| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 09:42 | |
| *** dviroel|afk is now known as dviroel | 11:28 | |
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 11:55 | |
| *** dasm|off is now known as dasm | 13:08 | |
| *** tosky__ is now known as tosky | 13:17 | |
| *** tosky is now known as Guest2169 | 13:29 | |
| *** tosky__ is now known as tosky | 13:29 | |
| *** tosky__ is now known as tosky | 13:58 | |
| whoami-rajat | #startmeeting cinder | 14:00 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Wed Jun 15 14:00:07 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is whoami-rajat. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'cinder' | 14:00 |
| whoami-rajat | #topic roll call | 14:00 |
| fabiooliveira | hi o/ | 14:00 |
| felipe_rodrigues | o; | 14:00 |
| felipe_rodrigues | o/ | 14:00 |
| Roamer` | o/ | 14:01 |
| jungleboyj | o/ | 14:01 |
| simondodsley | hi | 14:01 |
| rosmaita | o/ | 14:01 |
| aneeeshp1 | hi | 14:01 |
| caiquemello[m] | o/ | 14:01 |
| nahimsouza[m] | o/ | 14:02 |
| whoami-rajat | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-zed-meetings | 14:02 |
| luizsantos[m] | o/ | 14:02 |
| enriquetaso | hi | 14:02 |
| whoami-rajat | looks like a good turnout | 14:04 |
| whoami-rajat | let's get started | 14:04 |
| tosky | hi | 14:04 |
| whoami-rajat | #topic announcements | 14:04 |
| whoami-rajat | SRBAC Berlin discussion | 14:04 |
| whoami-rajat | so I'm not sure about the date or times of the sessions but i believe one related to service role was conducted on thursday and related to operator feedback was conducted on friday | 14:05 |
| yuval | hey | 14:05 |
| whoami-rajat | anyway, we had a ops meetup in berlin which had a topic to discuss about our issues with the current SRBAC strategy | 14:05 |
| whoami-rajat | majorly being the scopes since it has changed quite a few times in design and still the current one is not satisfactory | 14:06 |
| whoami-rajat | gmann, has described this in a ML thread | 14:07 |
| whoami-rajat | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-June/028878.html | 14:07 |
| whoami-rajat | the feedback etherpad for SRBAC in ops meetup is here | 14:07 |
| whoami-rajat | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/rbac-operator-feedback | 14:07 |
| whoami-rajat | honesty, i wasn't able to derive any conclusion or major points to highlight here | 14:07 |
| whoami-rajat | so feel free to take a look at the etherpad discussion section | 14:08 |
| whoami-rajat | another session related to service role was held on thursday last week | 14:08 |
| whoami-rajat | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/deprivilization-of-service-accounts | 14:08 |
| whoami-rajat | again, the etherpad says very less and until a recording is available, I couldn't derive much concrete items from the etherpad | 14:09 |
| rosmaita | me neither | 14:09 |
| whoami-rajat | i was hoping rosmaita would but hard luck :/ | 14:09 |
| whoami-rajat | let's see if TC posts an update about it | 14:10 |
| rosmaita | the policy pop-up team did not meet yesterday, so hoping to get some info on thursday at the TC meeting | 14:10 |
| gmann | yeah, I am consolidating about all the feedback from various place and ops meetup/forums etc | 14:10 |
| whoami-rajat | gmann, great thanks | 14:11 |
| gmann | and also will send the meeting schedule soon to decide the next step | 14:11 |
| whoami-rajat | sounds like a plan so let's wait for further discussions | 14:11 |
| whoami-rajat | thanks gmann for an update | 14:12 |
| rosmaita | gmann: my impression is that ironic absolutely wants scope, but maybe it can be optional for other projects? | 14:12 |
| rosmaita | (if it's too complicated to answer, we can discuss at the tc meeting) | 14:12 |
| gmann | rosmaita: may be but ironic can be exception but any other inter-dependent projects should not have scope as individual. but let's discuss in policy popup meeting | 14:12 |
| gmann | yeah | 14:12 |
| whoami-rajat | thanks again, let's move on to our next announcement | 14:13 |
| whoami-rajat | next, cinderlib for yoga must be released by 23 June | 14:13 |
| whoami-rajat | rosmaita, that's you | 14:13 |
| rosmaita | just wanted to remind everyone, i will talk about some issues later | 14:14 |
| whoami-rajat | ack, I received one reminder from herve about the cinderlib release | 14:14 |
| whoami-rajat | they've proposed a patch | 14:14 |
| whoami-rajat | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/845701 | 14:14 |
