Thursday, 2012-06-14

*** ncode has quit IRC00:14
*** johnpostlethwait has quit IRC00:25
*** joearnol_ has quit IRC00:30
*** milner has quit IRC00:34
*** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz00:36
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting00:37
*** adjohn has quit IRC00:41
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting00:41
*** dolphm has quit IRC00:42
*** s0mik has quit IRC00:47
*** milner has joined #openstack-meeting00:48
*** Mandell has quit IRC00:48
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn00:52
*** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting01:02
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting01:05
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC01:05
*** bencherian has quit IRC01:10
*** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting01:25
*** gyee has quit IRC01:25
*** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:34
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC01:34
*** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:34
*** jdurgin has quit IRC01:34
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC01:37
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC01:38
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC01:39
*** ayoung has quit IRC01:42
*** littleidea has quit IRC01:49
*** jsavak has quit IRC01:53
*** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC01:58
*** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer02:03
*** PotHix has quit IRC02:06
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting02:08
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting02:22
*** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting02:24
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting02:25
*** dwalleck has quit IRC02:29
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting02:29
*** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates02:37
*** danwent has quit IRC02:48
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting02:54
*** arosen has quit IRC02:54
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting02:59
*** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk03:14
*** arosen2 has joined #openstack-meeting03:14
*** edygarcia has quit IRC03:14
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting03:25
*** garyk has quit IRC03:37
*** dolphm has quit IRC03:40
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting03:59
*** Mandell_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:01
*** Mandell has quit IRC04:01
*** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz04:06
*** s0mik has quit IRC04:10
*** dolphm has quit IRC04:10
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting04:14
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC04:14
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting04:16
*** sandywalsh has quit IRC04:20
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz04:33
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting04:35
*** dwcramer has quit IRC04:37
*** dolphm has quit IRC04:39
*** joearnold has quit IRC04:39
*** zul has quit IRC04:45
*** sdague has quit IRC04:45
*** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting04:46
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting04:46
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn04:58
*** s0mik has quit IRC04:58
*** markmcclain has quit IRC05:03
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting05:05
*** reed has quit IRC05:08
*** garyk has quit IRC05:11
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting05:15
*** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting05:18
*** edygarcia has quit IRC05:29
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting05:43
*** dwalleck has quit IRC05:52
*** martine has joined #openstack-meeting05:55
*** martine has quit IRC05:55
*** blamar has quit IRC05:57
*** littleidea has quit IRC06:17
*** danwent has quit IRC06:30
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz06:56
*** Mandell_ has quit IRC06:57
*** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov07:09
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting07:09
*** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting07:11
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn07:27
*** bencherian has quit IRC07:41
*** Mandell has quit IRC08:03
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz08:27
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting09:01
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting09:42
*** myz has quit IRC09:45
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting09:45
*** myz has quit IRC09:58
*** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov10:16
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting10:20
*** myz has quit IRC10:27
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting10:28
*** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates11:15
*** gholt has quit IRC11:29
*** gholt has joined #openstack-meeting11:33
*** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting11:34
*** myz has quit IRC11:35
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting11:38
*** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:41
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting11:52
*** ncode has quit IRC12:06
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting12:20
*** myz has quit IRC12:37
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting12:37
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting12:37
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting12:52
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting12:54
*** jamespage_ has quit IRC12:55
*** dolphm has quit IRC13:00
*** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting13:02
markmcwhat are you doing over here?13:02
* markmc was on #openstack-meetign13:02
ttxDaviey: ping13:03
markmcso, I spent some time this morning getting a handle on 2012.1.1 plans13:03
openstackMeeting started Thu Jun 14 13:03:12 2012 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at
markmcso, I'm actually prepared for this :)13:03
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.13:03
ttx<markmc> so, I spent some time this morning getting a handle on 2012.1.1 plans13:03
ttx(for logging)13:03
markmceverything you say can and will be used against you13:03
ttxmarkmc: always.13:03
Davieyttx: ey13:03
markmcok, so I'll just dump the status as I see it13:04
ttxso what is your plan, before I expose the current issues we have ?13:04
ttxDaviey: welcome!13:04
markmcwe've 4 core stable/essex projects now13:04
markmcand here's what they've got13:04
markmcglance: 5 commits on stable/essex, 0 pending, 5 bugs targetted to essex13:04
markmcnova: 34 commits on stable/essex, 6 pending, 31 bugs targetted to essex13:05
markmckeystone: 4 commits on stable/essex, 4 pending, 4 bugs targetted to essex13:05
ttxon the things that were committed, is there anything high-impact / security-related ?13:05
markmchorizon: 8 commits on stable/essex, 1 pending, 7 bugs targetted to essex13:05
markmcttx, good question13:05
ttxI know the a,nswer is YES for horizon13:05
markmcpretty sure there are some CVE fixes on the nova side13:05
markmcso, the answer is probably yes except for glance13:06
Daviey14:03 < ttx> #startmeeting13:06
markmcoh, wait - I haven't targetted nova/glance bugs to the milestone yet13:06
markmcttx, I don't appear to have permissions for that ... halp!13:07
ttxmarkmc: you could for keystone ?13:07
*** myz has quit IRC13:07
markmcand horizon13:07
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
ttx404 on those links, missing essex I presume13:08
markmcmissing 2012.1.113:08
markmcI added those for keystone and horizon13:08
ttxoh. I see13:08
markmcno perms for glance and nov13:08
markmcok, while you're fixing that13:09
* ttx looks on how we did it for 2011.3.113:09
markmcbasic plan I think should be to release 2012.1.1 for all 4 projects soon13:09
