18:00:29 #startmeeting 18:00:29 Let the Jenkins meeting commence! 18:00:35 #chairs danielbeck kohsuke hare_brain rtyler 18:00:39 every freaking tmie 18:00:43 #chair danielbeck kohsuke hare_brain rtyler 18:00:44 Current chairs: danielbeck hare_brain kohsuke rtyler 18:00:46 * rtyler sighs 18:00:52 #topic Recap last meeting action items 18:01:05 ogondza: you pushed an RC right? 18:01:15 oleg-nenashev: then you have some items around GSoC 18:01:21 #info http://meetings.jenkins-ci.org/jenkins-meeting/2016/jenkins-meeting.2016-05-25-18.01.html 18:01:31 yep, rc pushed 18:01:44 \o/ 18:02:06 rtyler: I'm there 18:02:29 But my items are in progress. I'll make the full update later 18:02:42 okie doke 18:02:44 moving on 18:02:51 #topic LTS status check 18:02:54 ogondza: floor is yours 18:03:24 no problems found with the rc 18:03:32 I am fine releasing it as it is 18:03:58 this is the last LTS in this line right/ 18:04:03 there ware request to backport windows filed deletion fix that I am not so confident about 18:04:15 link? 18:04:17 rtyler: right, I would like to pick next today 18:04:40 https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15331 18:05:12 jglick: i missed https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-34281. is it applicable for current line? 18:05:43 now I see affects older version that, 2.0 18:06:02 #action ogondza to report testing is done and ping kk to do the release 18:06:14 ogondza: yes; but anyway I have found a related bug which remains open, and I have also found a workaround for the symptom of this bug affecting Pipeline 18:06:35 (Affects freestyle builds too, but the symptom is less obvious.) 18:07:11 ok, thanks. i am done (for this AI) 18:07:18 alright, moving to the next item 18:07:25 #topic Next LTS baseline selection 18:07:28 https://jenkins.io/changelog/ 18:07:41 #info https://jenkins.io/changelog/ for changelogs and community ratings 18:07:59 no frownies on 2.7 18:08:26 but the fix for https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-35206 in 2.8 looks like it would be missed, wouldn't it? 18:08:33 backportable probably 18:08:40 2.8 looks too recent 18:08:44 2.7 is a big bugfix 18:08:50 2.6 or 2.7, and the latter is mostly fixes 18:08:51 so 2.7 is better than 2.8 18:09:10 I'm in favor of 2.7 18:09:41 not a lot of compelling feature additions in 2.8 either 18:10:16 I think about Slave listener 18:10:21 Agree with 2.7. Still rather more recent than I'd like, but it seems to mostly be fixes we'd like to backport anyway if we chose 2.6. 18:10:25 It may be useful 18:10:36 not a criterion for LTS 18:10:45 we want stable over shiny 18:11:12 danielbeck: the Groovy change is in 2.7 18:11:39 that's the big reason IMHO to base LTS off it 18:11:48 would be backported anyway I'd hope 18:11:54 we need to bump to 2.4.7 in any case 18:12:07 so Groovy is not a criteria 18:12:29 how can 2.6 have such a good score with the blocker bug - JENKINS-35206? 18:12:32 I'm -1 on having an internal release in LTS 18:12:49 oleg-nenashev: is 2.4.7 properly released? 18:12:57 ogondza: It appears for several update cases only 18:13:05 rtyler: AFAIK yes 18:13:20 https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/2399 18:13:31 well, we have some time before the LTS would be released anyways, so that change could be backported if ogondza is okay with it 18:13:50 what's important to me is that the bug isn't present in the first 2.x-based LTS 18:14:21 rtyler: +1 on using released groovy 18:14:37 JENKINS-35206 has been caused by Install Wizard extensibility in 2.6 18:15:06 It didn't count loading of configs from the disk, but it's fixed in 2.8 18:15:25 I am fine with 2.7 18:15:50 ogondza: got somebody to nominate to make sure daspilker's PR gets backported? :D 18:15:57 2.7 + JENKINS-35206 backport + Groovy 2.4.7 basically? 18:16:02 danielbeck: +1 18:16:08 +1 18:16:22 (+whatever else pops up, but those seem to be the big ones) 18:16:30 ogondza: does that work for you? 18:16:32 I would backport all 2.8 fixes 18:16:44 We still have 2 weeks for soaking before LTS] 18:17:12 danielbeck: fine with me 18:17:26 #agreed next LTS baseline 2.7 + JENKINS-35206 backport + Groovy 2.4.7 18:17:26 JENKINS-34881 is critical for several cases for example 18:17:44 ogondza: I trust you and oleg-nenashev can figure out what additional backports are necessary separate from this meeting? 18:17:52 rtyler +1 18:17:58 yep, we can 18:18:03 wunderbar 18:18:10 That's why we have email thread 18:18:27 #topic GSoC Status Check 18:18:32 oleg-nenashev: the floor is yours 18:18:35 * oleg-nenashev starts typing 18:18:48 1) Student projects are in progress. Code is being pushed to repos. 