Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of WeeklyMinutes20110301


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 1, 2011, 4:02:24 PM (7 years ago)
Author:
shane
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • WeeklyMinutes20110301

    v1 v2  
    22
    33{{{
     4Likun
     5Jerry
     6Ocean
     7Jeremy
     8Fujiwara-san
     9Aharen-san
     10Stephen
     11Larissa
     12Shane
     13Kambe-san
     14Michal
     15Jinmei
     16Jelte
     17Keith
    418}}}
    519
    620= Feedback from Last Release =
    721
     22https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind10-announce/2011-February/000009.html
     23
     24Jeremy: Went well. Had some last-minute releases, but these were already identified by a few of the builders. Did not call for a freeze ahead of time, if we had then there would not be any issues. Everything was good.
     25
     26Shane: We do spend some time near a release. Do we want to factor into planning?
     27
     28Jeremy: Already had it planned to do ahead of time, using a branch that we're working on.
     29
     30Jelte: Earlier occasions we added a bunch of stuff before a release, but this time we were just unlucky.
     31
     32Shane: This is the last one of this year. Continue these next year?
     33
     34Jeremy: Not sure... starting in April do we want to do a lot of quality, or continue with snapshots? Or maybe a mix, like doing 6-week snapshots but then every 3 months doing a quality release.
     35
     36Larissa: Need to discuss further. I would prefer the later.
     37
     38Jeremy: One concern I have still is... we need to do production releases but we're not production quality yet. We haven't been misleading yet - people know these are prototypes.
     39
     40Jelte: +1 to Jeremy
     41
     42Shane: Will put on agenda for f2f meeting.
     43
    844= Difficulties Setting up a Forwarding Resolver =
    945
    1046Jeremy reports.
    1147
     48https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind10-dev/2011-February/002038.html
     49
     50Jeremy: I documented almost all the steps in setting up a forwarding resolver. Sent to bind10-dev list. Seems like we're so far away as something we want to ship or give as production quality software.
     51
     521. Using bindctl - if you make a typo it is unclear what the error is
     532. Configuring forwarding addresses had an unreadable error message
     543. Requires you to define a port number (known issues, should not be required)
     554. Running as non-root failed with different error messages - none pointed to where problem was!
     565. Have to start with nohup, make sure stderr/stdout go to /dev/null (with named you do not have to do that)
     576. When doing shutdown, get error messages that are empty
     587. Getting Python tracebacks that are lengthy written to screen hides error message
     598. Kerberos was used for all logins, so when DNS was down I could not login remotely
     60
     61Please look at my e-mail, if you have tickets let me know, if not we need to create.
     62
     63This was setting up a forwarder.
     64
     65Shane: I had a look, but mostly at the boss-related stuff. Jeremy or Stephen had an idea for "bind10 --cleanup" which would stop orphaned processes.
     66
     67Jinmei: Most of these seem to be generic, rather than forwarding-specific, right?
     68
     69Jeremy: Yeah, I think they're pretty generic. Other than configuration of the forwarder.
     70
     71Shane: Turn these into tickets, then run the experience again.
     72
     73Jeremy: I was working through the document for this, but did not get far because of all the problems. We have the ops team planning on setting up xfrin and xfrout authoritative server so I want to make sure the instructions for that are clear.
     74
     75Jeremy: Please read the e-mail.
     76
    1277= End-of-year Release =
    1378
    1479Announcements to be sent 2011-03-22, but release ready 2011-03-17 or 2011-03-18.
    1580
     81Larissa: Technical blog articles. We did not want to do a big media push since this not production ready. I would like to have them over a few days before and after the release, and we would have our events person co-ordinate that. I will send an e-mail to the list.
     82
     83Shane: Put on bind10-dev... possible someone may ask for something to be explained.
     84
     85Larissa: No press releases. We will do these in September.
     86
    1687= A-team status (for R-team) =
    1788
     89Shane: Features are done.
     90
     91Michal: Small features still in review. 2 or 3.
     92
     93Shane: Brainstorming session about to test things.
     94
     95Jinmei: Done in that we have completed the in-memory data source. Still ongoing, unrelated bug fixes.
     96
    1897= R-team status (for A-team) =
     98
     99Shane: Still some features being worked on.
     100
     101Stephen: Working on fallback to TCP.
     102
     103Jelte: Hope people are working on negative cache. I'm working on using the NSAS in the resolver. Going slowly.
     104
     105Ocean: I think tomorrow the negative cache will be finished and ready for review.
     106
     107Shane: You can see the ResolverTestingBrainstorming page for testing ideas.
    19108
    20109= Future Code Stubs =
     
