Difference between revisions of "Release Meeting Minutes/2008-07-07"

Latest revision as of 16:40, 10 January 2011

Present: Alexandra, Justin, Ken, Robert, Stephen, Tom, Will

Steve: lot to do through Sept. status?

Tom: iprop is merged now

Ken: doesn't appear to be getting any notice, deadline is about 2 weeks away

Steve: definite dates will get a better response, should pick a specific deadline to encourage people to speak up

Ken

Steve: Ken preparing draft for IETF. Some time unallocated (the week before IETF). How to use it?

Ken: Maybe something will pop up from Apple. Though anything from them would need to be fast tracked. Other than that, domain name referral.

Steve: Should do more foundation work on Apple things to get a better feel for the problem space.

Ken: Though we need to wait for Apple to tell us what they want.

Steve: Ken's planned work takes him to the 3rd week of Sept.

lxs

Steve: lxs's planned work is well known

lxs: working on newer patches. sent mail to list about patches, looking for response. who to assign patches to?

Steve: assign patches to tom

lxs: not enough time to work on embedded kerberos + KIM + patches by sept. waiting on justin for krb5_cc_cursor work.

Steve: focus on KIM first

Tom: several people will want that above other things

Robert

Steve: robert?

Robert: work with putting krb things into mysql config files, though much of mysql appears hardcoded. should be working on linux platforms by end of day. also clean up, comments, review.

Steve: wrap up mysql by friday?

Robert: hoping to. a lot of testing between VMs, need to try with physical boxes.

Will

Will: Webrev in OpenSolaris. Version exists to work with subversion repositories. Looked at OpenGrok and FishEye. OpenGrok can browse branch but tedious to figure out full diffs. FishEye has stale data.

Steve: FishEye has been out of date since June 9th. Known problem and will be fixed very soon.

Will: Webrev might be useful for code review process. Sun will investigate.

Steve: Is the real problem that no one has responded to the request for code review? Might just be that people didn't notice (and not that diffs are hard to get). Will should send up followup note with repeat of concrete deadline for code review.

Tom: FishEye might have the functionality Sun wants. Just needs to get fixed.

Steve: MIT doesn't want to invest in tools if the problem is just people not realizing they need to review the code.

Will: Once code review is done, merge branch.

Tom

Tom: Working on roadmap, client side referrals, apple patches and krb4 removal

Justin

Justin: More ccol_cursor work. Presentation for another team will take up some time this week