Meeting Minutes for May 16th 2010

<chris> #### Meeting Begins ####
[20:23:57]<chris> Agenda
[20:24:08]<chris> 1. Legacy functions discussion
[20:24:18]<chris> 2. Hosting and site move
[20:24:27]<chris> 3. Aruba 1.2.1 release
[20:24:37]<chris> 4. Project marketing strategy
[20:24:48]<chris> 5. Module versions (in the repos)
[20:24:52]<chris> 6. Open floor
[20:25:03]<chris> quite a list :)
[20:25:33]<random> yea
[20:26:39]<chris> care to kick us off with legacy functions?
[20:26:47]<random> sure
[20:27:09]<random> as you perhaps know
[20:27:30]<random> jamaica is at present supporting a bunch of legacy 
function
[20:27:47]<random> I'd like to propose a timetable for removing them
[20:28:17]<random> basically I'd like to announce removal in 2.2.0 and 
beginremoving in 2.3.0
[20:28:52]<random> starting with thos things that are embedded in the code
[20:29:03]<random> rather than simple function redirects
[20:29:30]<random> I just want to get agreeement that we can begin this 
process in 2.3.0
[20:29:56]<chris> ok, well first q I have is when do you anticipate 2.3.0 
appearing?
[20:30:37]<random> maybe in4 months?
[20:30:41]<random> first beta
[20:31:05]<chris> k
[20:31:06]<random> maybe a bit later
[20:31:32]<chris> what does embedded in the code mean?
[20:32:01]<random> if ($id == 4 || $uid == 4)...
[20:32:04]<random> shite like that
[20:32:06]<chris> aha
[20:32:22]<chris> so those would go in the 2.3.0 release
[20:32:25]<random> it offends my esthetics :)
[20:32:35]<chris> with function redirects removed later?
[20:32:49]<random> well we can remove those any time really
[20:32:56]<chris> ok
[20:33:00]<random> I haven't made a list
[20:33:15]<random> just wanted to get agreement on "earliest date"
[20:33:49]<random> other example
[20:33:52]<chris> tbh, I have no issues with removing them in 2.3.0, for me 
they add a layer of confusion
[20:33:57]<random> .xd support
[20:34:04]<random> it's embedded in hte code
[20:34:09]<random> yea
[20:35:03]<chris> same applies to xd support too, I thought that was long 
gone in jamaica
[20:35:09]<random> basically this stuff is all supposed to help backward 
compatibility to 1x modules
[20:35:12]<primus> I would have thought xd support would have already been 
eliminated
[20:35:12]<chris> even aruba supports xt now
[20:35:31]<random> yea well
[20:36:12]<random> this is for all those modules that are outliers
[20:37:15]<primus> are any of those modules ones that currently work with 
x2?
[20:37:30]<random> ?
[20:37:48]<random> these are vasically 1x modules we're talking about
[20:38:00]<chris> applies to all 1x modules really neil, when legacy support 
is turned on jamaica
[20:38:09]<primus> ok - sorry
[20:38:54]<random> any other opinions?
[20:39:27]<chris> fwiw, mine is, go ahead with your proposal
[20:40:13]<random> k
[20:40:23]<chris> on a side note, I'd like to see the existing legacy funcs 
farmed out to a module if at all possible (I know we discussed it before)
[20:41:02]<random> possible I guess, not sure what is involved
[20:41:09]<chris> I don't see that it's a long term maintainable option 
anyway though
[20:41:11]<Robert> I am okay with this, though I wish mikespub was here for 
his thoughts on the matter
[20:41:55]<random> he can still state his opinion. not like this has any 
immediate consequences
[20:42:29]<chris> yeah, we have 4 months at least before it becomes an issue 
of any kind
[20:42:41]<random> at least
[20:43:01]<Robert> I understand that ;)
[20:43:38]* random suggests we move on
[20:43:42]<chris> so you agree in principle to the proposal? :)
[20:44:23]<Robert> Yes I do
[20:45:43]<chris> ok, then we'll leave it to marc to take care of issuing a 
warning with 2.2.0 that the legacy code will be disappearing :)
[20:46:14]<random> k
[20:47:06]<chris> ok, next topic
[20:47:20]* chris scrolls up
[20:47:41]<chris> ah, yes, hosting and site move
[20:48:01]<chris> the latest news is we no have hosting kindly donated by 
Brian at neosurge
[20:48:15]<chris> moves are afoot to move the main site there
[20:48:36]<random> cool
[20:48:59]<chris> I don't have a timetable for the move as yet, I should 
have a better idea by next weeks meeting
[20:50:14]<chris> I'll probably have a list of related tasks by then too
[20:50:33]<Robert> Likes the sound of that
[20:51:19]<chris> I have nothing to add to this topic atm, any questions?
[20:51:31]<Robert> I am good
[20:51:40]<random> no
[20:52:01]<primus> no
[20:52:08]<chris> ok then, moving on :)
[20:52:15]<chris> 1.2.1 release
[20:52:29]<chris> not much to say on this, release already happened
[20:52:43]<random> cool
[20:54:20]<chris> there's a couple of other little bug fixes and pending 
commits which will probably see a 1.2.2 release appear in a couple of months 
time
[20:56:05]<chris> anyone anything to add?
