19:01:16 #startmeeting 19:01:16 Let the Jenkins meeting commence! 19:01:20 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Governance+Meeting+Agenda 19:01:34 I see that CERT team meeting is running over 19:01:54 #topic recap of actions 19:02:09 #info I got stickers all ready 19:02:43 and we just had finished the security roll out more or less 19:03:10 kohsuke Kostya asked for some specifics about printing details on the events list so he can print some himself. 19:03:25 those should go on a wiki page if possible 19:03:31 info spof and all that jazz :) 19:03:46 Okay, it's not like we care or dictate those things 19:04:02 it's useful to have guidelines though, in case community members want to make their own 19:04:29 I can point to how I do things in Stickermule 19:04:38 should be good enough 19:04:59 #action kk to link the stickermule parameters/coordinates for stickers 19:05:08 anything else before we move on? 19:05:13 Btw, not sure it's the right time to ask: but organizing an event in the next few weeks, should I prefer print them by myself? 19:05:26 or ask for someone to send to us? (JAM and another event) 19:05:46 from a practical standpoint it kind of depends on how fast we might be able to send them to your location 19:05:53 if there's time we should be able to send them, right? Within the boundaries of CIA anda ll, right? 19:06:19 maybe a conversation to be taken in the events list 19:06:29 Ok, already asked on the events list, just wanted to check. Thanks 19:06:37 * rtyler nods 19:06:43 #topic Review proposed www site change from Drupal to static site generation (current repo and generated version of site) 19:07:01 #info http://jenkins.lasagna.io/ 19:07:10 Is there a design doc for the change? 19:07:12 #info the source is here: https://github.com/rtyler/jenkins.io 19:07:33 ah thanks 19:07:44 So at this point, it's mainly just a change in how the site is generated, not in content or design, yes? 19:07:49 correct 19:08:00 the only thing missing is the changelog and download links in the sidebar, which I simply haven't added yet 19:08:00 Then so long as it works, I see no issue. 19:08:09 that's already statically generated content on the primary www machine 19:08:11 Well, there is this link at the bottom "improve this page" to Github :-) 19:08:13 so the sites both look different atm 19:08:22 teilo: there's some slight differences 19:08:22 Would be great to see drafts of a plugin page and of an abstract blogpost 19:08:31 are we trying to switch the production traffic? 19:08:31 missing the jenkins 2.0 is a pretty biggy! 19:08:37 heh 19:08:44 teilo: that banner goes away at the end of this week anyways 19:08:46 anyway 19:09:08 the reason I wanted to bring this up isn't to discuss huge website changes per se, so much as a change in the structure here to move jenkins-ci.org over to this 19:09:25 +1000 19:09:28 this doesn't contain any substantial changes from the existing site, but wijll give us tremendous flexibility to make changes in the coming months 19:09:28 And, fwiw, the benefits are? 19:09:33 since it's all on githubv 19:09:46 which means the authorship isn't limited to who has drupal access 19:09:55 Pros: easy contribution, better change tracking 19:09:58 to be clear, there is *no pipeline* for making theme changes with drupal 19:09:59 I think URLs like http://jenkins.lasagna.io/content/mailing-lists redirecting to http://jenkins.lasagna.io/blog/2010/05/31/mailing-lists/ is problematic 19:10:04 Cons: All kinds of performance issues 19:10:14 it only makes the eventual redirection in 2.0 switch harder. 19:11:03 Really? Performance issues? I'd've thought that Drupal -> static would be pretty much guaranteed better performance... 