Page MenuHomePhabricator
Paste P3179

2016-05-25 ArchCom-RFC triage meeting (#wikimedia-office)
ActivePublic
Actions

Authored by • RobLa-WMF on May 25 2016, 10:12 PM.
21:00:44 <robla> #startmeeting E187 ArchCom-RFC triage meeting
21:00:44 <wm-labs-meetbot> Meeting started Wed May 25 21:00:44 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is robla. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:00:44 <wm-labs-meetbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:00:44 <wm-labs-meetbot> The meeting name has been set to 'e187_archcom_rfc_triage_meeting'
21:01:33 <robla> #topic E187 ArchCom-RFC meeting - Please note: Channel is logged and publicly posted (DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTE) | Logs: http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-office/
21:02:04 <robla> hi folks!
21:02:44 <Scott_WUaS> Hi
21:03:07 <Scott_WUaS> :)
21:04:45 <robla> #link https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_meetings/RFC_triage_2016-05-25
21:05:16 <TimStarling> is the idea to assign priorities?
21:05:38 <robla> TimStarling: yeah, I think there's a couple of things I'd like to accomplish:
21:05:55 <robla> 1. Assign priorities for the "Backlog" items that say "need triage"
21:06:07 <robla> 2. Pick a good candidate for next week's IRC meeting
21:06:22 <robla> so....let's start with the top of the list I just linked to:
21:06:35 <robla> T128602
21:06:35 <stashbot> T128602: Create and deploy an extension that implements an authenticated key-value store. - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T128602
21:07:45 <robla> TimStarling: gwicke : Krinkle : is T128602 one that we just discussed in our meeting in the last hour today?
21:07:45 <stashbot> T128602: Create and deploy an extension that implements an authenticated key-value store. - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T128602
21:08:00 <TimStarling> don't think so
21:08:33 * gwicke does not think so either
21:08:56 <TimStarling> all the discussion was in march apparently
21:09:34 <TimStarling> is brion here?
21:09:52 <TimStarling> or tgr, Krenair, dbrant
21:11:01 <robla> perhaps we can set it to "normal" or "low" priority, and wait for objection?
21:11:02 <TimStarling> I think this RFC would not be controversial if it were discussed
21:11:14 <TimStarling> yeah, low priority
21:11:46 <TimStarling> it needs a committed client, once it has one of those, the priority can be higher
21:11:54 <robla> k....next on the list: T120380
21:11:54 <stashbot> T120380: RFC: Allow JSON values to be included in the API results - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120380
21:12:55 <MaxSem> I'll summon yurik
21:13:16 <MaxSem> ...and he's not online :P
21:13:42 <robla> ok....normal? low? high?
21:14:18 <TimStarling> I think normal? there is conflict, which probably makes it more our responsibility than the implementor's
21:14:42 <TimStarling> anomie seems to be dead against it
21:14:44 <robla> normal it is
21:15:17 <robla> ok, next up: T119050
21:15:17 <stashbot> T119050: Parametric JSON builder - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T119050
21:15:21 <robla> same story with that one?
21:16:11 * robla prepares to say "yes" and move on
21:16:47 <robla> ok.... normal for 119050. Next up: T117550
21:16:48 <stashbot> T117550: [RFC] Content bundler - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117550
21:17:06 <robla> that one is hexmode 's. Is he around?
21:18:44 <TimStarling> can you remind me what the criteria are for choosing the priority?
21:19:35 <robla> TimStarling: good point. I'm thinking priority should have a bit of a temporal element to it for our purposes
21:19:58 <TimStarling> something which needs to be discussed soon?
21:20:37 <TimStarling> I think this is low priority
21:21:02 <robla> yeah, so basically we should say this: "High" means "let's dedicate a meeting in the next 1-3 months (if not next week)
21:21:14 <TimStarling> on the basis that it may be superseded by shadow namespaces, and nobody is really pushing for it
21:21:29 <robla> "Medium" means "we really should resolve this by the end of the calendar year"
21:21:41 <TimStarling> we can discuss whether the requirements were met after shadow namespaces is done
21:22:36 <robla> ok...so, 117550 we can say is "low" priority, pending shadow namespaces
21:22:57 <robla> Next up: T114640
21:22:58 <stashbot> T114640: RFC: make Parser::getTargetLanguage aware of multilingual wikis - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114640
21:22:58 <gwicke> there is also a connection to OCG's bundler stuff
21:23:57 <TimStarling> high? seeing as daniel keeps talking about it, and cscott is promising to prototype it (as of a month ago)
21:24:28 * cscott delurks
21:24:53 * robla waves at cscott
21:25:28 <robla> high priority for 114640 then? Sounds good to me
21:25:34 <robla> next up....
