee> \o/

[22:06] <larjona> strugee I think it's better you chair this topic

[22:06] <strugee> ooooooo! I have a bunch of stuff for this one

[22:06] <strugee> evanpro: heya!

[22:07] <strugee> sounds good

[22:07] <strugee> so

[22:07] <strugee> I've pushed a bunch of stuff to GitHub in the past couple weeks

[22:07] <evanpro> put me on the queue, I have a topic here

[22:07] <larjona> ok

[22:07] <strugee> notably I fixed up a bunch of small stuff, mostly having to do with tests, for 0.3.1

[22:08] <larjona> congratulations strugee, I've seen a lot of coments/merges/issues closed

[22:08] <strugee> also we're now on Connect 2.x instead of 1.x, and I started the work to move us to Express 3.x in a branch

[22:08] <strugee> evanpro: so I put utml on the agenda because I wanted to ask you how attached you are to it

[22:09] <strugee> I'm planning to try and just fix up the utml module to work with Express 3.x but should that not work out for whatever reason, would you be okay moving to a newer template language?

[22:09] <strugee> otherwise we'd have to maintain a fork of utml probably

[22:09] <evanpro> So, I have a couple of questions here

[22:10] <evanpro> First, does it work right now, as it is in the repo?

[22:10] <strugee> yeah

[22:10] <evanpro> Like, you can load pages and go around on the web and stuff

[22:10] <evanpro> So, I wonder if maybe we shouldn't release this as 1.0.0

[22:10] <strugee> I've been doing things in branches and only merging them once Travis passes

[22:10] <evanpro> Have that epoch process

[22:11] <strugee> epoch process?

[22:11] <evanpro> Well, hmm

[22:11] <evanpro> Maybe there's a better word

[22:11] <evanpro> Watershed? Boundary?

[22:11] <strugee> ah yeah I see what you mean

[22:11] <evanpro> What I want is for us to have some freedom to do bigger development

[22:12] <evanpro> Like replacing connect with Express 3.x (or 4.x?)

[22:12] <evanpro> Bootstrap 3.x or 4.x

[22:12] <evanpro> UTML switched out with something else

[22:12] <strugee> I was going to do 3.x -> 4.x after the 3.x work was merged to master

[22:12] <evanpro> Bigger architectural stuff

[22:12] <strugee> right

[22:13] <evanpro> Well, not that big, but bigger

[22:13] <strugee> if you want to do that stuff around 1.0.0 I think that'd be great

[22:13] <evanpro> Right

[22:13] <evanpro> I guess I wanted to say, let's call 0.3.1 1.0.0

[22:14] <strugee> although personally I'm mostly concerned with following semver and beyond that I don't particularly care the size of changes that go into each release

[22:14] <evanpro> That's the other thing is that under 0.x we're kind of not bound by semver

[22:14] <evanpro> And above 1.x we are

[22:14] <strugee> yeah I agree

[22:14] <strugee> technically speaking the spec states that each release under 0.x should be treated as breaking which isn't really correct

[22:15] <evanpro> Oh I didn't know that

[22:15] <evanpro> I thought it was just all bets were off

[22:15] <evanpro> Wild wild west

[22:15] <strugee> that might be it. kinda the same thing

[22:15] <strugee> anyway 0.3.1 becomes 1.0.0 sounds good to me

[22:15] <evanpro> Oh, good!

[22:15] <strugee> :)

[22:15] <evanpro> OK, that was my big item

[22:16] <larjona> I cannot give an opinion on that. If you two agree, let's do it unless somebody else shouts here :)

[22:16] <evanpro> So, we stabilize, call it 1.0.0, and then start working on modernizing components

[22:16] <strugee> sounds great!

[22:16] <evanpro> So say we all

[22:17] <evanpro> Should we talk about the other agenda items?

[22:17] <evanpro> I'm not attached to utml at all

[22:17] <strugee> ok, good to know

[22:17] <strugee> oh also

[22:17] <evanpro> I only used it because I didn't have a templating engine in mind but I was already using underscore

[22:17] <strugee> connect-auth

[22:17] <evanpro> Yeah

[22:17] <evanpro> passport?

