Friday, 2018-08-03

*** liuyulong has quit IRC00:08
*** tonyb has quit IRC00:16
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:28
*** samP has quit IRC00:28
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC00:36
*** gyee has quit IRC00:36
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-meeting00:37
*** edmondsw has quit IRC00:42
*** longkb has joined #openstack-meeting00:49
*** ricolin has quit IRC01:27
*** mriedem_afk has quit IRC01:34
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:36
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-meeting01:44
*** ekcs has quit IRC01:47
*** dtrainor has quit IRC01:54
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting02:01
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC02:04
*** yamamoto has quit IRC02:12
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting02:18
*** tonyb has joined #openstack-meeting02:22
*** akhil_jain has joined #openstack-meeting02:23
*** yamamoto has quit IRC02:23
*** _alastor_ has quit IRC02:25
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-meeting02:25
*** ekcs has joined #openstack-meeting02:27
*** edmondsw has quit IRC02:30
ekcs#startmeeting congressteammeeting02:31
openstackMeeting started Fri Aug  3 02:31:33 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ekcs. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.02:31
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'congressteammeeting'02:31
ekcshello all. topics list kept here as usual. feel free to add your topics.
akhil_jainekcs: hi!02:32
ekcshi akhil_jain ! how’s it been?02:32
akhil_jaineverything good. what about you?02:34
ekcsnot too bad!02:34
*** psachin has joined #openstack-meeting02:34
ekcsok let’s get started then.02:35
ekcs#topic RC102:35
ekcsreminder again that RC1 is due next week. ideally it’s what we expect to be final release.02:36
ekcsi’m focusing on testing and bug fixing.02:37
ekcsdocs may need some attention too.02:37
ekcsany comments on RC1?02:38
akhil_jainnot from my side02:39
ekcs#topic patches02:41
ekcsany patches we discuss or bring attention to?02:41
ekcshere’s a few I wanted to bring attention to02:42
ekcsI see that akhil_jain you already reviewed a couple of them.02:43
akhil_jainyes looking into third. i think i encountered with third. there was some traceback from netron in logs02:45
akhil_jaini will try with your patch02:45
ekcsgreat thanks!02:46
ekcsanything else we want to talk about today?02:47
akhil_jainnothing from my side02:47
ekcsalright then! keep free to ping me if there’s anything to discuss.02:48
ekcslet’s wrap up then.02:49
ekcshappy friday and have a great weekend!02:50
akhil_jainBye, same to you02:50
ekcs= )02:51
openstackMeeting ended Fri Aug  3 02:51:44 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)02:51
openstackMinutes (text):
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting03:03
*** yamamoto has quit IRC03:11
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting03:37
*** yamamoto has quit IRC03:41
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting03:43
*** hongbin has quit IRC03:52
*** yamamoto has quit IRC04:02
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting04:03
*** yamamoto has quit IRC04:14
*** sridharg has joined #openstack-meeting04:17
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting04:28
*** liuyulong has joined #openstack-meeting04:32
*** ricolin has joined #openstack-meeting04:33
*** yamamoto has quit IRC04:38
*** dklyle has quit IRC04:39
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting04:43
*** yamamoto has quit IRC04:47
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:55
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting04:56
*** yamamoto has quit IRC04:58
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC05:02
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:08
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC05:10
*** tetsuro__ has joined #openstack-meeting05:10
*** ykatabam has quit IRC05:11
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting05:12
*** ekcs has quit IRC05:21
*** janki has joined #openstack-meeting05:44
*** tetsuro__ has quit IRC05:46
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:49
*** apetrich has joined #openstack-meeting05:57
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC05:57
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting06:03
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting06:07
*** yamamoto has quit IRC06:09
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC06:10
*** akhil_jain has quit IRC06:22
*** sridharg has quit IRC06:22
*** gibi is now known as giblet06:25
*** chason has quit IRC06:32
*** chason[m] has quit IRC06:32
*** jesusaur has quit IRC06:40
*** chason has joined #openstack-meeting06:43
*** jesusaur has joined #openstack-meeting06:45
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting06:52
*** rcernin has quit IRC06:54
*** chason has quit IRC07:01
*** chason has joined #openstack-meeting07:02
*** longkb has quit IRC07:03
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC07:03