21:25:37 <cscott> oh, right, the {{#lang}} thing. Yeah, I could totally whip up a prototype for that....
21:25:43 <TimStarling> cscott: we are choosing priorities for RFCs, where priority has some kind of relationship to meeting scheduling
21:26:05 <cscott> one way or another it would be good to straighten out this whole "user interface language" thing.
21:26:23 <gwicke> I'm starting to think that we generally need to come up with a high-level strategy for how multi-lingual content should interact with caching & parsing
21:26:24 <TimStarling> so high = a relatively high chance of being scheduled in the next few months
21:26:36 <cscott> sure, just give me, say, 2 weeks notice before we schedule 114640 for discussion and i ought to be able to whip up a prototype to discuss.
21:26:39 <gwicke> these RFCs that focus on a part of the problem seem to be too narrow
21:27:04 <gwicke> we have had that come up repeatedly in the last weeks
21:27:13 <TimStarling> cscott: do you have any RFCs you would like to see discussed soon, e.g. next week?
21:27:14 <cscott> gwicke: sure, the point of the prototype is mostly to learn-by-doing and understand the problem better. in my case at least.
21:27:18 <TimStarling> next week's slot is empty
21:27:40 <cscott> TimStarling: i won't be able to attend the meeting next week, alas.
21:27:45 <cscott> i will be in bermuda
21:27:54 <TimStarling> poor you
21:27:55 <cscott> on a big boat
21:28:08 <TimStarling> ;.(
21:28:41 <robla> next week's meeting: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E198
21:29:14 <robla> (it's boilerplate right now....let's figure out a candidate for next week)
21:29:51 <cscott> gwicke: without going too off-topic for your scheduling meeting, i agree that there are large issues related to how commons and wikidata handle multilingual content... and how they mix UX (via templates) and "content".
21:30:11 <robla> anyway, it looks like 114640 (or any of cscott's) are bad choices. We'll set T114640 to high, and maybe move on
21:30:11 <stashbot> T114640: RFC: make Parser::getTargetLanguage aware of multilingual wikis - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114640
21:30:14 <gwicke> cscott: the elephant in the room is caching & fragmentation
21:30:47 <gwicke> currently, none of the proposals seem to address that seriously
21:30:49 <cscott> yeah, it may be worth trying to build new tools that let commons/wikidata/etc construct UX in a caching-friendly way.
21:31:37 <robla> cscott: next up: T114454
21:31:38 <stashbot> T114454: [RFC] Visual Templates: Authoring templates with Visual Editor - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114454
21:31:38 <cscott> some sort of template system that lives between the existing handlebars templates and the existing wikitext templates, perhaps.
21:31:45 <cscott> oh, speak of the devil! ;)
21:32:19 <robla> cscott: we're using this as the list, and you're name is on there a lot :-) https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_meetings/RFC_triage_2016-05-25
21:32:42 <cscott> here maybe i'll take gwicke's point and say it would be good from an RFC perspective to have a higher-level discussion about templates and components and caching.
21:32:57 <TimStarling> pretty obvious who the author is when it talks about templates being "hygenic by default"
21:33:29 <cscott> oh, i thought i'd scrubbed the word "hygenic" from all my proposals
21:33:38 <robla> :-)
21:34:03 <TimStarling> I think this is low? pretty old and not recently discussed in the parsing team
21:34:29 <robla> priority of T114454 , "low", plus a comment "please file a bigger picture RFC so that we can block this RFC with that RFC?
21:34:29 <stashbot> T114454: [RFC] Visual Templates: Authoring templates with Visual Editor - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114454
21:34:34 <cscott> one of those things I think i want to take an afternoon to implement before discussing it further
21:34:46 <cscott> robla: i'm pretty sure gwicke already has a bigger picture rfc for that
21:35:01 <robla> cscott: which one?
