diff --git a/doc/devel/meeting_summary/2011-04-13.txt b/doc/devel/meeting_summary/2011-04-13.txt index 8ccd5dea7..949b644c8 100644 --- a/doc/devel/meeting_summary/2011-04-13.txt +++ b/doc/devel/meeting_summary/2011-04-13.txt @@ -24,85 +24,29 @@ _Protocol written by Ichthyo_ New Website Page Layout ----------------------- -Summary what is discussed +_Francesco Siddi_ has augmented his Layout proposal and already built up two page templtes to +cover most of the layout needs of the Lumiera website and documentation resources. However, +some points with the code generated by Asciidoc turned out to be problematic. -_cehteh_ points out that... +In a link:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.lumiera.general/2330[message preceeding the meeting], +today _ichthyo_ highlighted some general concerns which might need further discussion and maybe +a decision. -_joelholdsworth_ adds.... - - -Conclusion -~~~~~~~~~~ - - * do this - * do that - - - -Recurring Topics ----------------- -Discussion of open link:/documentation/devel/rfc.html[design process] drafts. - - -Prop1 -~~~~~ -link:/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/SomeProposal[descriptive name] -Summary what issues are discussed -..Details.. - -Conclusion:: drop it - - - -Next meeting ------------- - -The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC - - -'''' +utilising horizontal space +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Resolution of displays has been largely increased, especially on desktop computers, with +a tendency towards ``widescreen'' aspect ratio. While, on the other hand, text content +is still mostly vertically oriented. This leads to the question how to make use +of this additional space in horizontal direction, while still also supporting +the not-so large displays. .-- Discussion of details -- [caption="☉Transcript☉ "] ---------------------------- -[2011-04-13 22:48:05] there are still some layout issues -[2011-04-13 22:48:13] i'm working on them -[2011-04-13 22:48:45] that comes with the point about upgrading the webserver ... -[2011-04-13 22:49:00] does newer asciidoc improve this soemhow already? -[2011-04-13 22:49:05] no -[2011-04-13 22:49:13] so there is no need on my side to upgrade -[2011-04-13 22:49:24] good to know -[2011-04-13 22:49:37] i had the impression it may make your life easier -[2011-04-13 22:50:02] for the nobug documentation upgrading fixed a lot of bugs -[2011-04-13 22:50:32] anyway if you'll find the time to upgrade, it will be good maybe for other things -[2011-04-13 22:49:18] ok -... -[2011-04-13 22:51:42] the vertical navigation template -[2011-04-13 22:51:53] i read ichthyo notes -[2011-04-13 22:52:32] and i'm not sure about this horizontal space concept -[2011-04-13 22:52:45] could you clarify, please? -[2011-04-13 22:53:09] todays, the screens can get pretty wide -[2011-04-13 22:53:24] so there is a huge amount of horizontal space -[2011-04-13 22:53:39] while most documents are rater organised vertically (for good reasons) -[2011-04-13 22:53:45] 23" 16:9 with 2048x1152 in front of me -[2011-04-13 22:56:19] http://www.spiegel.de/ looks already ugly on my 12" laptop by default -[2011-04-13 22:54:01] e.g. if I enlarge my browser here to full screen -[2011-04-13 22:54:13] the current layout just covers less then half the space -[2011-04-13 22:54:13] is it possibly to flow text in 2 columns on wide screens? -[2011-04-13 22:54:35] cehteh: thats rather tricky and involved -[2011-04-13 22:54:41] exactly -[2011-04-13 22:54:51] guess that won't work without entering more java script coding -[2011-04-13 22:54:53] it is possible, but very tough -[2011-04-13 22:55:01] well i dislike pages which dont use most of the screen and leave it empty -[2011-04-13 22:55:03] CSS3 can do it almost on its own -[2011-04-13 22:55:22] but it's not cross browser yet -.... [2011-04-13 22:55:35] so my idea was just to let us discuss how we could use that additional space, when its available +[2011-04-13 22:56:08] I mean, just lets discuss open ended -- what possibilities do we see for that? [2011-04-13 22:55:42] if the screen is wide enough they should make 'some' use of it .. maybe just using biggier fonts -[2011-04-13 22:55:43] and if that is feasible -[2011-04-13 22:56:08] I mean, just lets discuss open ended -[2011-04-13 22:56:25] what possibilities do we see for that? [2011-04-13 22:56:46] using 2 columns would be one possibility, but that is tough and demading to get to work properly [2011-04-13 22:57:02] there are basically 2 ways [2011-04-13 22:57:18] 1 is to use liquid layout @@ -116,7 +60,15 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-13 22:59:52] (from a design point of view) [2011-04-13 22:59:54] :) [2011-04-13 23:00:01] * cehteh likes (or rather demands) that browser zoom (ctrl-+) works well on the lumiera page -... +--------------------- + + +using a »liquid layout«? +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + +.-- liquid <--> not liquid -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-13 23:05:14] ok, so apart from that, the discussion is liquid vs not liquid [2011-04-13 23:05:31] and also what possibilities there are [2011-04-13 23:05:43] ichthyo: what do you mean? @@ -189,47 +141,29 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-13 23:18:03] i.e. limiting the maximum width, but allowing some liquid expansion below that [2011-04-13 23:17:55] i'm not sure that just CSS is possible [2011-04-13 23:18:20] If I recall right, it used several nested containers -[2011-04-13 23:18:17] wtf is liquid? -[2011-04-13 23:18:23] * cehteh is no web developer -[2011-04-13 23:18:27] free floating text? -[2011-04-13 23:18:32] cehteh: liquid means, that the sizes adjust -[2011-04-13 23:18:55] boxes where the content is rendered? -[2011-04-13 23:18:36] sorry guys -[2011-04-13 23:18:42] let me clarify -[2011-04-13 23:18:51] I thought you were familiar with the term -[2011-04-13 23:18:55] I am -[2011-04-13 23:19:03] yes i am the web noob here -[2011-04-13 23:19:20] ... while I did quite a lot in the past, but mostly web applications, shops and the like -[2011-04-13 23:19:37] cant you just give a max-width=200em for a container for example? -[2011-04-13 23:19:47] yes -[2011-04-13 23:19:53] it is possible -[2011-04-13 23:19:59] and then you set an "overflow mode" -[2011-04-13 23:20:14] and whats overflow mode? -[2011-04-13 23:20:28] overflow mode is: adjust, clip, scrollbars -[2011-04-13 23:20:17] and if I recall correct, then the trick was to put a second container in that, with witdh 100% -[2011-04-13 23:20:54] i think we can set this -[2011-04-13 23:21:03] i'll investigate the possibilities we mentioned -[2011-04-13 23:21:08] and make a report in 1 week -[2011-04-13 23:21:35] fsiddi: that would be cool -[2011-04-13 23:21:52] I'll too try to dig in my old notes, maybe I'll find the example I have in mind +--------------------- -[2011-04-13 23:21:41] now i'l like to mention the 2nd and final point -[2011-04-13 23:22:52] my 2nd point is: navigation -[2011-04-13 23:23:33] can somebody help me with reimplementing the original nav system -[2011-04-13 23:23:50] the menu? -[2011-04-13 23:23:56] yes, of course -[2011-04-13 23:23:58] that reads the url and opens up the tree at the right point -[2011-04-13 23:24:07] that's pretty important -[2011-04-13 23:24:26] after that works, it'll be just fixes in the layout -[2011-04-13 23:24:45] of course I'll help, just I don't know the new menu system so well -[2011-04-13 23:24:54] so we'll should just pair up on that -[2011-04-13 23:25:06] cool -[2011-04-13 23:25:29] maybe we should just set up a separate meeting here on IRC, where we can discuss that? -[2011-04-13 23:25:41] (you and me, that is) -[2011-04-13 23:25:44] so will you have time to work on it next week? -[2011-04-13 23:26:45] i'll poke you after my report on the 1st point then -[2011-04-13 23:28:23] well I'd like to bring up the question regarding color +Regarding the handling of *vertical scrolling*, the conclusion was to stick to the defaults +as much as possible. Especially, scrollbars should rather be left to the browser, not added +to the content area. We might consider to fix the navigation block relative to the browser window +though, if that is doable with too much complications. Moreover, this navigation block, holding +the (vertical) tree-like menu, should be made sufficiently large in vertical direction, but might +show scrollbars in case of overflow. + +Navigation menu +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ +we still need to find a way how to make the new +JQuery+ based navigation menu open and highlight +the _current_ page automatically. _fsiddi_ and _ichthyo_ will work out a solution in a separate meeting +on IRC next week. + +Colour scheme +^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + +.gray shades or using a colour scheme? +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- +[2011-04-13 23:28:23] I'd like to bring up the question regarding color [2011-04-13 23:28:36] and I'll ask especially you, fsiddi [2011-04-13 23:28:44] you know, colours are a matter of taste [2011-04-13 23:29:15] thus I'd say, as you did the general layout, you have an important say in that @@ -255,73 +189,52 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-13 23:32:37] according to my experience [2011-04-13 23:32:47] it helps a lot when you set a clear style guide early [2011-04-13 23:33:41] ok -[2011-04-13 23:33:51] so what was the conclusion regarding the scrollbars? -[2011-04-13 23:34:19] do we want scrollbars on the content area, or do we want the header, footer just to scroll away -[2011-04-13 23:34:33] and do we want the navigation block fixed (relative to the screen) -[2011-04-13 23:34:42] or let it scroll