18:00:22 #startmeeting 18:00:22 Let the Jenkins meeting commence! 18:00:31 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Governance+Meeting+Agenda 18:00:40 #topic actions from the last week 18:01:04 ... which is http://meetings.jenkins-ci.org/jenkins-meeting/2016/jenkins-meeting.2016-03-16-18.00.html 18:01:42 Jenkins Days stuff, hmm, did we make more progress on that one? 18:01:53 alyssat? 18:01:57 i updated the wiki page w/ more info 18:02:11 should that be added to the agenda for today? 18:02:34 we can 18:02:41 tail end, our agenda is really full :/ 18:02:43 I'll let you do that in the background if that's ready 18:02:50 #topic LTS status check 18:02:58 wait, we're not done yet 18:03:02 ogondza: ^^ 18:03:04 there are other actions mister 18:03:09 oh? 18:03:21 1.652.3 has shipped 18:03:30 1.642.3 18:03:40 Oops 18:04:04 rtyler: is that what you meant? any other actions? 18:04:42 I had some candidacy things 18:04:48 https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Board+Candidacy+Process 18:04:55 anyways, we can keep going' 18:05:26 OK, back to LTS status check 18:05:55 Looks like backports are all there but waiting for ogondza to chime in... 18:06:07 there ware 2 issues backported that require remoting update JENKINS-28289 and JENKINS-26580. 18:06:34 the bump of remoting broke https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-33886 18:06:39 https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-28289 https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-26580 18:06:52 I do not feel one way or the other 18:08:17 Let me see, IIUC, you want to take some fixes in that requires remoting update, but that new version has significant issue(s) 18:08:35 in that case sounds like we cannot bring that version in, no? 18:08:36 there's no intermediate release that contains 28289 without all the JNLP3 stuff? 18:08:45 only when several JNLP connection comming from single IP 18:09:02 not sure that is significant 18:09:20 which isn't all that uncommon I imagine if they isolate by user account on the same hardware (which is kind of weird, but not unheard of) 18:10:00 but I may be biased, had to do this for years 18:10:07 I'm inclined to leave JENKINS-28289 out until we fix JENKINS-33886 18:10:46 #action ogondza to revert JENKINS-28289 fix and announce backporting ready 18:11:07 kohsuke maybe it's worth to build a 2.xx.1 without JNLP3 that has the proxy fix? 18:11:34 2.xx.1? 18:11:53 Basically a 'stable' remoting release 18:11:53 You mean 3 months from now? Hopefully by then we fix JENKINS-33886? 18:11:54 ogondza: JENKINS-33467 is ready to backport AFAICT 18:11:58 Oh 18:12:42 but your opinion may vary 18:12:55 Don't know whether worth the effort, just a suggestion that would allow fixing the issue without pulling in JNLP3 bugs 18:13:05 danielbeck: we can do that but then we'd be using this "new" remoting version for the first time in LTS 18:13:09 rsandell has an unmerged PR related to it, it seems 18:13:09 jglick: there is one plugin that do not have the fix released 18:13:25 riiight. Could lead to more fun 18:13:29 ogondza: https://github.com/Diabol/delivery-pipeline-plugin/pull/170 seems to be merged and released 18:13:41 * oleg-nenashev missed the remoting party again 18:13:46 I don't get the impression that JENKINS-28289 is that significant 18:14:04 I think we can aim to fix this in 1.651.2 18:14:18 Shall we move on? 18:14:24 +1 18:14:26 yes 18:14:29 #topic 2.0 status check 18:14:42 * kohsuke opens the floor to danielbeck 18:14:51 the beta is out: https://jenkins-ci.org/2.0/ 18:14:57 \o/ 18:14:58 clap clap 18:15:01 yee ha 18:15:06 We still have a bunch of stuff to fix before we can RC: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=81 18:15:23 Blocker + critical must be fixed, major are nice to have 18:15:32 so that's why we delayed the schedule a bit 18:15:42 so