| rosmaita | yeah, please put a -1 on that | 14:15 |
| whoami-rajat | and I've told him that after discussing all the issues we've in cinderlib, me or rosmaita will add a comment to the patch | 14:15 |
| rosmaita | also, there's https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/842105 | 14:15 |
| whoami-rajat | ah, this one is old ... | 14:16 |
| whoami-rajat | I will ask him to abandon the new one in favor of this one then | 14:16 |
| rosmaita | sounds good, just -1 both so that there's no confusion | 14:17 |
| whoami-rajat | yep, will do, thanks | 14:17 |
| whoami-rajat | next annoucement, spec freeze is 24 June | 14:17 |
| whoami-rajat | so i see the quota spec by geguileo still needs an update | 14:18 |
| rosmaita | has anyone looked at the task status field proposal? | 14:18 |
| simondodsley | also this one needs to be addressed: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder-specs/+/818551 | 14:18 |
| simondodsley | that's the one | 14:19 |
| rosmaita | that's the one | 14:19 |
| rosmaita | jinx!!! | 14:19 |
| whoami-rajat | also the SRBAC one needs to be updated after we've all the discussion points from ops meetup (maybe will get a Spec feeze exception) | 14:19 |
| simondodsley | Walt has an issue with it | 14:19 |
| simondodsley | hemna are you here? | 14:19 |
| geguileo | whoami-rajat: yeah, sorry I was busy with the nvmeof and backup memory usage stuff | 14:20 |
| * fabiooliveira oh no, you're jinxed -- kidding | 14:20 | |
| geguileo | whoami-rajat: those are ready now, so I should be able to go back to it | 14:20 |
| simondodsley | the task status one really needs to be either approved or not so they can start the coding. This has been hanging around since Yoga | 14:21 |
| whoami-rajat | geguileo, np, just wanted to know we're on track as next week is spec freeze | 14:21 |
| rosmaita | next time someone sees hemna in #openstack-cinder, please ask him to go back to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder-specs/+/818551 and respond to their responses | 14:21 |
| whoami-rajat | geguileo, great | 14:21 |
| geguileo | whoami-rajat: who needs sleep!! | 14:21 |
| whoami-rajat | :D sorry about all the work items you've got in this cycle ... and everything is IMPORTANT!! | 14:22 |
| geguileo | lol | 14:22 |
| simondodsley | there are a lot of old specs out there - we need to either kill them or retarget to zed | 14:23 |
| whoami-rajat | as rosmaita said, please followup with hemna on the spec and i will also take a look by this week | 14:23 |
| rosmaita | speaking of the memory usage stuff, geguileo has an interesting patch up: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/845805 | 14:23 |
| whoami-rajat | the numbers look fascinating, 1GB -> 130 MB | 14:24 |
| rosmaita | plus, it's not cinder-backup's fault! | 14:24 |
| rosmaita | (that's the best part) | 14:24 |
| enriquetaso | ++ | 14:24 |
| geguileo | lol | 14:24 |
| geguileo | yeah, not our fault for once | 14:24 |
| whoami-rajat | yeah, another not a cinder issue | 14:25 |
| jungleboyj | \o/ | 14:25 |
| whoami-rajat | simondodsley, good idea, i will take a look at specs that are not relevant for Zed and ask them to be retargeted or abandoned | 14:26 |
| whoami-rajat | ok so let's move on to topics | 14:26 |
| simondodsley | i've already asked for retargets but there have been no responses | 14:26 |
| whoami-rajat | oh, then we probably should abandon them after a certain amount of time but not too sure about it | 14:27 |
| whoami-rajat | rosmaita, what do you think ? ^ | 14:27 |
| rosmaita | whoami-rajat: yes, we should abandon anything maybe older than 2 cycles | 14:28 |
| jungleboyj | rosmaita: ++ | 14:28 |
| rosmaita | with a note, "feel free to restore if you want to keep working on this" | 14:28 |
| whoami-rajat | we've got 2 PTLs approval on this so let's move on with this strategy ^ | 14:28 |
| whoami-rajat | ok moving on to topics | 14:29 |
| whoami-rajat | #topic Reviews request | 14:29 |
| whoami-rajat | enriquetaso, that's you | 14:29 |
| enriquetaso | Hey | 14:29 |
| whoami-rajat | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/782624/ | 14:29 |
| enriquetaso | Just asking for reviews again :P | 14:29 |
| enriquetaso | I really need some reviews in this to continue working on more tempest patches. | 14:29 |
| enriquetaso | I'd like to see the mimic client on the CI before submitting more tempest test | 14:30 |
| rosmaita | reminder: all cinder-core are also devstack-plugin-ceph cores | 14:30 |