away too? -[2011-04-13 23:35:59] for general content, have it fixed, for documentation scroll it away? -[2011-04-13 23:36:10] the simplest solution is just to leave evertything scroll away of course -[2011-04-13 23:36:27] documentation pages need to be able to navigate within this documentation -[2011-04-13 23:36:45] next/previous/top and maybe few related pages -[2011-04-13 23:36:58] and back to home/home of documentation -[2011-04-13 23:37:06] but not more i think -[2011-04-13 23:37:21] thats the point, it can get cluttered -[2011-04-13 23:37:52] yes, leave only the minimal necessary things -[2011-04-13 23:38:08] well... *if* we want to keep the navigation (vertical menu) fixed, there are some problems -[2011-04-13 23:38:12] at least the documentation should be readable on a small device, webpad, netbook even smartphone -[2011-04-13 23:38:46] namely: what to do on unexpectedly small pages, and what to do when the menu tree itself - gets very large, so it doesn't fit on one page, even in half collapsed state, that is -[2011-04-13 23:39:29] you cant fix/address everything -[2011-04-13 23:39:42] of course, but how to degrade then -[2011-04-13 23:39:49] allow a scrollbar to appear? -[2011-04-13 23:39:51] there should be some safety marigin but otherwise just the browsers default fallbacks shall apply -[2011-04-13 23:40:45] in the worst case then the defaults are the best, the user is used how his device handles this -[2011-04-13 23:40:57] good point -[2011-04-13 23:41:00] right now the tree expands, scrollbars automatically appear -[2011-04-13 23:41:20] ok -[2011-04-13 23:41:47] and atm i would not consider portable devices for accessing the documentation -[2011-04-13 23:43:59] anyway, i am about to leave for tonight -[2011-04-13 23:44:08] ok -[2011-04-13 23:44:19] I think we're through with the web page design questions for now -[2011-04-13 23:44:26] good -[2011-04-13 23:44:33] :) - -[2011-04-13 23:45:32] Hi. -[2011-04-13 23:45:40] Hello skangas ! -[2011-04-13 23:47:53] I will actually just pop in to say hi this time. -[2011-04-13 23:48:18] skangas: how's life? had a busy time? -[2011-04-13 23:48:24] I have late nights and early mornings at the moment, so I need my sleep. ;-) -[2011-04-13 23:48:33] ;-) -[2011-04-13 23:48:42] ichthyo, Yeah, I am quite busy for the rest of this semester. -[2011-04-13 23:49:06] I am hoping things will change once summer comes. They usually do. -[2011-04-13 23:49:42] hopefully you've got interesting things to learn and program right now... -[2011-04-13 23:49:46] And, I decided not to apply for GSoC, so I know there will be time. :-) -[2011-04-13 23:50:09] Lumiera Summer of Code :P -[2011-04-13 23:50:12] Yeah, it is basically math and compilers currently. And even a bit of Prolog. -[2011-04-13 23:50:18] LuSoC -[2011-04-13 23:50:19] cool :) -[2011-04-13 23:50:43] heh, I really enjoyed that compiler building lections -[2011-04-13 23:50:46] http://dtai.cs.kuleuven.be/problog/index.html stomped on that recently .. would be fun to play with it -[2011-04-13 23:51:35] http://www.dcc.fc.up.pt/~vsc/Yap/clpbn/ is also cool .. unfortunally i think development stalled a bit -[2011-04-13 23:51:40] cehteh: This looks like (from skimming) exactly like the mathematical models I have been playing around with all day in school. - -[2011-04-13 23:51:46] uhm ok lets go on with the metting -[2011-04-13 23:52:21] two further topics, related: -[2011-04-13 23:52:25] the "impressum" -[2011-04-13 23:52:27] the license -[2011-04-13 23:52:46] ah yes, i seen you added serveral licenses .. -[2011-04-13 23:53:08] we should make more clear which license lumiera is under -[2011-04-13 23:53:25] only one 'license' page .. with gplv2 -[2011-04-13 23:53:50] and then 'other licenses' pages and explain where they are used -[2011-04-13 23:52:56] for the impressum, as said -[2011-04-13 23:53:08] I volunteer to put my name in there -[2011-04-13 23:53:25] so we sort-of share the consequences -[2011-04-13 23:54 ] for the impressum .. fine if you do, if you want you can add me too -[2011-04-13 23:54 ] and we have to figure out where to place the impressum .. iirc it must be on the homepage -[2011-04-13 23:54 ] but it doesnt need to be in the menu -[2011-04-13 23:55 ] just a very tiny links in the footer is enough +--------------------- + + +Webserver upgrade and the »reference distribution« +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +.-- Server upgrade discussion -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- +[2011-04-14 00:25:59] ok next point: +[2011-04-14 00:26:07] - Webserver update to squeeze (new asciidoc, keep ichthyos hand +[2011-04-14 00:26:07] installed trac) +[2011-04-14 00:26:07] - Do we want to bump our 'reference' distribution to squeeze too? +[2011-04-14 00:26:19] ... webserver .. as soon as possible, but no urge +[2011-04-14 00:26:34] reference .. i just wanted to bring this up, imo there is no need +[2011-04-14 00:26:46] personally, I will upgrade soon, next 2 weeks hopefully +[2011-04-14 00:27:13] yes i am on squeeze and even with backports already +[2011-04-14 00:27:29] so its prolly even better to have the reference on the devel server a bit behind +[2011-04-14 00:27:28] I would propose to bump the "reference" the moment when we actually upgrade the + devserver + builddrone +[2011-04-14 00:27:51] well the devserver will be upgraded when we bump the reference +[2011-04-14 00:28:10] builddrone will be upgraded sometime next but thats not related to the reference +[2011-04-14 00:28:12] but for now there is no problem also supporting lenny, but with the note that we'll + drop that support once we run into serious problems +[2011-04-14 00:28:22] yes +[2011-04-14 00:28:30] iirc that would be the reason to bump it +[2011-04-14 00:29:05] well, IMHO, when we both are on squeeze, then effectively the reference is bumped :-P +[2011-04-14 00:29:40] nah .. the reference is about what builddrone reports to us too +[2011-04-14 00:29:15] i'd stay with lenny as long as we can so .. or maybe if the next stable gets froozen + then we can go to squeeze +[2011-04-14 00:29:51] and what skangas and other gui coders need also +[2011-04-14 00:30:15] i expect that gavl and gui dependencies will be a cause for a bump + +[2011-04-14 00:32:50] summarize: bump it someday .. as need arises? +[2011-04-14 00:33:26] or even better. .. no decision yet .. we'll see when its time +--------------------- + + +Website licensing and legal questions +------------------------------------- + +.-- Discussion regarding the Web content license -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-13 23:54:14] For the record, I agree with what ichthyo said in his first e-mail. [2011-04-13 23:54:55] That "dual licensing under GPL and something comparable" is the best choice. [2011-04-13 23:55:03] Probably CC-BY-SA. @@ -399,131 +312,84 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 00:13:47] yay! [2011-04-14 00:13:51] btw duke nukem is delayed [2011-04-14 00:14:02] ouch, I'm surprised +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 00:14:41] ok lets summarise: -[2011-04-14 00:14:47] ichthyo: you add the impressum -[2011-04-14 00:14:51] ok -[2011-04-14 00:15:00] I clarify the actual licenses we use -[2011-04-14 00:15:07] yes -[2011-04-14 00:15:34] currently its not easily visible which license lumiera falls under -[2011-04-14 00:16:05] well, it's in the first senctence, and even in bold font -[2011-04-14 00:16:10] http://lumiera.org/project/legal/legal.html -[2011-04-14 00:16:40] yes but imo there should be only one License menu point, pointing to the gplv2 and our rationale document -[2011-04-14 00:16:56] ichthyo, Error on that page Webiste -> Website -[2011-04-14 00:17:09] and then maybe other sub items exactly stating "other licenses" or "license for the documentation" -[2011-04-14 00:17:09] I really need to sleep now... Good night! -[2011-04-14 00:17:09] thanks, noted -[2011-04-14 00:17:45] skangas: good night, sleep well! -[2011-04-14 00:18:03] if i click on license for some project i dont want to read much there should be just "this is licensed under foolicense" as first prominent sentence -[2011-04-14 00:18:08] n8 skangas -[2011-04-14 00:18:57] ok -[2011-04-14 00:18:58] for me now when i seen the 'license' menu after you added it, it unfolded to a list of licenses .. -[2011-04-14 00:19:15] me alreadly thought "wtf" ... guess what some outsider will think :) -[2011-04-14 00:19:45] :) +Conclusion +~~~~~~~~~~ -[2011-04-14 00:20:03] anyway, I think there are still some minor points left to discuss for this meeting -[2011-04-14 00:20:14] yes .. next one: -[2011-04-14 00:20:30] - Trac spam, solved, whats left to do (delete unused accounts) -[2011-04-14 00:21:00] you told me that its easily to delete the unused accounts .. - but from some i know that they are real users -[2011-04-14 00:21:20] well.. it is easy to tell those apart -[2011-04-14 00:21:23] i tihnk we should notify this at least on the ml -[2011-04-14 00:21:32] just need to improve the SQL a bit -[2011-04-14 00:21:55] the trick is: those "old" inactive accounts are by definition older than - the spam accounts we delete -[2011-04-14 00:21:45] how about creating a category 'people' on trac -[2011-04-14 00:22:03] where everyone who is new is instructed to fill a first ticket .. -[2011-04-14 00:22:29] puts a bit burden on the people, not really a good idea -[2011-04-14 00:22:46] but anyways meanwhile there are a lot more spam accounts, we should regulary wipe them -[2011-04-14 00:22:58] yes, so for now I'd just run that SQL once a month manually -[2011-04-14 00:23:34] prolly you should do that weekly :P -[2011-04-14 00:23:38] after some months, if we see it works well always, we can do a little shell script - to issue that