ttxok, the trick is to make stable-maint the release manager for essex series13:10
markmcwould like us to have candidate tarballs and call for testing by this time next week, say13:10
markmcand maybe do the release the week after?13:10
markmcttx, cool13:10
DavieyFor reference, Ubuntu has just uploaded this week of snapshots to our proposed archive.13:10
markmcDaviey, yeah, we've been tracking stable/essex too13:11
ttxmarkmc (and Daviey): you're now relmgr for essex on Glance and Nova, so that whould be unblocked13:11
DavieyWe'll be undergoing significant verification of these snapshots.13:11
markmchmm, I'm away the week after next13:11
markmcwell, at Red Hat Summit13:11
markmccould we possibly release this time next week ttx?13:11
ttxsounds like plenty of free time ahead.13:11
Davieywell, we probably don't have to rush it in for next week.13:12
markmcfree time in what sense?13:12
ttxmarkmc: if we get candidates out before the end of the week, we could target next Thursday13:12
*** myz has quit IRC13:12
markmcttx, cool13:12
markmcttx, I figure I can get to step 4 of today13:12
*** myz has joined #openstack-meeting13:12
ttxDaviey: could we sync candidates ?13:13
ttxDaviey: have the same things undergo testing on Ubuntu and upstream ?13:13
DavieyI'd quite like the verification we are doing on the snapshots to be useful for the point release.  If we rush out a release next week, the results could uncover regressions, making our verification independent.13:13
markmcwould like to look over the projects launchpad and history for serious issues which we haven't backported fixes for, though13:13
markmcwould need to be conservative getting any more in before a release next week, though13:13
ttxmarkmc: I see a benefit in waiting a bit more though13:13
markmcok, well13:14
markmcit turns out I'm away for 3 weeks from the end of next week13:14
ttxmarkmc: we could announce we'll be doing a 2012.1.1 "soon" and let extra fixes pour in13:14
markmcsomeone else could cut the release, though13:14
ttxDaviey: to sync with you, should we rush, or delay ?13:14
DavieyFrom my POV, a point release isn't in a huge hurry.. If we schedule a point release to be released say, 4 weeks from now.. (when markmc returns?).. that would work kinda well?13:14
Davieyallows us to have extended candidate baking ?13:15
markmcdon't see the point, myself13:15
Davieyttx: I'm in no hurry for us to rush13:15
ttxDaviey: thought you were already testing candidates ?13:15
markmcwith both Fedora and Ubuntu tracking stable/essex13:15
markmcthe chances of surprises are low13:15
markmccertainly not worth waiting 4 weeks13:15
ttxI know Horizon wants a point release sooner than that13:15
Davieyttx: we are, but the results of our snapshots will serve no help if we squeeze this out fast.13:15
ttxthey can wait 2 weeks, but will bitch about waiting 4+weeks13:16
markmcDaviey, release candidate tarballs tomorrow, you can't validate before next thursday?13:16
Davieymarkmc: Are you going to have any availability whilst at your summit?13:16
markmcnot enough to do this, no13:16
Davieyok, if you are confident we can do this in a week.. i certainly won't try to slow it down.13:17
ttxHmm. If we do final baking during that away week, we can release early the week after.13:17
ttxSo two options...13:17
ttx1. RC soon, release by Thursday next week13:17
ttx2. Announce, RC late next week, release early week+213:18
ttxerr.. +313:18
markmcttx, hmm, if you think waiting a week helps ... didn't you see me say I'm away for 3 weeks?13:18
markmc(holidaying in france after RH summit)13:18
ttxOh, you're away for three weeks ?13:19
markmcyeah, just realized13:19
Davieymarkmc: Ah, you can Sprint with ttx :)13:19
ttxI understood "just one week"13:19
markmcso if it's me cutting it, then (1)13:19
ttxWhere in France ?13:19
markmc2. 2. Announce, RC late next week, release early week after13:19
markmcttx, near lake annecy13:19
ttxOK, before we finalize the date, I'd like to expose the issues we currently have13:19
ttxa. We need to fix the versioning. stable/essex should have been versioned 2012.1.1 / Final=False at branch creation13:20
ttxcurrently it builds badly-versioned tarballs13:20
ttxI fixed it for Horizon, we need to fix it for the others13:21
ttxb. CI currently doesn't publish tarballs13:21
markmcttx, I've queued up patches for that13:21
markmcin gerrit13:21
markmcyeah, I noticed (b)13:21
*** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer13:21
ttxwhich makes it difficult to get candidates right now13:21
ttxbut that could be solved by tomorrow13:21
markmcseems like the tarball generation stopped around the time the pep8 issues happened13:21
Davieymarkmc: I'll take a gander at them after this, should be trivial.13:21
markmclatest one was May 1813:21
ttxmarkmc: apparently it's a zuul thing13:23
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1013091 in openstack-ci "Zuul isn't triggering tarball jobs" [Critical,New]13:23
markmcah, ok13:23
*** oubiwann1 has joined #openstack-meeting13:23
markmcwell, I have the utmost confidence in james and co. fixing it quickly :)13:23
ttxSo technically we could have candidate tarballs up before the weekend13:24
*** oubiwann has quit IRC13:24
markmcttx, yep13:24
ttxmarkmc: have enough bandwidth to make it happen ?13:24
markmcttx, yep13:24
Davieymarkmc: If we shoot for stable release next Thursday, you have high level of confidence they will be solid?13:24
markmcttx, with the slight caveat that I think it would be good to look back over git and launchpad to make sure we've missed nothing major13:25
ttxDaviey: should be solid, at least at tarball level13:25
ttxmarkmc: yes, that's my major issue with the "rushed" timeline:13:25
markmcttx, I will do that, but it means there's potential for more fixes to land early next week13:25
markmcttx, yeah13:25
Davieymarkmc: Okay.. how should we split this up?13:25
markmcttx, we'd have to be conservative13:25
ttxmarkmc: It would have been good to approach PTLs and ask them if there is anything more they want in before we cut13:25
markmcttx, and we can do another point release soon after if needed13:25
markmcttx, good point13:25
ttxbut there is no time for that in that timeframe13:25
markmcDaviey, yes, re: confidence13:26
ttxafter all, point releases are definitely something they have a say on, content-wise13:26
markmcDaviey, split what part up?13:26
markmcDaviey, the "let's make sure we haven't missed anything" thing?13:26
Davieymarkmc: Tasks to do.. ..13:26
ttxso basically we can definitely do Horizon in the timeframe proposed... the others, maybe less so13:26
*** oubiwann1 has quit IRC13:26
ttxmarkmc: do you see strong benefit in correlation ?13:27
markmcDaviey, well, I figure I'm doing all that otherwise there's no reason to rush13:27
Davieymarkmc: Do you want to do it all yourself, or split the burden?13:27
markmcDaviey, if you want to cut the release, we can push the release out to the following week13:27
* markmc doesn't *want* to do anything :)13:27
markmcttx, as in, releasing them all at the same time?13:28
ttxmarkmc: yes13:28
markmcttx, I see a strong benefit in releasing e.g. nova/keystone soon, certainly sooner than 4 weeks13:28
Davieymarkmc: what bonus are you seeing specifically ?13:28
markmcttx, don't see from the list of changes why horizon would warrant a particular rush over the other too13:29
markmcDaviey, what bonus what?13:29
ttxmarkmc: I think you need to talk to PTLs before making a final decision on the timeframe. If they all say "please go ahead with current state" it's doable.13:29
Davieymarkmc: nova/keystone soon.. what are the benefits of doing them sooner?13:29
markmcttx, ok, will do13:29
markmcDaviey, sooner than 4 weeks?13:29
markmcDaviey, well, put it this way what's the benefit in doing horizon sooner than 4 weeks?13:29
ttxmarkmc: I think that's because the Horizon devs pushed all the fixes they wanted in... and there is a couple of security issues that should definitely see the light of tarball release13:29
