IRC office hours/Office hours 2014-03-20

Chat on Metrics Meeting
Thursday 20 March 2014
19:00 - 20:00 UTC

[18:58:42] <rdwrer> #startmeeting WMF Free Software Advocacy Group formation meeting
[18:58:42] <wm-labs-meetbot`> Meeting started Thu Mar 20 18:58:42 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rdwrer. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
[18:58:42] <wm-labs-meetbot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
[18:58:42] <wm-labs-meetbot`> The meeting name has been set to 'wmf_free_software_advocacy_group_formation_meeting'
[18:58:49] <rdwrer> #topic Group formation
[18:59:06] <rdwrer> #info scfc_de has not yet fixed the effing meetbot instance
[18:59:13] <YuviPanda> hehe :P
[18:59:24] <YuviPanda> #info rdwrer has not yet volunteered to fix the effing meetbot tool
[19:00:13] <rdwrer> #action rdwrer to investigate meetbot configuration and maybe fix the topic changes, filed as bug 61042
[19:00:27] <rdwrer> OK but seriously, welcome to the free software meeting thingy
[19:00:31] <rdwrer> Let's start it up
[19:00:38] <greg-g> hello
[19:00:40] <ragesoss> ohai
[19:00:53] <brion> whee
[19:00:56] <rdwrer> I've written up a bunch of preliminary notes and outlines and things
[19:00:58] <rdwrer> #link http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/fsag-2014-03-20
[19:01:10] <rdwrer> I'll port that over to a wiki page at the end, so don't use markdown or whatever
[19:01:12] * greg-g reads�
[19:01:26] <rdwrer> First thing on the agenda is the structure of the group
[19:02:14] <rdwrer> I've tentatively asserted that the group should be basically a formless fact-finding entity, tasked with gathering *requirements* from staff and investigating *solutions* based on those criteria
[19:02:22] <greg-g> I'm happy to co-facilitate as needed
[19:02:27] <brion> *nod*
[19:02:35] <ragesoss> agree.
[19:02:45] <rdwrer> I don't anticipate that any real leadership will be needed, but each meeting should ideally have a chair - having a co-chair as well is nice
[19:02:49] <rdwrer> #chair greg-g
[19:02:49] <wm-labs-meetbot`> Current chairs: greg-g rdwrer
[19:03:13] <AndyRussG> Hi all
[19:03:16] <rdwrer> So as long as we have a few people around to call meetings and run things from a bureaucratic standpoint, that should be enough
[19:03:21] <greg-g> #info greg-g now has power
[19:03:40] * anomie wonders if meetbot has any other furniture-people�
[19:04:06] <ragesoss> #sofa ragesoss
[19:04:13] <rdwrer> #agreed Seems like "basically formless" is a good way to describe the group - greg-g will be co-chair and help out in absences of marktraceur
[19:04:22] <greg-g> +1
[19:04:26] <csteipp> +1
[19:04:26] <rdwrer> #topic Scheduling
[19:04:48] <greg-g> I kind of want to kick this topic to the end
[19:04:53] <rdwrer> Oh, we can do
[19:05:01] <greg-g> because my answer will be "it depends on what we decide to do as homework"
[19:05:06] <rdwrer> As long as we reserve about ten minutesish
[19:05:10] <greg-g> yeah
[19:05:19] <rdwrer> Because I intend for "form of meetings in the future" to be part of the question
[19:05:37] <rdwrer> #agreed Tabling scheduling for now because we have open questions about homework that will play into the answer
[19:05:43] <rdwrer> #topic Video conferencing
[19:06:02] <James_F> rdwrer: Please don't let wm-labs-meetbot` break the /topic.
[19:06:06] <rdwrer> Ta James_F
[19:06:19] <rdwrer> James_F: 2014-03-20 - 12:00:13 <rdwrer> #action rdwrer to investigate meetbot configuration and maybe fix the topic changes, filed as bug 61042
[19:06:34] <rdwrer> Anyway
[19:06:37] <James_F> ++
[19:06:52] <rdwrer> I'd like us to run through discussion of a few options
[19:06:58] <rdwrer> The first one we have is BigBlueButton
[19:07:11] <rdwrer> #link http://bigbluebutton.org/
[19:07:17] <AndyRussG> I thought flash-based-ness made that one not viable?