19:11:32 Yes, I don't see how performance can degrade here 19:11:52 abayer kohsuke +/-. Drupal has caching of raw HTMLs 19:11:55 kohsuke: I think you're overemphasizing the impact of URL redirection 19:12:05 oleg-nenashev: well, it's static vs. cache 19:12:12 it seriously doesn't matter in any objective metric other than "oh the URL doesn't look nice" 19:12:19 hard time seeing why it would have less perfs 19:12:19 SEO doesn't change, accessibility doesn't change 19:12:46 Will we need to have redirects from the Drupal URL and the new static URL in the 2.0 situation? 19:12:52 http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html 19:12:52 we should 19:12:59 In any case static sites can be easily scaled 19:14:16 none of the existing site content has been deleted or changed, it's all still accessible 19:14:33 what about cache timeouts for when the site is updated? 19:14:51 those definitely go away with a static site :P 19:15:00 I'm just saying when 2.0 moves the content around we need redirects from both the Drupal URLs like /content/mailing-lists and this temporary URL like /blog/2010/05/31/mailing-lists/ 19:15:05 * rtyler sighs 19:15:14 dude, this isn't about 2.0 19:15:18 you're muddying the discussion 19:15:28 that's why I wanted to talk about this now 19:15:36 Let's not think of what kk's referring to as "2.0" as much as "future-proofing URL stuffs". 19:15:38 I'm not saying I want to go re-org the whole bloody site 19:16:08 I'm saying, I am sick and tired of drupal, it's limit to contribution and I have a static site port ready to drop in 19:16:17 So long as there's a consistent logic to the URLs, then any time we do a redesign/reorg/relayout/whatever of the URLs, it's easy enough to just keep the chain going. 19:16:21 building that jenkins <3 docker landing page was a tedious pain in the ass 19:16:42 And it's not like we have a redonkulous amount of content to do redirects for in the first place. 19:17:09 abayer: yeah, that's what I'm trying to say 19:17:35 I still don't understand your fear of redirects 19:17:39 that's literally why they exist 19:18:08 but again, not the point of the topic 19:18:21 I think it's reasonable to carry generations of redirects around. 19:18:29 The alternative is never changing your URL layout, which is a bit odd. 19:18:57 see also http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/251/010/5d5.jpg 19:19:06 Maybe I lack appreciation on how hard it is control URLs for pages 19:19:18 I thought it's pretty easy to have blog/2010/05/31/mailing-lists/ appear as /content/mailing-lists 19:19:37 or *gasp* /mailing-lists 19:19:49 and so I'm like, why don't we just do that so we save the trouble of creating two URLs 19:19:54 then /content/mailing-lists would still need to be a redirect to blog/2010/05/31/mailing-lists/ 19:19:58 dude 19:20:07 those URLs have to be preserved 19:20:13 they're linked and archived in various forms throughout the internet 19:20:17 Which ones? 19:20:23 *all* of them 19:20:36 well redirect those with a moved permentant.... 19:20:37 rtyler To clarify, the canonical URL of every future page will be /blog/yyyy/mm/dd/${title} rather than something sane? 19:20:38 Ok, so we're not talking about new URLs here, just the same ones and existing redirects. 19:20:42 2010/05/31/mailing-lists a URL alias in drupal for /content/mailing-list 19:20:45 I'm confused. http://jenkins-ci.org/blog/2010/05/31/mailing-lists/ doesn't exist today 19:20:45 danielbeck: no 19:20:49 but the main pages in the site should never redirect 19:20:57 I could have a bookmark of a blog entry on jenkins-ci.org. When the current site gets replaced with this new structure, my bookmark should be redirected to the same post on the new site. 19:21:03 thats a sucky browsing experience on high latency lines 19:21:25 Right? 19:21:40 rtyler So maybe the question is why are non-story pages imported using /blog/ URLs, and is there an alternative to use the real URLs from the start? 