Davieymarkmc: no, generally - why them two as a priority ?13:30
markmcDaviey, whatever the benefit is applies to nova/keystone too :)13:30
* markmc takes a shortcut in answering13:30
ttxso for them, it makes sense...13:30
markmcttx, same goes for nova, for sure13:30
markmcttx, keystone less so, maybe - but there are some serious fixes that would be good to release13:30
ttxmarkmc: except vishy didn't ask you to cut a point release, yet :)13:30
Davieyso the priority is because they contain sec fixes?13:30
ttxThe difference with Horizon is that the PTL explicitely blessed the current state13:31
markmcttx, ok, I'll ask him to ask me13:31
markmcttx, I'm sure he'll oblige13:31
markmcok, look13:31
markmcpoint taken13:31
ttx(though I think he mentioned an extra fix that still needs to go in)13:31
markmc"talk to the PTLs"13:31
DavieyI assume vishy isn't around?13:32
ttxmarkmc: ok, so action is for you to talk to PTLs and see the remaining issues with 2012.1.1 tarballs resolved...13:32
markmcttx, yep13:32
ttxmarkmc: and then post your proposed plan to ML and see if it hurts anyone'sfeelings13:32
ttxmarkmc: and then go ahead and do it anyway.13:32
markmcttx, and create nova/glance 2012.1.1 milestone and target bugs to them13:33
*** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz13:33
ttxmarkmc: awesome13:33
markmcttx, and have the pending fixes in gerrit flushed13:33
ttxWould like to use a few minutes to talk about the ODS session outcomes and action plan13:33
markmcttx, and look back for serious issues which need to be backported13:33
ttxif we are clear with the way forward13:33
ttxAt ODS we discussed having separate stable-maint teams13:34
ttxopenstack-stable-maint focused on release -113:34
Davieymarkmc: Sorry, can i clarify.. You want to drive the work for this, or would you prefer it was split up a bit more?13:34
ttxDaviey: depends on the timing, which depends on PTL's reactions13:34
*** dwcramer has quit IRC13:34
ttxthen diablo-stable-maint team for anyone who cares about diablo (as long as anyone cares about diablo)13:35
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
DavieyOkay, because currently it feels like it will default to markmc.. which seems a little unfair to him.13:35
ttxwith some page that blesses those teams13:35
markmcDaviey, what would you like to help with? very happy for you to do so13:35
ttxold-series teams  can lose their blessing by being obnoxious to the security team13:35
ttxor if the PTL hates them13:36
Davieymarkmc: this is what i am trying to determine :)13:36
markmcDaviey, well, I listed my action items - which do you want to take off me?13:36
Davieymarkmc: splitting at task level, or project level.. i'm happy to do..  or just leave it all to you :)13:36
Davieymarkmc: Honestly, if you are happy doing it.. i won't rip anything off you, it just seemed unfair to you.13:36
ttxDaviey: markmc will need fast reviews on stable/* to complete his plan, that's one way to help, be on them quickly13:37
markmcyep, absolutely13:37
markmcgood point ttx13:37
markmcfast, but thorough :)13:37
ttxTalking from experience, relmgt is not a job that is easy to split13:37
ttxbut you need support from people to validate your reviews/choices13:37
ttxi.e. getting unblocked fast13:38
markmcso, the diablo-stable-maint team thing13:38
markmcttx, I guess I'm fine with the idea in principle13:38
ttxSo I'd say Mark handles 2012.1.1 but the rest of the team is on hands-on-deck ready to help him with reviews and stuff13:38
markmcttx, but not seeing enough in terms of volunteers etc. to be worth the effort of setting up the infrastructure13:38
DavieyI don't think there has been a call for volunteers, really.13:39
ttxright. My impression was that Dave & Canonical would maintain diablo for 18 months ?13:40
ttxand then anyone would be free to help them13:40
Davieyaggressively looking for trunk, or essex patches to backport interests me less for diablo.. but supporting specific issues targetted and reviewing others patches is more interesting (to me).13:40
Davieyttx: Yep13:41
markmcok, cool13:41
ttxmarkmc: it's a bit of chicken-and-egg. I think the team should be set13:41
DavieyI'm not expecting the need for a diablo point release.13:41
markmcif diablo-stable-maint is going to be Daviey and zul, that's cool13:41
ttxand we need some reference page to explain the status of maintenance for old releases13:41
ttxto set expectations right13:42
Davieyhello zul :)13:42
ttxi.e. if diablo-stable-maint team says they will just do security backports, I'm cool with that13:42
ttxbut that needs to be documented on a reference page13:42
Davieyand at least data loss.13:42
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting13:42
ttx sounds like a good pick13:42
ttxmarkmc: any issue with that plan ?13:43
ttxDaviey: does that reflect what you can do ?13:43
Davieybut generally, i want Ubuntu to be pushing patches into upstream, rather than carrying locally.. Which is why i'm keen on longevity whilst interest is in a branch13:43
Davieyttx: wfm13:43
markmcttx, yep, totally cool with Daviey and zul continuing diablo maintenance13:44
markmcttx, assuming the criteria for inclusion is the same as now, except maybe more constrained13:44
markmci.e. continues to be "safe source of fixes for high-impact issues"13:44
markmcbut that's my understanding of the plan13:45
markmcjust being clear13:45
markmcso, yeah - I'm cool13:45
Davieyyep, but also less aggression in seeking fixes to backport.. A per-issue basis13:45
markmcyep, cool13:45
ttxDaviey: agreed that the criteria for inclusion for series-specific stable teams has to be at least the stable-team rules ?13:45
Davieyat least13:45
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting13:45
ttxSubsidiary question: for security fixes13:46
*** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer13:46
ttxdoe sthat mean the security team can ping the diablo-stable-maint team to help with backport of security issues ?13:46
Davieytrack, support & help.. but only a maybe commitment on 'do'.13:46
Davieythat sounds a little weaker than i intended :)13:48
*** zvm-vlam has joined #openstack-meeting13:48
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting13:49
ttxDaviey: looks like the first task of  diablo-stable-maint will be to ensure we can merge stuff to stable/diablo again13:49
Davieyfor the 18 months since release, we will make sure security issues are addressed.13:49
Davieyttx: Are there issues you know of?13:49
ttxDaviey: put that in the description of diablo-stable-maint when you go to create it in LP13:50
Davieyttx: you want it documented here: ?13:50
ttxDaviey: I know there are security changes that are blocked13:50
DavieyOk, i'll dig into that.13:50
ttxDaviey: I want it to be documented on lp:~diablo-stable-maint13:50
Davieyok, cool13:50
ttxthen an announce on the ML, then i'll update Releases13:50
Davieyttx: Having said that, the structure allows other contributors to go further than i am able to commit to at the moment.13:51
ttxto designate the team as the keeper of Diablo.13:51
ttxDaviey: team description can change. That's just a description of the team's commitment13:51
Davieyok, winner13:51
ttxDaviey: action on you to set up team and announce it on ML13:52
ttxsee if anyone joins :)13:52
ttxmarkmc, Daviey: anything else ? Looks like we can followup through those actions using ML ?13:53
markmcttx, yep, sounds good13:53
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting13:53
markmcttx, you could do a bunch of #action for us could you?13:53
markmcjust so I don't forget what I said I'd do13:53
ttx#action markmc to talk to PTLs to discuss 2012.1.1 timeline13:54
ttx#action markmc to make sure versioning on stable/essex is 2012.1.1/Final=False13:55
ttx#action markmc to see that tarball posting job is fixed13:55
ttx#action markmc to follow-up on ML with proposed 2012.1.1 timeline13:55
ttx#action Daviey to set up lp:~diablo-stable-maint with commitments in the description13:56
