Confirmed users
3,816
edits
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
**Still need nice descriptions for: Providers / Calender Extensions | **Still need nice descriptions for: Providers / Calender Extensions | ||
**Theme Categories: Wil suggested just using one theme category. I agree. | **Theme Categories: Wil suggested just using one theme category. I agree. | ||
== IRC Meeting == | |||
=== Attendees === | |||
ssitter, xFallenAngel, sipaq, mvl, daniel, mschroeder, Archaeopteryx, ctalbert, lilmatt | |||
=== Meeting Log === | |||
<pre> | |||
ctalbert: Well, then let's get the party started, I suppose | |||
[09:04am] ctalbert: The agenda for the Calendar Status meeting is at: | |||
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:Status | |||
[09:04am] xFallenAngel: yep. lilmatt: you around? | |||
[09:05am] ctalbert: doesn't appear to be | |||
[09:05am] ctalbert: He's marked away on AIM too | |||
[09:06am] ctalbert: Let's go ahead and do what we can, because I have another meeting | |||
in 30 mins. | |||
[09:06am] ctalbert: In hopes that lilmatt will join soon, let's start with the AMO categories | |||
[09:07am] xFallenAngel: Ok. Archaeopteryx wanted to write up some descriptions for me, | |||
since I didn't get to doing that. We need a description for each category | |||
[09:07am] ctalbert: What are the categories? | |||
[09:07am] Archaeopteryx: [17:00:44] Archaeopteryx: Fallen|away: | |||
http://wiki.mozilla.org/User:Archaeopteryx/Calendar_Categories | |||
[09:08am] ssitter joined the chat room. | |||
[09:08am] xFallenAngel: sec | |||
[09:08am] xFallenAngel: bug 375050 | |||
[09:08am] xFallenAngel: c10 | |||
[09:09am] ctalbert: I see | |||
[09:09am] xFallenAngel: Archaeopteryx: Thanks, that looks nice. | |||
[09:09am] ctalbert: Archaeopteryx: very nice | |||
[09:09am] Archaeopteryx: maybe there should be a language packs category, too | |||
[09:10am] ctalbert: Wouldn't that be handled under the L10N project? | |||
[09:10am] sipaq joined the chat room. | |||
[09:10am] ctalbert: Hi sipaq, ssitter, status meeting is here today | |||
[09:10am] xFallenAngel: There will be a Language Support and Translation category, | |||
but I'd say just take the same text as with firefox | |||
[09:10am] ctalbert: +1 | |||
[09:10am] Archaeopteryx: ok | |||
[09:10am] Archaeopteryx: ctalbert: aol user? | |||
[09:11am] ctalbert: rhlonekinshar | |||
[09:11am] ctalbert: (long story) | |||
[09:11am] sipaq: ctalbert: ok, I'm leaving the call | |||
[09:12am] sipaq: have you guys already finished talking about 0.5? | |||
[09:12am] xFallenAngel: The only open point is the Themes, Wil suggested to just | |||
make one general category for themes, since sunbird is so "young". | |||
[09:12am] xFallenAngel: no, we put that towards the end | |||
[09:12am] ctalbert: I would agree with that. I don't know why we would need more | |||
than one actually | |||
[09:12am] • ctalbert looks at Fx | |||
[09:13am] xFallenAngel: Icon packs, full themes etc | |||
[09:13am] ctalbert: oh I see | |||
[09:13am] ctalbert: I think we can start with just a "themes" category and then | |||
branch out as we grow | |||
[09:14am] sipaq: I agree | |||
[09:14am] ssitter: Firefox uses Miscellaneous, Sports, Nature, Animals, Retro, Compact, | |||
OS Integration, Modern, Large | |||
[09:14am] ssitter: but we don't need that much | |||
[09:14am] ctalbert: true. Here's the link, just as an FYI: | |||
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:2 | |||
[09:14am] ssitter: one is ok I'd said | |||
[09:15am] xFallenAngel: Ok, so I'll take care of the remaining steps for that. I | |||
guess we can go to 0.5 Status now | |||
[09:15am] ctalbert: cool. | |||