[20:56:47]<Robert> Not I, besides a thankyou to all that made 1.2.1 happen 
:)
[20:57:00]<random> +1
[20:57:11]<chris> +1
[20:57:41]<chris> ok, moving on, next up, project marketing strategy
[20:57:58]<random> just breezing through aren't we
[20:58:19]<chris> shhhh, don't jinx it
[20:58:28]<random> k
[20:58:33]<chris> :D
[20:58:49]<random> I put that topic on as a follow up
[20:59:00]<random> to the discussion of modules last week
[20:59:16]<random> seems to me the two go hand in hand
[20:59:33]<random> and we should start by defining a strategy
[21:00:09]<random> otherwise development proceeds at its ownpace
[21:00:14]<random> and its own goals
[21:00:40]<random> I see defining a strategy as an opportunity
[21:00:52]<random> who wants to run with it?
[21:01:21]<chris> have to confess, marketing isn't my area at all, so 
developing policy on it wouldn't sit well with me
[21:01:35]<chris> Robert and Tim would seem the best suited candidates
[21:01:49]<random> group effort of course
[21:01:54]<chris> of course
[21:02:02]<random> but yes,should have a lead
[21:02:20]<Robert> I would be happy to help work on a strategy. I guess my 
first question what are our goals for said marketing strategy?
[21:03:21]<chris> gain in popularity
[21:03:25]<chris> more developers
[21:03:27]<chris> more users
[21:03:57]<random> help make the project more self sustaining
[21:04:17]<random> less reliant on specific ppl
[21:05:20]<random> raise visibility
[21:06:57]<Robert> Mighty good goals ;)
[21:07:12]<chris> that enough for you to work with then?
[21:07:20]<random> Xaraya needs to become a contender
[21:07:29]<Robert> It is a start
[21:07:44]<primus> I also think
[21:07:51]<chris> xaraya needs to decide what it's contending with
[21:08:09]<primus> a part of marketing is allowing easy access to new users 
to try everything out
[21:08:51]<primus> as close to one-click access to modules and themes as we 
can get
[21:09:37]<Robert> I think we will see that with a new build system/release 
module. (Just putting it out there)
[21:09:55]<Robert> But you are very correct primus
[21:10:07]<primus> just emphasizing it is a part of marketing
[21:10:21]<random> marketing implementation perhaps yes
[21:10:35]<random> first step though
[21:10:45]<random> is to agree on a strategy and goals
[21:13:09]<random> make sense?
[21:13:26]<primus> yes
[21:13:59]<Robert> Yes
[21:14:45]<Robert> Our primary goal is to increase visibility which in turn 
brings more people in, a secondary goal though just as important is to make 
the site more community oriented let people get more involved. Both of these 
goals would help a third goal of getting more developers and other experts 
on the team. (Just thinking out loud)
[21:17:01]<random> don't forget competition and market segments :)
[21:17:12]<chris> is increased visibility enough to bring people in? don't 
we need a carrot?
[21:17:58]<chris> build it and they will come doesn't cut it
[21:18:19]<primus> i think increased visibility needs to follow an organized 
environment, in order for people to stay
[21:18:54]<random> +1 @chris
[21:19:10]<Robert> Well those there goals not the actions ;)
[21:21:49]<chris> so our goal is to produce a product so compelling people 
have to have it, coupled with the infrastructure for them to get the most 
out of it they possibly can, with the least effort
[21:22:08]<Robert> ;)
[21:22:11]<chris> all that begs the question though, who are *they*
[21:23:28]<chris> do we want to appeal to the wp crowd? the 
xoops/drupal/nameyourcms crowd? some other as yet untapped market?
[21:23:53]<chris> xaraya, jack of all trades, master of none, it's both a 
blessing and a curse
[21:24:29]<primus> i think the drupal crowd may be the closest match, IMHO
[21:24:39]<Robert> I think we will touch the edges of all those markets. 
With your (chris) modules for example we do communication/community real 
well compared to other app frameworks
[21:25:26]<chris> we do a mean forum, I wouldn't say we're up to snuff in 
the community sense though (yet)
[21:26:30]<Robert> Well it was an example we still do it better then any of 
the others (that I have tested) If that isn't what we want to do well, its a 
matter of defining that.
[21:26:42]<chris> ditto publishing could be better, in fact most modules 
could be better, the core is great, it's the modules that will make or break 
xaraya though
[21:26:45]<Robert> What are we as a group willing and able to do for 
example?
[21:27:09]<random> publishing needs improvement yes
[21:28:28]<Robert> What are our needs as a group (I am no that should be the 
basis of what we do the greater good always comes first, but it starts the 
ball rolling)
[21:28:41]<chris> if we take the projects needs alone for the new jamaica 
based site we need a solid module for docs and a wiki
[21:28:47]<random> e-commerce
[21:28:55]<Robert> With said needs, what could be done better.
[21:31:16]<Robert> Another question, less on point but valid, an idea I 
proposed to Marcs comment on the forums about modules was having a Module 
Development lead. Is there anyone in the community that might be interested? 
Mikespub comes to mind I am sure there are others who would be quilified.
[21:31:42]<chris> lead to do what?
[21:33:39]<random> kead the dev effort of modules
[21:33:49]<random> lead even
[21:34:01]<chris> sure, but what does that mean exactly?
[21:34:02]<Robert> Well that part was a discussion about "first party 
modules" Again I am just thinking out loud. Put there resposibility would be 
to work in tandom with the PMC and lead developer to improve any modules we 
decide to have first pary modules of. What random said :P
[21:34:17]<Robert> But*
[21:35:34]<chris> ok, so someone to take responsibility for maintaining 
modules then?
[21:35:50]<random> yes
[21:36:12]<random> fix priorities, do releases etc.
