18:00:17 #startmeeting 18:00:17 Let the Jenkins meeting commence! 18:00:23 #topic Last meeting actions 18:00:40 #info http://meetings.jenkins-ci.org/jenkins-meeting/2017/jenkins-meeting.2017-03-29-18.02.html 18:01:38 release was run by KK 18:01:56 yay 18:02:06 I think alyssat_ took care of all the trademark things 18:02:17 yes. that's done 18:02:20 danielbeck: upgrade guide got squared away too IIRC 18:02:23 thanks to Daniel 18:02:49 rtyler yes 18:02:55 wunderbar, let's move on 18:03:02 #topic LTS status check 18:03:25 ok, the number of backported fixes i minimal 18:03:36 ATH test are still in progress 18:03:40 no candidates? 18:03:50 2 and one of them is groovy 18:04:04 IIRC we agreed it is too risky for 2.46.X 18:04:11 2.4.10 or 2.4.8? 18:04:15 I don't think the situation improved since we decided on 2.46 18:04:31 Yeah, there was at least one reported defect 18:04:33 https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D%202.46.2-fixed 18:04:44 however, this time it will require serious look at ATH results 18:05:05 as some failures look scary and there is a pile of failures as plugins was delisted 18:05:11 oops 18:05:32 ogondza: I will check issues and update the lts-candidate list today if something is missing. Just in case 18:05:35 I am not sure what to do with such tests - those plugins might never come back to distribution ... 18:05:47 @Igmnore ? 18:05:47 ogondza skip for now? 18:05:49 is there a way to skip if the plugin doesn't exist? 18:05:51 I guess 18:06:11 my question is not a technical one 18:06:36 keeping the suppressed code will we never need sucks as well 18:07:16 the point being, I will have to look at that tomorrow and push the RC once the results looks reasonably well 18:07:30 Maybe we want to backport "Internal: Make sure system threads run as SYSTEM.", but the issue link is broken in the changelog 18:07:38 will fix that as well :( 18:08:01 #action push the RC on Thursday once ATH looks green 18:08:22 *blue 18:08:28 #action ogondza push the RC on Thursday once ATH looks green 18:08:56 heh 18:09:10 orrc: we do not see any of that colors around ATH very often 18:09:11 ogondza: IIRC the next LTS baseline will be in june right? 18:09:28 chosen in 4 weeks, released in 8 18:09:37 wait 18:09:40 6 / 10 18:09:48 will be picked 24th of May 18:10:19 righto 18:10:25 ready to move on? 18:10:29 21th of June is the .1 18:10:40 yes we can 18:10:48 #topic Google Groups issues 18:10:52 can some of the chairs action me? 18:10:52 * rtyler grumbles 18:11:02 ogondza: for what? 18:11:06 #chair danielbeck kohsuke 18:11:06 Current chairs: danielbeck kohsuke rtyler 18:11:42 rtyler: oh, there is no butler confirmation on action command? ok 18:11:53 no 18:12:04 so google groups has flagged jenkinsci-users and jenkinsci-issues 18:12:24 from my understanding jenkinsci-users is now unblocked but there's no telling why it was blocked or if it might happen again 18:12:37 happened at least twice now 18:12:42 right 18:12:54 I hope it is not about "too many slave mentions" 18:13:10 a lot of folks suggested groups.io which I have starteed to look into, I'm hoping we can figure something out, but please know that I have literally no idea why we keep getting flagged :/ 18:13:48 rtyler: Any chance we get a response from Google Support? 18:13:57 hahaha :) 18:13:59 there isn't really "support" 18:14:10 there's a friend of mine who has been acting as a go between 18:14:18 we're being the product, not the customer... 18:14:25 but apparently there's supposed to be an "Appeal" type link for when a group is flagged 18:14:25 I know 18:14:31 except there isn't one anywhere :( 18:14:43 I am formally a customer of Google 18:14:46 I'm not entirely convinced thaqt there are humans involved here 18:14:47 Can give a try 18:15:11 groups.io seems to have been around for a while, and has plenty of usage, decent features, and it would be totally reasonable to pay $10/mo or whatever to not have Google involved, and to maybe stop hosting mailman or whatever it is 18:15:23 * orrc goes to look what anti-spam features they have 18:15:57 I don't expect to do this now, but between now and the next project meeting I would like to figure something out 18:16:15 if anybody has any contacts within google who might be closer to google groups, I would of course appreciate an introduction :) 18:16:27 otherwise, I don't really have any news, good or bad, to shed on the situation 18:16:35 any questions? 18:17:04 rtyler given the risk of Google groups, are we considering alternatives like groups.io? 18:17:44 danielbeck: I think you may have missed a line 18:17:48 how many moderators are there/should we start moderating messages? Are they moderated already? 18:18:08 the first-post-is-moderated thing isn't set on jenkinsci-users so I don't know 18:18:20 but between the first and second time the group was flagged, there wasn't any spam 18:18:25 so I'm not certain spam is the reason 18:18:35 rtyler sorry, only saw orrc's comments 18:18:53 * orrc volunteers for Euro-timezone mod duty for the existing lists 18:19:17 consider it done orrc :D 18:19:29 #action rtyler to add orrc to the spam brigade 18:19:36 +1, maybe there's some rules on ggroups to auto garbage groups where too many spams are reported, but we basically don't know for sure indeed :( 18:19:50 the thing is, users can also report groups 18:19:59 heh 18:20:02 so in theory, if enough people reported jenkinsci-users@ as abusive or spam 18:20:07 then we might get kicked off 18:20:17 but there's no way to tell what happened right now unfortunately 18:21:02 so what I'm thinking is that we: look into groups.io, continue to try to get more answers about what's up with google, and revisit next time aroundf 18:21:18 if we get flagged again between nwo and next meeting, we might need to accelerate a migration <_< 18:21:22 jenkinsci-dev is currently still unaffected? 18:21:28 yes 18:22:11 We may want to consider moving Security Advisories as a step 1 18:22:32 If they get blocked at the wrong time, we may have a problem 18:22:47 +1 to rtyler 18:22:48 moving lists also means that the email address would change 18:23:00 I would rather not move if we can avoid it 18:23:12 once every six years isn't so bad :D 18:23:31 * rtyler sends an email to orrc@java.net 18:23:40 haha, I did just look on there to see where it goes 18:23:57 sadly no more project hosting 18:24:16 if we get flagged again before next meeting, or cannot get answers before next meeting, I expect to come with a proposal for migrating all lists to groups.io 18:24:36 oleg-nenashev the advisories list only allows KK and me to post, so I'd be very surprised 18:26:09 m2 18:26:43 anything else on this topic? 18:26:55 no 18:26:57 seems reasonable 18:27:04 email the dev list as well about this 18:27:16 yeah, I'll start a new thread 18:28:12 alrighty then 18:28:23 #action rtyler to inform the dev list 18:28:28 #topic next meeting 18:28:52 April 26 is what my very trustworthy calendar (hosted by Google) says 18:29:12 don't rely on it too much 18:29:34 heh 18:29:42 if too many of your meeting invitations are marked spam… 18:29:48 #info April 26 will be the next meeting 18:29:58 thanks everybody, short and (bitter)sweet today 18:30:00 #endmeeting