[19:07:30] <rdwrer> AndyRussG: That would be an open question, but there are other pitfalls I'd like to discuss
[19:07:30] <AndyRussG> or less than optimal?
[19:07:32] <greg-g> BBB is (actively?) developing a webrtc version, right?
[19:07:38] <rdwrer> Especially since BBB is...yeah, what greg-g said
[19:07:57] <AndyRussG> Ah OK didn't know that
[19:08:01] <rdwrer> #info BBB flash-based, non-starter, but WebRTC would fix that (and RTC-based BBB is in beta now)
[19:08:05] <greg-g> so, I'm very pro a webrtc vesion that has a central badwidth provider, because the pure p2p solutions don't scale
[19:08:15] <rdwrer> Yeah, absolutely
[19:08:21] <rdwrer> greg-g: Is chatb.org one of those?
[19:08:27] <greg-g> I... don't know
[19:08:41] <rdwrer> Hm. OK, we may need to investigate that later
[19:08:45] <rdwrer> Anyway
[19:08:57] <rdwrer> The other potential pitfalls of BBB include a Java applet for screensharing
[19:09:16] <rdwrer> Also the fact that the interface has a few things we likely wouldn't use
[19:09:23] <AndyRussG> Any links on BBB's webRTC efforts? Info on how far along they are?
[19:09:34] <greg-g> right, it is a bit bloated, mostly desinged for the horrible "webinar" community
[19:09:45] <rdwrer> Since it was built primarily for teaching remotely, it has stuff like collaborative drawing and web page viewing that could maybe clot things for us
[19:10:14] <anomie> Does "collaborative drawing" mean "whiteboard"?
[19:10:22] <brion> cause that'd actually be kinda handy
[19:10:28] <rdwrer> I wonder if any of these things are actually issues, or if I'm imagining things
[19:10:47] <rdwrer> Anyway, one big plus is we have an instance hosted on WM hardware already
[19:10:47] <greg-g> #idea create a table on wiki with tools vs requirements, fill in
[19:10:50] <rdwrer> #link http://videoconf.wikimedia.ch/
[19:11:10] <rdwrer> ++ greg-g
[19:12:07] <rdwrer> OK, let's move on to chatb.org
[19:12:29] <rdwrer> This is the portion of the meeting where video tools are actually viable for running on my computer, so I propose trying to stress-test them
[19:12:45] <greg-g> #link https://chatb.org
[19:12:55] <rdwrer> As a prelude, this doesn't yet have screen sharing
[19:12:59] <matanya> there is stuff made by debian : https://rtc.debian.org/
[19:13:13] <greg-g> matanya: cool, let's try that after chatb now
[19:13:19] <greg-g> shall we try to all join a chatb?
[19:13:21] <greg-g> https://chatb.org/#GKWMIZSSIRLSFK
[19:13:39] <rdwrer> Joining
[19:16:40] <AndyRussG> Hmm seems to have killed my Iceweasel
[19:16:51] <AndyRussG> I had opened the page but nothing happened because I have flashblock
[19:17:11] <AndyRussG> And I was just about cleaning up my backdrop before unblocking flash
[19:17:23] <rdwrer> OK
[19:17:26] <greg-g> someone write up a quick summary of that experience
[19:17:27] <rdwrer> Success to some extent
[19:17:36] <rdwrer> #info 8 people were able to join
[19:17:40] <csteipp> I think Brad had the crash problem too
[19:17:41] <AndyRussG> Trying again
[19:17:44] <ragesoss> It wouldn't work on iceweasel for me, AndyRussG, but I assume because of HTTPS everywhere.
[19:17:48] <rdwrer> #info No mute-others button, so we had to rely on people being nice
[19:17:57] <anomie> No, no crash for me. Just trying different browsers to see if I could get sound.
[19:17:57] <greg-g> worked on Iceweasel for me, and I have flashblock/noscript installed
[19:17:59] <matanya> ragesoss: i use it too and it worked
[19:18:00] <ragesoss> but it was usable in Chromium.
[19:18:13] <rdwrer> #info (chatb) Firefox and Iceweasel seem to work, but spotty - Chromium takes it like a champ
[19:18:19] <anomie> No sound in Iceweasel here, sound in Chromium.
[19:18:26] <ragesoss> matanya: you used in in FF/IW with HTTPS Everywhere, or without?
