Mailing List Archive: PSC Meeting Notes

PSC Meeting Notes - 2020-07-28

Jul 29, 2020, 10:34 PM

Post #1 of 6 (500 views)

All,

The "Perl Steering Committee" (PSC) is a group of folks focused on moving the Perl programming language forward. We are currently meeting via video conference weekly in an attempt to accelerate the process. To be transparent, we take meeting notes and post them to the Perl wiki. We will also be sending them to the perl5-porters mailing list in the future. You can see all previous notes here: https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/Past-Perl-Steering-Committee-Meeting-Minutes <https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/Past-Perl-Steering-Committee-Meeting-Minutes>

https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28 <https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28>

Arrangements

Time: 2020-07-28 13:00 GMT
Location: Zoom
<https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28#attendees>Attendees

Tony Cook <https://github.com/tonycoz> (TonyC)
Paul Evans <https://github.com/leonerd> (LeoNerd)
Karl Williamson <https://github.com/khwilliamson> (khw)
Todd Rinaldo <https://github.com/toddr> (toddr)
James Keenan <https://github.com/jkeenan> (kid51)
H.Merijn Brand <https://github.com/Tux> (Tux)
Sawyer <https://github.com/xsawyerx> (xsawyerx)
John Lightsey <https://github.com/lightsey> (JD)
Nicolas R. <https://github.com/atoomic> (atoomic)
<https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28#meeting-notes>Meeting notes

<https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28#technical-meeting-objectives--agenda>Technical Meeting objectives / agenda

A brief report from the governance working group
We are still sorting through how we feel governance should work. This is being handled outside the technical call and details will be forthcoming.
Working group report on XS for Perl 7 - Devel::PPPort
Karl did work on Devel::PPPort. Thanks!
Proceeding with the plan as already specified. <>
Defaults Working group report
Currently starting over with a more step by step approach <https://github.com/atoomic/perl/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aobjective>
Step 1 is almost complete.
The plan for opening blead:
Open blead for normal development (there will not be a further 5.33)
Bump blead to 7.1.0 using the code we've developed already to bump the major version (Step 1)
We will proceeed with 7.1.x releases with an eventual release of 7.2 in May(ish) 2021
Meanwhile in parallel, we will develop the features for 7.0.0 in an independant branch.
We will get 7.0 to a RC state
We will test it against CPAN and adjust defaults if needed.
Once we release 7.0.0, the changes will be merged to blead.
Once 7.0.0 is released, development norms should return though we do plan to discuss changing those down the road.
<https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28#action-items>Action items

7.0.0 development for core will continue.
Todd is going to work on extracting the commit for blead to bump it to 7.1.0
Sawyer to email to perl5-porters that blead is open.
Move governance meeting to a different day. Bring up with Stuart and get agreement.
<https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28#future-agenda>Future agenda

The next meeting will be 2020-08-4 13:00 GMT

<https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/SC-Notes-2020-07-28#perl-700-work>Perl 7.0.0 work.

How to disable things and return to v5 defaults when needed. - Feature downgrading
use p5
use compat::perl5 (alternative name to "p5")
use v5 (magical v5.0.0 bundle in perl 7?)
Perhaps we should overload use v with less things not more.
discuss the v7 feature bundle
Assuming a short major life cycle, should there be a 7.2 bundle or just a 7 bundle?
how does one do use v8 in perl 7? Many don't like v8.
Essentially turns on all feature guards which are planned for 8.
Gives people a preview mode for 8 so they can test.
Configure option when building perl?
Environment variable?
use cool::stuff?
-e / -E discussion
Should -E default to v7? v8?
Most people think -e default to v5 and much code has built up around this.
perl -$letter is in short supply.
A reminder: /usr/bin/perl7 doesn't have to be the same thing as /usr/bin/perl5
refactor plans for perlpolicy

