Subject: [codesprints] Codesprint at IETF 76

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:01:40 -0500

Are the wiki pages for the next codesprint up?

Do we have a working plan yet?

RjS

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 09:11:42 -0500

> Do we have a working plan yet?

It's my understanding that we now have Django replacements for all of 
the old perl scripts. Does anyone have a good feel for what the next 
steps are? Do we know what will be useful to work on in Hiroshima?

/a

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:00:09 -0500

Any further thoughts from anyone else?

RjS

On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Adam Roach wrote:

> It's my understanding that we now have Django replacements for all  
> of the old perl scripts. Does anyone have a good feel for what the  
> next steps are? Do we know what will be useful to work on in  
> Hiroshima?
>
> /a

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:57:21 +0200

Well.. I think we have Django replacements for all old Perl scripts
that generated static HTML pages from cron jobs.  But we do have lots
of other kinds of old Perl code that still needs to be replaced
eventually; for example, various password-protected CGI scripts like
Meeting Session Requester and Meeting Materials Manager (for WG
chairs), Liaison Statement Manager (for WG chairs and liaisons), the
IESG I-D Tracker (for IESG/secretariat), and a lot of tools that are
used only by the secretariat. And there are some miscellaneous
scripts, like expiring Internet-Drafts after 6 months.

The password-protected tools aren't perhaps an ideal topic for the
code sprint, since many participants aren't in the intended user 
group (and don't have access to the current tool).

Some things on my "things it'd be nice to do" list include:

- Moving to Django 1.1 (although this might be almost ready 
  before Hiroshima)
- Improve coverage of the test suite (which has proved really
  useful when testing with Django 1.0/1.1)
- Finalizing the "new per-draft tracker page" (see e.g.
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-file/), and
  removing the code for the old one.
- Looking at the authentication/authorization code, and getting it 
  working in some way (depends on some currently ongoing discussions...)
- Moving IESG balloting code to Django (as the first piece of 
  password-protected functionality -- obviously, there's a lot more)
- Figuring out what needs to be done to retire the Perl scripts that 
  generate various views of the IESG agenda. One piece was already 
  rewritten in Django (https://datatracker.ietf.org/iesg/agenda/),
  but this mess turned out to have more pieces and a spaghetti 
  of dependencies...
- Moving old liaison statements from the hardcoded template: see 
  http://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/browser/branch/2.00/ietf/templates/liaisons/liaisondetail_list.html and scroll down to see what I mean...
- Doing something about mailing list search.
- Figuring out if we can retire (instead of replacing) the "Mailing 
  List Request Tool" and "Non-WG Mailing List Submission Page" tools  

I'm working on some of these currently, but obviously only some small
part of these will happen before Hiroshima.

Henrik, is there something related to the database redesign
we could do?

Best regards,
Pasi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sparks
> Sent: 22 September, 2009 01:00
> To: Adam Roach
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [codesprints] Codesprint at IETF 76
>

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:15:48 +0200

Hi,

There are a lot of good topics in Pasi's post, below.  For now I've
put up just a few items on the Sprint wiki page, but we can modify
that at will.

I think the most important things I'd like to accomplish this sprint
is

	1. Get us moved over to Django 1.0 or 1.1

	2. Get people coding new stuff against the new data-structures.

Obviously, the latter requires that there are new data-structures
and models in place, at least enough of them that we can start some
coding. I hope to have some models changed so that they will work with
both the old and new tables before Hiroshima; if so it should be possible
to move forward to point 2 above.  If not, we will need a fallback
topic.

I don't want to focus only on the old scripts; we all need some of the
joy of creating new features!

One possibility once the 1.0/1.1 transition is done is to do some
1.x Admin-Site tweaks.  The 1.x Django Admin-Site is much more extensible
than the 0.96 one, and it is possible that customised admin pages may
replace some of the remaining perl scripts, with minimal effort.

	Henrik

On 2009-09-24 18:57 [email-masked] said the following:
> _______________________________________________
> codesprints mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codesprints
>