RC is now planned for next Wednesday 18:15:43 in the 2.0 feedback page (https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/2.0+Feedback) I linked the hackernews and reddit thread about the beta 18:15:57 actually, kk linked, but they're good reads 18:16:07 also, KK's twitter feed has a screenshot of Jenkins on top of hackernews :-) 18:16:26 So things are progressing quite well 18:16:29 (ish) 18:16:48 alyssat and I are working on a vJAM around the 2.0 release date too 18:16:53 (we can talk more about that in #jenkins-community) 18:17:04 Please note however that if you plan to review stuff that goes into 2.0 in detail, please start doing so now. 18:17:27 Are we formally in the code freeze state? 18:17:28 #info outstanding 2.0 tickets https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=81 18:17:33 Excepting bugs? 18:17:43 I doubt having a giant pull request open for any amount of time from 2.0 to master to get thousands of comments on indentation will accomplish anything ;-) 18:17:49 Or to we delay this deadline as well? 18:17:52 Any questions, comments, etc? 18:18:00 kohsuke ^ 18:18:03 No new features. 18:18:12 #info 2.0 status check call on Hangout is on Monday and it's open to public 18:18:32 oleg-nenashev: let me dig up what I sent to the dev list... 18:18:50 IIRC there was only RC and release delay 18:19:20 #info https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-dev/f4iUVX7w_PE 18:19:41 2.0 branch is in the feature freeze, so it's still accepting bug fixes that meet the severity criteria 18:19:55 And for 1.x deadline is April 6th 18:20:05 So April 6th is the final freeze 18:20:41 But yeah, we should not push crap into 1.x even before this date 18:20:48 Yeah 18:21:04 which means 2.1 will be an abomination of a release :-) 18:21:11 \o/ 18:21:32 At some point that has to happen, and no, it won't be that bad! 18:21:35 and no one uses a .zero :) 18:21:40 I think we are moving on.. 18:21:44 +1 18:21:48 +1 18:21:53 If there are questions, just shoot me a message. 18:21:58 I'll ping KostyaSha 18:22:00 #topic Check status for action 3d - JetBrains licenses 18:22:27 Ehh, old thread 18:22:27 kostya does not seem present 18:22:35 still, valid question 18:22:35 I've pinged him 18:22:35 we can still address this topic 18:22:42 is wolfs the owner of the licenses now? 18:22:50 I think it's reasonable 18:22:58 We know our AIs on it 18:23:11 I honestly don't remember wolfs angle on this 18:23:14 wolfs in the infinite dark mode, unfortunately 18:23:26 I would handover it to somebody like batmat 18:23:44 what's the requirement for being a license holder? 18:23:50 or license owner? 18:23:55 #info What I do know for certain is that JetBrains has changed the terms of OSS IntelliJ license and people working for a company that provides commercial solution is disqualified. 18:24:05 aha 18:24:07 That includes anyone working for CloudBees 18:24:11 yes 18:24:34 I think this should be something that is parked with the board if possible 18:24:36 So I cannot apply on behalf of the project like I used to. 18:24:44 hare_brain ^^^ 18:25:10 I would +1 on the board, but does not make much sense due to elections 18:25:46 I think the action item to take away here is that we need to find a contributor who can own this moving forward 18:25:54 #info https://www.jetbrains.com/buy/opensource/?product=idea for the actual terms 18:25:55 I'm not sure we're going to get that done here today 18:25:55 Yes 18:26:02 rtyler+1 18:26:09 kohsuke: did you get that response from them - my interpretation is different. 18:26:11 I suppose I can take this 18:26:13 FWIW, I applied once to JetBrains and listed some of my plugins, and got a licence directly 18:26:20 Having started to use IJ some weeks ago, why not 18:26:28 At least if nobody steps forward 18:26:35 #action rtyler to work with batmat to figure out an intellij license owner for the project 18:26:54 onward! 