18:18:48 Any Jenkins community member is invited to participate in discussions/reviews 18:18:48 #info Jenkins Core Web UI improvements: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/2388 18:18:48 #info Support Core Plugin improvements: https://github.com/jenkinsci/support-core-plugin/pull/64 18:18:48 #info External Workspace Manager: https://github.com/jenkinsci/external-workspace-manager-plugin 18:18:49 #info Jenkins usage stats: https://github.com/Payal94/GSoC-Jenkins-Usage-Statistics-Analysis 18:18:49 #info Plugin documentation publishing: 18:18:50 2) We are going to announce mid-term evaluation plan on this week 18:18:50 3) No other news, oleg-nenashev still has several hanging TODOs 18:18:51 4) rtyler can make a brief update about infra requirements for GSoC projects, there is a related item in the agenda for this meeting 18:18:51 rtyler: agree with Oleg. To make sure nothing gets lost add it to the email or/and lts-candidate it 18:18:55 holy crap oleg-nenashev 18:18:56 it's called copying & pasting 18:18:57 heh 18:19:00 damn, you are fast 18:19:16 otherwise I would forget something 18:19:19 let's all take a moment to read the rapid-fire text from oleg-nenashev xD 18:19:25 oleg-nenashev That last #-info is incomplete 18:19:42 canyango1: Could you add the link? 18:20:09 oleg-nenashev: yes sure 18:21:10 My hanging AIs: 1) send abstracts to alyssat. 2) Publish a blogpost 18:21:40 #info Plugin documentation publishing:https://github.com/anyangocynthia/GSOC-automatic-publisher 18:22:01 oleg-nenashev: anything else we should cover before moving on? 18:22:02 canyango1: Thanks! 18:22:18 rtyler: Infra requirements for GSoC? 18:22:32 If there is nothing from students, I'm fine 18:23:00 #info The next public office hours will be held tomorrow as usual 18:23:34 #info 7PM UTC, likely in #jenkins-community 18:23:47 We have network issues 18:23:53 #info the GSoC Office Hours are in the public Jenkins calendar https://jenkins.io/content/event-calendar/ 18:24:15 So it will not be a google hangout? 18:24:38 Let's start in hangouts. If it does not work, we will switch to IRC 18:24:55 oleg-nenashev: That is ok 18:24:57 oleg-nenashev: you need to upgrade to bonded ISDN or whatever the state of the art in switzerland is these days xD 18:25:22 My network is fine 18:25:38 #topic Q3 patron messages 18:25:40 But canyango1 and payal had issues last time 18:25:44 ah 18:25:53 https://github.com/jenkinsci/patron/pull/12 is the current state of Q3 messages 18:25:53 danielbeck: you're up kumpel 18:26:04 XebiaLabs are back with a new message 18:26:04 #info https://github.com/jenkinsci/patron/pull/12 is the current state of Q3 messages 18:26:35 linked from the PR message (it's a lengthy URL so I'd rather not #info it here…) 18:26:51 http://jenkinsci.github.io/patron/tester.html?caption=Evolve+your+Jenkins+pipeline+to+CD+with+XebiaLabs&link=https%3A%2F%2Fxebialabs.com%2Fproducts%2F&blurb=Release+Orchestration+%7C+Deployment+Automation+%7C+Test+Results+Management+Automate+your+Enterpise+Continuous+Delivery+pipeline+with+XebiaLabs&logo=http%3A%2F%2Fgo.xebialabs.com%2Frs%2F404-ZJQ-295%2Fimages%2FXebiaLabs78x78.png 18:26:52 these looks fine to me 18:26:55 heh 18:27:25 lgtm 18:27:26 +1 18:27:30 We'll probably fix their typo in Enterpise before going live, but otherwise :) 18:28:07 Haven't heard from other patrons yet, but I'm assuming they keep their approved messages 18:28:28 anyone opposed to the Xebialabs message, or can we record approval? 18:28:34 there's a change in CloudBees' ad 18:29:03 i don't have the content sent to you me at the moment. but the ad will be on Jenkins World 18:29:19 alyssat We already have a Jenkins World message -- still different? 18:29:29 alyssat https://github.com/jenkinsci/patron/pull/12/files#diff-b2f8cad336649b880770ccf8bf14169cR358 18:29:33 remember, CloudBees has two 18:29:47 certification + JW 18:30:01 yes. it may be specific to the agenda being live..not sure yet 18:30:08 ah okay -- next meeting then 18:30:15 but if we're too late for approval here we can keep it as is 18:30:28 Well, if you don't have the message, we cannot really approve… 18:30:37 let's move on :o) 18:31:01 danielbeck: ? 18:31:13 #agreed XebiaLabs message is approved 18:31:24 rtyler that's it for this topic 18:31:53 no actions for next time? 18:32:11 #action danielbeck to prepare new CB patron messages for approval 18:32:17 #topic Licensing and unrestricted access of Usage Statistics 18:32:21 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Usage+Statistics 18:32:41 #info I sent a proposal to the infra list already to sanity check: http://lists.jenkins-ci.org/pipermail/jenkins-infra/2016-June/000742.html 18:33:13 basically, we have this monthly census data which goes up on stats.jenkins-ci.org and we have given people access to it in the past when they have asked for it 18:33:19 +1 for me for the proposal 18:33:28 it has become clear to me that our "access control" didn't make any sense 18:33:54 so I would like to license the census data under the Open Database License 1.0 and allow public access on census.jenkins.io 18:34:00 #info Open Database License http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/ 18:34:13 Yeah, open data for open project! 