Monday, 2 Nov 2020

Participants:
	* Pradyun
	* Sumana
	* Georgia

Agenda:
	* Yay, beta is out!
		* Feels like we checked the checkbox! :-)
	* Status & blockers
		* UX team: no blockers to report. status: analyzing surveys, still doing some interviews. Will check further re blockers.
		* Pradyun: beta is out! issues: mostly as listed below.
		* Sumana: did some triage + replaying to issue. some announcements (not widespread, likely today). making a "things that I do after a pip release" list.
	* Note: Ernest has a week off.
	* Invoices!
	* issue followup on things that we would like to finish before stable 20.3 release (from https://github.com/pypa/pip/projects/5 , https://github.com/pypa/pip/projects/6 , and https://github.com/pypa/pip/milestone/38 )
		* New resolver: Failure despite correct version numbers, when extras and already-installed package are encountered together #8785 https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/8785
			* last TODO was that Pradyun would investigate - any outcomes?
				* Not yet -- haven't looked into this since the call w/ TP.
				* Upon re-look: hairy problem. Bunch of edge case. Surfacing more often than we had expected. Needs to be fixed before 20.3.
				* TODO: Will need 3-4 hrs of Pradyun diving into it, connecting in currently unresolved issues.
		* https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/8380 `ResolutionTooDeep` error message
			* Have we resolved this with some other PR that maybe didn't get attached?
			* We basically removed the `ResolutionTooDeep` error in https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/8275, because we figured "how many package names have we looked at" is a bad metric. :)
				* We should probably to reintroduce this, as a hard-stop error at 1000 backtracks on the same package name.
				* should this block the 20.3 release? It's nice-to-have for when resolver behaves badly, as in #9011.... current threshold of 2 million is A LOT.
				* `ResolutionTooDeep` -- we changed it to 2 million package names, so no one ever sees it
					* but users will get backtracking error message
				* PG: should not block 20.3 release
					* SH: ok with not blocking the release on re-introducing this error. the backtracking provides context to the users.
					* GA: sounds good.
					* TODO: Sumana to explain this on the bug and move it out of blockers
		* https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/9011 Pip 20.2.4 goes into infinite resolution of dependencies  #9011
			*  What's next here? Investigation or implementation?
				* Investigation needed, seems a resolvelib bug.
				* Definitely a blocker for 20.3.
				* Not sure how likely it is that users hit this, since "when does this happen" is not clear.
					* But users hit this already, so, likely definitely gonna be a problem if not solved.
				* TODO: Pradyun to investigate [probably to talk with TP as well]
		* printing warnings about pip potentially introducing conflicts involving existing dependencies: https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/7744#issuecomment-717773481 
			* What needs to happen next here? Implementation, or more UX work to polish the warnings/information messages?
			* Implementation, and then *maybe* another round of reviews if I was wrong about what's do-able.
			* TODO: Pradyun to implement
		* Including backtracking in the user guide https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/9040
			* incorporate Sumana's commit and merge?
			* TODO: Pradyun to ^
		* https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/8495 New resolver error message is confusing if a package has inconsistent dependencies #8495
			* Is this post-release work or do we need it for 20.3?
			* Should be doable for 20.3, but I wouldn't block the release for it.
			* TODO: Sumana to note in issue: not a 20.3 blocker
		* https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/9083 numpy, PEP 440, comparison, version normalization
			* How hard is this to fix?
				* Has an approved PR, can be merged as is (waiting on writing a test tho): https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/9085
				* Pradyun resigns himself to making the 5-line test
				* TODO: implement test, merge