Open Source Meeting/2008-02-14

Open Source Meeting

Agenda

• • Source drops - snapshots or timed to releases - who uses which?
  • SLVoice open source? Any progress?
  • Cmake - tried it?
  • interest in a hang-out hour?

Transcript

• [14:04] Rob Linden: I gave Joshua the heads up we were going to be discussing source releases, and (w00t!) here he is
• [14:04] Joshua Linden: remembers seeing a "don't render particles until the texture is loaded" bug from at least a year ago... maybe someone here could tackle that?
• [14:04] Joshua Linden: is a meeting junkie. :)
• [14:05] Gigs Taggart: bah what do we look like, open source developers?
• [14:05] Rob Linden: https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Open_Source_Meeting/Agenda
• [14:05] Rob Linden: so, Mm....you put the first two items on the agenda
• [14:05] Carjay McGinnis: *waits patiently for Wiki to load*
• [14:05] Gigs Taggart: # Source drops - snapshots or timed to releases - who uses which? # SLVoice open source? Any progress?
• [14:06] Rob Linden: there was some dispute on list about the relative usefulness of the source drops Soft has been providing
• [14:06] Mm Alder: Yes. I'm wondering why the RC and WL source drops for releases have stopped showing up.
• [14:06] Rob Linden: however, before we talk about which one people use, I should say that I don't think this is a mutually exclusive thing
• [14:07] Rob Linden: to give you a little of the backstory here:
• [14:07] Rob Linden: we have had some discussions about what it means to release source, and had some of the same philosophical discussions about whether or not there should be a QA process around the source drops associated with releases
• [14:08] Rob Linden: in the meantime, in a fit of intiative, Soft automated the crap out of the source push process
• [14:08] Seg Baphomet: Well, for the purpose of Fedora packaging, release tarballs are much preferred to snapshots of any kind.
• [14:08] Gigs Taggart: I don't think there's enough code velocity for their concerns to be valid. We don't need extreme precision in bug reporting.
• [14:08] Joshua Linden: Bearing in mind that we have limited QA and Release personnel, including time for both doing the manual work and automating it
• [14:08] Soft Linden: Well, the point about distros is valid for point releases for sure
• [14:08] Michelle2 Zenovka: For packaging, i agree with Seg, but for testing svn drops are very fast turn around and i got a lot done with BOS so thats good too
• [14:09] Carjay McGinnis: I use the snapshots, but would prefer the "real" svn to be able to track the changes that are made as they are made.
• [14:09] Rob Linden: so....our desire to make sure sure that we actually test the source drops associated releases has come at odds with our resource constraints and/or ability to get them out as quickly as people would like
• [14:09] Carjay McGinnis: the snapshots have a kind of "stale" feeling
• [14:09] Seg Baphomet: Ultimately we should just be able to pull direct from LL's SCM if we want to test prereleases but we're not there yet...
• [14:09] Rob Linden: Carjay: but....but....
• [14:09] Gigs Taggart: Yeah I think we would all prefer a read-only live SVN ultimately.. but this measure isn't a bad compromise in the mean time.
• [14:10] Carjay McGinnis: no, I understand the reasoning
• [14:10] Soft Linden: So where we are right now is we -are- doing source drops on point releases, and we've got these running snapshots. What's not there are source drops coinciding exactly with first look and RC
• [14:10] Michelle2 Zenovka: Thats pretty reasonable
• [14:10] Joshua Linden: Which we should be doing, but since we have the running snapshots... are they close enough?
• [14:10] Carjay McGinnis: I just don't want to be haunted by bugs that have already been fixed
• [14:10] Gigs Taggart: We'll still get release tarballs on a pretty regular basis right?
• [14:11] Rob Linden: Gigs: yes, that's the goal, and certinaly, once several things are implemented
• [14:11] Soft Linden: Point releases will always have source drops, yes.
• [14:11] Gigs Taggart: I don't see a problem.
• [14:11] Mm Alder: Ok, the term "release" is pretty confusing in LL. "point release" is a new one on me.
• [14:12] Rob Linden: would love to rename our "release" branch to "trunk"
• [14:12] Seg Baphomet: I prefer having source that matches what LL releases. So we're on the same page.
• [14:12] Mm Alder: I'm with Seg.
• [14:12] Soft Linden: Right. So there's a drop exactly at 1.18.5 and there will be one at exactly 1.19.0.
• [14:12] Soft Linden: What's not there is 1.19.0RC2, for example. There's one slightly newer and one one slightly older.