SQL -[2011-04-14 00:23:42] crontab ftw -[2011-04-14 00:23:50] or so, weekly, no prob -[2011-04-14 00:24:02] you stay tuned and care for that? -[2011-04-14 00:24:17] yes, for the next time, and sometime in summer we make a cronjob -[2011-04-14 00:25:28] eh just logged in. .. prolly 80% are spam meanwhile -[2011-04-14 00:25:32] hehe + * Website content and documentation will be dual-licensed GPL 2+ and CC-3.0-BY-SA + * _Ichthyo_ will clarify the actual licenses used on the ``license'' page + * moreover he'll care to add an _Impressum_ -- as required by german law -[2011-04-14 00:25:59] ok next point: -[2011-04-14 00:26:07] - Webserver update to squeeze (new asciidoc, keep ichthyos hand -[2011-04-14 00:26:07] installed trac) -[2011-04-14 00:26:07] - Do we want to bump our 'reference' distribution to squeeze too? -[2011-04-14 00:26:19] ... webserver .. as soon as possible, but no urge -[2011-04-14 00:26:34] reference .. i just wanted to bring this up, imo there is no need -[2011-04-14 00:26:46] personally, I will upgrade soon, next 2 weeks hopefully -[2011-04-14 00:27:13] yes i am on squeeze and even with backports already -[2011-04-14 00:27:29] so its prolly even better to have the reference on the devel server a bit behind -[2011-04-14 00:27:28] I would propose to bump the "reference" the moment when we actually upgrade the - devserver + builddrone -[2011-04-14 00:27:51] well the devserver will be upgraded when we bump the reference -[2011-04-14 00:28:10] builddrone will be upgraded sometime next but thats not related to the reference -[2011-04-14 00:28:12] but for now there is no problem also supporting lenny, but with the note that we'll - drop that support once we run into serious problems -[2011-04-14 00:28:22] yes -[2011-04-14 00:28:30] iirc that would be the reason to bump it -[2011-04-14 00:29:05] well, IMHO, when we both are on squeeze, then effectively the reference is bumped :-P -[2011-04-14 00:29:40] nah .. the reference is about what builddrone reports to us too -[2011-04-14 00:29:15] i'd stay with lenny as long as we can so .. or maybe if the next stable gets froozen - then we can go to squeeze -[2011-04-14 00:29:51] and what skangas and other gui coders need also -[2011-04-14 00:30:15] i expect that gavl and gui dependencies will be a cause for a bump -[2011-04-14 00:32:50] summarize: bump it someday .. as need arises? -[2011-04-14 00:33:26] or even better. .. no decision yet .. we'll see when its time -[2011-04-14 00:33:40] ok next point: -[2011-04-14 00:34:57] - Go over pending RFC's (quick, not in detail this time) -[2011-04-14 00:35:11] should become regular on each meeting + +Trac spam +--------- +After an increasing amount of Spam tickets in the link:http://issues.lumiera.org[Trac], +_Ichthyo_ installed the Trac antispam plugin (which required an upgrade to Trac 0.12, +actually repackaging a current version into an pre-release debian package, as the +official debian package isn't on the required level). After a bit of training, +the Bayesian filter successfully blocked any further spam tickets. + +The remaining problem are spam user accounts though. To deal with that problem, _Ichthyo_ +designed a custom SQL query based on some obvious heuristics, which seems to pinpoint +all spurious accounts. We'll try to execute that SQL for some time manually, and -- +in case it behaves sane -- automate that cleanup as a cronjob in some months. + +_Cehteh_ points out that this new policy should at least be anounced on the Mailinglist. + + + +Recurring Topic: Design process entries +--------------------------------------- +Discussion of open link:/documentation/devel/rfc.html[design process] drafts. + +Since some time, no further discussion happened regarding the currently _pending_ +RfC entries. Agreement is that we should again return to the former routine and +revisit the relevant design process entries in each developer meeting. + + +.-- the Application Install proposal -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 00:48:25] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/ApplicationInstall.html [2011-04-14 00:48:40] maybe only pick out some interestin ones or some which are quick to decide [2011-04-14 00:49:06] well i want to go over all pending .. then we can put notes there "boring for the next meeting" -[2011-04-14 00:49:24] and next time we pcik only the interesting ones -[2011-04-14 00:49:33] ok [2011-04-14 00:49:42] for example this application install .. is boring .. you did a lot work, imo you can finalize it [2011-04-14 00:50:04] (i dint read it in detail now) [2011-04-14 00:50:25] maybe we want another state "accepted" .. [2011-04-14 00:50:44] that is the interesting things which we know we will not drop but which are not finalized yet -[2011-04-14 00:53:02] adding that to rfc.sh would be trivial +[2011-04-14 00:54:29] the application install came first... we