18:26:55 Also get orrc as a second community member? 18:26:55 OK, moving on... 18:27:19 #topic Google Summer Of Code 2016 update 18:27:26 #info https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-dev/f4iUVX7w_PE 18:27:26 * kohsuke moves mic to oleg-nenashev 18:27:46 oleg-nenashev wrong link 18:27:49 We have successfully handled the student application period 18:27:49 We have got a bunch of proposals (mentors cannot disclose the number) 18:27:49 We have done the preliminary filtering of applications 18:27:49 Currently GSoC mentors and org. admins are working on the student project slot application (deadline - April 11th) 18:27:49 We are also looking for mentors. 18:27:49 Hot areas - Web UI improvements, Fingerprints, Docker stuff 18:28:05 #info https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-dev/bmLARYolMig 18:28:08 Sorry 18:28:18 What's the next milestone? 18:28:35 April 11th - project slot application 18:28:49 We have a rough plan from yesterday's meeting 18:29:03 But it's secret according to GSoC rules 18:29:34 So the topic for the meeting. WE NEED MENTORS!!!! 18:29:47 hehe 18:29:52 #info we are good with student proposals 18:29:58 I wonder if I could be of any help, given I am clueless about Java. 18:30:12 also it may be too much time committment. 18:30:13 #info we need mentors for WebUI, Fingerprints, Docker 18:30:37 oleg-nenashev To clarify, Web UI is Jenkins, not jenkins.io? 18:30:37 autojack: we can talk about the time commitment with oleg-nenashev in #jenkins-community 18:30:37 autojack: Max 5 hours per week, because we want to have 2 mentors for every student 18:30:59 OK. that is probably too much for me, realistically. 18:31:03 or not 18:31:05 heh 18:31:06 oleg-nenashev: anything else 18:31:10 danielbeck: Yes 18:31:15 open to discuss more offline. 18:31:32 If nobody wants to be a mentor, then let's go forward 18:31:48 #action orgs to follow-up with autojack 18:31:52 Maybe a blog post about updates and call for more mentors might help 18:32:00 Agreed 18:32:00 #topic release officer announcement 18:32:08 hooray!@ 18:32:17 kohsuke: I'll write something 18:32:20 I'm planning on sending an email out to the mailing lists today for this 18:32:23 but 18:32:30 (drum roll) 18:32:35 #info ogondza is the new Jenkins release officer 18:32:39 woo! 18:32:39 (trumpet fanfare) 18:32:43 \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ 18:32:44 * batmat is very surprised 18:32:47 #info responsibilities listed here https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Team+Leads#TeamLeads-Release 18:32:49 congrats ogondza 18:32:51 :) 18:32:54 congrats!! 18:33:00 what a news! 18:33:05 congrats! 18:33:06 lolling. 18:33:09 Do we vote for it? 18:33:13 we had good interest in this position, so I'm highly optimistic that we'll have a number of people who can help participate 18:33:42 #action rtyler to email release officer announcement to the mailing list 18:33:49 ogondza: I'm happy to do my part in the team to transfer the knowledge and etc 18:33:55 oleg-nenashev: we're following the existing process for team officers 18:34:19 I don't have any further updates there, so I believe we can move on 18:34:27 #action oleg_nenashev to finally RTFM on the process 18:34:31 hah 18:34:34 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Team+Leads 18:34:41 whoa, thank you! 18:34:55 ogondza: I emailed you this earlier this week, in case you're behind on email :) 18:35:09 #info process doc is https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Proposal+-+Project+sub-teams 18:35:20 "Proposal" needs to come off from here given that it was blessed 18:35:27 OK, next topic, I think 18:35:29 aye 18:35:38 #topic Major infrastructure opportunity 18:35:43 \o/ 18:35:55 * oleg-nenashev is excited 18:36:00 before I dive into the opportunity I