ttx#action Daviey to announce ~diablo-stable-maint on ML to encourage joins13:56
*** dwalleck has quit IRC13:56
ttx#action ttx to rework wiki/Releases to reflect openstack-stable-maint and <series>-stable-maint commitments13:56
ttxall captured ?13:57
Davieymarkmc: You are happy with that weighting ?13:57
markmcsounds like a plan13:57
Davieyok, lets go home then \o/13:58
ttx#action Daviey/zul to be reactive to any reviews that markmc raises on stable/* over the next days :)13:58
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See for schedule and for meeting logs"13:58
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jun 14 13:58:36 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)13:58
openstackMinutes (text):
DavieyGood stuff.13:59
*** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
markmcttx, thanks for that13:59
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting14:04
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
*** oubiwann has quit IRC14:06
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting14:06
*** mdomsch has quit IRC14:07
*** markmc has left #openstack-meeting14:09
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting14:17
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting14:21
*** nikhil has joined #openstack-meeting14:25
*** primeministerp has quit IRC14:30
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting14:30
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC14:40
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting14:41
*** med_ is now known as medberry14:46
*** medberry is now known as med__14:46
*** med__ is now known as med_14:46
*** markmcclain has quit IRC14:48
*** PotHix has joined #openstack-meeting14:50
*** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting14:56
*** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk14:56
*** med_ is now known as med_out14:56
*** med_out is now known as med_away14:57
*** med_away is now known as med_14:57
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting14:58
*** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
*** mnaser has quit IRC15:19
*** mdomsch has joined #openstack-meeting15:20
*** reed has quit IRC15:21
*** pcrews has joined #openstack-meeting15:25
*** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting15:28
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting15:30
*** myz has quit IRC15:31
*** hazmat is now known as kapilt15:35
*** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting15:50
dacharynijaba: \o15:50
dacharydhellmann: o/15:50
dacharyjd___: \o/15:50
nijabadachary: dachary, jd: /o\15:50
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting15:52
*** ramjett has joined #openstack-meeting15:57
*** arosen2 has quit IRC15:57
*** arosen2 has joined #openstack-meeting15:57
*** garyk has quit IRC15:58
*** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
openstackMeeting started Thu Jun 14 16:00:06 2012 UTC.  The chair is nijaba. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.16:00
nijaba#chair nijaba dachary16:00
openstackCurrent chairs: dachary nijaba16:00
nijabaHello everyone!16:00
nijaba#topic actions from previous meetings16:00
*** openstack changes topic to "actions from previous meetings"16:00
nijaba#topic  dhellmann: submit plugin branch for review and merging16:00
*** openstack changes topic to "dhellmann: submit plugin branch for review and merging"16:00
nijabadhellmann: any news on this?16:01
*** flacoste has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
nijabaok, looks like doung went to get a coffee ;)16:02
* ttx lurks16:02
* dachary drinks coffee16:03
nijabawe'll get back to it in a moment16:03
nijaba#topic nijaba: to propose a google spreadsheet calculator to estimate volume of metering message (including nova, swift, cinder, quantum)16:03
*** openstack changes topic to "nijaba: to propose a google spreadsheet calculator to estimate volume of metering message (including nova, swift, cinder, quantum)"16:03
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
nijabaso here is what I came up with:16:03
dacharyI tried it and it worked for me.16:03
nijabadid not get that many comments about it16:03
dacharyAlso I agree with the assumption related to the size of the metadata payload.16:03
dacharyThat was my primary concern.16:04
* dhellmann sorry, noisy office today16:04
dacharyAlthough the size is large, I don't think it's out of proportion.16:04
nijabawell, to me it shows that being able to fine tune frequency could have a huge impact on vilume16:04
nijabavolume even16:04
*** Mike656 has joined #openstack-meeting16:05
dhellmannit also shows that we probably won't want to store everything long term, but aggregate the data16:05
nijabaso, should I link this gdoc in the blueprint?16:05
nijaba+1 (obviously)16:05
nijaba#action nijaba to point to the calculator in the blueprint16:06
nijaba#topic  dhellmann: submit plugin branch for review and merging16:06
*** openstack changes topic to "dhellmann: submit plugin branch for review and merging"16:06
dhellmannthat's done and merged16:06
nijabaok cool16:06
dhellmannwith the renaming (next action?)16:06
nijaba#topic dhellmann rename plugin to engine for storage backend ex-plugin-now-engine system16:07
*** openstack changes topic to "dhellmann rename plugin to engine for storage backend ex-plugin-now-engine system"16:07
nijabaso that's done too!16:07
dhellmannalso done16:07
nijaba#topic dhellmann: start mapping API queries to database engine methods16:07
*** openstack changes topic to "dhellmann: start mapping API queries to database engine methods"16:07
dhellmannI haven't made any progress on that. :-/16:07
dhellmannI plan to start this afternoon, after this meeting16:07
nijabashould we forward it to next week?16:07
dhellmannyes, please16:08
nijaba#action dhellmann: start mapping API queries to database engine methods16:08
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting16:08
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz16:08
nijaba#topic Discuss and hopefully agree on meter configuration mechanism16:08
*** openstack changes topic to "Discuss and hopefully agree on meter configuration mechanism"16:08
nijabathis was my latest proposal:16:08
nijabaany comments?16:08
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn16:09
dacharyI spent the day talking about puppet & mongodb and I'm convinced your proposal makes sense ;-)16:09
* dhellmann has not changed his mind about leaving this for the ops team to deal with16:09
dacharyIf mongodb left all for the ops to do, I'm sure they would have a really hard time.16:09
flacostedhellmann: that means leaving the configuration local to each agents and ops deals with that problem?16:09
flacostethat: pushing out and syncing changes16:10
dhellmannflacoste, right. put the config in a text file, like everything else, and use the same tool to push it out that we use for the other files16:10
nijabaflacoste: yes, that's what we discussed last week16:10
*** Mandell has quit IRC16:10
nijababut I am claiming that we are going to have data consistency issues16:10
dhellmannI won't block work on this, but it feels like the wrong thing to be focusing on right now16:10
*** bencherian has quit IRC16:10
flacostenijaba: i think dhellmann argument is that this is a sovled ops problem16:11
flacostewith tools like puppet and checf16:11
flacosteyou don't have syncing issue16:11
nijabadhellmann: would you agree to put it in our todo, and see if someone picks it up?16:11
flacostepuppet espeically will make sure that everything is synced16:11
nijabaflacoste: yes you do16:11
flacostenijaba: care to explain which syncing problems remain?16:12
dhellmannnijaba, that's fine, I guess16:12
flacosteassuming puppet is used?16:12
flacostei agree that if you aren't using puppet, you have a problem to solve16:12
nijabawell, experience shows that sometime classes are missused, and then you fall into a data consistency problem that cannot be reversed synced16:12
