15:00:35 #startmeeting 2022-09-13 - Developer Meeting 15:00:35 Meeting started Tue Sep 13 15:00:35 2022 US/Eastern. The chair is JBoyer. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:35 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:35 The meeting name has been set to '2022_09_13___developer_meeting' 15:00:39 #info Agenda at https://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=dev:meetings:2022-09-13 15:00:46 #topic Introductions 15:00:59 #info Dyrcona = Jason Stephenson, CWMARS 15:00:59 #info gmcharlt = Galen Charlton, Equinox 15:01:16 #info JBoyer = Jason Boyer, EOLI 15:01:22 #info jeffdavis = Jeff Davis, BC Libraries Cooperative (Sitka) 15:01:30 #info sandbergja = Jane Sandberg, Evergreen enthusiast 15:01:33 #info shulabear = Shula Link, GCHR in PINES 15:01:34 #info mmorgan = Michele Morgan, NOBLE 15:01:41 #info abneiman = Andrea Buntz Neiman, Equinox 15:01:53 #info rhamby = Rogan Hamby, Equinox 15:02:15 #info collum = Garry Collum, KCPL 15:02:21 #info terranm = Terran McCanna, PINES 15:02:40 #info stephengwills Maine Balsam Libraries 15:03:05 Others feel free to #info up as you filter in. 15:03:08 #topic Action Items from Last Meeting 15:03:13 #info Dyrcona will take a look at LP 1979357 15:03:13 Launchpad bug 1979357 in Evergreen "fixes for qatester failures" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1979357 - Assigned to Jason Stephenson (jstephenson) 15:03:33 I should probably have signed off on that already, I've already tested and verified most of it anyway. 15:04:04 just as long as some Jason looks at it 15:04:06 I have not had time to really look at it, so maybe I should remove myself from the bug? 15:04:09 Dyrcona, do you have time to investigate or should I grab that one 15:04:24 I'll take it then. 15:04:26 Dyrcona++ 15:04:36 JBoyer++ 15:04:39 #action JBoyer will take a look at LP 1979357 15:04:39 Launchpad bug 1979357 in Evergreen "fixes for qatester failures" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1979357 - Assigned to Jason Stephenson (jstephenson) 15:04:43 JBoyer++ 15:05:00 The other thing from last time, 15:05:01 #info JBoyer will propose LP users to trim from Drivers / Wranglers / etc. lists. 15:05:06 I did that, and Dyrcona cleaned them up. Hurrah. 15:05:09 Dyrcona++ 15:05:23 Unless someone has pressing updates that did not hit the agenda ( o.O ) we'll move on to LP stats 15:05:26 #info miker = Mike Rylander, EOLI, belated 15:05:35 JBoyer: one moment 15:05:46 sure thing 15:05:47 #info Bmagic = Blake GH, MOBIUS 15:06:11 * Dyrcona thinks we still have some Lp groups to clean up. 15:06:15 re 3.8 and 3.9 releases, I would like to declare a merge freeze for bugfixes by end of day tomorrow 15:06:32 for finalization (at long last) of the branches for maintenance releases on Thursday 15:07:10 gmcharlt++ and +1 even. 15:07:11 +1 15:07:32 gmcharlt++ 15:07:32 gmcharlt++ 15:07:39 * miker slowly backs away from the commit button 15:07:43 gmcharlt++ 15:07:45 gmcharlt++ 15:07:54 gmcharlt++ 15:08:00 Should we have a formal vote or just say, "hearing no objections...." :) 15:08:02 miker: no, sorry, you will have to wait until Friday to commit Evergreen/COBOL 15:08:04 gmcharlt++ 15:08:14 miker, It's like a yellow light when you drive like a Hoosier, it means speed up, not slow down! ;) 15:08:20 gmcharlt++ 15:08:25 I'll have Evergreen/FORTRAN in by EOB today, though 15:08:39 miker++ 15:09:14 Dyrcona, given the timeline and pace of recent commits I'm fine with "hearing no objections." 15:10:59 Ok. 15:11:24 is there a plan for release notes? 15:12:14 #info A merge freeze will be in effect EOB 9/14 so releases can be cut this week 15:12:23 an initial draft will be posted this evening; I'm not anticipate a great many additional patches between now and Wednesday evening 15:13:13 abneiman++ 15:13:15 gmcharlt++ 15:13:22 release_notes++ 15:13:56 release_notes++ 15:14:20 ok, we'll move on then if there are no other release updates 15:14:32 #topic Launchpad Status 15:14:35 #info Snapshot 15:14:39 #info Open Bugs - 2844 15:14:42 #info Pullrequests - 95 15:14:44 #info Signedoff - 62 15:14:49 #info Updates Since Last Meeting 15:14:53 #info Bugs Added - 52 15:14:58 #info Pullrequest tag Added - 28 15:15:02 #info Signedoff tag Added - 7 15:15:05 #info Fix Committed - 6 15:15:11 mmorgan++ 15:15:26 That brings us to the new 15:15:27 #topic New Business 15:15:35 #topic 3.10 release manager / team / etc. Volunteer, Voluntell, or Voluntold; your choice! 