19:21:44 kohsuke: that is correct, but /content/mailing-lists and /node/123 whatever does, those are what's being preserved 19:21:57 gagh this is so frustrating 19:22:19 we should just have a nice 404 page 19:22:20 FWIW I'm totally +1 for switching, even with these URLs 19:22:24 and be done with it 19:22:36 so I understand the desire to have good URLs 19:22:48 if rtyler and danielbeck are on the same page I don't want to a blocker 19:22:55 there's an implementation detail on how non-story type pages are being imported right now 19:23:20 I'm loathe to spend time adjusting the importer script at the outset because I have to run the importer script *every day* right now 19:23:24 to make sure i'm keeping sync 19:23:29 My brain melted a little, so I'm just staying out of this. =) 19:23:31 I'm tired of running two forks of the same content 19:23:48 all I'm trying to do right now, is get to the point to where I don't have to fork *content* 19:23:51 If it works and is maintainable, I'm indifferent. 19:23:57 or mirror redundant content rather 19:24:12 well until the changelog and download links are correct its a blocker for me. 19:24:14 #action rtyler needs to ensure "non-story" content doesn't end up in the /blog/ namespace 19:24:28 teilo: agreed, that's part of the switchover, those files are dumped on the www host right now 19:24:33 so I can't really pull them in :/ 19:24:54 #action rtyler needs to make site generate on cucumber so changelog content is incorporated 19:24:56 rtyler: ok. so does this mean that the packaging scripts need to be updated? 19:25:03 I'm +1 for static hosting on GitHub, don't care about the technology beneath if it works reliably 19:25:22 teilo: jenkins.lasagna.io is just github pages, which is why I've not done this yet, don't want to give jenkins infra deploy keys to any of my personal erpos if I can avoid it :P 19:25:37 teilo: no, those changelog files are just generated as HTML chunks 19:25:49 so here's what I'm understanding 19:25:56 telio: no, it's the site generation process that needs updating 19:25:57 1. most people are either positive or indifferent to moving 19:26:11 2. there's some more work that needs to be done to make sure everybody is happy 19:26:33 3. so long as that work gets done, there are no objections to this work moving fowrard, provided the site is available, blah blah blah 19:26:45 is this an accurate summation? 19:26:46 We are not using GitHub pages, right? It'll be still hosted on cucumber. 19:27:12 Yes, I hink it's a good summary 19:27:19 kohsuke: I'd rather sweep that implementation detail under the carpet, haven't really done much work on that 19:27:25 there are benefits to hosting fully on GH pages 19:27:40 right now content must be generated on cucumber, it needn't be hosted there necessarily though 19:28:08 #info there is a WEBSITE project in issues.jenkins-ci.org which has more tickets and where you should go if you're interested in helping drive this forward 19:28:53 kohsuke: I think as we draw up more of a "new website plan" we'll have to cross the bridge of migrating content, or archiving content from the existing site 19:28:57 that's a discussion for another day though IMO 19:29:01 one I'm not ready to speak to 19:29:25 You should also take a look at apache config file for jenkins-ci.org that has various extra redirects defined 19:29:42 ahh, good point 19:29:42 rtyler: are you done? should we move on? 19:29:51 #action rtyler needs to example apache configs for redirects we might have in place there 19:29:56 yeah, let's jump to the CERT stuff 19:30:10 #topic CERT membership requests from Ivan Meredith and Ben Walding 19:30:14 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/jenkinsci-dev/TachZG6zw44/UMBz91HMAgAJ 19:30:18 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/jenkinsci-dev/TachZG6zw44/v2sG6UvPAgAJ 19:31:00 Both are CloudBees employees and run the hosted Jenkins there (DEV@cloud). 19:31:32 Ben also has reported an issue, which we fixed today. 