| enriquetaso | thanks! That's all for me! | 14:30 |
| enriquetaso | I think we discussed this patch a few time ago on this meeting | 14:30 |
| enriquetaso | and could be ready to merge | 14:30 |
| whoami-rajat | the comment i read in the patch might not be too accurate | 14:31 |
| whoami-rajat | # Enables new features such as Clone v2 API, which allows proper handling of | 14:31 |
| whoami-rajat | # deleting snapshots with child clone images. | 14:31 |
| whoami-rajat | but will add a comment to the patch | 14:31 |
| whoami-rajat | so cores, please take a look as it's blocking work ^ | 14:31 |
| enriquetaso | whoami-rajat++ | 14:31 |
| enriquetaso | thanks, I'll update the commit msg after your review | 14:32 |
| whoami-rajat | ack thanks | 14:32 |
| whoami-rajat | moving on | 14:32 |
| whoami-rajat | #topic Four issues with cinderlib | 14:32 |
| whoami-rajat | rosmaita, that's you | 14:32 |
| rosmaita | lot to talk about here, but mostly informative (i believe everything is close to a solution if we agree) | 14:32 |
| rosmaita | so, the previous PTL seems to have left cinderlib in a heck of a state | 14:32 |
| rosmaita | issue #1: cinderlib CI | 14:32 |
| rosmaita | cinderlib is a cycle-trailing release, so master is still yoga development | 14:32 |
| rosmaita | hasn't been a problem in the past, but zed doesn't support py36 anymore, while yoga does | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | so we started hitting gate failures due to testing cinderlib (yoga development) with master (zed development) upper-constraints | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | fixed by including overrides in .zuul.yaml | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | part one (merged): https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinderlib/+/845170 | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | part two: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinderlib/+/845272 | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | (job wasn't failing, but I think that was luck, and we should be consistent about these changes) | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | so, just need reviews on part two ^^ | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | and the issue will be solved! | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | issue #2: unconstrained builds | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | tox.ini is set up so that we install cinder and os-brick from source | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | os-brick is in upper-constraints, so if we use upper-constraints, we can't install it | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | (because the development version exceeds what's in upper-constraints) | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | at the same time, if we don't constrain cinderlib for testing, we really don't know what library versions are actually being used | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | so we really do want to constrain it | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | proposed solution is https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinderlib/+/845607 | 14:34 |
| rosmaita | (which needs reviews) | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | it creates a local-upper-constraints.txt that doesn't include os-brick | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | it gets generated as part of the tox install_command | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | you can override the file that's used with the CINDERLIB_CONSTRAINTS_FILE environment var | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | I decided not to hide local-upper-constraints.txt in the tox temp dir so you can see exactly what's being used | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | that filename is added to .gitignore, so it shouldn't bother you at all | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | the reason why we're not using the standard TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE environment var is to make this change work with zuul | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | zuul always overrides TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE to use upper-constraints directly from its install of openstack/requirements | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | (this makes it possible to use Depends-on when testing upper-constraints changes) | 14:35 |