[21:36:15]<chris> that poses a number of questions, first being which 
modules exactly?
[21:36:32]<Robert> Not only maintaining them but working with the lead 
developer of core and the community strategizing (and maybe delegating 
improvement of modules)
[21:36:40]<random> suggested by the strategy
[21:36:52]<chris> too vague
[21:37:22]<random> the way I see it is
[21:37:26]<chris> you're not gonna get any response to that question until 
modules and responsibilities are defined
[21:37:39]<random> strategy --> market segments --> priority modules
[21:37:54]<chris> yep, I'd agree with that
[21:38:15]<Robert> Which modules, thats a good question, Marc made allot of 
good points on what should be considered. Though at first I think it would 
come down to any modules the project needs to have a functioning project 
site and modules that would help us market our product to any given market
[21:38:46]<chris> well, to an extent, yes the projects needs will steer 
development on some modules
[21:39:27]<random> I don't really see the site as driving the modules
[21:39:37]<random> we could just as well do the site in joomla
[21:40:04]<Robert> Yes but we lose lots of marteting potential using there 
product :P
[21:40:07]<chris> that makes no sense
[21:40:47]<random> in our case it perhaps doesn't make a lot of sense
[21:40:59]<chris> to use our own code?
[21:41:56]<Robert> Take publishing for instance. The improvemnts we would 
like, I would say most content based sites would enjoy those enhancements so 
I do see the projects needs stearing some development.
[21:41:57]<primus> i would say that every module mandatory to run the xaraya 
site would be priority modules - tier 1 modules
[21:42:04]<random> but there are plenty of projects whose sites are not done 
by their product
[21:42:23]<chris> I'm looking at the people we have
[21:42:39]<primus> what successful project doesnt use their own product?
[21:42:46]<chris> do we have anyone who's a joomla, drupal or someothercms 
guru?
[21:43:24]<chris> it's a damning indictment of our product to use a rival 
for our own site IMO
[21:43:35]<random> http://gallery.menalto.com/
[21:43:46]<primus> i've used them all - just playing around, that is
[21:44:14]<chris> gallery isn't a cms though, not a very good example really
[21:44:19]<Robert> Okay if we take development based projects as an example 
an open source IRC client with add ons would have almost the exact same 
needs as us. So letting our own needs stear some development isn't a 
problem, as long as we leave most solotions generic enough that anyone could 
use them.
[21:44:43]<random> fair enough
[21:45:40]<primus> i think one problem in the past is xaraya was originally 
built around using the comments module for the site; and avoiding the 
appearance of a CMS
[21:46:26]<Robert> But let\rquote s run with Chris\rquote s example. What 
are the projects needs internally. Docs, community based wiki, forums, 
bugzilla module (to tie it to the site and feel more integrated,) release 
module, build system (tied into several systems,) and a monotone/git module 
for our revision control system. The first few modules need to be very 
scalable, and our internal needs will mess with most other content based or 
project based sites.
[21:47:10]<Robert> That doesn\rquote t mean other needs will not be factored 
in hell it better be, but to say our needs (the project) don\rquote t factor 
is silly.
[21:47:12]<primus> uploads, images - for publising
[21:48:36]<chris> actually, I'd like to see all docs in the wiki, with some 
only editable by the project and others open for community contributions
[21:49:06]<chris> none of this project docs crap we have now, stuff is all 
over the place for no good reason
[21:49:48]<chris> sorry, slightly ot there </end rant>
[21:49:52]<Robert> Well I agree Chris ;)
[21:50:30]<random> don't really see the point of making a bugzilla module, 
for example
[21:51:30]<chris> we don't have to, might be worth exploring a means to list 
latest bugs on site though
[21:51:54]<chris> move people away from those abonimable lists
[21:52:29]*** jojo|away has quit IRC
[21:52:53]<random> so how should we proceed on this topic?
[21:53:04]<chris> did we agree on goals?
[21:53:07]<random> I see the discussion here as a first step
[21:53:23]*** jojo has joined #pmc
[21:53:40]<random> nope, haven't agreed on anything yet :)
[21:53:48]<chris> so do I, I see this discussion running through several 
meetings
[21:53:53]<Robert> It was an idea, it would be nice if people could interact 
with bugzilla with the same cradentials as on xar.com it lowers the barrier 
to entry. Makes things easier but its clearly not a huge deal either way.
[21:53:54]<random> sure
[21:54:11]<primus> a agree with that
[21:54:41]<random> robert: was just challenging the assumption that it's 
really important given bugzilla is already there
[21:55:29]<random> ideally there would eventually be some sort of
[21:55:29]<Robert> I wasn't saying we need to make a new bug tracker, but 
use the API's in bugzilla (in a module) so the site could interface with it. 
Not imporatant I agree
[21:55:38]<random> dare I say it
[21:55:42]<random> position paper
[21:56:00]<jojo> morning everyone - just reading back. Once comment about 
existing site in response to content etc - we had no xarpages when it was 
done, and @primus - we purposely steered away from using comments as that 
introduced a lot of work following them up everywhere so we didn't have 
them - only forums
[21:56:14]<jojo> *one comment, sorry (rushing here)
[21:56:28]<primus> hi jo ;)
[21:56:34]<jojo> hi :)
[21:57:47]<jojo> re modules - we did never separate them into 1st or 3rd 
party - it was a community effort and 3rd party devs were encouraged to 
register and work on their modules - the most popular put into the base 
distro
[21:58:04]<jojo> they were all 3rd party if not in core distro
[21:58:50]<Robert> I propose we open a topic on the forums for project 
marketing strategy, put some goals, work on action ideas and pick it up at 
the next meeting.