want to restate some of the challenges we see with our infrastructure 18:36:25 we're spread currently across four different datacenters, with varying capabilities in each one, with varying capacity as well 18:36:28 for example 18:36:35 if I want new resources in OSUOSL, I file a ticket 18:36:40 if I want it in Rackspace, I hit an API 18:36:53 if I want it in our physical datacenter, I spent $1000 and wait two weeks :-P 18:37:20 we also are heavily reliant on the mirror network, the vast majority of which we do not control, to distribute Jenkins 18:37:34 I did the numbers for that and our mirrors are deliverying roughly 2TB of Jenkins bits daily 18:37:59 That's a lot of goodness spreading around the world! 18:38:21 additionally 18:38:50 because of our limited capacity, we cannot provide newer services or be flexibile, oleg-nenashev and I have talked a lot in the past about expanding what ci.jenkins-ci.org can do 18:38:54 but we simply don't have the capacity 18:39:14 tl;dr: status quo is unnecessarily complex, makes rtyler cry, and limits what infra services we can offer 18:39:25 capacity as in hardware, or time? 18:39:29 yes 18:39:30 :) 18:39:59 and now…? 18:40:01 (drum roll) 18:40:05 hah 18:40:34 so the board has been in discussions with Microsoft to work with the Jenkins project to move into Azure 18:40:59 * batmat was about to say hell was really getting used on freezing those days ;) 18:41:02 *gasps* 18:41:04 this would be a *huge* deal (I cannot stress that enough) which would bring three exciting things to the table 18:41:13 this is like the 1997 Macworld! 18:41:16 1) consolidation in a single cloud provider I can put behind an API for provisioning resources 18:41:35 2) Give us a SSL end-to-end CDN for distribution of Jenkins 18:42:01 3) Give us the capacity to build out jenkins build/release infrastructure to make plugin/core development a lot better than it is today 18:42:11 (the last one is something I've been waiting ages to be able to do) 18:43:06 we'd be operating a full Ubuntu-based deployment still, outside of Windows builders (new feature!) for ci.j.o 18:43:08 Swarm Is Coming, then? :) 18:43:25 batmat: Azure Container Service yo! 18:43:27 Simplified infra that reduces ops overhead, with more capabilities 18:43:31 isn't it ci.j.io ? :) 18:43:32 SO 18:43:35 batmat: not yet 18:44:11 SO, a deal hasn't been signed yet, we (the board) are still finishing up some terms, but it's important to me that I update you all 18:45:16 the gist of what we're talking about would be a three year deal, so we'd have a great home for jenkins infra for the next three years minimum 18:45:24 (all the minds are blown, you're alone here) 18:45:27 haha 18:45:31 cool. so what is the deal? they provide N servers, or $N budget, in return for ... something? 18:46:28 orrc: the gist is, here's some Azure quota, use it however you want, in return for showing that Microsoft is supporting Jenkins (MS <3 Java or something) 18:46:45 Do they get something like a place for jumbotron? 18:47:04 Wait, this would give us a way to do demented testing of Jenkins-on-Winbuntu! =) 18:47:19 The expectation is that we come up with a braggable model use of how to do modern infra with Jenkins + Azure 18:47:31 oleg-nenashev: those specifics haven't been discussed, we've got an outstanding ticket to bring the sponsors block back to jenkins.io 18:47:42 (which I need to fix up, regardless of this agenda item) 18:48:24 I cannot stress enough how excited this will make me to cry less about Jenkins project infra :D 18:48:26 yes, sponsor blocks need to be fixed before 2.0 18:48:32 oleg-nenashev: agreed 18:48:36 Sponsors should get this traffic 18:48:40 orrc: did I answer your question? 