    26115both about the general sense about how to handle mostly empty implementation, and about the specific point of XXXCacche::dump/load/resize().
    27116
     117Jinmei: I noticed when I tested with cppcheck, there were warnings due to the fact that these were empty. I suppressed warning for these, but I think in the general case if we don't have a short-term plan we should remove from the master tree.
     118
     119Jinmei: A related point is that for this specific case I would suggest applying this practice and remove them, and put in comments, so we can perform a full check with cppcheck without suppressing warnings. Then we can enable the check throughout the file.
     120
     121Michal: Would cppcheck complain if there was header but no body?
     122
     123Shane: I think we should remove this. It goes along with the general policy of not having blocks of commented-out code, get it out of there.
     124
     125Jinmei: If nobody disagrees I will make a ticket for this task.
     126
    28127= "Pacific" Daily Call =
    29128
     
    31130
    32131"we've found there are several problems in it such as incomplete/missing calls on Monday/Friday and schedule conflict. Also, there's now only one "developer" in the US side of the region (i.e., me), it's more questionable to keep this style.  Considering this call is mainly for developers (in my understanding) and the fact that all but one developers are in Asia and Europe, my personal suggestion is to revert to the previous style, and US people join it best effort basis."
     132
     133Jinmei: Observations:
     134
     1351. We have issues on Mondays and Fridays. On Mondays only Asian people can make the call (still Sunday in the USA). On Fridays we skip the calls (Saturday in Asia, only 2 other participants).
     1362. Some days are not good for CNNIC developers, so we miss the calls.
     1373. Now Scott has moved to BIND 9 development, the only developer doing coding/reviewing is me (Jinmei). I don't think the Pacific call is really effective.
     138
     139Larissa: I agree there is an issue. The issue with CNNIC is that if it is a day when they have had a BIND 10 team call the night before, they are not at the office yet when we have the daily call.
     140
     141Jinmei: We soon have a face-to-face meeting, so maybe we can postpone the decision until then. But my impression is that we should conclude this is not really a good idea and go back to the original organization. If we do that, most of the developers are in Europe and Asia so it makes more sense for the other people to participate in that in a best-effort basis. For myself I don't mind joining it in most of the cases. If I do that then all of the developers are there.
     142
     143Shane: Jeremy would not be on daily calls...
     144
     145Jeremy: That's fine. I would prefer it during regular workday.
     146
     147Larissa: Maybe best possible solution.
     148
     149Shane: Another possibility is a 10-minute call with Larissa, Jeremy, and Shane.
     150
     151Shane: Some details to be discussed on list (for example summer time), but in principle I think it is an improvement. Other opinions?
     152
     153Jeremy: To clarify, these calls are part of the Scrum protocol? [ yes ] I wasn't clear if these were part of the protocol, if they have created success over the past 6 months or so.
     154
     155Larissa: People think they are helpful or not?
     156
     157Stephen: I have found them useful. In most cases it is not conflicting, but once or twice it has avoided a conflict.
     158
     159Jelte: Yes these are definitely useful.
     160
     161Jeremy: I wasn't sure if it was the same small set finding it useful. I wasn't sure for the rest. But that's fine either way.
     162
     163= A.O.B. =
     164
     165Jeremy: Any more details about the Google Summer of Code?
     166
     167Shane: Sent mail to ISC staff about this.
     168
     169Larissa: Need to have this by Friday.
     170
     171Jeremy: Some hints.
     172
     1731. We need to make sure we have multiple mentors listed for all projects regardless of whether they are going to be the ones doing it. We can move mentors once we have students.
     1742. Having a good list of projects. We need to open that up to the bind10-dev list now to get others contributing to building that. Also hit a student now who can share some of their project ideas - regardless of whether we get approved by Google.
     1753. They ''do'' have female t-shirts!!
     176
     177Larissa: Should also be for BIND 9 and DHCP development. I have no issue with the list going to the bind10-dev list. I'll send that. Appreciate that you have done this before.
     178
     179Likun: Can we send students?
     180
     181Larissa: I don't know. I will send a link to the SoC project.
     182
     183Michal: I tried applying for Jabber foundation 2 years ago, and usually there is not a lack of students applying. Like 10% of them get accepted... problem is convincing Google that the projects are nice. It may also be advertisement for us... students may look and say "hey what's this?"
     184
     185Jeremy: Need to be very clear that DHCP or other projects don't make BIND 10 lose availability. BIND 10 has a public development list, and the code tree has always been public.
     186
     187Larissa: I agree there is an issue there. I'll make clear we are evolving our development process at ISC, and the further along is BIND 10 but we're working on moving BIND 9 and DHCP 4 along the path.
     188
     189----
     190
     191Jinmei: About e-mail about reverting code when triggers build failure. I think it's a matter of wider interest for developers.
     192
     193----
     194
     195Jeremy: I'd like to switch both servers to port 53. This might break some systems if you're already doing things on port 53. Concerns about this?
     196
     197Shane: Better to do now than after release.
     198
     199Michal: If someone has something running, he cannot configure on a different port. So I suggested 2 weeks ago that we start without any ports configured.
     200
     201Shane: Send to list.