need it, you did it well .. it could be 'finalized' or + rather that would be some 'acceepted' candidate .. [2011-04-14 00:53:25] I think, the existing states are enough -[2011-04-14 00:53:26] yeah .. i think we dont need to 'finalize' and decide finally now [2011-04-14 00:53:44] either really discuss something and then decide, or just leave it in draft -[2011-04-14 00:53:50] well i just started alphabetically [2011-04-14 00:54:05] lets just postpone the application install and leave it in draft! -[2011-04-14 00:54:29] the application install came first... we need it, you did it well .. it could be 'finalized' or rather that would be some 'acceepted' candidate .. +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 00:54:24] Delectus? -[2011-04-14 00:54:40] delectus can be parked until someone else comes up with it -[2011-04-14 00:54:48] (btw i can do this right here and commit it) -[2011-04-14 00:54:51] yes, so thats an decision, lets park it -[2011-04-14 00:54:57] please do -[2011-04-14 00:55:42] question: do the parked onees also go into a different directory? -[2011-04-14 00:55:49] I'm asking because of the menu -[2011-04-14 00:56:04] iirc not .. but i can do that -[2011-04-14 00:56:13] (adding to rfc.sh) -[2011-04-14 00:56:17] let me look -[2011-04-14 00:56:46] no ... i make a rfc_parked/ dir -[2011-04-14 00:57:05] ok that would be nice -[2011-04-14 00:57:34] ok noted -[2011-04-14 00:57:34] next one -[2011-04-14 00:57:47] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/DesignParamAutomation.html -[2011-04-14 00:57:55] keep pending? -[2011-04-14 00:57:57] well, its Idea, I have to expand on that -[2011-04-14 00:57:57] yes -[2011-04-14 00:58:01] please keep pending +Delectus Shot Evaluator +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Agreement to _park_ it until someone else comes up to advance this topic further. -[2011-04-14 00:58:11] Design Process : Clip Cataloging System -[2011-04-14 00:58:16] park -[2011-04-14 00:58:20] park +Clip Cataloging System +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +similarily to _park_ until someone cares.... -[2011-04-14 00:58:31] LumieraForwardIterator -[2011-04-14 00:58:37] Design Process: Lumiera Forward Iterator + +DesignParamAutomation +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Keep _pending_ -- _ichthyo_ will expand on that + + +Lumiera Forward Iterator +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 00:58:39] pending - [2011-04-14 00:58:48] well, this is entirely an C++ topic [2011-04-14 00:58:58] I for my part vote for accepting it now [2011-04-14 00:59:11] I use this concept now since almost a year and it worked out well @@ -532,8 +398,17 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 01:00:14] but if it works for you, i put it on 'maybe finalize' .. means i read through it and finalize it when i have no objections [2011-04-14 01:00:24] yes, agreed +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:00:45] Design the Render Nodes interface + + + +Design the Render Nodes interface +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +.-- Discussion of details -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 01:01:04] thats definitely pending .. needs discussion [2011-04-14 01:01:33] yes [2011-04-14 01:01:54] maybe we park it to get rid of it for now since this is months ahead? @@ -541,17 +416,34 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 01:02:44] that RfC basically sais: PLING PLING PLING, we need to discuss that [2011-04-14 01:02:53] well, I wont drop it, its a nice place to document the intention about the design [2011-04-14 01:03:10] ok, so lets park it +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:03:13] Developer Documentation Structure + +Developer Documentation Structure +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +--> see link:http://issues.lumiera.org/ticket/763[Ticket #763] + +.-- Discussion of details -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +--------------------- [2011-04-14 01:03:23] i check that, bring it up to date and finalize it? -[2011-04-14 01:03:36] i have some objections agains that, see my comment +[2011-04-14 01:03:36] i have some objections against that, see my comment [2011-04-14 01:04:00] I think, the current structure is better than what that RfC proposes [2011-04-14 01:04:05] yes .. thats what i meant with bring it up to date [2011-04-14 01:04:39] i can keep it pending .. and then we can finalize it when you agree [2011-04-14 01:04:49] ok, so you will update it? [2011-04-14 01:05:32] yes .. maybe not for next time but i put it on todo +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:05:35] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/EngineInterfaceOverview.html + + + +Engine Interface Overview +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +.-- Discussion of details -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 01:05:50] pending .. there is lot to do? [2011-04-14 01:06:02] sort of [2011-04-14 01:06:10] basically that is a high level outline @@ -567,14 +459,21 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 01:07:43] yes .. lets talk next meeting about that (or some time else) [2011-04-14 01:07:57] ok [2011-04-14 01:08:05] so pending for now +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:08:11] FeatureBundle -[2011-04-14 01:08:14] park -[2011-04-14 01:08:26] park -[2011-04-14 01:08:26] very important, but far future -[2011-04-14 01:08:33] yes -[2011-04-14 01:08:39] MarbleMode +Feature Bundle +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Expected to be very important in the far future, but we don't have the +resources to work on that right now, so _park_ it. + + +Marble Mode +~~~~~~~~~~~ + +.-- Discussion of details -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 01:08:51] this is also a high level one [2011-04-14 01:08:57] I am much in favour of that [2011-04-14 01:09:09] but its really kind of conceptual @@ -589,32 +488,31 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 01:11:58] or we just finalize it as 'concept' we want no matter how we implement it finally [2011-04-14 01:12:05] yes ok then [2011-04-14 01:12:10] yes, ok then +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:12:49] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/NormalizedDeviceCoordinates.html -[2011-04-14 01:12:54] very rough -[2011-04-14 01:13:17] makes a lot of sense .. but unfinished, pending or park? -[2011-04-14 01:13:37] I'd say park -[2011-04-14 01:13:51] (I am also much in favour of that one) -[2011-04-14 01:13:42] ok +Normalized Device Coordinates +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +still very rough, but basically agreed. + +While it needs more work, it's a bit out of focus right now, so _park it. -[2011-04-14 01:14:16] ProcHighLevel -[2011-04-14 01:14:24] thats rather final now? -[2011-04-14 01:14:26] my vote goes for accept -[2011-04-14 01:14:35] is it up to date? -[2011-04-14 01:14:41] no significant addition since almost two years -[2011-04-14 01:14:46] yes, its up to date -[2011-04-14 01:14:52] ok final -[2011-04-14 01:15:37] and, btw, I know that you also supported many of those ideas -[2011-04-14 01:15:39] placement .. -[2011-04-14 01:15:48] I think same for that -[2011-04-14 01:15:57] up to date? -[2011-04-14 01:16:00] if you don't have a problem with it, I vote for accept -[2011-04-14 01:16:28] yes, as far as I can see, its up to date -[2011-04-14 01:16:32] yes for me the question is only if you need to refine some final things before accepting it -[2011-04-14 01:17:06] ok accept +Proc High Level Model and Placement concept +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +That's rather final by now. This link:http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc/ProcHighLevelModel.html[proposal] +meanwhile documents the existing design; it's up to date and didn't see significant +additions since almost two years. Generally agreed upon, so it's _final_ now. -[2011-04-14 01:17:18] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/RenderOptimizer.html +The same holds true for the +link:http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc/ProcPlacementMetaphor.html[Placement] proposal + + + +Render Optimizer, Resource Management and Profiling +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +.-- Discussion of details -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 01:17:19] park [2011-04-14 01:17:32] accept for me [2011-04-14 01:17:56] that is so much our common understanding meanwhile @@ -642,16 +540,20 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC first sentences, because then we could accept it right away [2011-04-14 01:21:45] ok pending for now .. i dont want to work on this currently .. other things are more important [2011-04-14 01:21:47] we both pretty much agree that we *want* some kind of budget managing and resource usage +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:22:41] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/Roadmap-first.html -[2011-04-14 01:22:45] final? -[2011-04-14 01:22:51] oops! my fault -[2011-04-14 01:22:55] anything not up to date? -[2011-04-14 01:23:00] that *was* accepted long ago -[2011-04-14 01:23:13] haha ok -[2011-04-14 01:23:47] we discussed and accepted that 2009, judging from the comments -[2011-04-14 01:23:49] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/StreamTypeSystem.html +Roadmap +~~~~~~~ +The link:http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc/Roadmap-first.html[Roadmap document] +was erroneously not marked as final; + +Seemingly it was decided upon in 2009 already ... + +Stream Type System +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 01:24:06] very important for me -- my vote is for