[19:18:27] <rdwrer> #info (chatb) greg-g reported lost text in the chat
[19:18:36] <matanya> ragesoss: with
[19:18:41] <subbu|lunch> not sure if i was on .. but i could see a number of you.
[19:18:43] <matanya> me too rdwrer
[19:18:45] <rdwrer> #info (chatb) Some people were unable to join, at least for video - maybe bandwidth issues
[19:18:58] <rdwrer> #info (chatb) matanya also lost text in the chat
[19:19:17] <rdwrer> OK, let's move on to Yet Another WebRTC Solution, which was brought in last-minute - meet.jit.si
[19:19:23] <matanya> rdwrer: for video, you must approve manually on some firefox versions
[19:19:31] <rdwrer> #link https://meet.jit.si/54pv3cyumeptlnmi
[19:19:45] <rdwrer> matanya: Should be the case on *any* WebRTC client, IIRC
[19:19:51] <ragesoss> ah, approve manually must have been the hitch. I got no 'allow webcam' dialog.
[19:19:58] <greg-g> "This application is currently only supported by Chrome, Chromium and Opera
[19:20:01] <greg-g> Download Chrome"
[19:20:02] <spagewmf> worked OK for me in Firefox 28 on Ubuntu 13.04, big lag on a chunk of chat text update
[19:20:13] <rdwrer> #info No Firefox support
[19:20:30] <spagewmf> ^that was my experience with chatb
[19:20:46] <AndyRussG> Iceweasel now froze...
[19:20:48] <matanya> way better
[19:21:05] <rdwrer> #info (chatb) spagewmf could get FF 28 working
[19:21:39] <James_F> I liked meet.jit.si.
[19:21:40] <rdwrer> Are people unable to join?
[19:22:12] <anomie> con: No way to tell who has the really loud typing
[19:22:32] <rdwrer> True
[19:22:41] <AndyRussG> OK I did join on chatb
[19:22:54] <rdwrer> AndyRussG: No luck with jitmeet?
[19:23:02] <AndyRussG> Trying now
[19:24:24] <AndyRussG> K I'm there
[19:26:47] <rdwrer> #info (JitMeet) etherpad feature would be nice if it worked
[19:26:49] <AndyRussG> Can people hear me at all?
[19:27:07] <AndyRussG> I can hear you mark
[19:27:13] <rdwrer> #info (JitMeet) matanya experienced bad audio quality
[19:27:54] <anomie> somewhat bad audio quality here too, but not unusable
[19:28:17] <rdwrer> #info (JitMeet) Apparentnly greg-g could get the Etherpad working
[19:28:32] <rdwrer> #info (JitMeet) Dat emoticon set
[19:29:05] <YuviPanda> ok am joining
[19:29:38] <rdwrer> We'll wrap up JitMeet in about a minute
[19:29:43] <rdwrer> After YuviPanda has joined
[19:29:54] <YuviPanda> I can't hear anyone
[19:29:59] <YuviPanda> at all
[19:30:04] <YuviPanda> I think someone's speaking
[19:30:11] <YuviPanda> it might be chris.
[19:30:18] * csteipp is talking�
[19:30:19] <YuviPanda> I can't see anyone else's video also
[19:30:21] <YuviPanda> yeah
[19:30:27] <matanya> crashed
[19:30:28] <YuviPanda> I can see only you, csteipp
[19:30:30] <AndyRussG> I can't hear csteipp
[19:30:35] <rdwrer> #info (JitMeet) YuviPanda couldn't join, sadface.jpg
[19:30:38] <YuviPanda> ok, I can see matanya now
[19:30:42] <YuviPanda> rdwrer: hi rdwrer
[19:30:42] <greg-g> ya'll have audio?
[19:30:52] <YuviPanda> rdwrer: I can't talk, have prtksxna sleeping behind me
[19:30:55] <AndyRussG> I'm hearing something
[19:30:55] <YuviPanda> ok
[19:31:05] <YuviPanda> wtf was that noise?!
[19:31:21] <rdwrer> #info (JitMeet) No /me support, KILL IT WITH FIRE
[19:31:23] <YuviPanda> ok, there's an intense drilling type noise going on
[19:31:34] <AndyRussG> Don't know, I asked and was only mocked in response
[19:31:49] <YuviPanda> now there's intense white noise
[19:31:53] <rdwrer> AndyRussG: We were able to hear you
[19:31:55] <AndyRussG> I can only see mark and S
[19:32:04] <rdwrer> But I think now with many people joined it's deteriorating
[19:32:09] * rdwrer closes�
[19:32:18] <YuviPanda> eughh
[19:32:19] <rdwrer> OK, let's talk about the aggregate
[19:32:35] <rdwrer> I think we can agree that neither of those RTC options are ready for big meetings
[19:32:52] <ragesoss> JitMeet remembered my nick upon rejoining. That's something.