19:31:50 danielbeck: for #info where's the details on the cert team? 19:31:56 https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Jenkins+CERT+team 19:32:35 I think their role in managing a large cluster of Jenkins masters make them qualified 19:32:56 And they have vested interest in securing Jenkins, as can be seen by Ben's contribution 19:33:18 Any objections/concerns/problems? 19:33:32 Here's my +1 19:33:47 I don't object 19:34:10 kohsuke: do we maintain a list of current cert team members anywhere public? 19:34:14 +1 for Ben knowing him a wee bit from Codehaus, no opinion for Ivan +0. 19:34:24 rtyler Closed infra wiki has a list. 19:34:46 yeah, that doesn't really help people not already on the CERT team :P 19:35:08 I think we can record blessing and move on 19:35:22 +1. Ben discovers much security issues + he really needs early access to test their stuff before the release. It's a win-win IMHO 19:35:36 danielbeck: you are endorsing this, right? 19:35:46 Of course. Those guys really want well tested fixes so they can help with that. 19:35:50 so you have implicit +1 19:36:00 Plus the trust is there through the role alone. 19:36:21 #agreed Thanks Ben and Ivan for joining the CERT team 19:36:24 moving on 19:36:34 #topic Review Board Election Process Proposal and either move forward with the proposal or take feedback so we can have elections next year 19:36:46 yay 19:36:50 another tyler topic 19:36:50 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Board+Election+Process+Proposal 19:37:06 it's great that this is moving forward 19:37:16 Yeah - I gave up waiting for it. =) 19:37:27 I've added #4 according to my previous AI 19:38:05 the proposal looks good! 19:38:30 so this proposal is v7 of this page, I like it 19:38:32 can we increase the 2 weeks for nominations (some people may be on holiday) 19:38:33 I believe during the board meeting hare_brain rtyler and I wanted to propose one more change in that #4 19:39:02 kohsuke: the "kohsuke is a permanent member for life" thing? :P 19:39:03 that is, instead of scheduling a new election out of cycle, the board will appoint a replacement 19:39:10 ah, that one 19:39:20 so that the term and stuff are predictable 19:39:35 teilo: how long is long enough? 19:40:02 3 weeks is doog. 4 is better but that may stretch out the process a little too long? 19:40:06 doog=good 19:40:07 Yeah, I'd prefer an appointment for interim members. 19:40:31 I'll put three weeks in 19:40:40 rtyler: thanks 19:40:51 kohsuke abayer: No strong opinion. Maybe better if the board gets approval on the governance meeting 19:40:52 kohsuke should be a BBMFL (Benevolent board member for life) :) 19:41:05 fredg02: I agree 19:41:18 a Jenkins board without kohsuke involved, unless he resigns, is silly 19:41:20 to me at elast 19:41:27 But in general I agree with such replacement proposal approach 19:41:37 like anyone would ever get more votes than KK 19:41:52 +1 for promoting KK to KKK :P 19:41:56 oleg-nenashev: Yeah, getting the blessing or at least lack of significant opposition from the governance meeting would make sense. 19:41:57 >_< 19:41:57 Um. 19:42:01 heh 19:42:07 I'm guessing he means King KK 19:42:10 heh 19:42:25 lol 19:42:28 How does STV work with quotas? 19:42:40 And by quota I mean the company rule 19:42:46 I'd love to have my permanent seat codified if people are OK. 19:42:51 oleg-nenashev, kkk is an extremist group here in usa, your statement is funny in that context :) 19:42:57 +1 for KKK 19:43:00 lulz 19:43:07 oleg-nenashev are you proposing approving board *nominees* in governance meeting, or using the governance meeting as the election forum? 19:43:10 okay, I'm going to update the proposal suggesting a permanent seat 19:43:14 I'd say if too many people from one company get elected, then the highest placing two of them get on and the others are disqualified. 19:43:19 The latter seems to go against the voting proposal entirely. 19:43:21 so cloudbees can have a max of one other person on the board. 19:43:22 hare_brain: We're talking about the replacements. 