nijabaso I am advocating that we neeed to care where data consistency is crucial16:13
nijabaanyway, I propose that we put it in a todo list, and see if we can have someone eventuall do it16:14
dacharyflacoste: how do you broadcast a change to all agents using puppet so that they all agree at a given point in time ?16:14
dhellmannthere are lots of other parts of the config that have to be consistent in order for OS to work. message bus credentials, for example16:14
nijabadhellmann: yes, but this translate to immediate operational disfunction, not woopies that you discover in your next billing cycle16:14
nijabasay a month later16:15
flacostenijaba: using cast won't solve that problem fwiw16:15
dacharydhellmann: yes, and that's also true of any mongodb deployment. They *partly* rely on puppet / chef. And also communicate with each other to ensure a consistent setup. Such as voting in replica sets and what not.16:15
flacostenijaba: it offers no garantee on when all agents are going to update their config16:15
jd___and that's still hypothetical16:16
nijabaflacoste: ok, what would you recommend then?16:16
flacostefor now :-)16:16
dhellmanndachary: realtime voting on HA/failover feels like a different sort of problem than this16:16
flacostethe stringent requirement that all agents be synced at the same time is overkill i think16:16
flacostewho cares that there is 30s window where different agents have different configs?16:17
nijabaok.  shall we vote?16:17
flacosteif that's a must-have, your solution doesn't cut it16:17
dacharydhellmann: true. Think about the master / slave relationship between mysql servers. then. It does not go only in one way. The slave communicates with the master and vice versa. Both are deployed using puppet / chef. But if that was their *only* mean of ensuring configuration consistency, they would be in trouble.16:18
dhellmanndo we have a requirement that all agents be configured exactly the same way?16:18
nijabadhellmann: for the data to be useable, I would think so16:19
jd___dhellmann: not for now16:19
* dhellmann smiles16:19
nijabaVote on: shall we put meter configuration mechanism in our todo?16:19
flacosteyeah, i'd say that's too early to know16:19
jd___and if we have, maybe it's a problem about the accounting format16:19
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting16:19
nijaba#agreed push meter configuration to a future version16:20
dhellmannnijaba, maybe the thing to do next on this is to prepare a more detailed problem description and some requirements? maybe I'm just not seeing something...16:20
* nijaba wonders if he should use #agree or #agreed ?16:20
dhellmannthe bot instructions say agreed16:21
dhellmannalso, startvote appears to be a command16:21
nijabadhellmann: as flacoste said, let's wait until we see if there is a problem or not16:21
dhellmannnijaba: that works for me16:21
nijaba#agree push meter configuration to a future version16:21
* nijaba will use startvote next time :)16:22
nijaba#topic Discuss proposing ceilometer as an incubated project16:22
*** openstack changes topic to "Discuss proposing ceilometer as an incubated project"16:22
nijabaI asked ttx to lurk for this part16:22
nijabaas I think his advice could be usefull16:22
nijabaso we now have a good skeleton16:22
nijabaa defined architecture16:23
nijabais it the right time to propose our project for incubation in folsom?16:23
dacharyI think it is, indeed.16:23
dhellmannis there a document that describes what we need to do to have it considered?16:23
nijabattx: ^ I think you would be best placed to answer that one16:24
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting16:24
*** Mandell has quit IRC16:25
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
nijabadhellmann: IIRC, there is no other requirement than having something the tb can look at and send a formal request via the mailing list16:25
dhellmannFWIW, I agree we should try, I just want to make sure we've met the "qualifications" if there are any defined16:25
dhellmannok, well, I think we've got that :-)16:25
* nijaba thinks so too, thanks to you an jd___16:26
dhellmanndo we need to document more of the plans for future work?16:26
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
nijabawell, it woudl be a good idea in any case16:27
nijabaI guess ttx is doing something else16:27
nijabashould we vote?16:27
dacharyyes, please16:28
nijaba#startvote propose ceilometer as an incubated project16:28
*** danwent has quit IRC16:28
dhellmann#vote yes16:29
nijaba#agree  propose ceilometer as an incubated project16:30
nijaba#action nijaba to send a proposal to the mailing list16:30
nijaba#topic Prepare documentation and framework for plugin contributors16:30
*** openstack changes topic to "Prepare documentation and framework for plugin contributors"16:30
nijabaso, I think it is time that we lay the ground for plugin/agent contributor16:31
nijabaand this requires to have:16:31
nijabaa sample agent implementation16:31
nijabaand documentation16:31
nijabaI'll be happy to work on the doc16:31
nijababut I'll have to rely on someone to work on the sample16:31
dhellmannI can get us set up on readthedocs.org16:32
dhellmannwe could use the existing code as examples, couldn't we?16:32
ttxdocument. incubation, looking.16:32
nijabattx: can you read the backlog and tell what you think about incubation for ceilometer?16:32
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting16:33
nijabadhellmann: it would be nicer if we had a proper "sample/start you project here"16:33
dhellmannah, I see what you mean16:33
nijabaatm, you have to know where to look16:33
dhellmannI thought the existing code would be useful as a walk-through example because it actually does something16:33
dacharydhellmann: I agree.16:34
dhellmannoh, sure, we need to put it in the docs and write about it, I just meant instead of making up a "fake" simple example, use a real one16:34
nijabadhellmann: ok.  if you tell me which one to use, I'll start the doc if you want16:34
dacharyit might be enough to say : look at this one, it is well commented & up to date. Take a look at the tests, they are good and extensive.16:34
dhellmannwe need separate examples for each of the plugin types16:34
dhellmann#action dhellmann: look at existing plugins and pick one of each for examples in docs16:35
dhellmanndachary, we probably want to "freeze" the example so the text does not get out of date with the line numbers in the code16:35
dhellmannwe can copy a version into the doc tree for that purpose16:35
nijabaI'll pick up the doc action next week then :)16:35
dacharydhellmann: good idea indeed16:35
dhellmann#action dhellmann: email info on examples to nijaba16:36
nijaba#action nijaba to prime the doc once info received from dhellmann16:36
dhellmannwe should probably include an "ops" section, even though that will eventually move into the regular admin guides16:36
nijabashould we shortly move back to the incubation topic?16:37
dhellmannyes, let's get ttx's input on that16:37
ttxProject types =
nijaba#topic incubation16:37
*** openstack changes topic to "incubation"16:37
ttxthe form for incubation is...16:37
ttxsome pieces of it might be a bit outdated, but that's still official procedure :)16:38
nijabattx: so, do you have some gut feeling about readiness of ceilomet for application?16:38
dacharyttx: is there an example of a recently accepted application to get inspiration on the wording etc. ?16:39
nijabain other words, would you advice us to apply at this stage?16:39
ttxI think it's ready to be incubated. The main issue is whether it belongs to the scope of what we call "OpenStack"16:41
*** littleidea has quit IRC16:41
ttxI expect the discussion to revolve around that16:41
nijabaI personally would think so16:41
nijababut that's q good time to know16:41
ttxThe PPB is still in cahrge of that, until the foundation is finally set up16:41
flacostettx: what aspect of ceilometer is bringing that question?16:42