*** kaisers has quit IRC07:03
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:04
*** ykatabam has quit IRC07:05
*** chason has quit IRC07:08
*** longkb has joined #openstack-meeting07:17
*** longkb has quit IRC07:31
*** longkb has joined #openstack-meeting07:35
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC07:41
*** chason has joined #openstack-meeting07:44
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:44
*** tetsuro__ has joined #openstack-meeting07:54
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC07:55
*** tommylikehu is now known as tommylikehu208:02
*** tommylikehu2 is now known as tommylikehu08:03
*** tommylikehu is now known as tommylikehu_afk08:04
*** tetsuro__ has quit IRC08:07
*** tommylikehu_afk is now known as tommylikehu08:09
*** dkrol has quit IRC08:22
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting08:23
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:27
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC08:40
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:41
*** electrofelix has joined #openstack-meeting08:49
*** sambetts_ is now known as sambetts09:03
*** chason has quit IRC09:10
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC09:11
*** chason has joined #openstack-meeting09:28
*** tetsuro_ has quit IRC09:31
*** liuyulong has quit IRC09:43
*** chason has quit IRC10:06
*** chason has joined #openstack-meeting10:07
*** chason has quit IRC10:12
*** hyunsikyang has quit IRC10:35
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting11:01
*** e0ne has quit IRC11:01
*** dtrainor has joined #openstack-meeting11:02
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting11:02
*** e0ne has quit IRC11:02
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC11:07
*** tssurya has joined #openstack-meeting11:17
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting11:17
*** e0ne has quit IRC11:17
*** tpsilva has joined #openstack-meeting11:48
*** abishop has joined #openstack-meeting11:52
*** _pewp_ has quit IRC12:03
*** _pewp_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:04
*** hemna_ has quit IRC12:04
*** hemna_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:15
*** longkb has quit IRC12:38
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-meeting12:39
*** efried is now known as fried_rice12:48
*** rfolco|off is now known as rfolco|ruck12:52
*** edmondsw_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:00
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting13:07
*** vgreen has joined #openstack-meeting13:07
*** dustins has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
*** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk13:25
*** lbragstad has quit IRC13:26
*** stephenfin is now known as finucannot13:28
*** psachin has quit IRC13:33
*** awaugama has joined #openstack-meeting13:45
*** jaypipes is now known as leakypipes13:46
*** antosh has joined #openstack-meeting13:47
*** bnemec is now known as beekneemech13:51
*** manjeets_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** SridarK has joined #openstack-meeting13:56
*** longkb has joined #openstack-meeting13:57
*** yushiro4 has joined #openstack-meeting13:57
*** mlavalle has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
mlavalle#startmeeting neutron_drivers13:59
openstackMeeting started Fri Aug  3 13:59:48 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mlavalle. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.13:59
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers'13:59
mlavalleI think I jumped the gun by a few seconds14:00
mlavalleoh well14:00
*** yushiro4 is now known as yushiro14:01
SridarKHi All14:01
mlavallehi longkb, yushiro, SridarK. Welcome!14:01
haleybmlavalle: i am in another simultaneous meeting, but will keep one eye open here14:01
mlavallehaleyb: ack14:01
yushiromlavalle, Hi :)14:02
mlavallelet's wait a couple of minutes to see if amotoki or yamamoto join the meeting14:02
longkbThanks mlavalle14:02
yushirohaleyb, Hi, long time no see since Denver :)14:03
haleybyushiro: yes, and i will be there in September, hope to see you there14:03
yushirohaleyb, me tooooooo :p  I'm glad to hear that.14:04
mlavalleok, let's get going14:04
mlavalle#topic Rocky rc114:04
*** SridarK has quit IRC14:05
mlavalleSo we have landed all the code in Neutron that we targeted for the rc114:06
mlavalleas a consequence, we are almost ready to cut rc1. however, we are still waiting to see what happens with the patches for the logging feature in FWaaS14:07
*** alex_xu has quit IRC14:08
mlavalleThat is why I invited today longkb, yushiro and SridarK, so we can assess where we stand14:08
*** edmondsw_ is now known as edmondsw14:08
yushiromlavalle, OK.  Thanks for inviting us.14:08
njohnstonwelcome FWaaS friends!14:08
longkbThanks a lot! mlavalle :)14:08
yushironjohnston, Yeeees :)14:08
mlavalleso where do we stand? do you have a pointer to the patches in question?14:09
