Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Location

BrowserRoom SystemPhone Dial-in
https://bluejeans.com/761546516/
  1. Dial: 199.48.152.152 or bjn.vc
  2. Enter Meeting ID: 761546516 -or- use the pairing code

Dial-in numbers:

  • +1 408 740 7256
  • +1 888 240 2560 (US Toll-Free)
  • +1 408 317 9253 (Alternate Number)

Meeting ID: 761546516

(Back to the DMCCB page)

Time

From 9.00 to 09.30 PT, Wednesday, May the27th.


Attendees

Regrets

DMCCB Meeting Goals

      • See DMCCB responsibilities listed in LDM-294 section 7.4

DMCCB Additional Resources

Discussion Items

ItemDescriptionCCB Notes

Flagged RFCs

(To be approved by the DMCCB)



Board Recommended RFCs
  • RFC-689 - Getting issue details... STATUS
    • To withdraw after  checking with Leanne Guy
  • Leanne Guy Confirm that 19.0.1 can be withdrawn (RFC-689)
Adopted but not implemented LDM RFCs (only document RFCs)

Proposed RFCs

(to review, do not require DMCCB approval)

  • RFC-699 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Jun/03/2020
  • RFC-698 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Jun/24/2020
  • RFC-697 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: May/29/2020
  • RFC-696 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: May/26/2020
  • RFC-695 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Jul/31/2020
  • RFC-680 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Apr/01/2020
  • RFC-652 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Jan/22/2020
  • RFC-651 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Jan/22/2020
  • RFC-638 - Getting issue details... STATUS Planned end: Jun/7/2020
  • RFC-699
    • to be flagged
  • RFC-698
    • KT to take care
  • RFC-697
    • no action
  • RFC-696
    • Just code, discussion ongoing
    • Tim to add a comment
    • This needs to be documented in a document (LDM ar LSE), no further RFCs are required, therefore this should be flagged
  • RFC-695
    • DPDD change, to be flagged
      • John Swinbankwrite a text to clarify when an RFC need to flag (DM-25191)

Adopted RFCs without Triggering issues

(to create implementing DM issues)



Adopted RFCs with all triggered work COMPLETED

(to set status as 'IMPLEMENTED')

  • RFC-333 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  • RFC-640 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  • RFC-686 - Getting issue details... STATUS

RFCs adopted since last CCB

(to review, no action required)

  • RFC-693 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  • RFC-692 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  • RFC-694 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  • RFC-688 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  • RFC-674 - Getting issue details... STATUS

RFCs implemented (or withdraw) since last CCB

(to review, no action required)

  • RFC-685 - Getting issue details... STATUS


Releases

  • Planned
  • Changes to the release schedule
  • We start on 20.0.0

Monitor Jira issues status:

  • the most forgotten 10 DM issues
    • (resolution = Unresolved ORDER by updated asc)

Support to J. Swinbank monitoring activity.

  1. DM-8774 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  2. DM-6913 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  3. DM-6372 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  4. DM-6170 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  5. DM-8834 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  6. DM-8835 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  7. DM-8843 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  8. DM-8912 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  9. DM-8889 - Getting issue details... STATUS
  10. DM-8956 - Getting issue details... STATUS

3928 unresolved issues (3957 on May the 6th)

  • John Swinbank (and now several others!) commented on DM-6913.
  • DM-6170 was marked as “done” back in January 2017; not clear why it appears here.
  • John Swinbank grabbed DM-8843 since it is relevant to his other interests (which is not to say he promises an immediate resolution).
  • John Swinbank  commented on DM-8912.
  • John Swinbank  commented on DM-8889.
  • Tim Jenness  commented on DM-8956 that we have “effectively stopped using eups third party TaP for distribution”, and that we might therefore close this as “Won't Fix”. I think that's probably right, but that we should go further and update the Developer Guide to record this position. At that point, can we simply shut down RFC-111?
    • DMCCB agrees that old packages do not require to be changed, but devguide needs to be updated (KT).
Open Actions

AOB
  • What are the rules for distributing project-written code via e.g. PyPI or Conda rather than EUPS?
  • All square supporting SW is already in Pipy.
  • Use astrometadata_translator as an example
    • marked as external
    • is like a DM forked 3rd package
  • From a process point of view, this should be clarified
    • Tim Jenness  to write a policy on how external code written by DM shall be handled.
Next DM-CCB June the 3rd


Pending Flagged RFCs

Key Summary
Loading...
Refresh

Pending Proposed RFCs

Key Summary
Loading...
Refresh

Oldest issues

Key Summary
Loading...
Refresh

Meeting outcome


Pending DMCCB Actions

DescriptionDue dateAssigneeTask appears on
  • John Swinbankwrite a text to clarify when an RFC need to flag (DM-25191)
John SwinbankDMCCB#51 (2020 - 05 - 27)
  • Tim Jenness  to write a policy on how external code written by DM shall be handled.
Tim JennessDMCCB#51 (2020 - 05 - 27)