19:43:25 abayer And how do you do this in mid-STV? 19:43:38 abayer thank 19:43:44 hare_brain: only governance meeting for replacement 19:43:47 abayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote 19:43:58 alright v9 of the document updated with King Kohsuke item 19:44:04 danielbeck: I'd have to check the details for exactly how that works out, but I know it's doable. 19:44:19 abayer Okay, great. Could you look that up? 19:44:27 Hit me with an action. 19:44:37 jieryn: Don't forget to exclude IS operator from C# and Python ;) 19:44:53 #action abayer to look up how to do STV with company rule (item 4) 19:44:53 #action abayer to look into implication of having the company quota with STV 19:45:04 So do it twice please, abayer 19:45:05 so for companies are you voting for the company or a person from that company? 19:45:08 LOL 19:45:10 heh 19:45:24 I'll look up how to do it *and* look into implications. 19:45:28 this is great, I didn't want to necessarily get things signed off on this meeting, but at least forward momentum 19:45:44 teilo: we'll be voting for human beings, not legal entities 19:45:47 in our next governance meeting I would like to get approval on a proposal so we can schedule election day for Feb 2nd 2016 19:45:49 Who will make changes in #4 and add #7 for KKK? 19:45:54 Stop saying KKK! 19:45:57 * rtyler is a human bean 19:45:58 =) 19:46:15 And I personally will be voting for ephemeral concepts, not human beings. 19:46:18 oleg-nenashev: KKK has been done 19:46:28 Gaaaaaaaah 19:46:30 No KKK! 19:46:31 * rtyler facepalms 19:46:33 in #1 19:46:33 No Grand Wizards! 19:46:39 Guys, we already got dumb slaves going against us, please no KKK 19:46:41 Ok. #7 for permanent board member 19:47:14 oleg-nenashev: thats in #1 "Kohsuke Kawaguchi holding a permanent board seat until such a time he decides to resign." 19:47:29 "You earn the voting right by having an account on jenkins-ci.org prior to the last election." --- so I am not allowed to vote? 19:47:31 +1 for such wording of #7 19:47:42 Hello 19:48:08 Let's just say last election is when interim board has happened 19:48:10 danielbeck: we should probably put something in there to make it clearer for this first time 19:48:17 kohsuke: that was years ago! 19:48:28 kohsuke I registered in 2011 or so, after the interim board. 19:48:30 why don't we just say for the first election at teh end of this calendar year? 19:48:44 as elections are every year, why not say for more than 1 year at the time of the election 19:48:45 oh oh, sorry, I didn't read too carefully 19:48:51 Or people who are registered at the formal adoption of this process. 19:49:03 hare_brain: +1 19:49:09 +1 19:49:13 +1 19:49:15 +1 19:49:21 (Just want to vote!) 19:49:21 +1 19:49:27 +cats 19:49:41 rtyler: you said you are not seeking the blessing of this today. 19:49:48 Does that mean we should move on? 19:49:50 Anything else on this? 19:50:01 as long as the formal adoption is before election day 19:50:03 LTS beer party? :) 19:50:10 #action rtyler to update election proposal based on meeting 19:50:19 heh 19:50:28 kohsuke: yeah, this is enough progress for now 19:50:28 I'm all for the security roll out beer party man 19:50:38 Ill seek blessing at the next meeting 19:50:41 #topic Jenkins 2.0 proposal recap 19:50:56 let me dig up a link 19:51:06 #info http://jenkins-ci.org/content/jenkins-20-proposals 19:51:22 *flees* 19:51:27 I published a few blog posts highlighting some fairly important proposals 19:51:40 I suggested a feedback window to jump into the JIRAs of a couple weeks 19:51:48 so we can get goin' already! 19:52:02 the last suggested feedback window will be over on friday 19:52:10 OK 19:52:20 Great 19:52:29 I put this on the agenda mostly because I wanted to say "hey y'all, let's build a thing already" 19:52:38 I'd love to get the symbolic 2.0 branch created 19:52:51 +1 19:52:54 setting up builds and all that 19:52:56 that's what all branches are in git :P 19:53:11 kohsuke: Are UX changes ready for 2.0 branch? 