• [14:12] Mm Alder: by not for the test releases
• [14:12] Seg Baphomet: I personally don't see much use in snapshots, it just seems like you're not quite sure what you're getting.
• [14:13] Seg Baphomet: LL seems to pop off RCs and whatnot fast enough anyway.
• [14:13] Soft Linden: Snapshots are good if you're tracking development of some feature, or if you want to localize where something broke to within a few checkins.
• [14:13] Joshua Linden: Snapshots seem valuable for otherwise un-labelled versions, e.g. the trunk (which is always moving) and eventually other branches which are being rapidly iterated on (maintenance)
• [14:13] Carjay McGinnis: well, I'd like to stay at the tip even if there are no releases for a while
• [14:14] Soft Linden: Carjay, release in svn will give you that with twice weekly drops (at least)
• [14:14] Seg Baphomet: But yeah. The problem with RCs is they're frozen. If what you want is not in it, you're screwed until the next round of RCs.
• [14:14] Carjay McGinnis: I know, that's why I use the, Soft
• [14:14] Carjay McGinnis: them
• [14:14] Mm Alder: But if you do want the RCs, you want the REAL RCs
• [14:15] Seg Baphomet: We need something inbetween although I personally am more interested in sticking to "releases".
• [14:15] Joshua Linden: Okay, sounds like we should get back to doing drops aligned with each FL/WL, in addition to the snapshot processes.
• [14:15] Soft Linden: Mm, why do you need the source at the exact RC version? -Only- bug fixes go into RC branches, so the svn for an RC branch will be less buggy than locking yourself on the last RC.
• [14:15] Joshua Linden: Er, FL/RC
• [14:15] Rob Linden: I think one of the disconnects is that Josh's team may not know how to use the new automated framework that Soft has made
• [14:16] Gigs Taggart: yeah I think it's important to keep perspective, it's a large, mostly slowly changing code base, especially on the RC branches.
• [14:16] Rob Linden: ...and soft has a difficult time teasing out what/when to push
• [14:16] Gigs Taggart: we don't have a huge amount of churn
• [14:16] Mm Alder: Residents can install FL and RCs. I can send them newview.exe and it all works.
• [14:16] Joshua Linden: That is true... although the source drop is not hard, it's just easily lost in the flurry of getting the bits out.
• [14:17] Rob Linden: what happens is Soft will release something new, and then realize that "whoops...a release went out on a slightly older version"
• [14:17] Joshua Linden: (We're limping towards having the whole thing be push-button; "build and publish this branch/revision")
• [14:17] Mm Alder: If a floater changes, along the FL branch, the source may not work with a residents installed FL.
• [14:17] Rob Linden: to emphasize what Josh just said: these are all temporary problems
• [14:18] Rob Linden: (where temporary still may be "a few months", but not indefinite)
• [14:18] Carjay McGinnis: yeah, well, like I said, the most prefered would be a public SCM with all the tags to simply go ahead and check out what you want, but I understand this is not possible right now
• [14:18] Mm Alder: What changed such that the source drops for test releases stopped?
• [14:19] Rob Linden: Carjay: yup we're creeping toward a point where we can do that
• [14:19] Joshua Linden: Mm Alder: soft started doing his snapshots, so I thought "Oh, I don't need to push for test-release-synchronized source drops; those snapshots should be close enough"
• [14:19] Mm Alder: Groan :-(
• [14:20] Gigs Taggart: I don't think that's a bad assumption.
• [14:20] Rob Linden: it's a pretty subtle point that's easy to lose if you're multitasking
• [14:20] Rob Linden: ...and Josh multitasks like a madman
• [14:20] Rob Linden:  :)
• [14:20] Soft Linden: Just to be clear though - what we're asking for are known-buggier source drops in arears.
• [14:21] Mm Alder: Aside from the fact that the source is our of sync with the test releases, all of the documentation points to the "Source downloads" page, which is now old.
• [14:21] Gigs Taggart: As long as point releases don't become overly spaced out I think it'll be fine, for people that must rely on a synchronized release.
• [14:21] Soft Linden: The source downloads page has a link to the svn info - but it may just be on the first look section, not the RC section.
• [14:22] Gigs Taggart: what are point releases running? About 1 month?
• [14:22] Gigs Taggart: less?
• [14:22] Mm Alder: If you use snapshots, then you definitely need to do QA on the source because it's a crapshoot whether or not the changes matter.
• [14:22] Soft Linden: Ah, dated snapshot section.