15:16:11 Who would like to bend 3.10 to their will? 15:16:24 I'd be happy to be part of a release team 15:16:32 sandbergja++ 15:16:39 That's great 15:16:39 sandbergja++ 15:16:39 sandbergja++ 15:16:50 sandbergja++ 15:16:57 sandbergja++ 15:17:05 sandbergja++ 15:17:15 sandbergja++ 15:17:55 I feel like I've been hogging a seat, but I'd be happy to help also. 15:18:13 mmorgan++ 15:18:19 I'm happy to continue organizing the BSW/FFs 15:18:22 mmorgan++ 15:18:25 terranm++ 15:18:28 terranm++ 15:18:33 terranm++ 15:18:37 Much like a conference call for programs, I don't think the applications are overflowing mmorgan. :) 15:18:39 mmorgan++ 15:18:42 terranm++ 15:18:45 and unofficially, there are some build things I can help codify and get out of my head for this release 15:18:52 mmorgan++ 15:18:56 mmorgan++ 15:19:00 terranm++ 15:19:05 gmcharlt++ 15:19:20 gmcharlt++ 15:19:24 mmorgan++ terranm++ 15:19:24 I've also meant to update a couple of the translation wiki pages for a while. 15:19:36 gmcharlt++ 15:20:00 so, sounds like a release team of sandbergja, mmorgan, terranm and me as a shadow 15:20:58 mmorgan++ terranm++ gmcharlt++ 15:21:28 gmcharlt++ 15:22:08 with respect to 3.10, I've got a question 15:22:32 the two biggest pieces I'm aware that are pending are the Angular patron/circ app and the Angular acquisitions blob 15:22:42 (yes, that's right, Acquisitions Blob is the new official title) 15:22:55 :) 15:23:05 I'm curious (terranm? berick?) how testing of the patron/circ app is going 15:23:32 There were a lot of small issues found during BSW that were tracked on a big ole spreadsheet. I'm not sure if any of those have been addressed yet. 15:23:46 (and where I'm leading up to is the question about whether Angular patron/circ is a 3.10 thing, 3.10 "experimental" thing, or a 3.11 thing) 15:24:14 (I'm partial, but I'm feeling generally pretty comfortable about Angular Acq Blob being suitable for 3.10) 15:24:15 IMO it could be experimental now, but it's not ready for prime time 15:24:52 Those interfaces get used a lot*. IMO the old and the new should be available for some number of releases 15:25:13 FYI: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PL04fcjom0l2xuum_Do-w04asn-ifAEHwuBY6yWIESQ/edit#gid=0 15:26:09 nicew 15:26:10 +1 to having both available for a transition period 15:26:20 Was there a previous discussion of a longer release schedule for 3.10, so that the patron screens are totally ready? 15:26:30 I feel like a significant overlap has been brought up before and wasn't seen as desirable. Unfortunately I think berick had the most to say about it but appears to be unavailable. 15:26:43 sandbergja: yeah, I recall there was a discussion a few meetings back 15:27:46 FWIW, I'm in the camp that some sort of overlap period is going to be a necessary evil, but I have significant concerns if such a period is allowed to go on too long 15:29:43 I think it would be best if we had an overlap period so that people can test functionality/ workflow and give feedback on what features work best 15:29:45 I wonder how many of us are reading the last meeting's notes... :D 15:30:12 so to spin a tale: maor testing in 3.10, possibly a non-default alt mode available in 3.10 (although I think I remember from berick that he doesn't think it would be easy to do that/) 15:30:41 3.11 - fully relased; new interface is default but can switch back as needed 15:30:55 3.12 - new interface only, the old one is actively removed 15:31:09 (and I acknowledge that that is probably an aggressive timeline) 15:31:17 I seem to recall him saying that the code could be in there so that certain new elements could be available to other interfaces without the new patron interfaces being visible 15:31:20 That sounds pretty good to me 15:31:30 The first step proposed last time was non-ui stuff first since so many components have been updated, that could be 3.10 even if the alt-mode isn't available yet 15:32:07 yeah, letting core component improvements in as early as possible would be good 15:32:14 +1 to that plan 15:32:16 +1 15:32:58 (and of course, calling out that Every. Last. One. Of. Us. would have to revamp circ desk training, directly or indirectly) 15:33:55 Yup 15:34:39 +1 to the proposed timeline 15:34:45 Although, IMO the interfaces / workflows aren't all that different. I don't think they're as different as going from the embedded OPAC to the current staff client. 