Re: PSC Meeting Notes - 2020-07-28 [ In reply to ]

walde.christian at gmail

Aug 2, 2020, 1:14 PM

Post #2 of 6 (498 views)

Permalink

On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:34:07 +0200, Todd Rinaldo <toddr@cpanel.net> wrote:

> The "Perl Steering Committee" (PSC) is a group of folks focused on moving the Perl programming >language forward. We are currently meeting via video conference weekly in an attempt to accelerate >the process. To be transparent, we take meeting notes and post them to the Perl wiki. We will also >be sending them to the perl5-porters mailing list in the future. You can see all previous notes >here: https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/Past-Perl-Steering-Committee-Meeting-Minutes

my time is very limited recently due to new work and covid, etc. so i wasn't paying attention

i'm glad to see this as a form of improvement, however i also see issues with this

my time is still limited so i don't intend to make a big thing, but here's what i'm thinking after 5 minutes of inspecting

issues: secret meetings, only publish short notes, no clear way of participation of the public

thoughts: it seems the feedback of "yo nobody even knew who was involved in the last cabal" was taken and understood as "ok, that's the only thing we need to fix"

suggestions:

- fully public recordings (just dump them on youtube, we have the tech and it's so easy children are doing it literally right the very second you are reading this, you could even stream them while having the meeting)

- no habit of discussions outside the meetings or p5p (some 1:1 convos will happen, but if they become the rule again things will break again)

- no decisions outside the meetings or p5p (if you want people to trust you it must be clear from the recording that the decision is arrived at at the meeting and WHY)

- clear method for the p5p mailing list to add or remove people

- clear method for the p5p mailing list to add things to the agenda or veto them (possibly a basic "this issue gets 10 +1s" rule) (honestly, isn't this the only reason cabals are used anyhow, so things aren't bogged down with bike-shedding? that's valid but the answer can't be NOBODY CAN INPUT but must have a mechanism of inputting while delaying bikeshedding)

- maybe post the update mails as text mails, there may be some people with clients that struggle with fancy html

dunno if any of my thoughts are naive here, but i have limited time. hope this is helpful

--
With regards,
Christian Walde

Re: PSC Meeting Notes - 2020-07-28 [ In reply to ]

toddr at cpanel

Aug 2, 2020, 1:43 PM

Post #3 of 6 (498 views)

Permalink

> On Aug 2, 2020, at 3:14 PM, Christian Walde <walde.christian@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:34:07 +0200, Todd Rinaldo <toddr@cpanel.net> wrote:
>
>> The "Perl Steering Committee" (PSC) is a group of folks focused on moving the Perl programming >language forward. We are currently meeting via video conference weekly in an attempt to accelerate >the process. To be transparent, we take meeting notes and post them to the Perl wiki. We will also be sending them to the perl5-porters mailing list in the future. You can see all previous notes here: https://github.com/Perl/perl5/wiki/Past-Perl-Steering-Committee-Meeting-Minutes
>
> issues: secret meetings, only publish short notes, no clear way of participation of the public

I've seen a few people complain about this. I'm going to use this email to respond to the general concerns.

The first concern seems to be that there are secret meetings going on.

These meetings are not secret, they are private. When they happen and have happened is public information. Private discussions have ALWAYS been a part of a development process. If you think of them less as a cabal and more as: a few folks decided to get together and chat about XX, do you still see things the same way? How is this different from a chat in IRC where everyone may or may not be present? As I understand the agreement about IRC in the past, the agreement was to share the results on the perl5-porters mailing list when they were complete. How is what we've been sharing not the same thing?

---

The second concern seems to be that we're not discussing outside of that group.

The mailing list is still here. The full notes are in it. How is the list being blocked from discussing any of it?

---

The third concern seems to be that decisions are being made (announced?) outside of the perl5-porters mailing list.

In all honesty the only decision I'm aware of that we've made per-se has been to open blead. Do you feel like that wasn't announced on the list?

