Meeting 2010 08 02

From PCGen Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

[PCGen] Board of Directors Meeting

Attendees:

Team Name Real Name
Chair Andrew Maitland
Admin Andrew Maitland
Arch Absent
Code James Dempsey
Content Absent
PR Absent
2nd Release James Dempsey
2nd Licensing Paul Grosse
Observer Connor Petty
Observer JSA
Observer Swiftbrook
Observer Blackbook


PCGen Board of Directors Meeting - Log

  • NON-QUORUM MEETING
  • [19:01] <@[Chair]Andrew> I've got 7pm local; shall we get under way?
  • [19:02] <[OGL]Nylanfs> No quorum but we can go over the agenda
  • [19:02] <@[Chair]Andrew> Yeah, pity that... Oh well, let's get started then
  • [19:02] <@[Chair]Andrew> Welcome everyone to the PCGen Board of Director's Meeting
  • [19:02] <@[Chair]Andrew> We are lacking a full showing of Board Members, so this will go fairly quickly
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> Our Agenda for this evening
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> 1.)  Team reports
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2.)  5.16.3 release, good to go?
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> 3.)  5.17.4 release to go a week after
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> 3.a)  I think there was a code discussion not too long ago that was going to cover merging CDOMUI and trunk, is that correct?  If so we need to discuss encouraging users to test out the new UI.
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> 4.)  Special discussion on mailing list/forum status (if not resolved by mailing list discussions)
  • [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> We'll skip #1 and jump to #2 and #3
  • [19:04] <@[Chair]Andrew> James, would you care to talk about that please?
  • [19:04] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sure ok
  • [19:04] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Firstly, we will go for a 5.16.3 RC3 release before we do the prod release - there have been a lot of changes on both the code and data sides
  • [19:05] <jamesd[Code_SB]> I was hoping to do that Sunday but found a bunch more bugs I wanted to hit first so it is currently delayed
  • [19:05] <jamesd[Code_SB]> So it will be tomorrow night at the earliest
  • [19:06] <jamesd[Code_SB]> There will be a check-in freeze after that (apart from docs) to assist in getting to prod quickly
  • [19:06] <jamesd[Code_SB]> and not having any new bugs introduced after the RC. The ideal is that the same code and data goes to prod as RC3
  • [19:07] <jamesd[Code_SB]> The fix list for 5.16.3 is getting pretty long - it will be a nice release even aside from the new data
  • [19:08] <jamesd[Code_SB]> So, once RC3 is out it would be good to have everyone give it a good test and then aim to get 5.16.3 out on the weekend
  • [19:08] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Comments/questions?
  • [19:09] <@[Chair]Andrew> Sounds good.
  • [19:09] <[OGL]Nylanfs> What about the couple of datasets that are waiting for data review?
  • [19:09] <@[Chair]Andrew> Which ones Paul?
  • [19:09] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Looking now
  • [19:10] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Two are Paizo sets I think
  • [19:10] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Or all three are
  • [19:10] <@[Chair]Andrew> Practical Enchanter loads without Error, and should be reviewed by Barak. But I've gone ahead and cleared it. Our Data Chimps are stretched thin
  • [19:11] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'll give them a review then... They in the 5.16 release currently?
  • [19:12] <[OGL]Nylanfs> There's Shadmar and Heart of the Jungle
  • [19:12] <@[Chair]Andrew> Shadmar is waiting for a Pub review
  • [19:13] <@[Chair]Andrew> okay, if you could assign those to me and I'll get to them
  • [19:13] <[OGL]Nylanfs> There's also the Eclipse Phase, but that is a bit out there so not sure how the data review would be on it :)
  • [19:13] <@[Chair]Andrew> Eclipse Phase? Didn't see any tracker on it.
  • [19:14] <@[Chair]Andrew> James, care to comment on items #3 and #4 since those all seem to be your area tonigh?. :)
  • [19:14] <[OGL]Nylanfs> It's under New Source data review
  • [19:14] <jamesd[Code_SB]> ok, #3 the 5.17.4 alpha release
  • [19:15] <jamesd[Code_SB]> On the code side we have 16 recorded bugs against the current code that were not in 5.17.3 - I'd like to see that list cut down a bit before we do the release
  • [19:16] <jamesd[Code_SB]> So that might delay the release a little
  • [19:17] <jamesd[Code_SB]> If we were doing fortnightly releases I wouldn't stress so much, but given that there has been a while between releases it would be better to have it a bit more stable I think
  • [19:17] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Comments/questions?
