17:01:51 <matjazp> #startmeeting training-guides
17:01:52 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Jun 15 17:01:51 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is matjazp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:53 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:01:56 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'training_guides'
17:02:06 <matjazp> roll call
17:02:14 <rluethi> hello
17:02:32 <matjazp> sayali and sean can't make it
17:02:39 <matjazp> dguitarbite?
17:02:43 <rluethi> experience suggests that pranav might be joining us later on :)
17:03:34 <matjazp> no special agenda... So we use standard one :)
17:04:01 <rluethi> we haven't had a regular agenda in quite some time.
17:04:10 <matjazp> #topic reviews
17:05:05 <matjazp> rluethi: anything about labs?
17:05:26 <matjazp> pranav has just one lab patch in the pipeline
17:05:26 <rluethi> there hasn't been much activity in labs lately.
17:05:44 <rluethi> as far as I know, sayali is working on the python port of osbash.
17:05:53 <rluethi> and maybe on some other stuff, too.
17:06:22 <rluethi> but that won't show up in the review queue for some time.
17:06:51 <matjazp> do you guyns think that KVM port is doable by fall?
17:07:53 <rluethi> well, it should be doable, but unfortunately I have very limited time these days and I'm not sure when that will change.
17:08:10 <rluethi> So if I have to do the port, I don't know when it will happen.
17:08:47 <rluethi> but it is my understanding that the python port uses KVM, so if sayali finishes that one, you'll have a KVM version.
17:09:31 <matjazp> rluethi: great :)
17:09:56 <rluethi> yeah, would be nice.
17:10:14 <rluethi> I am somewhat concerned about having two code bases with different features.
17:10:35 <matjazp> what's the status with a new branch? What was decided? skip to kilo?
17:10:59 * matjazp is looking at previous meeting minutes
17:11:20 <matjazp> aha... no action items
17:11:22 <rluethi> not sure I understand what you mean by "skip to kilo"
17:11:35 <rluethi> the scripts are at juno now.
17:11:57 <rluethi> we could create a new branch and make kilo scripts.
17:12:12 <matjazp> last was about sean doing two things: upstream training game content this week and training-guides landing page
17:13:07 <matjazp> aha, ok. I don't know why I thought that juno is not finished jet
17:14:05 <rluethi> I seem to remember that pranav said something about an unfixed race, but I don't think he sent me the information needed to reproduce it.
17:14:19 <rluethi> then again, I might have forgotten. It has happened before.
17:14:25 <rluethi> I'll have to ask him.
17:15:37 <matjazp> ok.. back to reviews.. christian is doing an improved index page for upstream training
17:15:54 <matjazp> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/185946/
17:16:19 <matjazp> what we have now is pretty much useless
17:17:06 <rluethi> too bad that there is no simple way to compare the output of two such files.
17:17:25 <matjazp> what files? slides?
17:17:47 <rluethi> doing a review only based on the source rst files is often a bit tricky.
17:17:50 <matjazp> we have publishing enabled for upstream slides
17:18:37 <rluethi> it would be nice if gerrit gave us links to the generated output, before and after.
17:18:53 <matjazp> do you mean that you wannt to see rendered slides side by side?
17:19:56 <rluethi> yes, pretty much.
17:20:27 <matjazp> rluethi: before will be published once we have landing page and publishing enabled. Draft will be published with the review, so you will be able to compare
17:20:37 <matjazp> it won't be side by side, but close enough
17:21:14 <rluethi> maybe we could get gerrit to add some links so the two versions are easy to find.
17:23:12 <matjazp> so the plan would be: 1) landing page + publishing of the materials
17:23:42 <rluethi> something like that.
17:23:54 <matjazp> 2) gerrit already publishes slides in the current reviiew
17:24:31 <matjazp> 3) we add to the gerrit draft output a link to the rendered master branch
17:25:56 <rluethi> yes. or the submitter adds the link in a comment or something. it's just tedious for reviewers to dig through log files to figure out where the output was published. It's a problem I used to have, not sure if it's still relevant today.
17:27:13 <matjazp> for upstream training things are clear, no? draft lin in the gerrit publish-checkbuild?
17:27:32 <matjazp> we do the same for training guides, of course.
17:28:29 <rluethi> so let's take the review you mentioned above as an example. how do I find the published draft?
17:28:39 <matjazp> btw, could you please also look at the current batch of open reviews? I enabled logo for Training guides and Christian is doing some cleanup
17:29:23 <matjazp> click on gate checkbuild/ clisk on draft / click on upsteream training
17:30:10 <matjazp> currently it publishes all in one big file, this review will improve
17:30:48 <rluethi> not as obvious as I'd like it to be, but much easier than I remember it. cool, thank you.