| rosmaita | and it overrides it aggressively, can't change this in our .zuul.yaml | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | so we have to use CINDERLIB_CONSTRAINTS_FILE | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | the downside is that we can't use Depends-on to test upper-constraints changes in the gate | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | but i don't think this is a big deal because cinderlib is a cycle-trailing release | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | so any problems will most likely be caught earlier by cinder | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | and you can always test locally by downloading the patched u-c file and setting CINDERLIB_CONSTRAINTS_FILE | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | (though you have to remember to remove os-brick from the patched file) | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | so that's how the patch works, please review and leave questions etc: | 14:36 |
| rosmaita | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinderlib/+/845607 | 14:37 |
| rosmaita | the nice thing is that that patch works for both tox and zuul | 14:37 |
| rosmaita | issue #3: not running requirements-check job | 14:37 |
| rosmaita | the standard requirements check template is not set up to handle trailing releases | 14:37 |
| rosmaita | but we only have 3 requirements: | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | https://opendev.org/openstack/cinderlib/src/branch/master/requirements.txt | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | so, this file ^^ is interesting because it contains cinder | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | it's needed for when someone installs cinderlib from pypi | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | we don't actually use the requirements.txt in the cinderlib tox.ini | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | because we install cinder and os-brick from source | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | and importlib-metadata is used by cinder, so we get it that way | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | so my proposal is that the PTL just check manually to make sure that requirements.txt is correct | 14:38 |
| rosmaita | os-brick and importlib-metadata are in global-requirements | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | but ... cinder is not | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | and it's not allowed in there | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | for info about this if you care, see this discussion in #openstack-requirements: | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-requirements/%23openstack-requirements.2022-06-08.log.html#t2022-06-08T15:36:55 | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | if cinderlib starts using more requirements, we can revisit this | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | but for now, I propose we do nothing | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | (just wanted to make sure everyone understands what's going on) | 14:39 |
| rosmaita | ok, finally | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | issue #4: not using released versions of cinder, os-brick in CI | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | we probably had this discussion when cinderlib CI was first set up for the train release, but I don't remember the reasons | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | so the issue is that all our CI is using cinder and os-brick source, so possibly using unreleased changes | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | we could add more jobs | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | or, we could just make sure that when we release yoga cinderlib | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | we also release yoga cinder and os-brick (if they contain any unreleased changes) | 14:40 |
| rosmaita | then we'll know that cinderlib has not been relying on any unreleased code to pass its CI | 14:41 |
| rosmaita | that's it ... so to summarize | 14:41 |
| rosmaita | issue #1 pretty much solved | 14:41 |
| rosmaita | issue #2 probably solved? | 14:41 |
| rosmaita | issues #3, #4 ... i propose we do nothing | 14:42 |
| rosmaita | sorry that was a lot of text to dump in here | 14:42 |
| rosmaita | any questions? | 14:42 |
| tosky | (I voted -1 on the second patch of #1 but it's either easily solvable or I'm plainly wrong) | 14:42 |