yushiromlavalle,  We're reviewing following 8 patches in fwaas for logging.14:09
yushiroThese patches depended on neutron patches and need to wait until these are merged. So, now these patches pass zuul checking and restart reviewing.14:10
*** SridarK has joined #openstack-meeting14:11
mlavalleare they passing zuul tests consistently?14:11
SridarKsorry irc issues14:11
yushiromlavalle, yes, currently they passed. (Now some patches are waiting zuul reply)14:12
longkbIt seems 3 of them have already passed zuul consistently14:12
yushiromlavalle, Therefore, would it be possoble to wait for keep on reviewing for fwaas patches ??14:13
longkbRPC and validator patches are waiting for zuul testing :)14:13
mlavalleLook, I already granted the FFE to this and I am not going to widthdraw it while you are fighting hard to land the feature14:13
SridarKmlavalle: thx14:14
longkbThat sounds greate! mlavalle14:14
mlavallewe have until next week to cut rc1. So no need to cut this effort prematurely14:15
yushiromlavalle, Thank you so much.14:15
mlavalleHaving said that, I want to remind everybody that we all have the duty with the community to deliver solid software14:15
mlavalleit is starting to look tight to me14:16
*** armstrong has joined #openstack-meeting14:16
SridarKmlavalle: what would be a drop dead deadline - so there is some buffer so we are comfortable with more testing14:17
mlavalleso let's continue the effort but I urge all the team members to keep a balanced assesment on whether we should deliver this or not14:17
mlavalleLet's give ourselves until Wednesday of next week to decide whether we go forward with this or we pull the plug14:18
SridarKmlavalle: thats very reasonable thx14:19
yushiroNext Wednesday,  I see.  Thanks mlavalle.14:19
mlavalleThat means Wednesday end of day USA time14:19
longkbThanks mlavalle :)14:19
yushiromlavalle, OK, i'll check JST time :)14:19
mlavallewhich translates to early morning in East Asia14:20
mlavalleThursday morning14:20
yushiromlavalle, Aha.  Thanks.14:20
mlavallehow about we all meet again on Thursday at 0200UTC?14:21
mlavalleSridarK: that is going to be 2100 my time and 1900 your time on Wednesday14:22
SridarKmlavalle: perfect thx14:22
SridarKthat is east Asia friendly as well14:22
mlavalleyushiro, longkb: what time is that in Japan and Vietnam?14:23
yushiromlavalle, Yes, I definitely join.  It's 11:00 JST and 09:00 VST.14:23
longkb+1 yushiro :D It's reasonable for us14:23
mlavalleso yeah, perfectly friendly for our East Asia friends14:23
*** manjeets__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:23
mlavallewe will meet in the #opentask-fwaas channel. does that work?14:24
njohnston+1 for #openstack-fwaas14:24
yushiromlavalle, It's very very helpful and friendly for us.  OK, no problem to meet at #openstack-fwaas14:24
mlavalleok, I'll be keeping an eye on those patches over the next few days14:25
mlavallegood luck! I'll keep my fingers crossed in one hand....14:25
mlavalleand the az in the other one ;-)14:25
SridarKmlavalle: i had one more issue to bring up after we are done on this14:25
*** annp has joined #openstack-meeting14:25
mlavalleSridarK: go ahead please14:26
SridarKWe had a bug for which we are trying to get a fix in14:26
openstackLaunchpad bug 1762454 in neutron "FWaaS: Invalid port error on associating ports (distributed router) to firewall group" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Yushiro FURUKAWA (y-furukawa-2)14:26
*** manjeets_ has quit IRC14:26
yushiroYes, thank you SridarK.14:27
SridarKyushiro: has a review out14:27
SridarKmlavalle: just want to keep that on ur radar14:28
*** artom has joined #openstack-meeting14:28
*** janki has quit IRC14:28
mlavalleSridarK: ok, I'll keep an eye on it14:28
SridarKthe fix as such is quite simple on validation, the concern is on datapath behavior on HA with switchover14:28
SridarKhave asked haleyb for comments on the patch as well14:29
SridarKso hopefully quite straightfwd once we get clarifications and also on testing yushiro is doing14:29
SridarKthats all from me14:29
mlavalleyeah, I see haleyb is involved. I'll take a look and see if I can help14:30
*** antosh has quit IRC14:30
SridarKmlavalle: perfect thx much14:30
yushiroNow, I'm testing this patch and associating firewall with HA router port.  We'd like to verify correct behavior when the router switchovered regarding conntrack.14:30
yushiros/firewall/firewall group14:30
SridarKmlavalle: if u look at my last review comment14:31
yushiromlavalle, haleyb i'll paste on gerrit for etherpad link for the result of testing.14:31
SridarKyushiro: +114:31
mlavalleSridarK: yes, that makes sense14:31
mlavalleyushiro: yes, that will be helpful14:31
mlavalleyushiro, longkb, SridarK: thanks for your hard work. Your efforts are much appreciated :-)14:32
SridarKmlavalle: no worries - mainly yushiro longkb & annp on the logging feature - great work14:33
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-meeting14:33