17:31:02 <matjazp> index needs to change to make reviewing of parts of slides easier
17:32:15 <matjazp> hence christian's review. One big file is not good, he will try to render it in a regular page, not as a slide
17:32:28 <rluethi> I haven't done reviews in training materials and focused on scripts because I don't feel I know enough to make adequate reviews, and not enough time to learn more about the slides.
17:33:05 <rluethi> I like the way the slides look.
17:33:17 <matjazp> yes, but some reviews are for cleanup only or for the design.. your opinion i much appreciated here
17:33:28 <matjazp> is
17:33:49 <rluethi> so where is the original (current stable) version of the slides in this patch?
17:34:46 <matjazp> publishing is enabeld only for upstream. we need to enable it for the training guides with separate patches
17:36:09 <matjazp> IIFC, pranav said that he will look into it (with the help from Andreas). As they needed the slides for Upstream Vancouver training, we rushed in only that part
17:36:12 <rluethi> so this isn't upstream then :)
17:36:46 <rluethi> no wait, it is. it says "Upstream Training" right on the first slide.
17:36:56 <rluethi> geez, I'm confused.
17:37:19 <matjazp> yes, I was talking about Training guides part (associate guide)
17:38:42 <matjazp> Content wise, we have three major part: Labs, Upstream training and Training guides
17:39:46 <matjazp> we're way behind converting XML Training guides to the new RST based slide format
17:40:11 <rluethi> okay, I know this is asking a lot, but if you want reviews on training-stuff where I can contribute something useful, could you add links to the before and after versions (in a comment of the review), maybe along with a few words about what kind of feedback you are looking for.
17:41:21 <matjazp> hmm, ok, If that will make you look at the stuff :) I'm not comfortable with merging content that has just one +2 (or none, if it is my patch)
17:41:24 <rluethi> the three parts I am familiar with, I can follow you there. I didn't realize we are not getting the conversion done as fast as we need it.
17:42:31 <rluethi> I realize I haven't given much (if any) attention to the slide patches. it's just overwhelming. back when I had more time, I would check out old and new versions, build them myself, compare them, and then write detailed reviews.
17:42:55 <rluethi> now I'm overwhelmed by the mere thought :-/.
17:43:29 <matjazp> As I see it, we need to get that landing page first, publish already completed labs and upstream training and then enable publishing of the draft for training guides part of the content
17:43:47 <matjazp> that would get the ball rolling again
17:44:40 <matjazp> As ppl see some stuff gets published, they can contribute more easily with short patches
17:45:14 <matjazp> RST conversion of the whole chapter is a big task
17:45:58 <rluethi> I will try to support you with reviewing, just give me clear instructions and tasks that don't take hours at a time.
17:47:35 <matjazp> OK, will do. But commit message should be clear about what was changed, no?
17:48:40 <rluethi> let's just take the one you mentioned before.
17:49:16 <rluethi> I don't know why the slide is confusing, but maybe if I had a link pointing at the old, rendered version, I'd understand.
17:49:56 <rluethi> then the same patch does something else, which is often a source of confusion.
17:51:05 <matjazp> OK.. So what I can do is publish the patch and then write a link to click onto in the comment with a clearer task for the reviewer? And add you and others as reviewers?
17:51:12 <rluethi> and it converts an index.rst into a more useful index.rst. again, I have no idea how the new version if more useful. I very much suspect that it _is_ more useful, but it would be nice to have some reasoning in the commit message.
17:51:34 <rluethi> perfect.
17:52:22 <rluethi> Should you still not get a review, send me an email and kick me :-).
17:52:25 <matjazp> we'll mock a bit around with links to the older reviews as "an original", as we don't publish our content yet
17:53:09 <matjazp> is it ethical to add action items to the missing team members? ;)
17:53:45 <matjazp> sean's landing page and pranav's publishing patch...
17:53:56 <rluethi> I'd say it teaches them a valuable lesson, but then again, who knows when I won't be able to make it :-)
17:54:33 <rluethi> well, repeating old action items is certainly not unethical.
17:54:55 <matjazp> true... We have a cloud security summer school with CSA next week , so I probably won't make it ;)
17:55:03 <rluethi> hitting them with lots of new ones probably crosses some line.
17:55:28 <rluethi> there you go.
17:55:39 <matjazp> let's just leave it as is, they both read IRC logs.
17:55:41 <rluethi> anyhow, if you want to add action items, be quick.
17:56:18 <rluethi> they do? hi sean, hi pranav, if you read this, and hi sayali, too, btw.
17:56:35 <rluethi> hey, I summoned him.
17:56:54 <matjazp> pranav?
17:57:01 <rluethi> no, sarob just joined.
17:58:10 <matjazp> hmmm... we will need to end this.
17:58:57 <matjazp> anything else?
17:59:06 <rluethi> nope.
17:59:13 <rluethi> thanks for chairing.
17:59:15 <matjazp> ok then. bye roger
17:59:19 <matjazp> #endmeeting