• [14:22] Rob Linden: point releases are generally no more frequently than a month apart
• [14:22] Joshua Linden: Gigs: About once a month, but there are weekly (at least) RCs in between
• [14:22] Gigs Taggart: k
• [14:23] Mm Alder: OK, what does "point release" mean? :-)
• [14:23] Rob Linden: 1.18.5.3 was the last point release (right?)
• [14:23] Joshua Linden: I don't use that phrase, but I'm assuming Gigs means 1.18.4, 1.18.5, 1.19.0, 1.19.1, etc
• [14:23] Gigs Taggart: so worst case you are a month out of date... and if there were a critical bugfix it would likely become a point release anyway.
• [14:23] Mm Alder: "point release" == "stable release" ?
• [14:24] Soft Linden: Stable release, official release. Non-testing releases.
• [14:24] Carjay McGinnis: all releases should be stable
• [14:24] Joshua Linden: I use "production viewer" and "pre-production viewer". The numbering is fairly hazy... the distinction between 1.18.5 and 1.19.0 is (at the moment) defined by intent rather than the changes themselves - we plan to make 1.19.0 mandatory at some point.
• [14:24] Carjay McGinnis: meaning "testing heavily by QA"
• [14:25] Carjay McGinnis: tested
• [14:25] Seg Baphomet: There's something that concerns me. What does "manditory" mean?
• [14:25] Seg Baphomet: Manditory for LL builds?
• [14:25] Seg Baphomet: I may or may not still be stuck with 1.18.5
• [14:26] Thraxis Epsilon: It means that is the lowest client version you can connect to SL with
• [14:26] Joshua Linden: Technically: we block logins that report previous production viewer versions (right now that'd be 1.18.2.1, 1.18.3.5, 1.18.4.3, 1.18.5.3)
• [14:26] Seg Baphomet: Well, my Fedora builds are on their own "channel". Will they be banned?
• [14:26] Joshua Linden: Nope
• [14:26] Soft Linden: No. But whether they continue to work is undefined.
• [14:26] Gigs Taggart: Can we request that channels be blacklisted?
• [14:26] Seg Baphomet: Hmmm. Good I guess.
• [14:26] Gigs Taggart: If there were a severe security problem for example?
• [14:26] Joshua Linden: Gigs: No, only channel/version pairs
• [14:27] Gigs Taggart: hmm might be something to look into then
• [14:27] Gigs Taggart: there would be no way to expire fedora users for example...
• [14:27] Gigs Taggart: or other third party viewers that change the channel.
• [14:27] Seg Baphomet: I haven't got around to trying 1.19 yet. Persumably it works without llmozlib...
• [14:28] Joshua Linden: Hopefully there are a finite number of versions. Whether we even require upgrades for security problems is an open issue. For LL builds we tend towards "yes", but this is uncharted waters.
• [14:28] Joshua Linden: Rob: Are we veering off topic? I'm happy to keep discussing, but... ?
• [14:28] Seg Baphomet: But then what happens when LL re-introduces web login?
• [14:28] Soft Linden: Seg - there would certainly be plenty of advance warning.
• [14:28] Rob Linden: yeah, we're veering off topic a bit. good conversation for the mailing list, and maybe next week
• [14:28] Rob Linden: we've actaully got a lot of stuff on the agenda
• [14:29] Carjay McGinnis: indeed, approaching the 30 minutes mark
• [14:29] Seg Baphomet: Well, warning isn't what I need. What I need is a solution...
• [14:29] Joshua Linden: CG Linden is holding office hours on release topics as well.
• [14:29] Rob Linden: anything else on the source release process? I think there's probably some internal followup that Josh, Soft and I can have
• [14:29] Seg Baphomet: I'm very not keen on introducing a branch of Mozilla to Fedora.
• [14:29] Rob Linden: oh.....CG's has an office hour.....cool!
• [14:29] Joshua Linden: 8am Pacific, so Europeans can attend easily. Tuesdays I think
• [14:30] Rob Linden: CG is on the release team, so he's a pretty good guy to talk to about these issues
• [14:30] Rob Linden: he's working on a lot of the infrastructure that's going to make doing source pushes more robust
• [14:30] Seg Baphomet: It seems I need to go out to dinner...
• [14:31] Seg Baphomet: Valentines day and all that.
• [14:31] Rob Linden:  :)
• [14:31] Diamanta Jewell: cc
• [14:31] Poppy Linden:  :)
• [14:31] Prospero Linden: Seg : bah
• [14:31] Seg Baphomet: Gotta run.