mlavalleThanks for the update14:33
yushiromlavalle, SridarK Me too.  Thanks for managing our community and helping :)14:33
SridarKyushiro: +1 cant say more for mlavalle14:34
annpSridarK, mlavalle: Thank you, too :)14:34
yushiro+Inf for neutron :)14:34
mlavallehaleyb: I don't think we have qurum for the RFEs portion of this meeting. so you can focus on your other meeting ;-)14:34
mlavalleTHanks guys14:35
* njohnston is just glad we all managed to get authenticated and past the spambot blockers14:35
haleybmlavalle: it just ended14:35
mlavallehaleyb: LOL14:35
mlavalleguys, let's tal on Wednesday14:35
mlavallehaleyb, njohnston, manjeets: although you are welcome, no need for you to aattend the Wednesday meeting. I can handle that14:36
mlavallenot very convenient time for US based folks14:36
manjeets__I'll try Im scheduled to be on a flight, I'll double check14:36
openstackMeeting ended Fri Aug  3 14:36:44 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)14:36
openstackMinutes (text):
SridarKbye all14:36
manjeets__thank you14:36
annpthanks all, bye14:37
longkbthank you all :)14:37
*** annp has quit IRC14:37
*** manjeets__ has quit IRC14:37
*** mriedem_afk is now known as mriedem14:43
*** janki has joined #openstack-meeting14:51
*** rpioso|afk is now known as rpioso14:55
*** longkb has quit IRC14:57
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting14:57
smcginnis#startmeeting releaseteam15:00
openstackMeeting started Fri Aug  3 15:00:39 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is smcginnis. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam'15:00
* fungi was just about to ask15:00
smcginnisWord on the street is ping lists look like spam and you get kicked, so I'm not going to do that.15:01
fungismart man15:01
dhellmannoh, that's new15:01
smcginnis#link Agenda, currently line 42715:01
smcginnisLooks like all the usual suspects are here, so that's good.15:02
smcginnis#topic Release status update15:02
*** yushiro has left #openstack-meeting15:02
fungiduring freenode spam floods their spam detecting bot we invite into a lot of official channels gets cranky when it sees someone mention lots of other nicks from the same channel15:02
ttxI did dump a bit there15:02
smcginnisttx: Did you just run that missing client release list today?15:02
ttxyes this morning15:03
ttxSo Libraries are all set15:03
smcginnisGreat, then that should be up to date.15:03
ttxClient libraries, a bunch are missing, the others are waiting for a stable branch15:03
ttxI suspect we have a decision to take there15:03
*** antosh has joined #openstack-meeting15:04
smcginnisI have a process.rst change queued to tweak how we approach those stable branches based on experiences this week and a quick conversation with dhellmann.15:04
smcginnisSo look for that and see if it makes sense to you.15:04
smcginnisdhellmann: Are you looking at outstanding commits on those?15:04
dhellmannsmcginnis : yeah15:05
dhellmannlet me see if I can pull that into a single report15:05
smcginnis"rewrite of the client" sounds kind of significant.15:05
ttxshould we trigger releases for those ?15:05
smcginnisI think so.15:05
smcginnisWe can send out a reminder that that is our policy.15:05
ttxand do it Monday15:05
dhellmannyeah, they rewrote that whole client to use cliff15:06
smcginnisOr send out a notification that said policy has been enforced and do it now.15:06
ttxFridays are bad15:06
smcginnisYeah, that's my thinking too.15:06
smcginnisdhellmann: Thanks15:06
ttxBut I'll be off and oblivious of IRC so your call :)15:06
smcginnisI'll send something to the ML after the meeting listing these and explaining the plan. Then Monday we can enforce it.15:07
armstrong@ttx: why are Fridays bad?15:07
ttxSkipping the Client libraries missing stable branch since you seem to have it under control15:07
ttxarmstrong: potentially gets in the way of enjoying your week end15:08
ttxServices missing milestone 3...15:08
armstrong@ttx: haha ok got it now15:08
smcginnisCinder missed?15:08
ttxlooks like it15:08
smcginnisDang. I'll have to berate jungleboyj later.15:09
dhellmannI would be afraid to guess at a version number for cloudkittyclient15:09
jungleboyjWhat did I do wrong?15:09
smcginnisMissed milestone-3 release for cinder.15:09
ttxDo we need to force those ?15:09
jungleboyjOy.  Totally forgot that with everything else going on.  I am sorry.15:10
smcginnisdhellmann: I think it would have to be a major version bump based on the changes there.15:10
jungleboyjsmcginnis:  Should I go do that now?15:10
dhellmannlet's drop cinder from governance ;-)15:10
smcginnisjungleboyj: We got the first two, so not the end of the world.15:10
ttxdhellmann: no they only missed one15:10
* jungleboyj glares at dhellmann 15:10
ttxBUT now that you mention it15:10
* dhellmann smiles sweetly at jungleboyj 15:10
ttxfreezer and searchlight did miss 215:10
jungleboyjHey now ttx15:10
dhellmannfreezer also had no ptl candidate15:11
armstrongare projects currently following the cycle-with-milestones?15:11