  • [19:17] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Umm meant Eclipse: The Codex Persona earlier :)
  • [19:18] <@[Chair]Andrew> None here James, all sounds good.
  • [19:18] <cpmeister____> none here
  • [19:18] <[OGL]Nylanfs> None here
  • [19:18] <@[Chair]Andrew> @Paul - No worries, that isn't in the bucket for 5.16; it would complain. That's a 6.0 release set only.
  • [19:19] <jamesd[Code_SB]> ok #3a) We discussed a future merge and decided that it would be good, but will be a few months off yet
  • [19:19] <@[Chair]Andrew> So, November or December then?
  • [19:19] <jamesd[Code_SB]> That would be to a new branch though to make a later merge with the trunk easier
  • [19:20] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Yes, possibly sometime around then
  • [19:21] <@[Chair]Andrew>o k, and I know predictions are tough, but would the 6.0 release be around March at our current pace? (I think Ennies submission are around then *hint hint*)
  • [19:21] <cpmeister____> sounds like a deadline :P
  • [19:21] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I would definitely LIKE to have a submission for the Ennies next year
  • [19:22] <@[Chair]Andrew> If it's between making a deadline and making a superb release, I'll take the superb release.
  • [19:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> I think it would make sense to keep that date in mind, but I can't promise anything right now
  • [19:23] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, That takes care of #2 -#3a in one fell swoop
  • [19:23] <@[Chair]Andrew> Anything you'd like to add as a Team report James just to finish it off?
  • [19:23] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sure :)
  • [19:24] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Code report 9 bugs created and 11 resolved in the last 2 weeks. I have also referred 2 bugs to data with the expectation that they will come back once a way forward is decided.
  • [19:24] <jamesd[Code_SB]> We should see a few more bugs fixed for the 5.16.3 release also
  • [19:24] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Formula engine work has started
  • [19:25] <jamesd[Code_SB]> CDOM UI branch was quiet over the last couple of weeks but is starting up again now
  • [19:26] <jamesd[Code_SB]> We've had some good discussion on John's equipping mockup
  • [19:26] <jamesd[Code_SB]> and work continues on the main CDOM project in trunk
  • [19:27] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Any questions or comments?
  • [19:27] <cpmeister____> any planned work for the UI tokens soon?
  • [19:27] <@[Chair]Andrew> Wow, Code has been hopping ;)
  • [19:29] <@[Chair]Andrew> Connor any comments to add for the UI stuff?
  • [19:31] <cpmeister____> not really, work will continue as usual
  • [19:32] <@[Chair]Andrew> James, any answer for the UI token question?
  • [19:34] <jamesd[Code_SB]> That will probably become part of the CDOM work - no urgency that I know of
  • [19:34] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thanks James
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, I'll do the admin team report now.
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> and it's short tonight
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Web - Is covered under agenda item #4
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Trackers - Need to finish migrating to JIRA. I've been a bit lazy and haven't taken the time to do 8 a piece to a new Admin Tracker for David to migrate.
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Release - Covered under Agenda Items #2 and #3.
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Personal Data Monkey endeavors:
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Working on Pathfinder Advanced Players Guide
  • [19:35] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, that's all for Admin. Any questions for Admin?
  • [19:36] <jamesd[Code_SB]> None here
  • [19:37] <@[Chair]Andrew> okay, Nylanfs, anything from the PR side of things?
  • [19:38] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Lots of datasets getting done, although we could use some more active data monkeys
  • [19:38] <@[Chair]Andrew> You saying Licensing isn't busy enough?
  • [19:40] <[OGL]Nylanfs> No I'm saying that I don't want the data people to get burned out :)
  • [19:40] <@[Chair]Andrew> Well, I must say I've been impressed by the sheer volume of sets we've gotten into the 5.16 release in such a short time.
  • [19:41] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, moving onward to #4
  • [19:41] <@[Chair]Andrew> Special discussion on mailing list/forum status (if not resolved by mailing list discussions)
  • [19:41] <@[Chair]Andrew> Tony has been hammering almost silently in the background trying to get this mighty beast slayed singlehandedly.