[21:59:01]<random> +1
[21:59:04]<chris> +1
[21:59:21]<chris> robert, would you mind being the one to make that topic?
[21:59:31]<Robert> Would not mind at all :)
[21:59:34]<random> no holds barred yes?
[21:59:42]<chris> cool, thanks
[21:59:54]<Robert> no holds barred of course
[22:00:08]<random> sounds good
[22:01:33]<jojo> @primus - "i think increased visibility needs to follow an 
organized environment, in order for people to stay"
[22:01:38]<Robert> Jo to clarify no decision has been made on modules in 
that sense it\rquote s just an idea floating at the moment.
[22:01:42]<jojo> ++ to that - i think that is a key issue
[22:02:22]<jojo> @Robert - no prob, just reiterating what the situation was 
as i was going to say that maintenance was a key issue
[22:02:37]<jojo> and we had a lot of people about, but maintaining modules 
was too much work
[22:03:04]<jojo> i can attest to that eg esp when we had module fixes that 
had to go across all modules - mainly to support core
[22:03:18]<jojo> so actually doing other things and maintaining them was 
huge
[22:03:42]<jojo> i did it as i was sposedly on pmc and in charge of the 
modules repo at the time
[22:03:54]<jojo> but then we had people help like marcel
[22:05:09]<jojo> besides - the aim was to encourage a community of devs not 
take over from the community
[22:05:54]<jojo> @primus - i think organization is the key - i'd say it's 
critical for success
[22:09:28]*** Paul_C has joined #pmc
[22:09:58]<random> move on?
[22:10:26]<chris> sure
[22:10:39]<Robert> +1
[22:10:48]<chris> next topic, modules in the repo's
[22:11:54]<random> the question here is: do we keep different versions of 
modules
[22:12:05]<random> in the repository
[22:12:13]<random> specific case:
[22:12:24]<chris> diff versions being different to each release yes?
[22:12:37]<random> 2.2.0 requires changes in the modules
[22:12:41]<random> so what do we do
[22:12:50]<random> keep 2.1.0 compatible versions
[22:12:56]<chris> yep, s'what I thought you meant
[22:13:07]<random> or just forget them and keep 2.2.0 compatible versions
[22:13:22]<chris> how unwieldy will the repo's become with a branch per core 
version?
[22:13:47]<chris> well,we need 2.1.0 compatible versions for the 2.1.0 
release
[22:13:51]<jojo> can't you tag modules and checkout in the build process at 
a specific revision tag?
[22:13:52]<chris> and for the 2.1.0 rc
[22:14:22]<jojo> assuming we have a consitent naming convention for the tag 
names
[22:14:27]<random> sure, can tag revisions, and wedo so for the core
[22:14:51]<jojo> right - so cant' we extend that and checkout for the build 
process at those tag revisions
[22:15:06]<random> but that assumes we have stable modules in one version 
before we move to the next
[22:15:13]<Robert> Dumb question, can't we treat the module.jamaica.crispbb 
as bleeding edge, and say module.jamaica.cripsbb.2.1.0 as the one for said 
release or go the other way have modules.jamaica.crispbb as current stable 
version modules.jamaica.crispbb.2.2.0 and merg back.
[22:15:14]<random> plucking is not a practical option
[22:15:17]<jojo> it does now - no different
[22:15:31]<jojo> it's just an option
[22:15:54]<jojo> we used to go thru before release and ensure all modules in 
a specific distribution were stable - else they didn't go in
[22:15:58]<jojo> if u recall
[22:16:21]<random> take into account that we will have more frequent 
releases
[22:16:48]<random> assume half a year on the outside
[22:16:51]<jojo> so a policy of maintaining stability in the modules repo 
and tagging them for a specific release using standard format
[22:17:03]<jojo> if no specific tag for that release then they don't build?
[22:17:19]<jojo> just thinking 'out loud'
[22:17:26]<random> I don't understand
[22:18:58]<jojo> well, it's an alternative to lots of branches i spose but 
won't work if you want to also maintain specific branches longer term past 
release dates
[22:19:13]<jojo> then you are forced to go to release branches for modules - 
which also is an option
[22:19:38]<jojo> they can be removed or hived off to another db over time if 
the branches become an issue
[22:20:37]<jojo> that also assumes you maintain modules for 3rd party devs, 
or the 3rd party devs can use mtn in that way
[22:20:49]<jojo> at least for the modules you want in the repo
[22:21:26]<jojo> the more you take away from 3rd party devs, the less likely 
i think they will be to put their modules into the xaraya repository - ie 
more likely to maintain them separately
[22:21:41]<random> take away?
[22:21:48]<chris> no ones taking anything away from anyone?
