[Pulp-dev] Pulpcore meeting notes

[Melanie Corr]

Hey David,

Ar Déar 22 Aib 2021 ag 16:14, scríobh David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>:

>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 10:13 AM Melanie Corr <mcorr at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi !
>>
>> Ar Máirt 20 Aib 2021 ag 15:02, scríobh David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com
>> >:
>>
>>> # April 20, 2021
>>>
>>> ## Topics
>>> * Demo videos?
>>>     * Was asked about a demo video for a feature
>>>     * I guess we're not doing these anymore?
>>>     * Fail to record anything due to capacity and commitments
>>>     * Record demos ad hoc?
>>>         * Ask feature writer to record demo when stakeholder asks for
>>> one
>>>
>>
>> I still think it would be easier for me to share updates and features
>> with the community if there were short demos.
>>
>
> Agree here. I've been trying to record demo videos for new features
> whenever I implement them.
>
Your demos are great. daviddavis++


>
>>
>> Can I be a stakeholder asking for demos?
>>
>
> No objection from me.
>

By me, I should clarify that I mean the community as a stakeholder.

As Pulp has a number of projects interacting with it, I try to improve the
release announcements so it's easier for stakeholders and the wider
community to understand the headline features and the purpose of
implementing them in pulpcore. Small demos of the headline features, in
many instances, would help.


>
>>
>> So, should I remove the request for a demo from the contributor
>> guidelines?
>>
>
> At the very least, we should at least keep the information about how to
> record a demo video.
>

Last October/November, we added the need for demos per substantial change
to our contribution guidelines. Neither PR contributors nor reviewers seems
to have enforced this guideline. I've no doubt that there are a number of
valid reasons for this, with the most obvious and ultimate reason being
time.
I understand that a lot of the features in Pulpcore are probably more
demoable when a plugin starts to avail of the features.
Perhaps there might be a cleverer way to select which demo would be worthy
of contributor time.
In Foreman, a PR can have the label "demo-worthy" assigned to it.
Would something like this work better?

>
>
>>
>> * Releasing https://pulp.plan.io/issues/8578
>>>     * Problem: BaseDistribution is deprecated but plugin api is missing
>>> RepositoryVersionRelatedField
>>>     * 3.12.1 or early/small 3.13.0?
>>>         * bumping minor release would cause extra churn
>>> * 3.13 - https://pulp.plan.io/versions/188
>>>     * Needs date and release lead (rotation on lines 10-11)
>>> * make distribution update synchronous https://pulp.plan.io/issues/7762
>>>     * rhui would like to dev freeze by may
>>> * Streamed endpoints
>>>     * https://github.com/pulp/pulp_ansible/pull/562
>>>     * faster
>>>     * query evaluation
>>>     * gunicorn timeout - blocks API worker
>>> * Review old quarter open issues
>>>     * https://tinyurl.com/pulpq42020
>>>
>>> ## Action Items
>>> * [david] release 3.12.1 with https://pulp.plan.io/issues/8578
>>> * [dalley] confirm with rhui if https://pulp.plan.io/issues/7762 is
>>> still needed given auto-publish/auto-distribute and on the their Dev Freeze
>>> timeline
>>> * [david] look at the pulp-oci-images and redmine integration
>>>
>>> David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Melanie Corr, RHCE
>>
>> Community Manager
>>
>> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>
>>
>> Remote, Ireland
>>
>> mcorr at redhat.com
>> M: +353857774436     IM: mcorr
>> <https://www.redhat.com>
>>
>>

-- 

Melanie Corr, RHCE

Community Manager

Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>

Remote, Ireland

mcorr at redhat.com
M: +353857774436     IM: mcorr
<https://www.redhat.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20210423/4623289f/attachment.htm>