[09:15am] ctalbert: Sipaq, want to take the lead? | |||
[09:15am] sipaq: sure | |||
[09:16am] sipaq: as far as I can see, we have only the Mac 10.3 bug outstanding | |||
[09:16am] sipaq: and this bug has a patch, wchich still needs to be tested | |||
[09:16am] sipaq: IMO nothing is holding up an RC1 right now | |||
[09:16am] sipaq: we just need someone to package a multi-locale lightning builds | |||
[09:17am] xFallenAngel: was that timezones bug fixed that required l10n? I didnt | |||
quite follow that... | |||
[09:17am] sipaq: xFallenAngel: yes, that bug was fixed 2 days ago | |||
[09:17am] xFallenAngel: great | |||
[09:17am] ctalbert: I can call Matt and see if he has time for that. If not, maybe | |||
I can package the lightning builds...I don't know if I have everything required. | |||
[09:17am] sipaq: and as far as I can see, most localizers have already fixed their locales | |||
[09:17am] ssitter: you can't package Lightning until all the locales have been fixed too | |||
[09:18am] ctalbert: Good point | |||
[09:18am] xFallenAngel: how many are missing? | |||
[09:18am] Siwy4444 joined the chat room. | |||
[09:18am] sipaq: ssitter: do you have an overview, which locales still need fixing, | |||
meaning their tinderboxen are green? | |||
[09:18am] ssitter: http://ssitter.googlepages.com/tinderbox-l10n-branch | |||
[09:19am] ssitter: 14 are still orange | |||
[09:19am] ssitter: 7 are back to green | |||
[09:19am] ctalbert: sipaq, about the Mac OS X bug (372287), I thought that lilmatt | |||
recommended we go ahead and check in Daniel's patch to let the Tbox build it. I thought | |||
lilmatt said he could test the patch if he had binaries from a tbox. But, he can't | |||
build it himself on 10.3. | |||
[09:20am] sipaq: ctalbert: yes, can you do the checkin? | |||
[09:20am] sipaq: ssitter: can you poke the locale owners in md.l10n? | |||
[09:20am] ctalbert: Yeah, I can do that. It also looks like Tony stepped up to test | |||
the patch (comment 16) | |||
[09:21am] ctalbert: sipaq, I will give Tony a day to test, and then based on his | |||
recommendation will check it in. If it doesn't pass his test, no need to check it in. | |||
[09:21am] sipaq: ctalbert: right | |||
[09:21am] ssitter: sipaq: this morning I also added comments to the existing l10n bugs | |||
[09:22am] daniel: remember: that patch is just a wild guess from me... | |||
[09:22am] daniel: | |||
[09:22am] ctalbert: true | |||
[09:22am] sipaq: ssitter: great, BTW you should really be added to our team page as | |||
our l10n liaison. Send me a short bio | |||
[09:22am] sipaq: Hey daniel, how is it in the states? | |||
[09:22am] daniel: nice, big | |||
[09:23am] daniel: lots of intersting people here | |||
[09:23am] daniel: we should really put more focus on caldav | |||
[09:23am] daniel: it's moving forward... | |||
[09:23am] ctalbert: It's moving rather quickly too, as I understand | |||
[09:23am] daniel: all people looking for good clients... | |||
[09:23am] ctalbert: (compared to 2445, 2446 etc) | |||
[09:23am] xFallenAngel: daniel: were you able to slap someone at yahoo or google to | |||
use caldav? | |||
[09:23am] daniel: ctalbert: yes | |||
[09:24am] sipaq: ssitter: can you tell l10n owners, that we will release RC1 without | |||
their locale, if they do not fix their strings by Friday evening | |||
[09:24am] sipaq: I will blog about it, too | |||
[09:24am] daniel: actually google is attending the roundtable, dont know what they are planning | |||
[09:24am] daniel: maybe caldav soon... | |||
[09:24am] ssitter: btw, what is the status of the l10n bugzilla contact that should be | |||
created to watch l10n changes in calendar? | |||