ttxso we kind of need to decide what to do there15:11
smcginnisYeah, we have two that do not meet our requirements to be included.15:11
dhellmannand searchlight, I think?15:11
smcginnisNot too surprisingly, the two that also do not have a PTL.15:11
ttxdhellmann: freezer also had no team meeting over the past year15:11
ttxI sent an email this morning to get a bit of status15:11
smcginnisarmstrong: Most of the service projects are.15:11
smcginnisMy post the ML can include both the missing client libs and the missing services.15:12
ttxdhellmann: as top contibrutor you know more about freezer than all of us combined right15:12
dhellmannif you put me in charge I think you can guess what I'd do with it15:12
smcginnisttx: I think we have a default PTL to appoint for that, right? ;)15:12
dhellmann"I will not seek, and will not accept, my party's nomination..."15:13
smcginnisSo based on PTL and missing releases, I think we need a larger conversation about those two with the TC.15:13
* dhellmann tries to get his quotes right15:14
smcginnisAnd based on our policy, I think we need to exclude them from part of the coordinated release.15:14
dhellmannsmcginnis : I agree15:14
jungleboyjSeriously though, sorry for missing that.  Thanks for undestanding.15:14
dhellmannsmcginnis : I also agree on that15:14
ttxI understand that some components may be feature complete, but I think having one person signed up to ensure minimal responses and releases is not too high of a bar15:14
dhellmannjungleboyj : we'll find a way for you to make it up ;-)15:14
jungleboyjdhellmann:  Sounds like a plan.15:14
dhellmannttx: I think that is the lowest possible bar15:14
ttxand dropping those off "15:15
smcginnisSo I will call out the missing client releases, the missing milestone-3 service projects, and that the two (searchlight and freezer) will not be considered official rocky deliverables.15:15
ttxthe release"15:15
ttxor the official set of projects is not killing them, it's just reflective of what we are ready to associate the openstack name with15:15
dhellmannsmcginnis : yes. An email to the -dev list would be a good way to record that formally, and then we can take the TC action of deciding what to do next.15:15
dhellmanndoes the release team want to make a recommendation there? or do we just want to highlight the situation?15:16
ttxbasically asd a community we need to decide whether openstack rocky should include Freezer and Searchlight15:16
ttxand frankly, if nobody cares enough about those to sign up to request releases...15:16
smcginnisFOr the cycle-w-i unreleased ones, I will just mention that without calling out all of them. Since it will already be a big list of projects.15:16
ttxthey could continue their lives as an unofficial thing15:17
fungii don't think the release team needs to make any recommendation. simply following the outlined policy and then making the tc aware of what has transpired is plenty15:17
smcginnisttx: I don't know, we have a written policy in place about that. I'm always flexible, but seems kind off wrong to not meet criteria but then have a community decision to still do it anyway.15:17
fungipretty sure the tc consensus will be ~ the same as what the release team would have recommended, but that avoids making the release team out to be the "bad guys"15:17
ttxI'm all for cutting some slack to small teams, but at some point keeping some teams alive is just perpetuating useless pain15:18
* dhellmann puts away his black hat15:18
* fungi fears a black hat15:18
smcginnisttx: Are you saying whether they get listed as part of the official rocky deliverables, or whether they continue on as official OpenStack projects?15:18
ttxsmcginnis: agreed15:18
dhellmannsmcginnis : for the release team the former; for the tc the latter15:19
fungithe first is the purview of the release team, the second of the tc15:19
ttxsmcginnis: as release team, we have the policy and apply it to define what is included in release. But as TC we should decide whether the project team still belongs. And missing release is a pretty significant miss15:19
smcginnisOK good, that's my sentiment as well.15:20
ttxthe TC /could/ decide to keep them anyway15:20
ttxalthoug that would be a bit weird15:20
smcginnisI just misinterpreted the earlier statement as leaving it up to the community whether to include them in rocky.15:20
dhellmannif they were still active in the community (had PTLs) I could consider keeping them as "independent" projects, but that doesn't feel like the case here. but we can discuss that within the tc.15:21
ttxsince releasing is one of the requirements to be official15:21
ttxdhellmann: we have a policy that openstack "main" components have to follow a cycle-based model15:21
ttxso that "openstack" can be released on a cadence15:22
ttxwe cut some slack to peripheral deliverables15:22
ttxbut those are really  not part of the "openstack" release15:22
smcginnisIs that a clear delineation in your map?15:22