15:34:57 +1 15:35:03 terranm++ 15:35:13 terranm: true, but the little differences can really catch folks, I suspect 15:35:26 gmcharlt++ 15:35:28 true 15:35:40 (And in the ways we least expect.) 15:35:58 terranm, yeah, the threat is that The Way Things are Done may be different enough between AngJS and Ang that this or that feature may not be 100% the same day one, even if present. 15:36:00 Practically everybody that works in a library will touch those screens, which is not necessarily true of other functions. 15:36:27 and breaking people's muscle memory is a real concern 15:37:34 As a cataloger I can attest that even the smallest change can completely throw us off our rhythm 15:37:36 gmcharlt++ 15:37:47 mrussell++ 15:37:52 gmcharlt ++ 15:38:04 I don't have a feel for how many frontline staff participate in BSW / FF, but maybe an extra callout to them would be a good idea 15:38:17 +1 15:38:19 hmm, and I just realized that Angular circ/app interesections with the next agenda item: standalone offline circ client 15:38:59 Depending on how that's handled it can be entirely separate and not intersect the client until the offline client is removed. 15:39:20 i.e., either that the Angular patron/circ app needs to be taught how to work offline, else we're never getting rid of the AngularJS circ app, or we run with the standalone clinet idea 15:39:49 Oh, that angle, ok. 15:40:04 I always try to get frontline staff in on BSW/FF, but depending on how busy they are impacts the feedback. 15:40:43 I'm in favor of whichever option allows us to download our blocked patrons list again. (No matter how limited we've tried to make it since moving to the web client, we've never been able to download it because it's too large.) 15:41:06 terranm: That, yes. 15:41:51 Well, since we're discussing it, 15:41:56 #topic Should there be a standalone offline client? (see e.g. LP#1943486) 15:42:07 I'm basically landing at "Yes" 15:42:20 (unsurprisingly, given my comment) 15:42:53 hm, bot's on break. 15:42:58 LP1943486 15:43:01 https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1943486 15:43:01 Launchpad bug 1943486 in Evergreen "Offline Circulation interface may not load under certain circumstances" [Undecided,Confirmed] 15:43:27 +1 to standalone, reliable client or app 15:44:34 See also: https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1727557 15:44:34 Launchpad bug 1727557 in Evergreen "Web Client: Download Block List causes unresponsive page with large file" [High,Confirmed] 15:44:53 Hmm. Also bug 1981841 15:44:53 Launchpad bug 1981841 in Evergreen "Offline Circulation Non-functional after Clearing Cache" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1981841 15:45:00 +1 to standalone here too. Current offline doesn't work for us in many scenarios - we didn't even point our libraries at it during our last upgrade. 15:45:26 berick had an interface somewhere 15:45:27 The question (quickly) becomes "Who has time to do this?" It's entirely possible that big chunks of the existing app can be dropped into an Electron container to get something started and the extra abilities it enables means that lovefield would be no longer necessary, but it's still a new thing for someone to build. 15:46:06 was it an extension of Hatch? IIRC 15:46:17 (The same could be said of a lot of things around here, but this seems fairly large.) 15:47:05 I'm pretty sure berick's interface is its own thing, not related to Hatch. 15:47:14 (I have to run away for a few minutes, bah!) 15:47:14 does anybody have any experience with React Native? Asking because it might also address a potential need for a mobile-focused offline client 15:49:05 If Bill or someone has the beginnings of something that's great, but even just agreeing as a community that we want to go in that direction would make it easier to arrange dev resources. 