[22:22:01]<jojo> heh i don't think you understand what i said
[22:22:17]<jojo> "that also assumes you maintain modules for 3rd party devs, 
or the 3rd party devs can use mtn in that way"
[22:22:58]<jojo> then i qualified and said that i think the more you take 
away (ie do things yourself instead of letting the 3rd party dev do it) the 
less likely .. etc etc
[22:24:07]<jojo> i basically was trying to consider all sides of the story - 
maintaining modules for different releases, doing releases, and encouraging 
contributions
[22:24:26]<jojo> they are intertwined
[22:24:59]<random> to summarize, tagging is not an option. the question then 
is whether it makes sense to try and maintain different module versions, or 
just keep moving to the latest version
[22:25:14]<random> knowing that that has an impact on prior core versions
[22:26:12]<jojo> well tagging could be an option then still - if you're 
trying to maintain different module versions
[22:26:15]<random> in other words, moving modules to 2.2.0 makes 2.1.0 les 
sinteresting perhaps
[22:26:35]<random> admittedly this won't happen with every core version
[22:26:39]<chris> I think we should go for a module branch per core version
[22:26:43]<jojo> *qualifying - tagging and release branches
[22:27:00]<jojo> you need to tag anyway at the release branch, like we do 
for core
[22:27:35]<random> OK, on the assumption that there aren't a lot of these 
modules anyway :)
[22:27:56]<random> think we need another db though :)
[22:28:12]<chris> yeah
[22:28:50]<jojo> why is that?
[22:28:58]<random> modules db is huge
[22:29:15]<jojo> why not hive off the modules no longer required to some 
other db then?
[22:29:29]<jojo> a 'retired modules' db?
[22:30:16]<random> as far as I know you can't delete module from a db
[22:30:21]<random> well that's not really true
[22:30:23]<jojo> makes no diff i guess which way you do it - although 
keeping current one means all scripts, users, builds or w/e don't have to 
change
[22:30:43]<random> but removing branches sort of a surgery mtn doesn't 
really like
[22:30:50]<jojo> you can delete branches from a db - either way you need to 
maintain history across dbs
[22:30:59]<jojo> which menas having at least the parent branch in the same 
db
[22:31:26]<jojo> at least for the 'active' modules db
[22:31:57]<jojo> I meant maintain history across the branches sorry
[22:32:01]<random> in a similar vein, I am going to open a repos for 
properties
[22:32:17]<jojo> heh going full circle then by the sounds of it
[22:32:24]<jojo> to when we had a separate properties directory
[22:32:24]<random> for new properties
[22:32:35]<random> yes
[22:32:47]<jojo> we had that until 1.0 release - got rid of it, due to 
various considerations as u know
[22:33:01]<random> and also hope to eventually move properties that don't 
really belong in core there
[22:33:10]<jojo> code issues, performance issues, packaging issues and so 
on - guess they can be looked at to solve
[22:33:20]<jojo> if you're going to separate them out again
[22:33:22]<random> yea, was an unfortunate decision
[22:33:34]<jojo> i mean that is why we put them in the modules dir
[22:33:41]<jojo> and got rid of the separate properties directory if you 
recall
[22:33:44]<jojo> due to the problems
[22:34:01]<jojo> oh - you're saying it's unfortunate that you need to do 
this again?
[22:34:17]<random> I'msaying that was an unfortunate decision
[22:34:26]<random> had negative consequences
[22:34:33]<jojo> eh?
[22:34:38]<jojo> it's been much better
[22:34:44]<jojo> no packaging problems, performance is better
[22:34:56]<jojo> code is easier
[22:35:00]<random> I don't see how this is aperformance issue
[22:35:12]<jojo> well marcel could perhaps elucidate
[22:35:28]<jojo> he was a key proponent of putting them back in a module 
directory
[22:35:37]<jojo> or back into base if they were not owned by a psecific 
module
[22:36:06]<jojo> packaging is not an issue if the property is a stand alone 
of course
[22:36:16]<random> properties have evolved a bit since then
[22:36:22]<random> andneed to evolve some more
[22:36:35]<random> so in the future
[22:36:43]<random> they can be in modules asnow
[22:36:47]<jojo> yes - i know the evolution
[22:37:00]<random> or as separate entities
[22:37:11]<jojo> right i'd agree with that
[22:37:13]<random> and for these there will be a separate repos
[22:37:21]<random> in this way
[22:37:30]<random> it will be possible to contribute
[22:37:33]<jojo> ok for seprate properties independent of modules
[22:37:34]<random> and use properties
[22:37:58]<random> without having to install modules for them
[22:38:01]<jojo> so 'non-core' properties
[22:38:11]<random> it is a degree of freedom so to speak
[22:38:11]<jojo> ones that you also dont' want to put into base module
[22:38:18]<jojo> well in some ways
[22:38:24]<jojo> each has pros and cons
[22:38:33]<jojo> i'm thinking you mean something different tho
[22:38:48]<jojo> ie these would usually go into base module - if they don't 
belong to a module
[22:38:54]<jojo> and they should be part of 'core'
[22:39:06]<jojo> what i feel you're talking about is a code override 
directory - where things like
[22:39:11]<random> I don't won't to load base module with dozens of new 
properties
[22:39:11]<jojo> properties, custom functions, or w/e
[22:39:13]<jojo> can be put
[22:39:20]<jojo> by anyone that wants to contribute
[22:39:41]<jojo> well is it shipped with core distro ?
[22:39:47]<jojo> if so it makes no difference what dir it's in
[22:40:00]<jojo> but having an override directory for personal properties 
etc would be different
[22:40:01]<random> base is a core module
[22:40:04]<jojo> yep
[22:40:15]<jojo> so you don't intent to ship these properties with the core 
distro?