[22:17] <strugee> is somewhat abandoned, and I emailed the maintainer about finding a new maintainer

[22:17] <strugee> and never heard back

[22:18] <strugee> we can move to Passport although in the short-term it may be easier to maintain a fork and just merge all the open PRs

[22:18] <evanpro> Ah

[22:18] <evanpro> Sure, I could see doing that

[22:18] <strugee> you'd be ok with that? I'll ask paroneayea or someone to fork it to the e14n org

[22:19] <evanpro> That sounds great, +1

[22:19] <evanpro> Although longer-term it'd probably be good to join the crowd with Passport

[22:19] <strugee> yeah agred

[22:19] <strugee> s/agred/agreed/

[22:19] <evanpro> The connect-auth stuff is pretty deeply embedded though

[22:19] <strugee> ok

[22:19] <evanpro> Jeez pump.io is a real time capsule in some ways

[22:19] <strugee> yeah that's why I thought maintaining a fork will be good in the short-term

[22:19] <strugee> :)

[22:20] <evanpro> So, release process

[22:20] <strugee> yes

[22:20] <evanpro> Oh, uh, I have a couple more questions

[22:21] <strugee> what is it? just write a changelog, tag and publish to npm?

[22:21] <strugee> I'm not sure if you're okay with someone else doing that

[22:21] <strugee> oh sure

[22:21] <evanpro> It would be nice if we set up travis ci to test for 1) NodeJS LTS version, 2) NodeJS stable version 3) Whatever version is currently in Debian

[22:21] <strugee> yes

[22:22] <strugee> speaking of which

[22:22] <evanpro> I don't know if we pass tests on any of those though

[22:22] <evanpro> Right now it's doing 0.10 and 0.12

[22:22] <strugee> since in the past we've discussed which versions we should support I made a chart:

[22:22] <strugee> https://nodecompat.com/

[22:22] <evanpro> Nice!

[22:22] <strugee> lists each distribution and what version of Node they ship

[22:23] <strugee> most distros are planning on shipping post-4.x versions in the next year or two, so we're okish for now but should move to new versions

[22:23] <evanpro> Oh wow

[22:23] <evanpro> That table is wild

[22:24] <strugee> I'm 90% sure we'll break on newer Node versions (including TLS) since our deps are so old, but I don't think there are any major issues besides that

[22:24] <evanpro> OK

[22:24] <strugee> I can turn on LTS on Travis when we get to some reasonable level of modernness :)

[22:24] <evanpro> Well, let's stick with the ones that work then for this release, and then work towards the present

[22:24] <strugee> sounds good

[22:25] <evanpro> So, for release process, yeah, I think changelog, tag, and npm publish

[22:25] <strugee> ok

[22:25] <evanpro> and update http://pump.io/

[22:25] <evanpro> Can you npm publish it?

[22:25] <strugee> that just means updating the README, doesn't it?

[22:26] <strugee> uhh

[22:26] <strugee> I'll check but I don't think so

[22:26] <strugee> yeah I think paroneayea gave me access to the GitHub repo but not npm

[22:26] <evanpro> I don't think updating the readme works since we have the try-it-now button

[22:26] <evanpro> I don't think he can

[22:26] <strugee> ah okay

[22:26] <strugee> yeah, I don't think so either

[22:27] <evanpro> npm owner seems to do it

[22:27] <evanpro> https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/owner

[22:27] <evanpro> What's your npm ID?

[22:27] <strugee> strugee

[22:28] <evanpro> OK, one sec

[22:28] -*- larjona renamed milestones: 0.3.1 -> 1.0.0, 0.3.2-> 1.1.0 and 0.4 -> 1.2

[22:28] <strugee> larjona: thanks!

[22:28] <evanpro> evan@elizabeth:~/Code/pump.io$ npm owner ls pump.io

[22:28] <evanpro> evanp <evan@e14n.com>

[22:28] <evanpro> strugee <alex@strugee.net>

[22:28] <strugee> 0.3.2 should be 1.0.1, though, and 1.2 should be 1.1

[22:28] <larjona> ok, fixing

[22:28] <strugee> evanpro: whooo! \o/

[22:29] <strugee> thanks!