15:50:07 It seems like a desktop/native OS app (as opposed to a web app) is the clear way to go, as the web seems to still have some road blocks for offline (block list) 15:50:18 Sigh, haven't hit that key combo in a while... 15:51:53 Bmagic: I'm not so sure that a desktop application solves the blocklist download issue, but I'd have to take a closer look. 15:52:20 I thought it was a shortcoming of the lovefield local browser database capacity? 15:52:44 #info berick's offline proof of concept: https://github.com/berick/eg-offline-jfx 15:52:48 We didn't used to have any problems downloading the blocklist in the old XUL offline client. I think it was just downloading it to a file back then? 15:53:19 Bmagic: Could be. I haven't looked at the bug in a while. 15:53:34 me either :) 15:53:38 terranm: Yes, that's correct. 15:53:42 yeah, I would think that anything that can spin up a thread or background process to fetch what is just a text file, though sometimes a large one, should be OK 15:54:27 And not having it be subject to the vagaries of browser caching would be nice. 15:55:32 * Dyrcona imagined a user service that would run in the background and grab the offline block list automatically. 15:55:43 +1 15:56:04 Getting library staff to remember to click the Download button back in the day was always a bit of a challenge. 15:56:12 To jeffdavis' point above before I screwed up my client again, it sounds like there is interest in this direction from the community. 15:56:27 we already have Hatch, whats another thing eh? My thinking was, why not piggy back on Hatch? Thereby preventing users from having to install two* things? 15:56:46 Which means we don't have to hash all of this out right now. 15:57:14 Bmagic: a potential opportunity to try something that can remove the need to care about JVMs 15:57:29 shall we move on to eslint? 15:57:43 sure 15:57:49 Does anyone have time to survey the landscape and report back next meeting? 15:57:49 (move on I mean) 15:58:15 If not we can always continue the discussion over email. 15:58:19 #topic Migrating away from the deprecated Angular linter (see LP#1959048) 15:58:23 (Requesting a review, and how to coordinate this with the large outstanding angular PRs?) 15:58:32 gmcharlt, thanks for your review! 15:59:03 it's the sort of branch that will go out of date quickly, so if anybody has the tuits for merging it, I would appreciate it 15:59:28 yeah, from my POV it's ready to be merged; I don't anticipate much trouble adapting the angular acq branch to it 15:59:46 gmcharlt++ #that's good to hear! 15:59:54 sandbergja++ gmcharlt++ 15:59:58 my only real question is whether we want to be brave and also backport it to 3.9 (though I don't think we want to be brave, honestly) 16:00:12 I was curious about the patron pieces (and other outstanding angular branches) 16:00:30 it feels kind of mean to change the goal post of how picky the linter is 16:00:45 after folks have put up a pullrequest 16:01:10 gmcharlt: I know that I'm not that brave :-) 16:01:20 I think berick would be the main person not here who would be largely affected 16:02:09 Given that berick is not here to comment, I'd say at a minimum we don't backport it. 16:02:16 Backporting to 3.9 may be unappealing, but there's not a good way to avoid existing PRs from being effected. I'm not sure it's run as often as it ought be anyway for many PRs. 16:02:36 Dyrcona: yeah, I think the real question is timing of merging to the master branch 16:03:17 (I raised the possibly of a backport mostly just in case somebody turned up who needed it; I'm not advocating for it) 16:03:27 Perhaps the decision should be postponed until we can get feedback from berick? 16:04:10 I'm okay with that 16:06:12 sandbergja, would you like to stretch your new release team muscles and followup with berick about this either directly or via the dev list? 16:06:33 haha sure! 16:06:37 sandbergja++ 16:07:07 sandbergja++ 16:07:29 #action sandbergja will followup with berick about timing re: merging the new linter 16:08:00 ok, any further agenda lint lying around? 16:08:18 JBoyer: I see what you did there 16:08:26 :) 16:08:32 * JBoyer winks, does finger guns 16:09:17 We're already a little over time, so 16:09:19 #topic Announcements 16:09:22 #info Next Meeting is October 11, 2022 16:09:25 #endmeeting