18:49:08 rtyler: yeah. if there aren't any further details than that at the moment, fair enough 18:49:21 so long as the quota is big enough to run all the cool stuff you just mentioned :D 18:49:30 +1 Ok for the current state 18:49:40 orrc: oh believe me it is :) 18:49:48 bbenz is here from microsoft btw :) 18:50:01 bbenz hello! 18:50:06 hi bbenz :) 18:50:14 part of the thing that I think is compelling for them, is we run a popular open source project, and with an open infrastructure 18:50:23 which gives us the ability to talk ad nauseum about how we deploy 18:50:27 (which I've done for years now) 18:51:12 Any other concerns, questions, etc? 18:51:12 if there aren't any more immediate questions, feel free to email me or ping me on IRC outside of this meeting in #jenkins-infra 18:51:27 sounds good to me :) 18:51:29 I think this is a good opportunity for new people to join the infra team 18:51:30 fine by me 18:51:44 lgtm 18:51:46 So I'd like to encourage that too 18:51:48 let me info kohsuke 18:52:00 noun is a new verb 18:52:12 #info rtyler and the board are working on finalizing a deal with Microsoft for running the Jenkins infra on Azure 18:52:15 there, continue 18:52:23 All right, moving on 18:52:32 #topic Update to CD Summit & Jenkins Days wiki page 18:52:37 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Proposal+-+Revisiting+JUC+in+2016 18:53:04 last wk i took the AI to provide more info to the CD Summit & Jenkins Days wiki page 18:53:13 Back, timed out... 18:53:31 a recap: CB would like approval for the term "Jenkins Days" 18:54:01 what were the action items from the previous discussion? 18:54:17 I am hoping the diagram on the wiki page for CD Summit & Jenkins clarified things a bit 18:54:37 oleg-nenashev: "need more clarity on Jenkins Days since that appear to have changed since the early round" 18:55:44 on Day 1 there we be workshops - one session is on 7 Habits of Highly Effective Jenkins User..thnx to abayer 18:55:53 *will 18:56:29 Day 2 of the event consist of Jenkins keynote + Pipeline talk ..thnx to rtyler 18:56:51 Does the Jenkins Track target OSS or CloudBees stuff? Or both? 18:56:54 stupid question: day 1 and 2 of what? 18:57:04 "Jenkins Days" :P 18:57:15 the event that cloudbees would be running 18:57:19 orrc: the event consist of 2 days 18:57:41 ah, so the line-up is the same for all of them? 18:57:43 +1 from me, gtg 18:57:45 orrc: yes 18:57:47 from the cloudbees side, at least I suppose 18:58:12 yes. the line up is pretty much the same 18:58:26 from the Jenkins name usage, this seems like a reasonable use 18:58:41 "CD Summit & Jenkins Day" is awkward. 18:58:52 in some cities we do have community member as speakers 18:59:14 * oleg-nenashev read the rtfm again. Both OSS and CloudBees stuff are accepted to the Jenkins track 18:59:21 I believe we tried to pick locations that have local JAMs going 18:59:26 hare_brain: I think that awkwardness stems from it being a joint operation 18:59:27 alyssat: You mean "community members who aren't also CloudBees employees". =) 18:59:38 abayer: that's correct 18:59:41 =) 18:59:44 "Scaling Jenkins in the Enterprise with CloudBees" from the Dallas example on the "Jenkins Track" doesn't sound particularly community-like :) 19:00:05 orrc: you're correct that isn't. 19:00:55 the Jenkins track is a blend it looks like 19:01:24 rtyler: yes 19:01:27 maybe makes sense to explicitly set quota for OSS and CB stuff 19:02:30 alyssat: correct me if I'm wrong but I think we are trying to get the name usage approval here, right? 19:02:54 that's correct! 19:02:55 the wiki page update was a pre-requisite for that 19:04:14 could we vote for approval? 19:04:30 I think this helps JAMs around the world and help us reach Jenkins users 19:04:45 is there any guarantee, like oleg-nenashev says, that there is actually non-CB content? 