Date

Call-in Information

Time: 10:00 am, Eastern Time (New York, GMT-04:00)

Attendees

(star)  Indicating note-taker

  1. Brian Lowe  
  2. Georgy Litvinov 
  3. Ralph O'Flinn 
  4. William Welling (star)
  5. Benjamin Gross
  6. Dragan Ivanovic 

Agenda

  1. Releases management
    1. Status
    2. Next steps

  2. Moving forward reviewing PRs on VIVO and Vitro

    1. https://github.com/vivo-project/Vitro/pulls and https://github.com/vivo-project/VIVO/pulls
    2. Tiny and big PRs classification
    3. Assignment of reviewers
  3. VIVO 2.0 architecture
    1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z51mkqlAopQ2rLkitHiQVwRojijnPM9pB8tQelW-lSA/edit?usp=sharing

Notes

  1. Releases management

Dragan: apologize for missing committers call two weeks ago

Dragan: status of release; still no functional 1.12 release; share release responsibility

William: have someone else take responsibility for 1.12 release?

Bryan: almost half of year after announcing 1.12 release

William: release documentation appears live and do not have confidence

Bryan: not entirely confident in release process; suggest maybe Dragan take it on with collaboration with Ralph

Dragan: organize meeting with Ralph and go over release process

Georgy: figure out what is going wrong; was under impression it was resolved; first approach with discussion to determine and improve documentation for clear procedure

William: last known issue was to revert CI PR merge on Vitro that published the installer

Dragan: action item to work toward release

2. Moving forward reviewing PRs on VIVO and Vitro 

Dragan: ralph committed to providing list of PR reviews and details; how to proceed? PRs to which branch


William: branch management in disarray

Ben: expresses concern of merge conflicts without release

Dragan: not all same branch restrictions on all repositories

William: apply some level of restrictions on all repositories

Bryan: conditional level of requiring reviews

Dragan: document or comment for PR classification
 

Bryan: can use labels for this?

William: second that; also that should look into new GitHub beta projects

Dragan: actions; get with Ralph for release and classify PRs

William: what does assignment of reviewers look like

Dragan: should we use more of a push approach

William: would accept some assigned reviews

Georgy: how to handle certain PRs that appear to be not required or relevant; should comment and/or close?

Dragan: comment and attempt to get more eyes on

Georgy: should discuss certain PRs

Dragan: what is first step, comment or discuss with committers

Bryan: two different cases; one only determined by code review and another is significant feature requiring discussion; multiple rounds to determine

William: we should go issue first approach; discuss bug and feature on issue and save time for PRs

Dragan: is similar to MongoDB

William: how to handle stale issues and PRs?

Benjamin: GitHub does represent actual issue creation dates

Georgy: need more information on issues created; should we use slack chat to discuss with issue creators?

Dragan: yes
Dragan: How we are going to deal with requests? How to deal with it?

Georgy: Organize discussion in Slack. 

Dragan: If it is not became obvious in Slack then discuss it on Committers meetings. 

Brian: We may consider minor policy changes. If we want some procedure if PRs author not respond, close outdated PRs.

Dragan: I agree with you. We should improve documentation and align with it as much as possible. In reality 2 weeks is not working. We have PRs that are more than 3 years ago.

Brian: There will still be delays, but if the other side is not responding for too long then we should close it after some period. That would be a clearer procedure.

Dragan: If we are very interested in that contribution but other side is not ready to finish it, what should we do?

Brian: I think there are plenty of bottlenecks on both sides. But some long running big things should be removed if they are not needed. 

Georgy: We should also think about license aspect of contributions.

Dragan: I will check Lyrasis to know more about policies.

Brian: We can build up on Fedora policy rules.

Georgy: If we have an option to simplify policies as much as possible that would be great.

Dragan: Sure. But first we should solve current issues with releases and PRs. 

Draft notes on Google Drive

Actions 

  •  Dragan Ivanovic to help Ralph in resolving publishing releases issue. Also, to try to improve documentation. 
  • Dragan Ivanovic to assign PRs to reviewers (committers)
  • Later, we can improve contribution policy, including closing PR with inactive PR creators (who didn't responded on comments). We should also consider introducing Contributor license agreements in the process - link 

Previous actions 

  • No labels

All content on the LYRASIS Wiki is licensed under the CC BY (Attribution) license, unless otherwise noted.