21:35:10 <cscott> "page components"/templates
21:35:30 <gwicke> that's more focused on content, and not so much on UI
21:35:54 <gwicke> the client-side front-end one is the UI complement
21:36:02 <robla> cscott: Phab task?
21:36:12 <cscott> i had an unconference session at the all-hands on the visual templates stuff and it went terribly, turns out everyone who signed up assumed i was going to teach them to use mediawiki's existing template system, not propose some new doesn't-exist-yet hotness
21:36:24 <gwicke> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T111588
21:36:31 <cscott> so in the unconference spirit the session got redirected to match what people actually wanted
21:36:54 <Scott_WUaS> (gwicke: can you please share some URLs that currently focus "multi-lingual content should interact with caching & parsing"?)
21:36:56 <gwicke> it's not specifically targeted at i18n currently
21:37:09 <cscott> Scott_WUaS: that's daniel's RFCs
21:37:28 <cscott> Scott_WUaS: T114662 and T114640
21:37:28 <stashbot> T114662: RFC: Per-language URLs for multilingual wiki pages - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114662
21:37:28 <stashbot> T114640: RFC: make Parser::getTargetLanguage aware of multilingual wikis - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114640
21:37:42 <cscott> gwicke has commented on both of those, i believe, bringing up the caching issue
21:37:48 <Scott_WUaS> Thnx:)
21:37:58 <TimStarling> T114432 is next on the list, I thought it was a nice idea, but reception at the dev summit was mixed IIRC, and then there was no further discussion after that, so I guess it is low
21:37:58 <stashbot> T114432: [RFC] Heredoc arguments for templates (aka "hygenic" or "long" arguments) - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114432
21:38:12 <gwicke> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T99088 has some high-level thoughts on the general problem area
21:39:35 <cscott> I think T114432 actually had a meh reaction more than a negative one. i don't think people were opposed, but there is a very vocal contingent who reacts negatively whenever anything is said "to make things easier for visual editor"
21:39:36 <stashbot> T114432: [RFC] Heredoc arguments for templates (aka "hygenic" or "long" arguments) - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114432
21:40:15 <robla> cscott: right, but are you disagreeing with TimStarling's proposed "low" priority?
21:40:18 <SMalyshev> it looks like pretty arcane addition to already quite arcane syntax
21:40:36 <gwicke> it might be useful to think through & write down how an API-driven frontend could help i18n specifically
21:41:12 <cscott> robla: "low" seems right to me, i'm not blocked on further rfc discussion
21:41:36 <robla> thanks cscott - ok, next up:
21:41:50 <robla> T114421
21:41:50 <stashbot> T114421: [RFC] Optional Travis integration for Jenkins - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114421
21:42:00 <robla> also cscott :-)
21:42:35 <cscott> i still use my npm-travis tool, but ops seems violently opposed.
21:42:54 <cscott> containerized test jobs is always right around the corner, and will eliminate any need for travis, i'm told.
21:43:14 <robla> cscott: is that going to be in perpetual "agree to disagree" state, or do you see a way forward?
21:43:56 <cscott> well, i don't have the appetite to fight that particular battle myself. it seems that teams are just going around ops and using travis if they need it.
21:44:22 <cscott> that seems dysfunctional, but it's a dysfunction i'm not in a good place to address. it's not entirely clear that the RFC process is a good way to address it either.
21:44:22 <gwicke> cscott: is *ops* really opposed? I only see releng on the task
21:44:27 <cscott> so i'd say status "stalled"
21:45:02 <robla> priority is "low" for ArchCom, I think....it may even be one that we take ourselves off of
21:45:26 <gwicke> hehe
21:45:26 <cscott> yeah.
21:45:45 <robla> ok, next up
21:45:56 <robla> T114394
21:45:56 <stashbot> T114394: RFC: PageLookup service and PageRecord object - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114394
21:46:04 <TimStarling> with 15 minutes left, should we soon talk about scheduling for next week?
21:46:05 <cscott> at the time in the flush of early excitement about the rfc process i may have abused it to try to settle impasses ;)
21:46:19 <cscott> i think my rfcs are done, right?