[09:24am] sipaq: ssitter: I don't know how to create an alias | |||
[09:24am] ctalbert: sipaq, ssitter, I will make a blog post with an update and announce | |||
a test day for next week (hopefully with locales) | |||
[09:25am] ctalbert: ssitter, like the QAContacts? | |||
[09:25am] ssitter: I think there was something discussed like that some weeks ago | |||
[09:25am] sipaq: ctalbert: can you ask mozilla people, if they could create a | |||
calendar-l10n@mozilla.bugs bugzilla alias for us that localizers can watch? | |||
[09:26am] ctalbert: I can. I'll ask the QA guys that work on the L10N stuff, they | |||
should know how to go about doing that. | |||
[09:26am] sipaq: ctalbert: yes, exactly like the QA contacts | |||
[09:26am] • ctalbert imagines we file a bug somewhere.... | |||
[09:26am] ctalbert: So, to wrap up: | |||
[09:27am] sipaq: ctalbert: I'll file a bug, but if you poke someone, it might actually | |||
be in this century | |||
[09:27am] sipaq: | |||
[09:27am] ctalbert: heh | |||
[09:27am] sipaq: s/be/be fixed | |||
[09:27am] ctalbert: sipaq, I have another question | |||
[09:27am] ctalbert: and daniel | |||
[09:28am] daniel: ok | |||
[09:28am] sipaq: yes? | |||
[09:28am] ctalbert: What about mschroeder 's recent patch to fix the iMIP bar alignment. | |||
It's a very small XUL only change and we tested it on several Tbirds/OS pairs. | |||
[09:28am] ctalbert: Can we take it for 0.5? | |||
[09:28am] ctalbert: mschroeder: have the bug number handy? | |||
[09:29am] mschroeder: 361634 | |||
[09:29am] mschroeder: oh no | |||
[09:29am] ctalbert: 379876 | |||
[09:29am] ctalbert: I think that's it ^ | |||
[09:29am] mschroeder: yep | |||
[09:29am] • daniel looks | |||
[09:30am] sipaq: ctalbert: if you have a good feeling, then we should take it | |||
[09:30am] sipaq: ctalbert: but I'll blame you, if something goes wrong | |||
[09:30am] ctalbert: I'm fine with that. | |||
[09:30am] ctalbert: | |||
[09:30am] mvl joined the chat room. | |||
[09:30am] mvl was promoted to operator by ChanServ. | |||
[09:30am] daniel: go | |||
[09:30am] ctalbert: thanks. I'll check it in later today. | |||
[09:30am] daniel: no prob | |||
[09:31am] ctalbert: Ok. Should I summarize things quickly? | |||
[09:32am] sipaq: ctalbert: that would be great | |||
[09:32am] ctalbert: xFallenAngel & Archaeopteryx will finalize all the issues with | |||
the categories AMO stuff | |||
[09:32am] ctalbert: ssitter will poke Localizers about getting their stuff fixed for | |||
Friday evening | |||
[09:32am] ctalbert: I will post an update on status to the blog about this and next | |||
week's test day | |||
[09:33am] ctalbert: I will call lilmatt and see about building a localized lightning | |||
next week | |||
[09:33am] ctalbert: I already poked Tony about his status on the Mac OS X bug, if | |||
that works out, I'll check in the change | |||
[09:33am] ctalbert: sipaq will file a bug about the L10N watcher | |||
[09:33am] ctalbert: I'll poke people about it | |||
[09:33am] sipaq: ssitter will send sipaq a short bio, so that he can be added to the | |||
team page on the project website | |||
[09:33am] sipaq: | |||
[09:34am] ctalbert: mschroeder: do you have cvs access, or do you need me to check | |||
in your patch? | |||
[09:34am] mschroeder: ctalbert: you have to check it in | |||
[09:34am] ctalbert: cool, no problem. | |||
[09:34am] ctalbert: Did I miss anything? | |||
[09:34am] • ctalbert is in another meeting now | |||
[09:34am] xFallenAngel: I have another concern, something I think we totally neglected | |||
during the F2F meeting: With regards to 1.0, what are we going to do about the ~600 open | |||
