2021-12-07 TC Working Group Agenda and Meeting Notes

[ocket 8888 <oc...@gmail.com>]

If you have anything you want to discuss at next week's meeting,
respond to this email and it's on the agenda

Re: 2021-12-07 TC Working Group Agenda and Meeting Notes

[Zach Hoffman <zr...@apache.org>]

Suggest discussing:
- What will it take to start using versioned module paths to lock down
dependency versions?

Active mailing list threads:
Mailing list threads:
- GH issue labels to help determine priority
<https://lists.apache.org/thread/z6lk4hvr7nmrjfbrqb2stddkqp3khbgm>

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 9:10 AM Jeremy Mitchell <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Do we plan to remove Riak as an option for Traffic Vault now that Postgres
> TV is available?
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:16 AM ocket 8888 <oc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If you have anything you want to discuss at next week's meeting,
> > respond to this email and it's on the agenda
> >

Re: 2021-12-07 TC Working Group Agenda and Meeting Notes

[ocket 8888 <oc...@gmail.com>]

1. Attendance
- Matt Jackson
- Rawlin Peters
- Zach Hoffman
- Taylor Frey
- Jeremy Mitchell
2. Will we remove Riak as a Traffic Vault backend?
- Yes, it's already deprecated, so we can remove it with ATCv7.0.0
- The transition is fairly simple.
- The TO API endpoints specific to Riak are all either deprecated or
removed already
3. What will it take to start using versioned module paths to lock
down dependency versions?
- People can't import our clients without using exact commit hashes
- Go team says "if you don't like it, don't use `go`" - require e.g.
Bazel for building?
- Possible strategy is to use "module-specific" tags - e.g. v1.7.0-0
for version 7.0.0
4. Mailing List Thread: GH issue labels to help determine priority
5. Can we add some "impact" and "effort" labels to our tech debt items
to help people prioritize them?
- #5772 Added "low effort"
- #5076 Added "low effort"
- #4800 Added "low effort"
- #4428 Added "low effort"
- #4427 Added "low effort"
- #4411 Added "low effort"
- #4324 Added "low effort"
- #4311 Asked reporter if this issue can be closed now that ORT perl
script is removed
- #4122 Added "low effort"
- #4025 Added "low effort"
- #3968 Added "low effort"
- #3721 Added "low effort"
- #3791 Added "low effort"
- #3288 Added "high effort" label
- #2827 Added "low effort"
- #2809 Added "low effort"
- #2727 Asked if this is a duplicate of #3288
2669
- #2558 Closed
- #2546 Asked if this is still applicable
- #1018 Added "low effort"
- #979 Added "low effort"

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 9:18 AM Jeremy Mitchell <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can we add some "impact" and "effort" labels to our tech debt items to help
> people prioritize them?
> https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22tech+debt%22
>
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 9:09 AM Jeremy Mitchell <mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Do we plan to remove Riak as an option for Traffic Vault now that Postgres
> > TV is available?
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:16 AM ocket 8888 <oc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> If you have anything you want to discuss at next week's meeting,
> >> respond to this email and it's on the agenda
> >>
> >

Re: 2021-12-07 TC Working Group Agenda and Meeting Notes

[Jeremy Mitchell <mi...@gmail.com>]

Can we add some "impact" and "effort" labels to our tech debt items to help
people prioritize them?
https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22tech+debt%22

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 9:09 AM Jeremy Mitchell <mi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Do we plan to remove Riak as an option for Traffic Vault now that Postgres
> TV is available?
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:16 AM ocket 8888 <oc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If you have anything you want to discuss at next week's meeting,
>> respond to this email and it's on the agenda
>>
>

Re: 2021-12-07 TC Working Group Agenda and Meeting Notes

[Jeremy Mitchell <mi...@gmail.com>]

Do we plan to remove Riak as an option for Traffic Vault now that Postgres
TV is available?

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:16 AM ocket 8888 <oc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> If you have anything you want to discuss at next week's meeting,
> respond to this email and it's on the agenda
>