• [14:31] Rob Linden: alright, let's move on to voice
• [14:31] Carjay McGinnis: have fun, Seg
• [14:31] Poppy Linden: prosp, not feeling the valentines LOVE? :D
• [14:31] Rob Linden: not much to say here (pardon the pun/irony)
• [14:31] Poppy Linden: ttyl seg
• [14:32] jadz0r Conover: Ok. Would Vivox be OK with a third party client connecting to the servers?
• [14:32] jadz0r Conover: That means you need to contact SL support for assistance. ;)
• [14:32] Poppy Linden: chrismignon, please contact support
• [14:33] Rob Linden: re: vivox. in general, we talk to all of our component suppliers about the benefits of opening up their source
• [14:33] Mm Alder: Back to voice?
• [14:33] Mm Alder: Oops, too quick.
• [14:33] Poppy Linden: unless you are seeing this with software you developed, in which case please add an agenda item to http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Open_Source_Meeting/Agenda
• [14:33] Rob Linden: and in general, we like to talk about what we're doing publicly
• [14:34] Rob Linden: but, just like anyone in the business, we sign non-disclosure agreements with many companies we talk to
• [14:35] Rob Linden: ...so, what we can say about conversations we're having with any specific company are pretty limited
• [14:35] jadz0r Conover: So, it's pending?
• [14:35] Thraxis Epsilon: Vivox is well aware of the benefits of Open Source software... since most of their network is built on it
• [14:35] Carjay McGinnis: question is, would it be possible to replace SLVoice by a purely open source version and still use the vivox infrastructure (if they provide them)?
• [14:36] Rob Linden: Carjay: I don't know
• [14:36] Mm Alder: Carjay: you'd need their codec.
• [14:36] Soft Linden: They use siren14, no?
• [14:36] Carjay McGinnis: I thought there was a reference implementation?
• [14:36] Gigs Taggart: does the release of their specs imply that they do consent to third part client use?
• [14:36] Rob Linden: the codec is G.722.1 Annex C (aka Siren), if I recall correctly
• [14:37] Soft Linden: Siren14™/G 722.1C
• [14:37] Rob Linden: if I recall correctly, the docs have an email address for asking Vivox questions directly
• [14:37] Carjay McGinnis: because I guess most people would not want a Linux-only open source client that could only talk to Linux users or Windows users that are willing to use it instead of the official SLVoice
• [14:38] Prospero Linden: Carjay, yes, that would be non-optimum :)
• [14:38] Gigs Taggart: heh Rob for president.
• [14:39] Gigs Taggart: The skill of the artful dodge :P
• [14:39] Rob Linden: ducks
• [14:39] Rob Linden: weaves
• [14:39] Mm Alder: Prospero: just another non-optimum solution. Optimum would include open source SLVoice
• [14:39] Soft Linden: Actually, Gigs - if the question is whether Vivox would mind people connecting to their servers... that really is a Vivox question
• [14:39] Diamanta Jewell: Please , how contact Sl support by other mean that phone ?
• [14:39] Poppy Linden: Gigs, i don't think they want us making up their policy :P
• [14:40] Prospero Linden: Diamanta : see http://www.secondlife.com/support
• [14:40] Gigs Taggart: has no idea what the contracts LL signed with Vivox look like
• [14:40] Gigs Taggart: I thought that already might be covered contractually. Apparently not. :P
• [14:40] Diamanta Jewell: okay but there is a phone number but a mail there is ?
• [14:40] Mm Alder: So it looks like a Vivox alternative is a reasonable approach.
• [14:41] Carjay McGinnis: hm
• [14:41] Gigs Taggart: Because none of us have signed anything with vivox, really their policy wouldn't affect us... Unless they wanted to get into some sort of arms race. My main concern was some fallout for LL over it.
• [14:41] Carjay McGinnis: indeed, that's what I was thinking of, too
• [14:41] Mm Alder: I didn't want to get half way through and find SLVoice suddenly open source.
• [14:42] Carjay McGinnis: I doubt that will happen
• [14:43] Mm Alder: OK, since I brought up the topic: next topic please.
• [14:43] Rob Linden: Mm: if you're serious about getting started on an alternative, you should ask Vivox first
• [14:43] Carjay McGinnis: ok, so what *can* we discuss? :)
• [14:44] Rob Linden: next topic: "Cmake - tried it?"
• [14:44] Mm Alder: Rob: I don't intend to use any of the Vivox stuff. Why would they care?
• [14:44] Rob Linden: "I didn't want to get half way through and find SLVoice suddenly open source."