dacharyttx: why wouldn't it be in the scope of OpenStack ?16:42
dhellmanndo we need to put together an argument in favor?16:42
ttxso depending on whether you think you'll get more support from the future TC and Foundation board, or from the current PPB, it mught be a good idea to hold :)16:42
* nijaba has absolutely no idea why one woulld be more favorable than the other...16:42
ttxOpenStack is the basic blocks of IaaS. You can argue that metring is as critical vbase piece as .. say.. common auth16:42
nijabaIaaS without metering = crapware ;)16:43
ttxSo good luck :)16:43
nijabaso, anyone think we should hold?16:43
*** rohitk has joined #openstack-meeting16:43
dacharyttx: I see your point now.16:44
dhellmannif we're rejected now we can try again, right?16:44
*** sleepsonzzz is now known as sleepsonthefloor16:44
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting16:44
dacharynijaba: I think there are good arguments to advocate that ceilometer is an essential part of openstack. We should not hold, in my opinion.16:44
nijabawell, if the ppb says it is out of scope, then I think it will be tough for future TC to say otherwise16:44
dhellmannit's likely to be the same people, isn't it?16:45
nijababut I think now is a good time to test our arguments16:45
nijabanope, TC will be composed of the paying foundation menbers + some devs16:45
nijabawhile today it is only the project leads16:45
dhellmannwe should probably ask for supporting comments from some ops folks, too, to include in the proposal16:45
nijabadhellmann: would seem like a good idea16:46
ttxnijaba: no. TC is all elected16:46
dhellmannoh, I thought the TC was still going to be mostly project leads, but I haven't followed that too closely16:46
* nijaba also need to dig on that one16:46
ttxdhellmann: all elected, PTLs included.16:47
dhellmannok, so possibly different makeup16:47
nijabaanyway, I propose to revise my action to "prepare the application for review at the next meeting"16:47
ttxanyway, no way to tell if waiting increases your chances :)16:47
dhellmannnijaba, that sounds like a good adjustment16:47
dacharynijaba: ok16:47
*** JoseSwiftQE has joined #openstack-meeting16:48
dhellmannttx, has anyone made an argument that metering shouldn't be included?16:48
nijaba#action nijaba to prepare incubation application for review at the next meeting16:48
*** Carlos_Swift_QE has joined #openstack-meeting16:48
* nijaba bets no one has made an argument either way16:48
nijabashall we move on?16:48
dacharydhellmann: I think the strongest argument against would be "Why is it bad that ceilometer is not part of OpenStack ?".16:48
nijaba#topic Establish communication with swift/quantum/cinder on best points of interaction for our agents16:49
*** openstack changes topic to "Establish communication with swift/quantum/cinder on best points of interaction for our agents"16:49
*** reed has quit IRC16:49
dhellmanndachary, that's something to think about16:49
dhellmannnijaba, nova, too?16:49
nijabaso it seems that we need to start discussing with other projects how to best integrate with them16:49
ttxdachary: ++16:49
dacharyand that's probably be the best advocacy. If swift / quantum / nova etc. all agree on ceilometer one way or the other, it will become part of their roadmap.16:50
nijabaso, shall we divide the task among ouselves and join their next meetings to introduce ceilometer and what we would need?16:51
dacharynijaba: that's a good idea actually16:51
nijabaanyone care about some project in particular?16:51
dacharyI've not had much success in communicating with Dragon but I can try again. I've not been very persistent.16:52
nijabaI bet dhellmann does not care much for swift, for example16:52
dachary#action dachary talk to Dragon about SystemData / ceilometer and try to create cooperation16:52
dhellmannI think we're most interested in quantum at this point16:52
dhellmann(by "we're" I mean DreamHost)16:53
nijabafeel free to take the action then16:53
dhellmann#action dhellmann to talk to Quantum devs about integration with ceilometer16:53
nijabaflacoste: do you want to take one?16:53
flacostenijaba: i'd rather not for the moment tbh16:53
flacostei don't have relationships with any projects16:54
dacharynijaba: I'll take swift16:54
flacosteand hiring a new squad is keeping me real busy :-)16:54
nijabaok, I'll take cinder then16:54
dacharyunless someone else wants to ;-)16:54
nijabaflacoste: please concentrate on that, for sure!16:54
dachary#action dachary to talk to swift devs about integration with ceilometer16:54
nijaba#action nijaba to talk to cinder devs about integration with ceilometer16:55
nijabanova, anyone?16:55
dacharynijaba: that would be me (Dragon)16:55
dachary#action dachary talk to Dragon about SystemData / ceilometer and try to create cooperation (i.e. nova)16:55
dhellmanndachary, I think I'm going to end up working on a patch to add more details to notification messages coming from nova16:56
nijabaok, so the missing one is glance then16:56
nijabaI can take it if noone wants it16:56
jd___i'll do16:56
nijabathanks jd!16:57
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting16:57
nijaba#topic Status of the essex compatibility effort that jd is leading16:57
*** openstack changes topic to "Status of the essex compatibility effort that jd is leading"16:57
dacharydhellmann: I'll submit messages to you for approval before actually sending them. Review is good.16:57
nijabajd___: 2 minutes left if you want to give us some update16:57
dhellmanndachary, sounds good. I thought you might want to mention that we're willing to contribute code, not just asking for them to do stuff. :-)16:58
dacharydhellmann: good idea indeed. The code you wrote will be our best ambassador ;-)16:58
jd___I've send review requests to os-infra to have some tests automated on essex, and waiting for approval16:58
nijabadhellmann: ++16:58
*** matwood_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:58
nijabajd___: great.  so we should go do some reviews?16:59
nijabajd___: any blockers found?16:59
jd___it's at FYI16:59
dhellmannI'll take a look after lunch and give a +116:59
nijaba#action jd___ to talk to glance devs about integration with ceilometer17:00
jd___so far the tests passes, so it's good, it should work for essex for most (tested) parts17:00
jd___I know that the daemon won't actually run but we don't have test for that so far :)17:00
dacharythank's all !17:00
nijabaneat!!!  I think we should keep that topic for next weel, as we are out of time...17:00
nijabathanks all!17:00
*** matwood has quit IRC17:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See for schedule and for meeting logs"17:00
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jun 14 17:00:51 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)17:00
openstackMinutes (text):
flacostethanks nijaba17:01
*** markmcclain has left #openstack-meeting17:01
*** matwood_ has quit IRC17:03
*** dwalleck has quit IRC17:04
*** donaldngo has joined #openstack-meeting17:06
*** donaldngo has quit IRC17:06
*** donaldngo has joined #openstack-meeting17:07
*** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting17:08
*** jsavak has joined #openstack-meeting17:09
*** joesavak has quit IRC17:10
*** sam_rackspace has joined #openstack-meeting17:11
*** joearnol_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:12
*** Carlos_Swift_QE has quit IRC17:12
*** joearnold has quit IRC17:13
*** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting17:13
*** jsavak has quit IRC17:13
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting17:14
dwalleckugh, sorry, running late17:14
davidkranzdwalleck: I don't think Jay is going to make it.17:14
dwalleckYup, neither is Ravi....17:14
davidkranzdwalleck: There were a couple of issues where Sam said he would follow up with you last week.17:15
dwalleckyeah, we followed up the resource management stuff a bit17:15