[19:32:52] <AndyRussG> Hmmm
[19:32:57] <rdwrer> This may be because of the peer-to-peer nature of them, but we may want to investigate whether that's the case
[19:33:02] * YuviPanda concurs�
[19:33:02] <AndyRussG> Where did you set your nick?
[19:33:06] <anomie> That last seemed to be having a "netsplit" of some sort, some people could see/hear certain other people but not others.
[19:33:12] <rdwrer> #action Figure out whether JitMeet/chatb are peer-to-peer or centralized
[19:33:16] <greg-g> I thought it asked for one to join
[19:33:18] <ragesoss> AndyRussG: I was prompted when I first clicked the chat icon.
[19:33:38] <AndyRussG> Hmmm maybe I just blindly clicked and didn't notice
[19:33:54] <rdwrer> Would people be comfortable suggesting either of these options for one-on-one or smallish meetings?
[19:34:25] <rdwrer> I think ragesoss said he might use chatb for it
[19:34:43] <ragesoss> I had a better experience with JitMeet, actually.
[19:34:52] <matanya> jitmeet was the best for me so far, apart from white noise
[19:35:07] <ragesoss> either would be usable-ish.
[19:35:10] <matanya> and breaking audio when people join
[19:35:13] <AndyRussG> Me too, though with Chromium I did eventually join chatb
[19:35:18] <rdwrer> 'kay - could we maybe make a recommendation of JitMeet on-list for small meetings? Or should we reach out to do more bug triaging with upstream first?
[19:35:23] <rdwrer> e.g. Firefox support
[19:35:30] <rdwrer> And a working Etherpad
[19:35:42] <anomie> Also would be nice to figure out that netsplit issue for JitMeet.
[19:35:52] <rdwrer> anomie: I'm not sure I saw that issue
[19:35:54] <ragesoss> one key question for either one... can you create a meeting link well in advance and expect it to work at meeting time?
[19:36:06] <spagewmf> Hard to beat Google Calendar's "Add hangout" integration.
[19:36:07] <AndyRussG> Hmmm
[19:36:14] <AndyRussG> Also, what about doing a test on the bandwith issue?
[19:36:15] <anomie> rdwrer: Like how I couldn't see/hear Yuvi or a bunch of other people, but they could see/hear each other
[19:36:25] <rdwrer> ragesoss: I think so. I've rejoined meetings after everyone quit without issue
[19:36:28] <ragesoss> spagewmf: if you put the link in the calendar event, it's nearly as good.
[19:36:42] <ragesoss> rdwrer: but what about a week later?
[19:36:57] <rdwrer> ragesoss: That, I'm not as sure about. Let me try rejoining the one we had yesterday.
[19:37:17] <spagewmf> agreed. We already do that for etherpad links. If a tool had easy simultaneous Etherpad and video, it could be a win over Google
[19:37:55] <rdwrer> Yeah, going to the same link later will restart the meeting
[19:38:06] <rdwrer> I'm not sure about the etherpad's persistence, though - one sec
[19:38:18] <matanya> i saw there fosdem talk
[19:38:19] <matanya> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BC210m5rr6E&feature=youtu.be
[19:38:46] <rdwrer> OK, still issues with their EPL integration
[19:39:06] <rdwrer> #action (JitMeet) Figure out if etherpads persist after everyone leaves the meeting
[19:39:45] <rdwrer> Based on the fact that the video chat will definitely persist, though - is this something we'd be comfortable recommending?
[19:40:15] <matanya> can it be self-hosted?
[19:40:25] <matanya> this might resolve this concern
[19:41:07] <AndyRussG> How about a test of jitsi with a prior test of bandwidth or conneciton quality via some other tool, and everyone on the same, latest version of Chromium?
[19:41:11] <rdwrer> matanya: Believe so, yes.