ttxand part of the release model doc15:22
ttxbasically everything in the "openstack" bucket on the map is released in a cycle-based fashion15:23
ttxit is "the openstack release" which we say is released every 6 months15:23
ttxanyway, that was a diversion15:24
ttxwe have a couple other components missing milestone315:24
dhellmannso the next step there is for smcginnis to send that email to the -dev list?15:24
ttxmostly confirming the other list15:24
smcginnisdhellmann: I believe so.15:24
dhellmannok, noted15:24
dhellmannand for the others, do we want to force tags?15:25
* dhellmann goes to find that policy again15:25
smcginnisI think we said we would do that at RC time?15:25
ttxsmcginnis: maybe no point in forcing a python-searchlightclient release if we do not include searchlight15:25
smcginnisRight, we can probably skip that one.15:25
dhellmann"The release team will remind projects that miss the first milestone, and create tags on any later milestones for the project team by tagging HEAD at the time of the deadline."15:25
smcginnisUnless we want to have one final release to get what is out there.15:25
ttxThe policy is weird in that we save intermediary-released things that did not do a single release over cycle but drop things that are on a milestone-base and did release one15:26
dhellmannperhaps we should address that discrepancy for stein15:26
ttxif freezer and searchlight were cycle-with-intermediary we would have saved them15:26
smcginnisYeah, that doesn't really feel right to me, but I guess at least we have the expectations documented.15:26
dhellmannin the mean time, it sounds like we said we *would* for tag things15:26
dhellmannI can prepare that patch if you want15:27
smcginnisThe wording does imply that.15:27
ttxI would still raise those who haven't done a single release and that we force... and ask the TC to review them15:27
ttxpotentially dropping them too15:27
ttxSome are active and just planning to do a release for all the cycle15:28
fungithat makes a lot of sense to me15:28
ttxbut some others might just be dead15:28
dhellmannwas jungleboyj going to do cinder, or should I?15:28
smcginnisWe do have the force flag in the deliverable now, so at least it will be easy to pull out a list of "concerns".15:28
ttxwe'll see which ones ask for a release next week15:28
fungiif the release team regularly has to force releases of deliverables because the team responsible isn't requesting them on schedule, that's a problem regardless of release model15:28
jungleboyjdhellmann:  Still cut the milestone?15:28
smcginnisdhellmann: I guess if we are going to go ahead and tag those, we might as well do them in one batch.15:28
ttxcinder is fine, it missed only one15:28
*** janki has quit IRC15:29
smcginnisfungi: ++15:29
dhellmannttx: the policy we documented says we would do all of the others15:29
dhellmannI will include cinder in this patch I'm working on15:29
ttxah ok15:29
jungleboyjdhellmann:  Thank you.15:29
smcginnisI suppose at least then we reduce the chance of surprises next week at RC time.15:29
dhellmannI won't include freezer or searchlight, since we're going to drop those15:29
dhellmannI'll make that a separate patch15:29
ttxsmcginnis: basically, I would strongly recommend that those intermediary-released not-yet released actually DO a release asap15:30
smcginnisWorks for me.15:30
ttxthose we have to force will get questioned15:30
smcginnisttx: I will note that in my post.15:30
dhellmann add rocky-3 milestone tags for projects that missed15:31
smcginnisThanks dhellmann15:32
smcginnisLooking ahead at the RC1 tasks, we are otherwise in good shape I think.15:33
ttxthere are a bunch of tempest plugins that will likely just need a forced release15:33
smcginnisI need to go back in re-read that long thread. Was the conclusion that those tempest plugins should be published to pypi??15:34
smcginnisI have not seen much activity with getting that set up.15:34
ttxsmcginnis: for intermediary-released stuff that did not do a single release, it's almost as if we should ask the TC wonder we should force releases or drop15:34
dhellmannshould I remove all of the freezer and searchlight deliverables, or just the service?15:34
ttxI'd say all15:35
smcginnisThat would make sense. It's kind of like the cycle-with-milestones missing the deadlines.15:35
dhellmannit feels weird to include the clients and not the services15:35
smcginnisYeah, drop the clients I think.15:35
dhellmann remove freezer and searchlight from rocky series15:35
ttxand -uis15:35
*** cfriesen is now known as cfriesen_afk15:36
smcginnisOK, so with my calling out cycle-with-intermediary release recommendation, I will also state that projects that do not do one by RC will be dropped from rocky.15:37
smcginnisttx: Sound right?15:37
dhellmannI was distracted there for a second while I wrote those patches; should I tag designate-dashboard, too?15:37
smcginnisHmm, probably.15:38
ttxI'd say "could be dropped" since that's not in our policy yet (we said we would force release)15:38