• [14:44] Michelle2 Zenovka: Yea tried it its great!
• [14:45] Mm Alder: Oh, you mean ask them if they have plans for open source! Got ya.
• [14:45] Thraxis Epsilon: You could probably get a Mumble based solution up and going pretty quick
• [14:45] Michelle2 Zenovka: really needs the unix make install target that i have provided BOS already
• [14:45] Rob Linden: anyway, next topic
• [14:45] Gigs Taggart: mm: if an alternative was half done, I think they might feel more pressure to open source anyway. :P
• [14:45] Poppy Linden: Carjay, realize that anything we say would be considered "official" and we have legal agreements with vivox. It's even tougher because even if we didn't have that on our minds, there's the fact that we're just not in the position to answer these things.
• [14:45] Rob Linden: CMake
• [14:46] Michelle2 Zenovka: yes i've been playing a lot with cmake
• [14:46] Poppy Linden: I have no idea what their answers to these questions would be. Cant even guess. ;)
• [14:46] Rob Linden: Poppy: you put CMake on the agenda, right?
• [14:46] Poppy Linden: that i did
• [14:46] Rob Linden: discuss :)
• [14:46] Poppy Linden: Michelle2, is it working out for you?
• [14:46] Poppy Linden: i just want to generally know how it's working for those who are using it
• [14:47] Poppy Linden: and for those who aren't using it, why not?
• [14:47] Michelle2 Zenovka: yes, with my extra patchs and by work with BOS i think we beat of the bits i didn't like and fixed a few other bits
• [14:47] Carjay McGinnis: Poppy: ok, I got you, so it wasn't really a good topic for the Agenda (SLVoice that is). Ok, to cmake.
• [14:47] Michelle2 Zenovka: as i said most important is to get the make install target in the code, it allows multiple paralllel trival installs on unix systems in proper FSH locations
• [14:48] Poppy Linden: Michelle2, oh yeah! good catch on the time_t, i had a chuckle when i saw we used raw ints for time
• [14:48] Poppy Linden: ok
• [14:48] Mm Alder: Poppy: I've been using SCons and it works without bugs. Don't need CMake until it's clean..
• [14:49] Rob Linden: Mm...which platform are you on?
• [14:49] Mm Alder: MS Windows
• [14:49] Poppy Linden: ...
• [14:49] Michelle2 Zenovka: scons is not clean on debain, i have to apply a handful of build pacthes, cmake fixes all these for me
• [14:49] Gigs Taggart: ints for time_t eh... no wonder my 286 build had Y1970 errors
• [14:50] Gigs Taggart: scons 1.19 was clean for me on ubuntu
• [14:50] Poppy Linden: is there a jira open for the make install target?
• [14:50] jadz0r Conover: Same here - ubuntu
• [14:50] Carjay McGinnis: btw, LLString::npos is obviously not an S32 on 64bit
• [14:51] Rob Linden: good point Poppy: "patch attached" would be even better ;-)
• [14:51] Michelle2 Zenovka: Yes poppy all sub tasks under VWR 2871
• [14:52] Michelle2 Zenovka: yes patch attached and tested
• [14:52] Rob Linden: oh, cool
• [14:52] Poppy Linden: as far as the scons comments, scons works fine right now for how we use it, we aren't developing cmake because of that
• [14:53] Poppy Linden: I just noticed I wasn't a watcher on that one (my bad!)
• [14:53] Michelle2 Zenovka: As for my issues i have to patch out currently with scons they are documented on sldev on my comments about windlight builds
• [14:53] Gigs Taggart: I think the point is that we might not be testing cmake as heavily because it doesn't add any immediate gratification and the old way works :P
• [14:54] Prospero Linden: heh
• [14:54] Prospero Linden: "it's the future!"
• [14:54] Gigs Taggart: But unifying the build systems is definitely worth it.
• [14:54] Poppy Linden: i will have a look at 4506 then, i think it would help out a few ppl
• [14:54] Michelle2 Zenovka: yea, i get fed up having to rebase the same old build patches al the time, cmake clears all this for me
• [14:54] Rob Linden: not many (not any?) of our windows developers are using scons right now. they are tentatively committed to using cmake, unless it is shown to eat babies
• [14:55] Mm Alder: I'm not against CMake, just against bugs. :-)
• [14:55] Carjay McGinnis: I'm a python guy, but cmake looks promising
• [14:55] Gigs Taggart: yeah maybe just start throwing out some cmake only tarballs for us :P
• [14:55] Rob Linden: Mm: understood....not an early adopter on this front
• [14:56] Rob Linden: Gigs: I think Soft has done that already
• [14:56] Gigs Taggart: cool
• [14:56] Poppy Linden: Mm, that's fair - and I can certainly attest to some of these issues being something to avoid if you otherwise have work to do :)
• [14:56] Michelle2 Zenovka: Carjay: theres a bootstrap script fo cmake thats python might need some poking
• [14:57] Joshua Linden: needs to skeedadle - feel free to IM me with release-ish questions.