[19:41:36] <rdwrer> #link https://github.com/jitsi/jitmeet
[19:41:48] <rdwrer> So we should be able to run that locally
[19:42:07] <AndyRussG> rdwrer: that'll definitely improve bandwidth
[19:42:11] <rdwrer> AndyRussG: Do you want to try that now? I don't think I have the latest version of Chromium
[19:42:29] <AndyRussG> I have 32
[19:42:49] <rdwrer> Hah
[19:42:49] <rdwrer> Version 34.0.1827.0 custom aura (249533)
[19:42:53] <rdwrer> I guess I have a pretty good version
[19:43:09] <AndyRussG> Hmmm
[19:43:35] <matanya> Chromium 33.0.1750.152 is latest for firefox
[19:43:49] <rdwrer> AndyRussG: I think the bandwidth we saw between the first 4-5 people was basically representative of what I'd expect in The Real World
[19:44:38] <AndyRussG> that makes sense, just wondering if it's worth trying to eliminate what the issues were
[19:44:44] <rdwrer> Oh, sure
[19:44:53] <rdwrer> If that's something we want to do first, we can
[19:45:06] <AndyRussG> may not be, just a thought
[19:45:27] <rdwrer> #action Test JitMeet's effectiveness normalized for connection speed and browser version
[19:46:14] <rdwrer> I guess there's nobody else interested in pushing either of these tools to the staff list - we can postpone that until after we act on a few of the action items we have.
[19:46:27] <rdwrer> Also...
[19:46:54] <rdwrer> #action Find information about BigBlueButton's work on WebRTC - determine if it will be enough of a change that we can recommend that as a solution
[19:48:06] <rdwrer> #topic Scheduling
[19:48:45] <rdwrer> All right, last thing
[19:49:00] <rdwrer> When should we meet again, and should it still be IRC-only (and if not, what should we use?)
[19:49:17] <ragesoss> IRC4LYFE
[19:49:21] <rdwrer> I picked IRC because it was the easiest inoffensive thing I could think of
[19:49:35] <rdwrer> But I know Deskana was (maybe trollifically) preferring a video chat
[19:49:36] <AndyRussG> The meeting just became a recursive method
[19:50:54] * rdwrer wonders about preferences of brion, anomie, greg-g�
[19:51:13] * anomie has no medium preference, as long as it's something that works ;)�
[19:51:24] <brion> i'm fine with irc
[19:51:26] <YuviPanda> IRCCCCC
[19:51:36] <brion> ASCIIIIIIIII
[19:51:40] <ragesoss> I think Yuvi's got some echo.
[19:51:44] <ragesoss> mute ur keyboard.
[19:51:44] <rdwrer> OK, what about timing?
[19:51:56] <rdwrer> We have a bunch of research questions out as action items, but I doubt they'll take much time
[19:52:00] <greg-g> IRC is good (sorry was multitasking, which is the downfall of irc)
[19:52:06] * greg-g was being pinged everywhere�
[19:52:09] <YuviPanda> brion: suely you mean unicode
[19:52:27] <spagewmf> do/can any of the video chat offerings integrate a web IRC window?
[19:52:57] <rdwrer> spagewmf: I think JitMeet uses XMPP for its chat
[19:54:09] <rdwrer> Given no particular insight from the crowd, I'm going to suggest two weeks from now as our second meeting
[19:54:18] <spagewmf> sounds good
[19:54:23] * AndyRussG is cool w/ that�
[19:54:25] <rdwrer> That will be April the 3rd, at lunchtime PDT
[19:54:51] <rdwrer> #action Schedule meeting for 2014-04-03 12:00 PDT
[19:55:05] <AndyRussG> (off-topic: In fact any of the video call options, even a non-integrated chat, are preferable to Google, since chats in hangouts disappear w/ no record, which is awful)
[19:55:06] <rdwrer> I'll try to wrangle our video-related action items before then
[19:55:19] <brion> whee
[19:55:38] <rdwrer> And probably enlist help from some of you over time :)
[19:56:04] <rdwrer> So, successful meeting and I look forward to doing it again soon
[19:56:07] <spagewmf> it would be nice if the chat window in our video tool (that most people have never used or heard of) was IRC (that many people have never used)
[19:56:13] <rdwrer> Anything else? Closing remarks?
[19:56:26] <spagewmf> thanks y'all
[19:56:38] <brion> sounds like a plan
[19:56:48] <AndyRussG> w00t for the first meeting!
[19:57:00] <James_F> Thanks rdwrer, everyone.
[19:57:15] <rdwrer> #endmeeting