non-enhancement bugs that we have? Its nice to have new features, but we also want existing | |||
features to work and not have bugs. | |||
[09:35am] daniel: of course | |||
[09:35am] ctalbert: We need to look at that, for sure. | |||
[09:35am] • ctalbert wonders when we'll be able to do that | |||
[09:36am] xFallenAngel: I know some are duplicates and will go away when we implement | |||
the new features, but its still a lot | |||
[09:36am] daniel: yes, IMO the only way we have is to prio them | |||
[09:36am] xFallenAngel: I don't know if this problem goes away by itself, thats why I | |||
brought this up | |||
[09:36am] daniel: most wanted get fixed first etc | |||
[09:37am] ssitter: ok, so RC is planned for Friday? Will it be a real RC or an almost RC? | |||
(I think of things like official branding, no firefox support, version, update channel, ...) | |||
[09:37am] ctalbert: We could start out by prioritizing them with the "target release" flag. | |||
[09:37am] ctalbert: ssitter, I think we should do a real release | |||
[09:37am] ctalbert: er RC | |||
[09:37am] sipaq: ssitter: this should be a real RC | |||
[09:37am] ctalbert: So, we need people to execute ssitter's checklist | |||
[09:39am] ctalbert: volunteers? | |||
[09:39am] gavin_ left the chat room. (Ping timeout) | |||
[09:39am] ssitter: not to forget preparing the release notes | |||
[09:40am] ssitter: ctalbert: someone with cvs and stage account, I don't know if tinderbox | |||
access is required | |||
[09:40am] ssitter: too | |||
[09:40am] ctalbert: lilmatt.... | |||
[09:40am] sipaq: I'll have to go to a meeting | |||
[09:40am] sipaq: CU guys | |||
[09:40am] ctalbert: ok | |||
[09:41am] lilmatt: I just woke up. I'll check back once I shower and am at the office | |||
[09:41am] ctalbert: ssitter: Let me see if I can find lilmatt and we'll see if he can do | |||
it or walk me through it. | |||
[09:41am] xFallenAngel: create a bug, mark it blocking, put the checklist in it. I could | |||
probably do some things i.e remove firefox support. | |||
[09:41am] ctalbert: xFallenAngel: the checklist is on the wiki | |||
[09:41am] xFallenAngel: ah | |||
[09:41am] sipaq left the chat room. (Quit: Chatzilla 0.9.73 [BrowserTrunk 0.8.0.99/1177121277.10760]) | |||
[09:41am] xFallenAngel: but a bug would probably be nice anyway, just to ease tracking | |||
[09:42am] ctalbert: http://wiki.mozilla.org/User:Ssitter/ReleasePreparation | |||
[09:42am] ctalbert: true | |||
[09:43am] ssitter: (some of the items might be out-of-date or invalid) | |||
[09:43am] snotling left the chat room. (Quit: Parti) | |||
[09:43am] xFallenAngel: I'll make one, one sec | |||
[09:43am] ctalbert: ok | |||
[09:44am] gavin_ joined the chat room. | |||
[09:45am] xFallenAngel: But back to the 600 bugs: Is there a way we can reduce the number | |||
of bugs or prioritze them in in the course of a testday? | |||
[09:45am] xFallenAngel: (bug 380164 for the rc1 stuff) | |||
[09:46am] • ssitter thinks that if lilmatt has time he probably should write down what steps | |||
are required to switch a tinderbox/l10n-tinderbox into release mode and back | |||
[09:46am] ctalbert: xFallenAngel: thanks for the bug | |||
[09:46am] ctalbert: xFallenAngel: there may be a way to do this on a test day. | |||
I was also thinking the same thing. | |||
[09:46am] mvl: ehm, i doubt it | |||
[09:47am] mvl: prioritizing is for developers, not for users (=testers) | |||
[09:47am] xFallenAngel: Thats true, that was my second thought. Users will prioritize by what | |||
they want most. | |||
[09:47am] ctalbert: mvl: yeah, that's the one thing that gave me pause too | |||
[09:48am] xFallenAngel: but I don't know how we should manage all those bugs with our limited | |||