[22:40:16]<random> not sure what you mean by override dir
[22:40:19]<jojo> makes sense then
[22:40:54]<jojo> well - a directory where people can put their own custom 
code, be it properties or w/e, including what we discussed in the past - ie 
overrides for existing functions
[22:41:08]<jojo> this is a discussion we had many moons ago - prolly a few 
times if u recall
[22:41:25]<random> I don't,but yes that is what it is
[22:41:28]<jojo> so no specifically an 'override directory' but a code 
library directory
[22:41:36]<random> take as an example the creditcard property
[22:41:41]<jojo> where you can have properties, or new module functions, or 
w/e
[22:41:56]<random> can be used by lots of modules
[22:42:03]<jojo> yes
[22:42:04]<random> but nothing core like
[22:42:09]<random> it is an ecommerce thing
[22:42:14]<jojo> sure - useful tho
[22:42:17]<jojo> like the email property
[22:42:27]<random> yes
[22:42:27]<jojo> or upload property
[22:42:42]<random> I'm excepting properties that are used by core modules
[22:42:51]<random> but take countrylisting for example
[22:43:17]<jojo> yep - something frequently used by people like the upload 
property in base
[22:43:29]<random> yes
[22:44:02]<jojo> oh - so you mean move those out to a separate directory?
[22:44:24]<random> we could, not in a hurry to do it though
[22:44:39]<random> just saying they are not really "core"
[22:45:05]<random> I'm more concerned with newer properties
[22:45:08]<jojo> well neither is mail really or roles but they offer key 
functionality used by majority of users i guess
[22:45:13]<random> finding a home for them
[22:45:42]<jojo> i think of core as the stuff in the includes dir in 1x or 
the lib dir exluding creole in 2x
[22:46:13]<random> yea correct, I meant core modules
[22:46:21]<random> email is used by roles
[22:46:23]<random> and so on
[22:46:39]<random> countrylisting isn't used anywhere in the core modules
[22:46:45]<jojo> so to me base is as good as any, and if people have custom 
properties with out a module then your idea of a separate dir would be 
good - and no need to ship with core distro
[22:46:56]<jojo> but people could download them right as required? that the 
idea?
[22:47:01]<random> anyway, most of this functionality is already in the main 
branch
[22:47:45]<jojo> that was i guess the idea of putting the properties into 
the Release module when i did it - and have their own registration (given 
they need to be identified uniquely)
[22:47:46]<random> yes, eventually I suppose we could organize nightlies
[22:48:02]<random> and folks could contribute single properties
[22:48:09]<jojo> or just get their authors to update in the release module
[22:48:19]<random> this alsohasthe good effect of making property code more 
self contained
[22:48:47]<jojo> true, but you'll need more code in core
[22:48:52]<jojo> *core distrbution at least
[22:48:53]<jojo> so heavier
[22:48:54]<random> with there own init routines
[22:49:01]<random> documentation etc
[22:49:32]<jojo> sounds like more complexity but improved documentation is 
always a good thing
[22:49:33]<random> additionto core code is less than 100 lines sofar
[22:50:02]<jojo> oh this is started, ok - didn't realize
[22:50:32]<random> anyway, I guess we're OT. just wanted to mention it in 
the context or repos
[22:50:40]<random> of repos
[22:50:52]<jojo> good stuff, thanks random appreciate your discussion on it
[22:51:12]<random> np
[22:52:47]<jojo> so back to branches and modules - separate branches for 
each module/release ?
[22:52:47]<random> move on?
[22:53:16]<jojo> if so then the build code needs to be updated prolly for 
efficiency
[22:53:41]<jojo> (put on the task list)
[22:53:47]<random> the modules involved at this point are few
[22:54:17]<jojo> k
[22:56:33]<random> chris?
[22:56:48]<chris> sorry, just reading back a way :)
[22:57:04]<chris> so, what decision on the module versions?
[22:57:13]<random> likeyousuggested
[22:57:19]<chris> right
[22:57:20]<chris> +1
[22:57:25]<random> lol
[22:57:38]<chris> :)
[22:57:58]<chris> ok, next topic then?
[22:58:06]<random> thinkso
[22:58:14]* chris nods
[22:58:45]<chris> open floor, anyone any topics they'd like discussed?
[22:59:12]<jojo> what happened to the servers that neosurge gave us in the 
past?
[22:59:43]<chris> he gave, had issues with his business and was out of 
contact with us for a while
[22:59:59]<jojo> no i mean the ones we were using
[23:00:06]<chris> we weren't using any afaik
[23:00:08]<jojo> we were using them for some time -
[23:00:12]<jojo> for all the network stuff
[23:00:29]<chris> since I've been here jo we had newton and davinci that's 
all
[23:00:31]<jojo> due to issues we had with getting the servers fixed when 
they broke- we had to remove it all
[23:00:44]<jojo> and move the stuff to newton (ev1) and marcel's servers
[23:00:50]<jojo> i'm just wondering whatever happened about that
[23:01:03]<jojo> it was a hassle at the time
[23:01:04]<chris> no idea
[23:01:21]<jojo> well anyway it gives us a new shot to get fresh serveres 
from a reliable source i guess
[23:01:25]<jojo> *fresh servers
[23:01:39]<random> reliable remains to be seen
[23:01:40]<jojo> or look at alternatives for at least web services
[23:02:01]<jojo> well there are a few good places to look - i was just 
raising it
[23:02:06]<jojo> as this was an issue some time back
[23:02:26]<jojo> not sure what the status is now
[23:03:19]<chris> you've lost me jo, we were looking for hosting, and 
neosurge has offered some
[23:03:26]<jojo> ie re the web rework and such - we need a place to host it 
so i was told some time ago, plus the actual migration/upgrade plan
[23:03:42]<jojo> oh - neosurge again - you mean he's offered since that time
[23:03:49]* chris nods
[23:04:03]<chris> sorry, thought you'd read back, I mentione that early on 
in the meeting
[23:04:04]<jojo> ah right - so you're going to take him up on it again or 
continue looking for an alternative this time?