accept [2011-04-14 01:24:16] we had some discussion how to maintain metadata .. [2011-04-14 01:24:40] i vote for accept too but this metadata (which may decribe the type) needs work @@ -670,8 +572,14 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 01:27:38] i think that needs some time to settle to the right point [tm] [2011-04-14 01:27:43] I'm not right away implementing it, but the implementation is rather trivial [2011-04-14 01:27:48] so leave it pending +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:28:00] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/ThreadsSignalsAndImportantManagementTasks.html + +Threads Signals and important management tasks +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +.-- Discussion of details -- +[caption="☉Transcript☉ "] +---------------------------- [2011-04-14 01:28:33] we need to work together to implement this on the main .. but generally i think this can be accepted with some refinements [2011-04-14 01:28:14] some time ago, we had a short discussion about that @@ -701,50 +609,34 @@ The next meeting will be at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC [2011-04-14 01:35:51] anyways .. i accept it .. implementation pending [2011-04-14 01:37:38] signal handling becomes a 'subsystem' then ... :) [2011-04-14 01:37:46] yes, thats what I mean +--------------------- -[2011-04-14 01:36:50] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/TimelineSequenceOutput.html -[2011-04-14 01:36:52] final? -[2011-04-14 01:37:00] definitively final -[2011-04-14 01:38:08] TimelineSequence: the key point is: we have multiple timelines -[2011-04-14 01:38:28] and a sequence can be used in multiple timelines -[2011-04-14 01:38:36] yes .. ok for me i think -[2011-04-14 01:38:37] I think we pretty much agree on that -[2011-04-14 01:39:01] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/UseCases.html -[2011-04-14 01:39:08] nobody cares :P -[2011-04-14 01:39:20] nobody cares -[2011-04-14 01:39:34] that means parked? or drop? -[2011-04-14 01:39:35] park it, until we have someone working on the workflow +Session structure -- Timelines, Sequences, Output +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +This link:http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/TimelineSequenceOutput.html[proposal] +can be considered definitively final. Key point is: we have multiple timelines and a sequence can be used +in multiple timelines. We pretty much agree on that, thus it counts as _finalised_ now. -[2011-04-14 01:40:01] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/VersionNumberScheme.html -[2011-04-14 01:40:10] accept (after you explained it to me .. ) -[2011-04-14 01:40:35] :-D -[2011-04-14 01:40:14] accept +Use Cases +~~~~~~~~~ +This is an heavyweight proposal regarding the high-level design and general handling of the +Application. This would be really a topic to be discussed in conjection with the ``Workflow'' +-- the idea was to have a working group focussed these topics entirely, but there is no one +in charge of that right now. Thus _park_ it for the time being. -[2011-04-14 01:40:41] http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/WebsiteNavigation.html -[2011-04-14 01:40:50] is that final? -[2011-04-14 01:40:55] (up to date) -[2011-04-14 01:41:15] do others need to discuss this .. fsiddi? -[2011-04-14 01:41:27] there is one point: the tagging of pages -[2011-04-14 01:41:37] if we remove that, the rest is implemented right now -[2011-04-14 01:42:08] leave it pending and when you meet with fsiidi next time you discuss and fix this? -[2011-04-14 01:42:18] ok +Version Number Scheme +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +The proposal for link:http://lumiera.org/documentation/devel/rfc_pending/VersionNumberScheme.html[Version numbering] +is _accepted_ -- it's considered close to common practice and _ichthyo_ relied on it for the debian +package already. + +''''''''''''' + + +Next meeting +------------ + +The next meeting will be as usual, at Wednesday May 11, 20:00 UTC -[2011-04-14 01:47:47] so meeting is finished now, officially... -[2011-04-14 01:47:59] n8 :) -[2011-04-14 01:48:10] well i work a bit .. night owl mode :P -[2011-04-14 01:48:11] next meeting on 11.5.2011 -[2011-04-14 01:48:42] btw, I'm quite sure I skip LAC this time -[2011-04-14 01:48:52] me too -[2011-04-14 01:48:58] just overall too much to do right now -[2011-04-14 01:49:15] no lumiera at lac -[2011-04-14 01:49:33] but I'd be quite interested to come to that FSCONS conference skangas told us about -[2011-04-14 01:49:38] in october or so -[2011-04-14 01:49:57] lets see .. time & money -[2011-04-14 01:51:12] ok, going off now -[2011-04-14 01:51:15] * cehteh goes hunting some food -[2011-04-14 01:51:19] (and hopefully going to bed soon) -[2011-04-14 01:51:21] see you -[2011-04-14 01:51:24] see you! -----------------------------