21:46:38 <robla> cscott: yup
21:46:38 <TimStarling> cscott: yes
21:47:17 <cscott> recapping from my perspective only, i think prototyping {{#lang}} (or whatever) was the only thing that rose to 'high' priority?
21:47:24 <robla> TimStarling: good point. So....we didn't hit paydirt on anything we talked about yet as a candidate for next week
21:47:56 <robla> anyone have a nomination for next week?
21:48:05 <cscott> T91137?
21:48:05 <stashbot> T91137: RFC: Support a branching content history model - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91137
21:48:12 <cscott> although i'd like to be there for that one as well, i guess.
21:48:37 <cscott> T351 is mine too, i think, don't know why Qgil's name is associated.
21:48:37 <stashbot> T351: RfC: Square bounding boxes - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T351
21:48:56 <cscott> what about T96384? that seems like it should be straightforward perhaps?
21:48:56 <stashbot> T96384: Integrate file revisions with description page history - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T96384
21:49:03 <TimStarling> the low-numbered RFCs were copied from the wiki by qgil
21:49:06 <cscott> that's a @daniel rfc
21:49:08 <robla> T382 looks like an interesting choice
21:49:09 <stashbot> T382: RfC: Server-side Javascript error logging - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T382
21:49:31 <robla> cscott: we probably shouldn't choose one of yours if you're out next week
21:50:43 <cscott> robla: yeah, that's why i nominated a T96384, a @daniel RFC. dunno his availability.
21:50:43 <stashbot> T96384: Integrate file revisions with description page history - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T96384
21:51:48 <cscott> hm, there's a @csteipp RFC as well, maybe that's worth getting to before he transitions out of the WMF headspace? T75953
21:51:48 <stashbot> T75953: RFC: MediaWiki HTTPS policy - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T75953
21:52:11 <cscott> it will probably be harder to get his participation if that if deferred for a few months
21:53:41 <robla> ok....maybe in general I can take it as an action to figure out a security related RFC for next week. We also have T135963 as a recent one that has big implications worth discussing
21:53:41 <stashbot> T135963: Add support for Content-Security-Policy (CSP) headers in MediaWiki - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T135963
21:54:05 <TimStarling> sounds good
21:54:25 <robla> Krinkle basically advised that we hold off a little bit on that one, though. He's going to be shepherding it. Still I'll be happy to own figuring this out
21:54:41 <TimStarling> maybe csteipp will have an idea for a task which is not even tagged as an RFC yet
21:54:51 <dapatrick> robla, why did Krinkle advise holding off?
21:55:26 <TimStarling> he has 53 tasks assigned to him
21:55:28 <robla> dapatrick - I think just because he had only just volunteered to shepherd, and I had just put him on the spot with "how about next week?"
21:55:35 <Krinkle> dapatrick: I'm not advising to hold off on the project in general. Merely holding off on scheduling the IRC meeting as I familiarise myself with the task.
21:55:40 <Krinkle> 1 week :)
21:55:48 <TimStarling> authored 100
21:56:07 <TimStarling> csteipp authored 100 open tasks
21:56:21 <dapatrick> robla, Krinkle I see.
21:56:24 <cscott> +1 to robla's plan to triage csteipp
21:56:55 <cscott> and maybe T135963 for the week after that, it can be a security fest ;)
21:56:55 <stashbot> T135963: Add support for Content-Security-Policy (CSP) headers in MediaWiki - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T135963
21:57:11 <robla> ok....so....I think we're done with the realtime portion of the meeting. However, we also have Z425 as a place to continue this conversation in a less synchronous fashion
21:57:33 <robla> #link https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/Z425
21:57:53 <robla> #info triage discussion can continue on Z425
21:58:13 <Scott_WUaS> (Great process emerging here re Phabricator - thanks, all!)
21:58:28 <robla> any last minute comments/questions/concerns before I officially end this meeting?
21:59:21 * robla might actually end it *dozens of seconds* early
21:59:38 <robla> #endmeeting
Content licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) 4.0 unless otherwise noted; code licensed under GNU General Public License (GPL) 2.0 or later and other open source licenses. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Code of Conduct. · Wikimedia Foundation · Privacy Policy · Code of Conduct · Terms of Use · Disclaimer · CC-BY-SA · GPL · Credits