[23:04:17]<chris> we've taken him up on it again
[23:04:27]<jojo> @chris - no i got here late, i'd have to look in the log i 
think to see it
[23:04:47]<jojo> well - ok, but you'll need a server admin
[23:04:56]<jojo> rabbitt used to do that for us when we used it last time
[23:05:18]<jojo> of course it was lucky as the issue with broken hardware 
could have been worse at the time
[23:05:24]<chris> yeah, we've needed a server admin for quite some time jo
[23:05:25]<jojo> but rabbitt managed to get it all off and back on ev1
[23:05:27]<chris> know any?
[23:06:58]<jojo> not really - non free anyway for extra work as required on 
brian's servers - unless you got some sort of maintenance thing as well?
[23:07:56]<chris> not really no, but that said, he's there to call upon for 
assistance if we really get stuck
[23:07:57]<jojo> as i mentioned - rabbitt had to do a lot of work, and was 
lucky he was avaialble to move it all back when it broke and setup the 
infrastructure on newton
[23:08:06]<jojo> heh ok
[23:08:12]<jojo> good luck :)
[23:08:25]<chris> lol, thanks
[23:08:56]<jojo> how many servers now to maintain?
[23:09:25]<chris> 3
[23:09:39]<jojo> so separating out the network services again from the web 
and mtn?
[23:09:49]<chris> that said, the monotone one marc's hosting isn't much work
[23:10:13]<jojo> true - easy stuff in terms of just maintaining mtn
[23:10:25]<jojo> i guess i was talking about the servers themselves
[23:11:11]<jojo> 2 then if marc is maintaining one
[23:12:02]<jojo> as mentioned before - if you only need space for web 
services then dan and i were happy to do that - and the server maintenance 
would be just part of our normal work
[23:12:29]<random> gotta go folks. thanks to chris and robert for organizing
[23:12:30]<jojo> so then you're only left with one server to maintain
[23:12:51]<chris> night marc
[23:12:59]<jojo> cya random
[23:13:09]<Robert> Thanks for coming random :)
[23:14:15]<jojo> btw you still have dan's name down as maintainer for all 
the lists in mailman - he hasn't been doing that for years, just so you 
know - perhaps you need to put someone on there as maintainer
[23:15:15]<chris> ah, right, no didn't know that, you're right
[23:15:39]*** random has quit IRC
[23:15:56]<jojo> there used to be requirement for approving messages etc - 
so not sure what's been happening there these last few years
[23:16:09]<jojo> guess PMC were handling it?
[23:16:17]<chris> you know about as much as me with regards to the lists jo
[23:16:23]<chris> I'd like to see them die tbh
[23:16:30]<jojo> the mailing lists?
[23:16:33]<chris> yes
[23:16:35]<jojo> gee they are the one thing i regularly look at
[23:16:45]<jojo> it's sooooo much easier then having to click thru every 
forum post
[23:16:48]<chris> I find them an inconvenience
[23:16:58]<jojo> plus i used to be able to search them and organize them 
nicely in my mail reader
[23:17:21]<jojo> now they are disappearing and all the good/useful posts 
have slowly been going (i guesss deleted off the server as i cant' get them 
back )
[23:17:43]<jojo> all the key dev projects have mailing lists - at least for 
dev discussion
[23:18:04]<chris> no one's deleted anything afaik, unless it purges them 
after some amount of time
[23:18:19]<jojo> that was one reason also we didnt use comments on 
xaraya.com - takes too much time to go thru each article or w/e the comments 
are posted and reply to them
[23:18:57]<jojo> forums at leat puts the comments in one place but still a 
pain really if u have a mailing list it's an efficient alternative
[23:19:01]<chris> I find it odd, it seems the project as a whole had an 
version to the web
[23:19:07]<chris> aversion*
[23:19:12]<jojo> no
[23:19:37]<jojo> i dont' think so - web is critical for marketing, 
communicating and so on
[23:19:44]<jojo> at least i think so
[23:19:55]<chris> that's how it seems, the web site and its users treated as 
second class citizens
[23:19:56]<jojo> perhaps some devs didn't like the web generally
[23:20:01]<chris> with devs hiding in mailing lists
[23:20:05]<jojo> nope - wasn't in the past
[23:20:15]<jojo> john and I specifically wanted the forum setup for users
[23:20:23]<jojo> and promised to maintain it when others wanted the lists
[23:20:30]<jojo> but the website has always been thought of as critical
[23:20:45]<jojo> one reason there are all the roles there is because Marcel 
wanted to demonstrate the usefulness
[23:20:54]<jojo> of xaraya to maintain real business infrastructure
[23:20:57]<chris> lol
[23:21:11]<jojo> and thus the intention to use the website also for the 
whole project
[23:21:35]<jojo> ie mailing to the team (well over 60 active contributors) , 
special sections for each team and so on
[23:21:36]<chris> how the hell is a backend system of any use as a 
demonstration for potential users?
[23:21:42]<jojo> it's not back end
[23:21:46]<chris> roles?
[23:21:47]<jojo> the roles list was open
[23:21:55]<chris> can users see the infrastructure?