• [14:57] Michelle2 Zenovka: I've got a cmake branch in my svn for banging out debian builds using the cmake system
• [14:57] Poppy Linden: ok, Michelle2, i picked up that bug, thank you for looking into this
• [14:57] Poppy Linden: ttyl josh
• [14:57] Michelle2 Zenovka: ty Poppy
• [14:57] Carjay McGinnis: yes, i gave cmake a spin but stopped when I realized I also wanted OpenAL and had to integrate it but wasn't sure I wanted to do it all on that evening
• [14:57] Rob Linden: before we run out of time, I'd like to get to Poppy's last item
• [14:58] Poppy Linden: it's late, so last agenda point -
• [14:58] Michelle2 Zenovka: carjay, nick my svn i've got all the patches for openal on cmake done too
• [14:58] Poppy Linden: i'm all for having a meeting that's agenda / issue / bug / triage focused
• [14:58] Carjay McGinnis: ah, ok, thanks
• [14:58] Poppy Linden: but would anyone be interested in an hour to just hang out and chat about projects?
• [14:58] Prospero Linden: Poppy's Project Party Hour
• [14:58] Squirrel Wood: Yes!
• [14:59] Poppy Linden: well, i know ppl are working on AWESOME things
• [14:59] Carjay McGinnis: are there free beverages?
• [14:59] Poppy Linden: like the Augmented Reality patches
• [14:59] Poppy Linden: etc
• [14:59] Mm Alder: LLproject s or OS projects?
• [14:59] Poppy Linden: but nobody gets a chance to talk about them
• [14:59] Poppy Linden: OSS projects
• [14:59] Poppy Linden: you guys get to hear PLENTY about what we do :P
• [14:59] Gigs Taggart: every other office hour is about LL projects, we don't need more LL project talk :P
• [14:59] Gigs Taggart: yeah
• [15:00] Poppy Linden: seriously, even we like to see what the rest of the planet is up to :P
• [15:00] Carjay McGinnis: sounds good
• [15:00] Gigs Taggart: sounds good to me...
• [15:00] Poppy Linden: wow, cool!
• [15:00] Poppy Linden: so, shout a PST time / daythat works for you.
• [15:01] Squirrel Wood: between 10am and 4pm works for me
• [15:01] Gigs Taggart: what about right after this?
• [15:01] Squirrel Wood: right after this is benjamins hour ?
• [15:01] Gigs Taggart: oh
• [15:01] Poppy Linden: hmm
• [15:01] Gigs Taggart: hasn't been going to those
• [15:01] Prospero Linden: The danger of doing it right after this is that the agenda may spill over....
• [15:01] Squirrel Wood: UI talk
• [15:01] Poppy Linden: maybe right before?
• [15:02] Soft Linden: You might poll on-list. Polling here is going to get you a selection of times that work well for people for whom this time already works. :)
• [15:02] Gigs Taggart: heh
• [15:02] Gigs Taggart: selection bias
• [15:02] Prospero Linden: Soft is wise
• [15:02] Rob Linden: yep
• [15:02] Carjay McGinnis: true
• [15:03] Mm Alder: Poppy: text chat or voice chat?
• [15:03] Poppy Linden: soft, i was thinking about that, but the ppl here already contribute, and so get first dibs? :P
• [15:03] Rob Linden: ok....Zai, you wanted to talk wiki stuff?
• [15:03] Gigs Taggart: I don't have a problem with running it past a wider audience first
• [15:03] Poppy Linden: Mm, good question - i know a lot of ppl are anti-voice, but it can be handy
• [15:03] Poppy Linden: alright
• [15:03] Gigs Taggart: Now that linux has voice I can go either way.
• [15:03] Zai Lynch: yes. i wanted to suggest a template that marks articles for deletion. i talked with SignpostMarv about it and said he would like the idea
• [15:03] Poppy Linden: sounds like it's a good idea, that's what i really wanted to check out.
• [15:04] Poppy Linden: Thanks everyone!