[22:29] <evanpro> NP

[22:29] <evanpro> Glad that works, I trust you to pull the trigger

[22:29] <strugee> I'm honored :)

[22:29] <evanpro> Let me know and I'll broadcast as much as I can

[22:29] <strugee> ok, will do

[22:29] <strugee> we can send something out from pumpio@pumpit.info too

[22:29] <evanpro> Hooray

[22:30] <evanpro> Uh, I guess I'll need to upgrade all the E14N servers

[22:30] <evanpro> Hey, what's the deal with the Docker package? Is it for real?

[22:30] <strugee> I think Nemno knew at some point? not here today though

[22:30] <evanpro> OK

[22:31] <evanpro> I just checked the Dockerfile, it uses alpine-node which doesn't work so great with e.g. Docker Cloud

[22:31] <strugee> ah k

[22:31] <strugee> I searched "pump.io docker" and there seems to be several images too

[22:31] <evanpro> I'll see if I can adapt it

[22:31] <evanpro> Yeah, but we should probably have an "official" one

[22:31] <evanpro> like pumpio/pumpio or something

[22:32] <strugee> yeah

[22:32] <evanpro> Oh that kind of brings up another point

[22:32] <strugee> is there an issue on that? we can just maintain a Dockerfile in e14n/pump.io

[22:32] <evanpro> Either works

[22:33] -*- Sazius is here, reading backlog

[22:33] <larjona> welcome Sazius

[22:33] <strugee> Docker issue: https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/issues/789

[22:33] <evanpro> welcome Sazius!

[22:33] <strugee> evanpro: you were saying? another point?

[22:33] <strugee> Sazius: heya! \o/

[22:34] <evanpro> Oh, the other point was maybe moving the repo from e14n/pump.io to another organization

[22:34] <evanpro> Since e14n is a company

[22:34] <evanpro> But I think it's probably OK for now

[22:34] <evanpro> Maybe when we get the Conservancy thing straight, it'd be a good time to do it

[22:34] <strugee> ah ok

[22:34] <larjona> I think we shouldn't move things until we finish the Conservancy application

[22:34] <evanpro> Agreed

[22:35] <evanpro> OK, so have we exhausted this topic?

[22:35] <evanpro> I kind of have to get going

[22:35] <strugee> I think so

[22:35] <strugee> evanpro: ok

[22:35] <strugee> afaik that's it

[22:35] <larjona> wait

[22:35] <larjona> Estimated time of release?

[22:35] <strugee> just for fun before you go: I gave a talk on Pump.io at LinuxFest Northwest a couple weeks ago :)

[22:36] <strugee> larjona: a couple weeks I'd think

[22:36] <larjona> ok, just to know :)

[22:36] <evanpro> Wow!

[22:36] <evanpro> strugee: that's awesome

[22:36] <strugee> evanpro: yeah! it was a lot of fun, people seemed to really like it

[22:37] <evanpro> larjona: next agenda item?

[22:37] <strugee> it's at https://media.strugee.net/u/alex/m/linuxfest-northwest-2016-pump-io-the-community/ if you want to take a look

[22:37] <larjona> #TOPIC Community governance and sustainability

[22:37] <larjona> here we have:

[22:37] <strugee> although I know you're busy, so no worries

[22:37] <larjona> Node adoption (sponsoring, administering)

[22:37] <larjona> Adoption of non-node related websites (e.g. OpenFarmGame, ih8.it)

[22:37] <larjona> Governance (non-profit status/application)

[22:37] <larjona> Funding

[22:38] <larjona> I have to say that I didn't do my homework of last month

[22:38] <evanpro> Me either

[22:38] <evanpro> Can I talk about node adoption?

[22:38] <larjona> So the Conservancy application stays the same, unless somebody did something

[22:38] <evanpro> Two big things there

[22:38] <larjona> go

[22:38] <evanpro> One is that I haven't finished the spreadsheet

[22:38] <evanpro> The other is that I didn't do the announcement

[22:38] <evanpro> I'll do both next week

[22:38] <larjona> great

[22:38] <larjona> ah, there is another thing

[22:39] <evanpro> OpenShift?