---

Your remaining concerns seem to be suggestions for how the mailing list can direct the discussions. I suggest baby steps here. How about starting with feedback or questions on what's been discussed so far. I'd even be happy with new topics all together, though I will caution you that there is no guarantee that it will take priority over the existing backlog.

> honestly, isn't this the only reason cabals are used anyhow, so things aren't bogged down with bike-shedding? that's valid but the answer can't be NOBODY CAN INPUT but must have a mechanism of inputting while delaying bikeshedding)

What you're saying here does a good job of summing up the situation. The whole reason we are sharing our notes is so people know what's being discussed and can comment.

I hope that helps clarify things. If you have concerns, please let us know.

Thanks,
Todd

Re: PSC Meeting Notes - 2020-07-28 [ In reply to ]

walde.christian at gmail

Aug 2, 2020, 2:01 PM

Post #4 of 6 (498 views)

Permalink

Addendum: I had several people mention this to me. I asked them to lend their voice to this issue by responding along with me.

Even as little to +1.

I uniformly got back an answer along the lines of:

*** I am afraid to. ***

--
With regards,
Christian Walde

Re: PSC Meeting Notes - 2020-07-28 [ In reply to ]

walde.christian at gmail

Aug 2, 2020, 2:10 PM

Post #5 of 6 (498 views)

Permalink

On Sun, 02 Aug 2020 22:43:24 +0200, Todd Rinaldo <toddr@cpanel.net> wrote:

>> honestly, isn't this the only reason cabals are used anyhow, so things aren't bogged down with bike-shedding? that's valid but the answer can't be NOBODY CAN INPUT but must have a mechanism of inputting while delaying bikeshedding)
>
> What you're saying here does a good job of summing up the situation. The whole reason we are sharing our notes is so people know what's being discussed and can comment.

I appreciate this, i'm glad there's a clear formulated goal here.

> These meetings are not secret, they are private.

Immaterial difference to the concern.

The concern is that the whole and full content of the meetings is secret unlike the discussions on p5p, which both leads to a lack of understanding and trust in words not mentioned in the notes, and a possible lack of understanding as to why a decision was made.

The whole and full content must be available.

> The mailing list is still here. The full notes are in it. How is the list being blocked from discussing any of it?

The full contents aren't available to it. (I could also talk about accessibility here, but i'm taking baby steps.)

> The third concern seems to be that decisions are being made (announced?) outside of the perl5-porters mailing list.

No. I never said that.

I said "- no decisions outside the *meetings or* p5p"

> How about starting with feedback or questions on what's been discussed so far.

The people i talked to feel they may as well be screaming at their bathroom wall.

This isn't about what was discussed.

This is about the design and mechanisms of the thing that is used to discuss.

If there is no accountability or power of the people over the process, then the process does not involve them, but only imposes on them.

Just consider the current situation. Even if 20 people on p5p agreed with me, you could just as well ignore them, and as mentioned, a lot of them are afraid to speak up.

--
With regards,
Christian Walde

Re: PSC Meeting Notes - 2020-07-28 [ In reply to ]

perl at froods

Aug 2, 2020, 4:41 PM

Post #6 of 6 (494 views)

Permalink

On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 1:43 PM Todd Rinaldo <toddr@cpanel.net> wrote:

> The third concern seems to be that decisions are being made (announced?)
> outside of the perl5-porters mailing list.
>
> In all honesty the only decision I'm aware of that we've made per-se has
> been to open blead. Do you feel like that wasn't announced on the list?
>

All of the decisions surrounding cancelling all future 5.3x releases and
moving immediately to a backcompat-breaking 7.x series was made without
consultation with the list. In fact, most of it was made without the list
even being made aware of it until a press release had occurred, apparently
because

1. it was not considered important to involve anyone else in the decision,
and
2. so that it could not be reversed without the community looking bad (and
forcing whoever pushes for that option to look bad as well).