19:04:55 That was my question as well. 19:05:33 I'm not concerned about so much CB stuff that non-CB stuff gets pushed out, but whether there will be non-CB content at all. 19:05:54 For example in the first one in Dallas the day 1 speaker is the JAM leader 19:06:30 orrc: for the OSS sessions those are being created by our very own abayer and rtyler. should we make those slides visible to ensure there's no CB content? 19:07:00 *visible - public 19:07:02 orrc: fwiw, my talk is just an update of Seven Habits of Highly Effective Jenkins Users with no CB-specific content. 19:07:16 Ditto for mine 19:07:31 dittoz 19:07:45 This would be easier if you guys stopped hiring everyone with Jenkins experience. ;) 19:07:50 we are also not using CB template 19:07:53 heh 19:08:29 hare_brain: I'll followup with kohsuke to see if we can stop hiring qualified candidates 19:08:32 xD 19:08:38 fair enough. so long as there's some sort of guarantee that there is actually non-CB content, even if 90% of it will be delivered by CB employees, it doesn't seem so bad :D 19:08:52 hare_brain: looking for a job? 19:08:56 No. 19:09:08 not until board elections are over, at least :) 19:09:16 anyway... 19:09:26 If we could explicitly reserve 1-2 slots for JAM moderation, it should be file 19:09:32 *fine 19:09:46 wat 19:09:46 which are the 13 cities? 19:09:54 anyway, +1 ish from me 19:10:21 orrc do you want me to list out all the cities? mostly in Americas and a few in EU 19:10:37 orrc You don't want this meeting to end, admit it :P 19:10:39 We're over, and I'm late for my next meeting. I'm not horribly against this use, but I do have concerns about the high number of CB employees that are doing the presentations. Nothing personal, just optics. 19:10:42 +1 from me considering this request is inline with our trademark guidelines (and bonus that Jenkins content is being presented) 19:10:47 alyssat: was just wondering, since there was talk of JAM cooperation :) 19:10:57 I'm with hare_brain 19:11:04 danielbeck: I already voted! 19:11:09 alyssat: please follow up with orrc in #jenkins-community on that 19:11:18 As I pitched when I originally introduced this wiki page, I think there's a real value in us showing Jenkins in person to people around the world. That's important for the project. 19:11:19 we should also let the JAM list know if you haven't 19:11:19 rtyler: will do 19:11:36 I think we can record agreement with a concern here 19:11:42 Yes. 19:11:57 noted. thank you 19:12:01 Maybe some kind of preference to non CB speakers if we find them? 19:12:36 #agreed the name usage in "CD summit & Jenkins Days" is approved with a concern that CB speakers are disproportionately high. 19:12:45 danielbeck: I think we are already doing that 19:12:53 oh 19:12:56 we are, when available 19:13:08 all right, let's do your topic quickly and wrap this up 19:13:10 So all orrc and hare_brain need to do is show up :-) 19:13:13 hah 19:13:26 kohsuke You're the only chair 19:13:29 danielbeck: if you can fly me to Dallas, I'm in 19:13:29 ready to move on? 19:13:31 oh 19:13:36 #chair hare_brain danielbeck rtyler 19:13:36 Current chairs: danielbeck hare_brain kohsuke rtyler 19:13:44 orrc: we are coming to Europe, too 19:13:52 #topic Advance notice: Privacy affecting bug, 1.642.4 release 19:13:54 this is quick 19:14:18 We discovered a bug affecting the last ~2 months of Jenkins releases that results in Jenkins submitting anon usage stats data when it should not 19:14:39 I will publish an advisory later today, and notify dev/users/advisories lists 19:14:59 We'll also release 1.642.4 whose only change is the fix for this bug 19:15:14 FYI to this meeting so you're not surprised wtf is going on 2 hours from now. 19:15:50 heh 19:16:05 all rigiht, are you done? 19:16:16 I'll be happy to answer questions in private, but note I'll publish more information later today 19:16:20 that's it from me 19:16:26 #topic next meeting 19:16:39 April 13th 19:16:47 #info next meeting is April 13th 19:16:50 See you with 2.0 RC! 19:16:52 #endmeeting