| geguileo | rosmaita: regarding the cinderlib requirements, it should *never* have any more than what we currently have | 14:42 |
| geguileo | so it should be ok leaving it as it is (like you propose) | 14:42 |
| rosmaita | works for me! | 14:42 |
| whoami-rajat | for #3, i think it's OK to manually check if right versions of cinder and os-brick are mentioned in requirements.txt unless someone thinks otherwise | 14:42 |
| rosmaita | yeah, the alternative is to hack the requirements file like i did with upper-constraints ... don't think it's worth it, though | 14:43 |
| geguileo | rosmaita: I don't see the issue for #4 | 14:43 |
| whoami-rajat | for 3 requirements? don't think so and doesn't add much burden on me as well so no problem at all | 14:44 |
| geguileo | rosmaita: when both are working on the same release it makes sense to run it against master, since we want them to keep in sync and not find surprises | 14:44 |
| geguileo | rosmaita: once os-brick releases we pin it to in cinderlib tox.ini to the stable branch, and the same thing when cinder releases | 14:45 |
| geguileo | and then once cinderlib releases we can unpin those 2 | 14:45 |
| rosmaita | right, it's just that it could be possible that some stuff has been merged to cinder or os-brick stable/yoga that we are testing with | 14:45 |
| geguileo | I believe that's mostly what we've been doing | 14:45 |
| rosmaita | and if someone installs cinderlib from pypi, they get released versions of cinder, os-brick | 14:46 |
| geguileo | true | 14:46 |
| rosmaita | it's pretty unlikely | 14:46 |
| geguileo | I don't anticipate many issues there though | 14:46 |
| rosmaita | but to be safe, we can just release new cinder and os-brick at the same time | 14:46 |
| rosmaita | yeah, i am just being over-cautious | 14:47 |
| geguileo | yeah, I just feel bad giving extra work with those 2 additional releases | 14:47 |
| whoami-rajat | rosmaita, do you mean releasing stable/yoga of cinder and os-brick? | 14:47 |
| rosmaita | releases are cheap ... testing is hard! | 14:47 |
| rosmaita | whoami-rajat: yes, exactly | 14:47 |
| jungleboyj | :-) | 14:47 |
| rosmaita | by the way, i meant to say something about cinderlib for people here who are unfamiliar with it | 14:48 |
| whoami-rajat | we can do it but if we think we're good with what we currently have then maybe not required | 14:48 |
| whoami-rajat | ok that doesn't seem like a big issue to discuss right now, i think the focus should be more on #1 and #2 | 14:49 |
| rosmaita | cinderlib is used by Ember-CSI which is a container storage interface for kubernetes | 14:49 |
| whoami-rajat | and thanks rosmaita for finding out the issues and providing a verbose summary | 14:49 |
| rosmaita | so you can use the cinder drivers without having to run cinder as a service | 14:50 |
| rosmaita | yeah, verbosity is my middle name | 14:50 |
| rosmaita | that's all from me | 14:50 |
| whoami-rajat | lol | 14:50 |
| whoami-rajat | great, so i guess that's all we had for topics | 14:50 |
| whoami-rajat | let's move to open discussion | 14:50 |
| simondodsley | Anyone else seeing tempest test `tempest.api.compute.admin.test_volume_swap.TestMultiAttachVolumeSwap` failing with `ValueError: Multiple pingable or sshable servers not supported at this stage`? Seems to be ever since https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/842921 merged | 14:51 |
| whoami-rajat | #topic open discussion | 14:51 |
| aneeeshp1 | Hi, I am representing Fungible (https://www.fungible.com/product/nvme-over-tcp-fungible-storage-cluster/) and attending this meeting for the first time. | 14:51 |
| aneeeshp1 | Just wanted to talk about a new driver for Fungible storage backend. | 14:51 |
| aneeeshp1 | I have submitted a blueprint for the new driver (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/fungible-volume-driver) | 14:52 |
| aneeeshp1 | CI setup in progress. Expected to be ready by end of this month. Planning to submit a patch once the CI is ready. | 14:52 |
| aneeeshp1 | Can this be targeted for Zed? | 14:52 |
| rosmaita | aneeeshp1: welcome! | 14:52 |
| whoami-rajat | aneeeshp1, Welcome! | 14:52 |
| geguileo | aneeeshp1: welcome to the cinder meetings! | 14:52 |
| aneeeshp1 | Thank you! | 14:52 |
| jungleboyj | Welcome. :-) | 14:52 |
| fabiooliveira | welcome \o/ | 14:52 |
| whoami-rajat | aneeeshp1, sine you've filed a blueprint, you're already on the right track, one question, do you have a patch up for the new driver? | 14:53 |