number of developers. | |||
[09:48am] xFallenAngel: So I think if we can assume that testers == power users, we can somehow | |||
integrate them to help us | |||
[09:48am] ctalbert: maybe we should have a "developer bug triage day" | |||
[09:49am] mschroeder: We should somehow categorize all those bugs (more detailed than components). | |||
[09:49am] mvl: to me, bug counts means nothing | |||
[09:49am] ctalbert: right, but there are a set of those out there we want to address for 1.0 | |||
[09:50am] ctalbert: if we can flag some as more important, we can ask folks in the community to | |||
help out by starting on patches for those | |||
[09:51am] xFallenAngel: I think what would help us be organized is to not (only) put priorities | |||
in the bugs, but maybe we can make a wiki page. The page could contain bugs sorted by how severe | |||
they are, partly in relation to each other. I.e you can say "bug AAA seems to be more important | |||
than the bug BBB thats already on the page, I'll put it on top of that one." | |||
[09:52am] xFallenAngel: I also think that bug numbers are not the most important thing, but we | |||
don't want to have buggy code with a lot of features. We should at least know where the "important" | |||
bugs are. | |||
[09:52am] mvl: what does 'important' mean? | |||
[09:52am] mvl: using a wiki to do things that bugzilla already can do sounds silly to me | |||
[09:52am] ssitter: by going throught the roadmap you could set 'Target Milestone' and/or 'Priority' | |||
on the bugs | |||
[09:52am] mvl: bugzilla has a severity field. you can use that | |||
[09:53am] xFallenAngel: but can you graph bugs as in "A is more important than B" ? | |||
[09:53am] ctalbert: I was thinking we could use the "target milestone" field to indicate bugs we | |||
want for 1.0 | |||
[09:53am] mvl: you can sort on severity | |||
[09:53am] ctalbert: but no, you can do a graph of that. | |||
[09:54am] ssitter: mmh, severity (impact) of a bug is not the same as the priority to add it | |||
to a particular release | |||
[09:55am] mvl: you have severity and priority. That's enough. We should not copy that all | |||
into a wiki (which will be out-of-sync most of the time) | |||
[09:55am] ssitter: agreed | |||
[09:55am] xFallenAngel: Hm ok. I'd be fine with priorities/milestones. I just fear that | |||
at some point we will have an unmanagable number of bugs marked for 1.0, when we get | |||
towards 1.0 that would definitly hold us up. | |||
[09:56am] ctalbert: And we need some people to go through bz and tag bugs w.r.t. | |||
milestone/priority/severity too. | |||
[09:57am] ssitter: xFallenAngel: in that case 1.0 is not ready and must be shifted | |||
or the bugs need to be triaged again | |||
[09:58am] xFallenAngel: maybe we could go with a policy of "not more than xxx bugs with | |||
target 1.0, if so then try to move other 1.0 bugs either to post-1.0 or a lower release" | |||
[09:59am] mvl: no. bug count does not mean a thing! | |||
[10:01am] ssitter: this is correct, look at all the open Firefox and Thunderbird bug numbers | |||
[10:01am] ctalbert: I think he just meant as a way to ensure we fix *some* of those for 1.0. | |||
[10:02am] xFallenAngel: So we conclude that we just need to prioritize and mark targets | |||
and hope that all goes well? | |||
[10:03am] ctalbert: I think we can do that, and we can add some markings for "good first | |||
bugs" so that we can recruit more people to help. | |||
[10:05am] ssitter is now known as ssitter|afk. | |||
[10:05am] ctalbert: I think we're out of time here. Discussion can continue, of course, | |||
but I'll cut from here and post this to the wiki. | |||
</pre> | |||