smcginnisttx: OK15:38
ttxbasically that will be a TC decision15:38
ttxand one where the health info will prove useful15:38
dhellmannok, I updated to include designate-dashboard15:38
fungii feel like it's the release team's choice whether they force tag a deliverable or not. i wouldn't wait for the tc to tell you it's unnecessary unless you really just want to save yourself the trouble of tagging something which ends up not included in the coordinated release deliverable set15:39
smcginnisI think we should amend the release documentation so that it is a release team decision going forward, but since we do not state that now, probably best to make it a TC decision.15:39
ttxfungi: I'm happy with the TC formally saying that15:39
ttxbut I don;t think it's been stating that as clearly in the past15:39
dhellmanndo we need a resolution?15:39
smcginnisfungi: It does seem like it should be this group's choice, but I think the gotcha is we had not previously stated that.15:40
ttxI would keep the TC in the loop the first time, then document as policy15:40
fungidoes the tc already have policy around this which needs alternig? if not, seems like it's well within the release team's jurisdiction (though i do support the tc adding policy or a resolution to back up the release team's decision in such matters)15:40
ttx(same as the two milestones missed, out policy15:40
dhellmannok, ttx's approach works for me15:41
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC15:41
smcginnisMaybe a second ML post with the [TC] tag explaining the situation, then we can discuss in the -tc channel.15:41
dhellmannor even on the mailing list :-)15:42
dhellmannbut yeah15:42
fungijust worried that the tc explicitly delegating this choice to the release team sets a precedent that similar sorts of choices have to be explicitly delegated to teams in the future15:42
ttxfungi: it's more of a timing issue15:42
dhellmannthat's reasonable15:42
ttxif we had set that policy clearly months ago, it would feel less like sudden powergrab15:42
ttxso keeping the TC in the loop of the first time sounds like a reasonable approach15:43
fungi100% in favor of keeping the tc in the loop and asking them for input. as to whether we need to delegate it at the tc level, i suppose that's a topic for another venue15:43
dhellmannI suspect that the teams affected are going to be surprised no matter how much notice they have.15:43
ttxah, no... was not askign for a reolsution ofr anything15:43
ttxmore for forgiveness15:43
fungimakes sense15:43
ttxAnd I would definitely want the input of whoever did the health check for that team15:44
ttxsince the situation is often unique15:44
smcginnisGoing forward I think we can say the rule is the rule, but this is a little different.15:45
fungiseems fine to be careful this round as it's the first time it's being potentially enforced and there could be backlash/confusion15:46
ttxnext topic?15:46
smcginnisOK, I think we're probably good with that for now. I want to make sure we have some time for a few other things.15:46
smcginnis#topic ACLs15:46
ttxI'll process those next week15:47
smcginnisI wanted to at least discuss the ajutant ones.15:47
ttxI'll keep them unifixed for them to fix before next milestone15:47
ttxsince they are not in Rocky15:47
smcginnisThey just became official, so wondering if we need to set a policy that new projects that are too late for the current cycle don't get their ACLs changed until the next cycle opens up.15:47
smcginnisttx: ++15:47
smcginnisI think those are the only ones out of the list that had any kind of issue. The rest seem pretty straight forward.15:48
smcginnisAnything else on ACLs?15:49
smcginnis#topic Open Discussion15:49
smcginnisOh, PTG.15:49
ttxI had a topic15:49
ttxReview next week work15:49
smcginnisI was going to say, not sure if we need a planning etherpad. We can just find some time at the PTG like we've done before.15:49
smcginnis#topic Review next week work15:50
* jungleboyj feels like he should pay attention to this so I know what to do. :-)15:50
ttxIt's relatively easy until you hit the end15:51
ttxbut then we usually hit 7 so late in the week it's called the week after15:51
ttxor even 215:51
armstrongscmginnis the PTG is in Denver right?15:51
ttx"minimum set of projects used by devstack have been branched"15:51
smcginnisI think we've also had late critical things that caused requirements thaw to be late.15:52
smcginnisarmstrong: Correct15:52
ttxdo we ahve a list we can track ?15:52
dhellmannttx: I think we just usually wait for everything there15:52
dhellmannthey all tend to come in around the same time anyway15:52
dhellmannbut I think the intent of that phrasing was the starter-kit projects15:52
dhellmannso we would wait for glance but not freezer15:53
ttxsince we are not really ahead, i expect next week will be all about chasing those RC1s, releases and branches15:53
dhellmannwe should coordinate with gmann on those branches15:53