18:34:42 heh 18:34:59 batmat couldn't join us but he registered a +1 here http://lists.jenkins-ci.org/pipermail/jenkins-infra/2016-June/000752.html 18:35:34 in the thread vpandey, abayer and kohsuke all appear in favor as well 18:36:02 As long as rtyler is writing the next privacy advisory when we mess up, especially in the face of https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/1985 18:36:18 danielbeck: IIRC I helped write the last one :P 18:36:51 but yes, I agree with your underlying point, we need to be more proactive about usage stats 18:37:07 and ensuring the data's integrity 18:37:19 with PR 1985 we have zero control about the data collected by plugins 18:37:30 right now it's a medium issue concern, as we only publish reports 18:37:45 in the future, we publish all the raw data again 18:38:14 the "raw data" i.e. immediately post-decryption is not what I am suggesting we license here 18:38:34 stop encrypting? 18:38:35 If we put data in a structured form (e.g. Elasticsearch), we could setup per-field filtering and moderation. But it will require some efforts 18:38:49 And it's going to be _us_ who publish everyone's credentials store contents if a weird plugin starts collecting that. 18:38:55 you can't place raw in elastic without denormalisation 18:39:34 danielbeck: I think I need to dig into these PRs separately from this discussion, if these are going to enable plugins to send a boatload of data to jenkins infra, I will likely have a problem with that :) 18:39:49 rtyler right now, possibly sensitive data is all filtered, but additions by plugins will not be. 18:39:52 not to mention, the manner in which usage stats are encrypted and sent has a size limit 18:40:21 danielbeck: right, that's a requirement that should be addressed regardless 18:40:30 we shouldn't pretend that census data has been strictly access controlled 18:41:13 it is now. 18:41:17 so privacy concerns about batmat's PRs should be addressed regardless of this topic 18:41:20 hah 18:41:32 well it is now largely because we shut off the data pipe 18:41:40 "no access" is one form of access control I suppose :P 18:42:06 I see this topic and batmat's PR as linked -- we cannot reasonably implement the PR while at the same time providing access to monthly files again 18:42:10 IMO 18:42:27 then I would rather put the burden on that PR/feature 18:42:38 at least open (as proposed) or mostly open (as in the past) access 18:42:49 we have one GSoC student whose work relies on this data, in addition to a few other folks who do various tinkerings with it 18:43:34 And I have no problem handing the data to someone who's working on something benefiting the project on a case by case basis. 18:44:05 well as of now we have no licensing of the data to begin with 18:44:18 so the "benefitting the project" is a total pipe dream to me 18:44:47 that also puts "us" in the position of judging whether somebody's work is beneficial to the project 18:45:04 and we would need a means of objectively determining that 18:45:09 In Payal's case, we proposed the GSoC project. So it's very clear cut here. 18:45:49 I mean, go ahead if you like, but it will basically kill the PR. 18:46:14 I don't see how it wouldn't. 18:47:26 move to the ML? we need batmat's opinion at least 18:47:37 I might try to kill that PR once somebody informs me of the infra impact anyways :P 18:47:50 To clarify, I'm not -1 here, but we need to be aware of the side effects. 18:48:12 hm 18:48:22 danielbeck: how about this, I'm going to punt this to the next meeting 18:48:39 and I'll figure out a lot more with batmat when he's back online 18:49:02 I agree with your concerns about side-effects, and without batmat here to discuss, I don't think this is urgent enough to push on right now 18:49:17 +1, and sorry for derailing this without notice 18:49:27 it's not like you're on the infra list or anything :P 18:49:29 * rtyler ducks 18:49:50 #action rtyler to sync with batmat to identify side effects for https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/1985 with this proposal 18:49:54 #topic next meeting 18:50:11 The 22nd doesn't look problematic 18:51:10 that works 18:51:20 any EU holidays I might not know about? 18:51:38 not here 18:51:50 #info Next meeting June 22nd 18:51:54 thanks everyboyd! 18:51:56 #endmeeting