davidkranzdwalleck: Should we officially start the meeting or cancel?17:16
dwalleckDo you have anything you want to bring up? I've been slammed so I won't be able to get around to reviews or additions till this weekend17:17
davidkranzdwalleck: I guess we should cancel then.17:17
dwalleckSure, sounds good. I have a few emails I need to send out later. We can gather up again in G+ if there's anything pressing17:18
davidkranzOK, so be it.17:18
dwalleckI think I should have some much more substantial stuff to talk about by next week17:19
sam_rackspacesounds good. I've been buried as well and haven't had anytime to move much forward17:19
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting17:19
sam_rackspaceother than the follow up conversation I had with Daryl last week. :-)17:19
dwalleckOkay, everyone have 40 minutes of your day back :)17:19
*** donaldngo has quit IRC17:19
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting17:20
jaypipes\o/ u-verse back online..17:20
*** sam_rackspace has quit IRC17:20
*** rohitk has quit IRC17:20
dwalleckman! We almost made it =P17:20
jaypipesanybody wanna recap me?17:21
dwalleckI was late17:21
*** sam_rackspace has joined #openstack-meeting17:21
dwalleckI blame Sam17:21
*** oubiwann has quit IRC17:21
dwalleckSo we haven't talked about anything yet. Didn't seem like we had enough people to talk about anything then17:21
dwalleckAnd now here comes people =P17:22
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting17:22
jaypipesah, cool.17:22
dwalleckSo meeting back on then?17:22
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting17:23
jaypipesdwalleck: good with me.17:23
jaypipesalright, where is our agenda?17:24
dwalleckDown at the pub? :D17:24
dwalleckThis was Ravi's week, I'd have to look it up17:24
dwalleckAhh, here we go17:24
openstackMeeting started Thu Jun 14 17:25:00 2012 UTC.  The chair is dwalleck. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.17:25
dwalleck#topic Status of Swift tests17:25
*** openstack changes topic to "Status of Swift tests"17:25
dwalleckJoseSwiftQE: ?17:25
JoseSwiftQEJust uploaded the pep8 fixes.17:25
JoseSwiftQEthat was silly of me to miss that, but it's all fixed now.17:25
dwalleckI haven't had a change re-review anything you've put in this week17:25
*** Carlos_Swift_QE has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
JoseSwiftQEOnce they're in, I plan on making smaller more frequent commits to get more features and tests in.17:26
*** markmcclain has quit IRC17:26
dwalleckOkay, good deal. I'll try to take a look today. I think we're getting close...17:26
jaypipesJoseSwiftQE: k, I will test it locally. thx!17:26
jaypipeslooks like ravi forgot to update the agenda link... the one I posted above is from a while ago.17:27
dwalleck#topic Status of parallelization17:27
*** openstack changes topic to "Status of parallelization"17:27
jaypipesoooh, me plese17:27
dwalleckI've got his email that I'm reading from17:27
dwalleckgo, because I know I've been swamped and haven't been able to jump in =P17:28
jaypipescan I describe the strategy I discussed with you and davidkranz yesterday?17:28
jaypipesok, cool.17:28
JoseSwiftQEjaypipes:  side question for you.  Somehow the author got set to David Kranz on my commit, and I can't fix it.  I'm a bit of a git newb, but even git commit --amend --autho=me isn't working :\17:28
*** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting17:28
jaypipesJoseSwiftQE: that's likely a bug in gerrit.. just iignore.17:28
jaypipesfor now. being worked on.17:28
jaypipesOK, so the strategy I described for parallelizing the tests (easily) was to make some adaptations to the base test case classes that would create a user/tenant for each test case object17:29
*** mnaser has quit IRC17:29
jaypipesthis would get us past the big issue with currently rtunning with --processes=N, which is running out of quotas...17:29
dwalleckyup yup17:30
jaypipesI am going to be working on this today and tomorrow. Should have a patch up that shows the code so we can discuss17:30
dwalleckand isolates testing well also17:30
jaypipesdo we have any HPers on the channel? I'd like to discuss the negative/fuzz testing.17:30
jaypipesnijaba: around?17:31
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting17:31
davidkranzOh. I see we reconvened.17:31
jaypipesI don't see any other HPers...17:31
pcrewsjaypipes: I'm lurking, but haven't dug too deep into randgen applications for that stuff yet (next week)17:31
nijabajaypipes: o/17:31
jaypipesnijaba: any other HPers? we'd like to discuss strategy with the negative tests and also how bugs are being used for tracking these tests17:32
*** dhellmann has quit IRC17:32
jaypipespcrews: k, no worries.17:32
jaypipesnijaba: if you want, you can say "I'd rather see an email about this to the ML first, discuss on ML, and I will have HPers at the next meeting to disucss" :)17:32
nijabajaypipes: HPers?  not sure I follow you?17:32
jaypipesnijaba: ah, sorry, I thought you worked at HP in Ravi's group!@17:33
jaypipessorry about that!17:33
nijabajaypipes: nope, still working fro canonical ;)17:33
jaypipesdoh, you're nic barcet.17:33
nijabano worries ;)17:33
jaypipesOK, so it looks like there aren't any other HPers...17:33
*** ayoung has quit IRC17:34
jaypipesdavidkranz, dwalleck: I will write up an email with discussion points about changing the tracking of these things in our bug list and in slowing down pace of these negative test17:34
dwallecksounds good17:34
davidkranzjaypipes: Thanks.17:34
jaypipeswhat;'s the next topic?17:34
dwalleck...I think this is all copied from last week17:35
davidkranzHow about : Expectations of Tempest execution time17:35
dwalleckWe can do that17:35
dwalleck#topic Tempest execution time17:36
*** openstack changes topic to "Tempest execution time"17:36
jaypipesI believe *smoke* tests should take no longer than 10 minutes to complete.17:36
davidkranzI think there are three cases: 1) gating job 2) Good tempest run 3) complete regression test17:36
jaypipesthat would be 600 seconds, or approximately 40% of the current runtime.17:37
davidkranzjaypipes: Does smoketest == gating job?17:37
dwalleckI could see even 15, but 10 would very nice17:37
jaypipesdavidkranz: it should be the *first* gating job, yes. if the core projects decide they would like the complete regresion test to gate after some time, cool with me.17:37
jaypipesdavidkranz: the idea being we should have a hierarchical, waterfall-type gate job, with the smoke tests being the first gate and finer-grained tests run only after successful completion of smoke tests17:38
sam_rackspace+1 for David's opinion17:38
jaypipesdavidkranz: which opinoin is that? :)17:38
sam_rackspaceAs in I agree that a smoke is gate number 1 and the most important/required :-)17:39
davidkranzjaypipes: I wasnt' sure if there was a jenkins-determined time that we need to stay under to be a good citizen of gating jobs.17:39
jaypipesdavidkranz: lol, I think we've blown up our "being a good citizen Karma" with our Ci overlords ;)17:40
sam_rackspaceand then a waterfall-type gating process/job to suit needs, but the smoke tests have to run before any given build is even considered testable/useable.17:40
jaypipesright, jeblair? :)17:40
jaypipessam_rackspace: yup, 100%17:40
dwalleckIf there is, that's something we probably need to keep in mind17:40
jaypipesdwalleck: my idea is to break the current job (which executes everything) into a series of dependent jobs.17:40
davidkranzOur tools to reduce the time are parallelize, only create servers when necessary, reduce smoke cases.17:41
jaypipesdwalleck: that way we will have finer-grained control of test runs and what the core projects want to prevent a merge with a failure17:41
jaypipesdavidkranz: ++17:41
jaypipesdavidkranz: no, +10017:41
dwalleckjaypipes: ++17:41
davidkranzI can take a look at the server creation and try to trim it down if no one else is doing that.17:42
dwalleckI see what you're saying, that makes sense.17:42
