BrowserRoom SystemPhone Dial-in
  1. Dial: 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)


From 9.05 to 09.35 PT, Wednesday, January the 15th.



DMCCB Meeting Goals

DMCCB Additional Resources

Discussion Items

ItemDescriptionCCB Notes

Flagged RFCs

(To be approved by the DMCCB)

  • Planned end: Jan/15/2020
  • Leanne Guy : Discussions happened during the last weeks, but still, the new version including the comments is still missing.
  • John Swinbank : ask KT and Wil to review the last update, to get a sign off from the sizing team
  • Leanne Guy suggest having an additional week for discussion
Board Recommended RFCs

Adopted but not implemented LDM RFCs (only document RFCs)

Proposed RFCs

(to review, do not require DMCCB approval)

  • Planned end: Jan/31/2020
  • Planned end: Dec/13/2019
  • Planned end: Dec/13/2019
  • Planned end: Jan/22/2020
  • Planned end: Jan/22/2020
  • Planned end: Jan/08/2020
  • Planned end: Jan/17/2020
  • Planned end: Jan/16/2020
  • Planned end: Jan/20/2020
  • Planned end: Jan/22/2020
  • Kian-Tat Lim working on RFC-648, RFC-650, and RFC-653
  • RFC-651 and RFC-652 will be flagged as soon as a documents are ready to review
    • DMCCB will not be involved until the document to approve 
    • Colin Slater is not in favor of RFC-651
  • RFC-655 will probably be withdraw
  • RFC-656 no action
  • RFC-658 
    • John Swinbank  this package is not of interest of the community, just internal
    • It should not be a lsst_distrib 
    • this should be a deliverable to T&S
    • It would be OK to add to the lsst_ci
    • add the meta package to the Jenkins build like lsst_ts...
      • Tim Jenness to comment on the RFC-658 with the 2 alternatives
  • RFC-659
    • The depreciation procedure should be updated. The proposal seems reasonable.
    • Kian-Tat Lim  should give the final sign up.

Adopted RFCs without Triggering issues

(to create implementing DM issues)

Adopted RFCs with all triggered work COMPLETED

(to set status as 'IMPLEMENTED')

RFCs adopted since last CCB

(to review, no action required)

RFCs implemented (or withdraw) since last CCB

(to review, no action required)


  • Planned
  • Changes to the release schedule
  • Next planned major release 20.0.0
    • Planned for Spring 2020

    • Blocking issues open:
  • Do we need a 19.0.1 patch?
    • so far no RFC open
      • see   and related discussion
  • Tim Jenness updated the environment
  • 20.0.0 available end of May 2020
    • blockers to be done by the beginning of May
    • new functionalities?
    • John Swinbank releases are not tight to functionalities, but functionalities will be merged when ready
    • Wil O'Mullane which functionalities we need for commissioning at the end of the year? The May release should have enough of Gen3?
    • We can do the May release in any case, and then we do other minors or patch releases as required.
  • Potential 19.0.1:
    • it doesn't seem worth.
      • DM-22703 to be closed as won't fix

Monitor Jira issues status:

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

Support to J. Swinbank monitoring activity

From Previous week:

  •  John Swinbank proposes to relate it to next release
  •   John Swinbankproposes to close it as "won't fix”, on the basis that LDM-472 is obsolete. We should also officially mark LDM-472 as obsolete. But we should discuss all this with Wil O'Mullane before doing so.

New list:


3936 unresolved issues (3771 on January the 8th)

  • DM-6571
    • just to be mentioned to the release note
      • John Swinbank block release 21 on dm-6571 and ensure there is an appropriate deprecating on release 20
  • DM-6602
    • There should be an RFC to make LDM-472 obsolete
      • Wil O'Mullaneto look at LDM-472 to ensure it is really obsolete and open an RFC to mark it as obsolete
  • DM-5000, DM-6146: Obsolete → Won't Fix.
  • DM-6632: Legit ticket, low priority, added comment.
  • DM-6075: Implementation for RFC-183, which is incorrectly marked as done. Given that it's nearly four years old, and that we have to prioritize actually getting things working as opposed to polishing architecture, I (John Swinbank ) don't think we should devote effort to this ticket. However, since the RFC was legitimately adopted, I don't think we can just close this. Added comment.
  • DM-5067: Obsolete; closed as Invalid.
  • DM-6649: Nice idea, if we had lots of time. As it is, Won't Fix.
  • DM-6386: We won't devote resources just to writing unit tests, although obviously we'll add them as appropriate during the course of development. Closing this as Won't Fix.
  • DM-6659: This is an installation problem that is 3.5 years old, and hasn't seen further complaints. Closing this as Won't Fix until & unless it causes reproducible problems for somebody this decade.
  • DM-6355: Probably still valid. Added a query to the ticket.
  • DM-6664: Presumably still valid, but low priority. Added comment.
Open Actions


Leanne Guy  new RFC will be opened on parquet files

Next DM-CCB 

Wednesday, January 29th.

Pending Flagged RFCs

Pending Proposed RFCs
Oldest issues

Meeting outcome

Pending DMCCB Actions