smcginnisI think I proposed them last cycle, but would be good to at least give gmann a heads up they are coming.15:54
dhellmannttx: I expect so, yeah15:54
ttxand we'll likely hit 2-9 the week after15:54
ttxDo we want to use some kind of tracking to see progress ?15:55
ttxwe traditionally used etherpad dump in the tracking doc15:55
dhellmannwe've had quite a few changes to the validation code this cycle; it wouldn't hurt to have some WIP patches for some of these branches to make sure we didn't break the validation for branching without tags15:55
dhellmannttx: yeah, either the etherpad like we've done before or a story with tasks would be good15:56
ttxand a spreadsheet at one point15:56
smcginnisLet's start with the etherpad and see if we need more.15:56
ttxthe per-week format of makes it a bit painful to use as release tracker15:56
smcginnisMaybe an ethercalc then?15:56
ttxmaybe track at the bottom ?15:56
dhellmannttx: the spreadsheet was more useful before we could use list-deliverables to see what hadn't been done15:56
smcginnisAt the bottom of the tracking etherpad sounds good to me.15:57
ttxit's just me and my visual completion hints... I like to cross lines and add checkmarks15:57
*** mriedem is now known as hansmoleman15:57
ttxmakes it feel like progress15:58
dhellmannsure, having a list like that works for me15:58
ttxbut a watch on list-deliverables probably works too15:58
dhellmannit's a bit more to do manually, but *shrug*15:58
dhellmannI think last time we waited to create a short list of things to watch when we were starting to see what might come in late15:59
dhellmannor be blocked on bugs15:59
ttxok I added a header for a Release candidate 1 / proposed intermediary release / branching tracker  at the bottom of the doc16:00
ttxi suspect there are a bunch of OLD intermedary releases that need a refresh before branching too16:01
* ttx looks that16:01
ttxlike swift 2.18.0 is two-months old and might want a refresh16:01
smcginnisOK, we're actually over time. Anything else we should make sure to cover?16:02
dhellmannnot from me16:02
ttxI need to run and immerse myself in cold water16:02
ttxit's pretty hot here16:03
smcginnisOK, thanks everyone.16:03
smcginnisttx: So I hear. Stay cool.16:03
openstackMeeting ended Fri Aug  3 16:03:18 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)16:03
openstackMinutes (text):
*** armstrong has quit IRC16:03
*** tssurya has quit IRC16:05
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting16:09
*** melwitt is now known as jgwentworth16:14
*** fried_rice is now known as fried_rolls16:19
*** psachin has joined #openstack-meeting16:29
*** imacdonn has quit IRC16:37
*** imacdonn has joined #openstack-meeting16:37
*** antosh has quit IRC17:03
*** ricolin has quit IRC17:05
*** dmellado has quit IRC17:22
*** stevebaker has quit IRC17:23
*** gouthamr has quit IRC17:23
*** cfriesen_afk is now known as cfriesen17:25
*** erlon has quit IRC17:26
*** gouthamr has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
*** psachin has quit IRC17:29
*** gouthamr has quit IRC17:33
*** mlavalle has left #openstack-meeting17:34
*** hemna_ has quit IRC17:41
*** ekcs has joined #openstack-meeting17:42
*** sambetts is now known as sambetts|afk18:02
*** electrofelix has quit IRC18:06
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting18:15
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting18:26
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC18:33
*** hemna_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:48
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting18:57
*** bobh has quit IRC18:58
*** gouthamr has joined #openstack-meeting19:04
*** fried_rolls is now known as fried_rice19:18
*** mjturek has joined #openstack-meeting19:52
*** dmellado has joined #openstack-meeting19:56
*** gouthamr has quit IRC20:00
*** artom has quit IRC20:07
*** vgreen has quit IRC20:12
*** stevebaker has joined #openstack-meeting20:14
*** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting20:21
*** raildo has quit IRC20:25
*** e0ne has quit IRC20:40
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting20:41
*** abishop has quit IRC20:45
*** e0ne has quit IRC20:45
*** beekneemech is now known as bnemec-pto20:55
*** rfolco|ruck is now known as rfolco|off21:01
*** awaugama has quit IRC21:02
*** donghao has joined #openstack-meeting21:02
*** dustins has quit IRC21:27
*** apetrich has quit IRC21:34
*** pcaruana has quit IRC21:38
*** njohnston has quit IRC21:47
*** gouthamr has joined #openstack-meeting21:48
*** donghao has quit IRC22:12
*** hongbin has quit IRC22:19
*** tpsilva has quit IRC22:54
*** larainema has quit IRC23:07
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting23:13
*** tetsuro_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:29
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC23:38
*** rpioso is now known as rpioso|afk23:45
*** harlowja has quit IRC23:48
*** mjturek has quit IRC23:52

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!