19:53:15 I mean symbloic to humans? 19:53:19 heh 19:53:27 oleg-nenashev: some of them are, more work to come 19:53:39 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolics? 19:53:39 I'm +1 on getting the 2.0 branch, can we nominate somebody to be release manager for it like we do for LTS? 19:53:42 that way it's merged up 19:53:45 and refreshed, etc 19:54:00 +1 to having a RM. 19:54:12 * kohsuke looks at danielbeck 19:54:23 *also looks at danielbeck* 19:54:26 I would nominate abayer but I think working with me full time will be punishment enough 19:54:29 whaat? 19:54:32 Also I am a terrible RM. 19:54:48 heh 19:55:15 or is this where we should nominate product management kind of person? 19:55:16 If someone else wants to step up, that'd be great, but danielbeck as fallback seems reasonable. =) 19:55:18 we don't need to figure out an RM in this meeting necessarily, but I would love to see somebody on point 19:55:31 for SPOF reasons I'll be still the human function that produces signed bits 19:55:34 kohsuke: I see it much closer to the LTS owner role, somebody to play traffic cop a bit 19:56:46 I'd suggest we email the list and see if anyone else is interested. 19:56:52 I'm not sure a product management role makes as much sense, since there's some execution oriented responsibilities to make sure that things are getting merged in cleanly/correctly/etc 19:57:00 I'm cool with that idea abayer 19:57:05 And then make danielbeck do it anyway. 19:57:08 1, 2, 3 NOT IT 19:57:18 I don't do emails. 19:57:26 *looks at danielbeck again* =) 19:57:33 *then looks at kohsuke instead* 19:57:46 If I volunteer, would that move the conversation along? 19:57:53 I think so. 19:57:55 I don't think repeatedly claiming to not want to do it is useful :P 19:58:05 Or that. 19:58:17 until you pass off the responsibilities I'm fine with you taking point initially danielbeck 19:58:20 get things started 19:58:24 sure 19:58:44 #agreed danielbeck is appointed as 2.0 release manager 19:58:48 moving on... 19:58:57 #topic next meeting 19:59:17 Nov 25th the same time 19:59:22 two weeks from now is pretty close to thanksgiving 19:59:26 Yeah 19:59:26 Yeah. 19:59:33 Lots of Americans will be in transit. 19:59:38 I know lots of folks take wednesday off to travel 19:59:39 Or leaving work early, etc. 19:59:47 I'll be in the kitchen. 19:59:48 Or hacking for Tyler. =) 19:59:50 could we do dec 2nd? 19:59:53 +1 20:00:02 That'll also mess up our LTS schedule. 20:00:05 Historically we stuck to 2 week cadence 20:00:06 What did we do last year? 20:00:20 We probably forgot to have a meeting. 20:00:23 I think we just skipped if a date doesn't work out. 20:00:29 nah, we did 20:00:30 When we skip, the next one will be 4 weeks away 20:00:33 https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Governance+Meeting+Archive+2014 20:00:55 we can try to do the meeting, but I'm loathe to put the board election proposal up for final signoff if the attendance is paltry 20:01:11 Then skip that item if nobody's present. 20:01:22 Can we meet if just to get LTS status check 20:01:42 would it be possible to just do the LTS status check on the 25th and a full meeting on the 2nd perhaps? 20:01:48 best of both worlds, more meetings! 20:01:52 slackers can skip, but hard-working Americans are welcome to stick around 20:02:03 lulz 20:02:14 rtyler And the next meeting on Dec 9 then? 20:02:21 Let's just never stop meeting. 20:02:45 * rtyler shrugs 20:02:48 rtyler Also, for the other week, remember we want office hours to happen 20:02:50 fuck it let's do the 25th 20:02:51 same time 20:02:51 OK, 11/25 20:03:10 #agreed we'll stick next meeting being 11/25 20:03:21 will hope to keep the agenda light 20:03:28 I think that's it 20:03:29 well, I'm going to have beefy topics :) 20:03:41 thanks everybody for joining today though 20:03:48 * rtyler jumps back to #jenkins and #jenkins-community 20:03:48 Not turkey topics? 20:03:50 and helping the release out 20:04:00 #endmeeting