  • [19:42] <@[Chair]Andrew> Once I got caught up, James, Anestis and myself figured out what was causing some of the issues. I finally got something partially working, however, the solution is not 'mature' enough for full time use.
  • [19:43] <@[Chair]Andrew> The Bridge is still in Alpha, and I don't expect it to be ready for a production release in the next six months.
  • [19:44] <[OGL]Nylanfs> :(
  • [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> Based upon what I've seen, I cannot recommend it as a solution unless they resolve several of my concerns.
  • [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> Primarily is security, the method used leaves us open to any spammers
  • [19:45] <@[Chair]Andrew> The second is ease of use, it's not exactly very user friendly in the set up department.
  • [19:45] <@[Chair]Andrew> Like I said, I've only gotten it working one way, Email > Forum.
  • [19:45] <@[Chair]Andrew> Forum to Mailing List isn't working. Since it's an alpha I'd have to send a bug report to get that worked on.
  • [19:47] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Is there anything that we could do to spur along work?
  • [19:47] <@[Chair]Andrew> James did find another solution that seems perfect, the downside, it's not free, and it's only for a production cycle License. Meaning we can get updates, but only within that version cycle.
  • [19:47] <[OGL]Nylanfs> This is the M2F software right?
  • [19:47] <@[Chair]Andrew> Yes, m2f is the bridge
  • [19:47] <@[Chair]Andrew> They apparently need php developers
  • [19:48] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Hmm, I would think that there'd be some in the general user base
  • [19:48] <@[Chair]Andrew> Anyways, that is where we currently stand in the Mail <> Forum solution realm
  • [19:48] <@[Chair]Andrew> Questions, comments?
  • [19:50] <@[Chair]Andrew> Open Forum then. This is the part where ANYONE may bring up relevant topics to the Board.
  • [19:50] <jamesd[Code_SB]> None from me
  • [19:51] <@[Chair]Andrew> Jon, Paul M, Swiftbrook?
  • [19:51] <swiftbrook> OK ... Question from the peanut gallery: I've looked over the overview pages and can't find the answer. What's the difference between 5.16.x and 5.17.x? Why the two code build paths?
  • [19:52] <swiftbrook> If not appropriate Q, I'll post to boards.
  • [19:52] <@[Chair]Andrew> Appropriate
  • [19:52] <@[Chair]Andrew> I think James can answer better from a Code stand point
  • [19:52] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sure
  • [19:52] <jamesd[Code_SB]> 5.16 is our production branch
  • [19:53] <BPIJonathan> We are doing a minor update to Gaslight for version 1.4, will provide that information as soon as its relevant.
  • [19:53] <jamesd[Code_SB]> We are conservative in what is changed there to ensure a stable product
  • [19:54] <jamesd[Code_SB]> 5.17 is the new development track and in there we have much construction work and things are not guaranteed to be stable until e bring it all together in the end
  • [19:55] <jamesd[Code_SB]> That said we like the alpha releases to still be useful so they are tested and if it isn't working they don't get put out
  • [19:55] <jamesd[Code_SB]> So I guess the bets summary is that 5.17 is the bleeding edge at this stage and 5.16 is the stable recommended product for the average user.
  • [19:56] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Does that help?
  • [19:56] <@[Chair]Andrew> If I may also add - 5.17 is the path towards 6.0 in which we have many new improvements; better error catching, improved performance, enhanced User Interface; A reworked and stable engine core.
  • [19:56] <swiftbrook> Yes, I understand. A different coding for the 5.17 branch would might bet less confusing. Test_5.17 ??? Trial_5.17 ???
  • [19:56] <jamesd[Code_SB]> They get marked as alpha releases in SF
  • [19:57] <swiftbrook> Thanks!
  • [19:57] <jamesd[Code_SB]> whereas we have release candidates and production releases for the 5.16 branch
  • [19:58] <@[Chair]Andrew> We have three/four stages - Alphas (New Code Work); Betas (Bug Stomping for all the features); Release Candidates are final proofing, and then we have Production Releases which are Stable tested and reliable.
  • [19:58] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Spot on
  • [19:58] <@[Chair]Andrew> 5.16 is at the Production end of the Cycle, 5.17 is the new Alpha cycle into what will be the 6.0 production release. :)
  • [19:59] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, any further questions, comments?
  • [20:00] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thanks for coming everyone *Bangs Gavel* Have a good night. Meeting adjourned.
Retrieved from "http://159.203.101.162/w/index.php?title=Meeting_2010_08_02&oldid=2484"