| rosmaita | aneeeshp1: https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#cinder-new-driver-merge-deadline | 14:53 |
| whoami-rajat | ah you already said it will be pushed once CI is ready, my bad | 14:53 |
| aneeeshp1 | whoami-rajat: not yet. Will be ready by end of this month. | 14:53 |
| whoami-rajat | aneeeshp1, so currently our deadline for driver merging is 15th July, maybe enough time to review the change but will be good if you can try to get it done earlier | 14:54 |
| whoami-rajat | #link https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#z-cinder-driver-deadline | 14:54 |
| rosmaita | how many drivers are proposed at this point? i am losing count | 14:55 |
| whoami-rajat | ah, rosmaita shared this already, I'm skipping some messages ... | 14:55 |
| whoami-rajat | more than we can review? | 14:55 |
| geguileo | aneeeshp1: you can push the patch before upstream CI is ready | 14:55 |
| whoami-rajat | 6-7 probably | 14:55 |
| aneeeshp1 | Can the patch review start before the CI is ready. I might be able to submit the patch earlier, but CI will take some time (end of the month) | 14:55 |
| geguileo | yes it can | 14:55 |
| aneeeshp1 | Thank you geguileo. I will do that | 14:55 |
| whoami-rajat | yes, it won't be merged unless the CI is reporting but that doesn't block reviewing the driver patch | 14:56 |
| aneeeshp1 | Okay thanks | 14:56 |
| aneeeshp1 | I will create patch ASAP. | 14:56 |
| whoami-rajat | great, thanks for your contribution | 14:56 |
| aneeeshp1 | thank you all | 14:56 |
| rosmaita | looks like 8 new drivers | 14:57 |
| whoami-rajat | make sure to add it to the work items section in your blueprint | 14:57 |
| aneeeshp1 | sure | 14:57 |
| whoami-rajat | rosmaita, wow, maybe the highest I've seen in a cycle | 14:57 |
| jungleboyj | Yes. | 14:57 |
| jungleboyj | Since the old days when we were the hot new thing in town. | 14:58 |
| whoami-rajat | I will create etherpad for spec and drivers to prioritize them | 14:58 |
| enriquetaso | cool | 14:58 |
| Roamer` | hi, so real quick (I hope... unless there are any objections and maybe I should have put this in the schedule)... so you may remember that in the May 25h video meeting I brought up a problem with the StorPool driver keeping Glance images in a different Cinder pool (underlying StorPool template) than the volumes the users wish to create, and there seemed to be some consensus that instead of | 14:58 |
| Roamer` | every driver reimplementing half of the workflow for creating an image out of a volume, it might be easier to add a driver capability "I know how to clone volumes efficiently even into a different pool"... so today I filed https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/clone-across-pools and what do people think about the name of the capability? | 14:58 |
| Roamer` | I have already started working on it (we have to do something like this at a customer installation and this option, a driver capability, will be *much* cleaner than what we have now), I guess I will have something ready for review in a day or two | 14:59 |
| whoami-rajat | also one announcement i forgot ... we've the festival of XS reviews this Friday, but i will be sending a reminder to ML anyway | 14:59 |
| enriquetaso | oh,i wont attend this XS review festival because i'm on AR Holiday :( | 15:00 |
| rosmaita | wow, third friday of the month has arrived really fast! | 15:00 |
| jungleboyj | rosmaita: Yeah, how did that happen already? :-) | 15:01 |
| whoami-rajat | Roamer`, thanks for providing the update | 15:01 |
| whoami-rajat | enriquetaso, ah shoot, but no problem | 15:01 |
| whoami-rajat | rosmaita, yeah really, i thought it was the second one this Friday | 15:01 |
| whoami-rajat | we've passed the time limit for the meeting | 15:01 |
| whoami-rajat | so let's wrap it up | 15:02 |
| whoami-rajat | thanks everyone | 15:02 |
| whoami-rajat | #endmeeting | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Wed Jun 15 15:02:09 2022 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2022/cinder.2022-06-15-14.00.html | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2022/cinder.2022-06-15-14.00.txt | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2022/cinder.2022-06-15-14.00.log.html | 15:02 |
| jungleboyj | Thanks! | 15:02 |
| *** dviroel is now known as dviroel|lunch | 15:18 | |
| *** dviroel|lunch is now known as dviroel | 16:15 | |
| *** dviroel is now known as dviroel|afk | 18:47 | |
| *** dasm is now known as dasm|off | 21:09 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!