jaypipesdavidkranz: OK, if I work on the parallel execution today, can either you or dwalleck work on identifying precisely which tests are decorated as smoke, but arenty'?17:42
jaypipesdavidkranz: ++17:42
jaypipesdavidkranz: smaller commits, the better...17:42
jaypipesdavidkranz: it makes merge hell easir.17:42
davidkranzjaypipes: Sure.17:43
dwalleckI can take a pass at it17:43
*** ramjett has left #openstack-meeting17:43
davidkranzOK, so Jay:parallelize, Daryl: smoke accuracy, David: server creation overhead?17:43
jaypipeskk, I say we get to work then...17:44
davidkranzAs we have discussed, when a new server is needed is somewhat of a judgement call so we can iron that out in reviews of code submissions.17:44
dwalleckjaypipes: ++ O17:45
jaypipesdavidkranz: My rule of thumb: if a server needs to be restarted, rebooted, updated metadata, snapshotted, or modified in any way, the server needs to be created and destroyed in the test method. If not, it can be added as a class-level shared instance.17:45
dwalleckI'll make a first pass through and put it up for a review17:45
davidkranzSounds good.17:46
jaypipesalrighty. sounds like a plan.17:46
* jaypipes eager to get to work..17:46
davidkranzSo long then...17:46
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See for schedule and for meeting logs"17:46
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jun 14 17:46:27 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)17:46
openstackMinutes (text):
*** dwalleck has quit IRC17:46
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC17:47
*** pcrews has left #openstack-meeting17:48
*** sam_rackspace has quit IRC17:48
*** mnaser has quit IRC17:50
*** darraghb has quit IRC17:50
*** danwent has quit IRC17:52
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting17:53
*** mnaser has quit IRC17:53
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting17:53
*** mnaser has quit IRC18:02
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
*** joesavak has quit IRC18:09
*** mnaser has quit IRC18:10
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting18:13
*** mnaser has quit IRC18:13
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting18:13
*** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting18:14
*** mnaser has quit IRC18:18
*** sleepsonthefloor is now known as sleepsonzzz18:18
*** dachary has quit IRC18:20
*** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting18:20
*** JoseSwiftQE has left #openstack-meeting18:21
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting18:21
*** Carlos_Swift_QE has quit IRC18:27
*** sleepsonzzz is now known as sleepsonthefloor18:30
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting18:31
*** Gordonz has quit IRC18:31
*** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting18:32
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting18:42
*** kapilt is now known as hazmat18:46
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting18:55
*** mnaser has quit IRC18:56
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting18:56
*** dprince has quit IRC18:56
*** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting18:57
*** jaypipes has quit IRC19:00
*** Mandell has quit IRC19:00
*** dwcramer has quit IRC19:03
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting19:05
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting19:14
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting19:15
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting19:15
*** dachary has left #openstack-meeting19:16
*** matwood has quit IRC19:16
*** mattray has quit IRC19:17
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC19:17
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting19:18
*** s0mik has quit IRC19:27
*** flacoste has left #openstack-meeting19:33
*** sleepsonthefloor is now known as sleepsonzzz19:38
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC19:46
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting19:47
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting19:49
*** sleepsonzzz is now known as sleepsonthefloor19:51
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting19:51
*** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting19:52
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting19:54
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting20:01
*** joesavak has quit IRC20:04
*** mattray1 has joined #openstack-meeting20:05
*** mattray has quit IRC20:07
*** rnirmal has quit IRC20:12
*** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:12
*** dolphm has quit IRC20:15
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC20:15
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC20:15
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting20:15
*** dwcramer has quit IRC20:16
*** Mandell has quit IRC20:21
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting20:21
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting20:28
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz20:29
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting20:30
*** sriramhere has joined #openstack-meeting20:33
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting20:59
*** markvoelker has quit IRC21:01
*** ayoung has quit IRC21:02
*** Mike656_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:10
*** Mike656 has quit IRC21:10
*** gyee has quit IRC21:11
*** mnaser has quit IRC21:11
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn21:12
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting21:12
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting21:16
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz21:19
*** dhellmann has quit IRC21:21
*** oubiwann has quit IRC21:22
*** littleidea has quit IRC21:23
*** markmcclain has quit IRC21:23
*** joearnol_ has quit IRC21:27
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting21:34
*** joearnold has quit IRC21:34
*** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting21:40
*** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov21:46
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz21:47
*** dprince has quit IRC21:50
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting21:54
*** joearnold has quit IRC22:04
*** somik has joined #openstack-meeting22:04
*** Gordonz has quit IRC22:06
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting22:10
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting22:13
*** mdomsch has quit IRC22:19
*** Mike656_ has left #openstack-meeting22:21
*** Mandell_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:21
*** Mandell has quit IRC22:24
*** Mandell_ has quit IRC22:28
*** mnaser has quit IRC22:28
*** krtaylor has quit IRC22:31
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting22:36
*** joearnold has quit IRC22:39
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting22:40
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting22:48
*** mestery has joined #openstack-meeting22:48
*** sleepsonthefloor is now known as sleepsonzzz22:51
*** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz22:55
*** sriramhere has quit IRC23:03
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting23:04
*** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer23:06
*** danwent has quit IRC23:07
*** markmcclain has quit IRC23:10
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting23:14
*** blamar has quit IRC23:19
*** dwcramer has quit IRC23:29
*** dolphm has quit IRC23:30
*** johnpostlethwait has quit IRC23:38
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting23:38
*** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting23:41
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz23:41
*** markmcclain has quit IRC23:45
*** mikal has quit IRC23:45
*** littleidea has quit IRC23:46
*** matwood has quit IRC23:54
*** danwent has quit IRC23:56
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting23:56

Generated by 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!