[23:21:58]<jojo> he wrote an article on it and used the link as a 
demonstration
[23:22:03]<jojo> yep - could do at the time
[23:22:06]<jojo> may have been changed
[23:22:11]<jojo> there's an article on it lol
[23:22:29]<jojo> the whole web was setup to use and demonstrate xaraya to 
users and potential users
[23:22:34]<jojo> having the blog cloud
[23:22:52]<jojo> to demonstrate blogs
[23:22:58]<chris> sorry, but frankly I find the way roles is setup to be a 
mess
[23:23:05]<jojo> having dev centre for all dev related stuff
[23:23:19]<jojo> well - i dont' like it but that's the way it was on the old 
site
[23:23:25]<jojo> and the way people wanted it at the time
[23:23:32]<jojo> the article is probably still on site too that marcel did
[23:23:39]<jojo> although i cant' find anything these days - links are gone
[23:23:50]<jojo> there are bad links all thru google
[23:23:59]<jojo> and old useful docs i can't find anymore
[23:24:11]<jojo> i think the links must not have been considered when some 
content was migrated
[23:24:19]<jojo> ie no consideration for SEO or existing links
[23:24:23]<jojo> just removed and resetup
[23:24:28]<jojo> no migration plan?
[23:24:40]<jojo> anyway - i can probably find the doc for you if you want
[23:24:57]<chris> tbh, I don't really
[23:25:00]<jojo> and - it used to work for us at the time - it's quite a 
different setup now
[23:25:02]<chris> I can look at the result
[23:25:05]<jojo> there are only a few people doing stuff
[23:25:13]<jojo> no teams by the looks
[23:25:25]<jojo> so it becomes redundant for you
[23:25:36]<chris> even with teams it's ridiculous overkill
[23:26:19]<jojo> i think some things are defintiely
[23:26:27]<jojo> most was a copy from teh old site - the roles setup
[23:26:36]<jojo> which had been around before my time
[23:26:57]<jojo> however i think the intention was good - just xar couldn't 
handle it
[23:27:23]<jojo> if we wanted that at the time perhaps some other cms could 
have handled it better but then it would defeat the purpose
[23:27:35]<jojo> i belive we need to use xaraya for the web site
[23:27:41]<jojo> if we're serious about it
[23:28:01]<chris> of course
[23:28:03]<jojo> and i think too that has always been the intention - use it 
for what we want - if it's not up to scratch then we will see an dshould 
improve it in those areas
[23:28:06]<jojo> that was the idea
[23:28:23]<jojo> but i think that was forgot along the way - and then 2x was 
split off and that was that
[23:28:53]<jojo> one thing we did have was infrastructure
[23:28:57]<jojo> not perfect but evolving
[23:29:02]<jojo> and it's a pity that was lost
[23:29:20]<jojo> i agree with primus - we need some prior to visibility
[23:29:34]<jojo> or to be taken seriously
[23:29:35]<primus> :)
[23:29:37]<jojo> now we don't have any
[23:29:44]<jojo> or very little
[23:30:51]<chris> infrastructure and organization aren't really the same 
thing
[23:30:56]<jojo> of course not
[23:31:07]<jojo> we need both - they are different
[23:31:14]<jojo> we also dont' have organization atm
[23:31:25]<jojo> we had that before - gain not perfect, but evolving
[23:31:30]<jojo> one is a subset of the other really
[23:31:42]<chris> we have it now, not perfect, but evolving :)
[23:31:45]<jojo> what we had is mostly lost
[23:31:50]<jojo> has to be rebuilt
[23:32:05]<jojo> i think a mistake is to dismantle everything because it's 
not used - right now
[23:32:24]<chris> why?
[23:32:29]<jojo> i think making provision if you have a goal in mind is good
[23:32:35]<chris> it can always be re-instated when there's demand?
[23:32:42]<jojo> of course
[23:32:47]<chris> I assume you're talking about the lists there?
[23:32:50]<jojo> it's a matter of integrating all these things
[23:32:54]<jojo> with marketing as well
[23:33:00]<jojo> and perceptions of the public
[23:33:10]<jojo> plus whether or not you want ot continue to reinvent the 
wheel
[23:33:13]<jojo> or evolve
[23:33:22]<jojo> *perception to the public i mean
[23:33:44]<jojo> certainly yes - the lists are a sad state
[23:33:49]<jojo> so much information lost
[23:33:56]<chris> sorry, it must be late here, you've lost me now
[23:34:01]<jojo> some useful for research - so we dont' have to reinvent the 
wheel
[23:34:15]<jojo> some useful for historical reasons in a project such as 
this (was)
[23:34:28]<chris> jo, I've heard all this before
[23:34:40]<jojo> well, i guess i've always tried to take a systems 
approach - and consider impact of one area on another
[23:34:50]<chris> whilst I agree, you lamenting there loss is of little 
consequence
[23:34:51]<jojo> in response to your 'lost me now' comment
[23:35:03]<jojo> i'm stating it - you said you were lost
[23:35:13]<jojo> so i expanded on it
[23:35:26]<jojo> i realize with your last statement you were talking about 
something different
[23:35:34]<chris> heh, then it is late
[23:35:53]*** primus has quit IRC
[23:36:14]<chris> I should probably wrap up this meeting whilst I'm still 
conscious
[23:36:20]<jojo> yeah i wasn't actually talking about the lists 
specifically - just responding to your mention of them :)
[23:36:26]<jojo> lol ok
[23:36:43]<chris> right, yeah, crossed lines then
[23:36:46]<jojo> i don't know when it started - i noticed it still here when 
i dropped in
[23:37:02]<jojo> usually i miss it - unusual for me to be here at that time 
on monday morning
[23:37:08]<chris> #### Meeting Ends ####