[22:39] <larjona> yes

[22:39] <strugee> evanpro: lovely. will you ping someone when you do the announcement so we can rebroadcast from the community account?

[22:39] <evanpro> Yes

[22:39] <evanpro> OK, so, let's talk about OpenShift

[22:39] <evanpro> That could be a life-saver

[22:39] <larjona> Gerard Ryan got a grant to use Openshift (100$ credit for 6 months), and he's available to use it or delegate to somebody

[22:40] <strugee> re: OpenShift, seems like we should just offer that up to people who want to maintain e14n nodes, right?

[22:40] <evanpro> That'd be nice

[22:40] <strugee> I'm not sure what the process there would be but

[22:40] <larjona> to get the credit somebody has to fulfill some burocracy and enter a credit card. He said he can do it if we don't mind

[22:41] <evanpro> I can try it, too

[22:41] <evanpro> Especially if it's working with Docker

[22:41] <larjona> I think current Openshift works with openshift 2.0 without docker but in the future they will migrate to openshift 3.0 with docker.

[22:41] <larjona> (Gerard said)

[22:41] <evanpro> OK, unfortunately I have to run

[22:42] <larjona> evanpro: So you talk with Gerard?

[22:42] <evanpro> Thanks larjona and I'll ping everyone as I make announcements

[22:42] <evanpro> larjona: yes, I'll do that

[22:42] <strugee> evanpro: thanks for being here! this was really helpful

[22:42] <larjona> ok fine, thanks!

[22:42] <-- evanpro left #pump.io

[22:42] <larjona> thanks evanpro happy weekend

[22:42] <larjona> well, he left

[22:42] <strugee> maybe he'll see it in the logs

[22:43] <strugee> we're still on community governance right?

[22:43] <larjona> yes

[22:43] <strugee> ok

[22:43] <larjona> I'll try to put some time this month and finish the Conservancy application, but help is deeply appreciated

[22:43] <strugee> so just as an fyi I talked with bkuhn at LinuxFest Northwest and he says that Conservancy will probably take several months to get to our application

[22:43] <strugee> I can put in some time on that this month too

[22:44] <larjona> Yes strugee we knew that it would take long. I just hope our part will not take long anymore :)

[22:44] <strugee> yeah :)

[22:46] <larjona> ok, anything else?

[22:46] <Sazius> I'd love to help with the application, but I'm afraid my free time is basically zero at the moment :-(

[22:46] <strugee> larjona: not AFAIK

[22:46] <larjona> then we can finish

[22:47] <strugee> ok

[22:47] <strugee> finish this topic or finish the meeting?

[22:47] <larjona> with an ice cream for our bug squasher of the month

[22:48] <larjona> Finish the meeting, unless there is another topic

[22:48] <larjona> (the next topic was "other stuff")

[22:48] <larjona> so?

[22:48] <larjona> anything else?

[22:48] <larjona> strugee: this for you

[22:48] <larjona> . ,

[22:48] <larjona> * ,

[22:48] <larjona> ` .|, '

[22:48] <larjona> ' ,~~~ ` _

[22:48] <larjona> ,* / `* ' //

[22:48] <larjona> ,* ; ,O. //

[22:48] <larjona> ,(:::)=//

[22:48] <larjona> ( `~(###)

[22:48] <larjona> %---'`"y

[22:48] <larjona> \ /

[22:48] <larjona> \ /

[22:48] <larjona> )( hjw

[22:48] <larjona> '------`

[22:49] <strugee> hey thanks :)

[22:49] <strugee> I can't really think of anything else!

[22:49] <strugee> although I would like to say while we're still logging

[22:50] <strugee> that if anyone runs pump.io on a distribution that is not listed on https://nodecompat.com, please ping me

[22:50] <pumabot> http://i.imgur.com/ncvO5Nl.jpg

[22:50] <larjona> ok!!

[22:50] <larjona> so thanks everybody for attending or reading the logs later

[22:50] <larjona> #############################################################

[22:50] <larjona> END LOG

[22:50] <larjona> #############################################################

Next meeting

Next meeting will take place on 2016/06/17 at 20:00 UTC The next Pump.io Community Meeting will be, hopefully, on Friday 2016/06/17 at 20:00 UTC