| opendevreview | yatin proposed openstack/releases master: New Dalmatian ovsdbapp release 2.7.1 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919916 | 04:55 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Jens Harbott proposed openstack/releases master: Retire sahara: mark deliverables retired https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919402 | 08:07 |
| opendevreview | Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/releases master: Nova deadlines for Dalmatian schedule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/918422 | 08:31 |
| opendevreview | Thierry Carrez proposed openstack/releases master: Update team exceptions in ACL issues script https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919928 | 09:22 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/releases master: Nova deadlines for Dalmatian schedule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/918422 | 09:57 |
| elodilles | release-team: reminder: the weekly meeting is about to start in ~10 minutes | 12:49 |
| hberaud | ack | 12:50 |
| elodilles | #startmeeting releaseteam | 13:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Fri May 17 13:00:03 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is elodilles. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 13:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 13:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam' | 13:00 |
| hberaud | o/ | 13:00 |
| elodilles | Ping list: release-team elod | 13:00 |
| frickler | \o | 13:00 |
| elodilles | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/dalmatian-relmgt-tracking | 13:00 |
| elodilles | we are @ L97 | 13:00 |
| elodilles | o/ | 13:00 |
| elodilles | Dalmatian-1 ~o~ | 13:00 |
| hberaud | life is too short... | 13:01 |
| ttx | o/ | 13:02 |
| elodilles | and development cycles fly by | 13:02 |
| elodilles | let's start! | 13:02 |
| elodilles | #topic Review task completion | 13:02 |
| elodilles | 1st task: 'Ensure that all trailing projects have been branched for the previous series. (elod)' | 13:02 |
| elodilles | kayobe (kolla) and openstack-ansible were not branched | 13:02 |
| elodilles | https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:caracal-trailing-branch-cut | 13:02 |
| elodilles | patches proposed but teams responded with -1 ^^^ | 13:03 |
| elodilles | so we have to keep an eye on these and follow up later | 13:03 |
| elodilles | 2nd task: 'Propose autoreleases for cycle-with-intermediary libraries which did not release since the previous release. (elod)' | 13:03 |
| elodilles | https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:dalmatian-milestone-1 | 13:04 |
| elodilles | patches were generated ^^^ | 13:04 |
| elodilles | many deliverables had only non-functional changes, so around half needed a release patch | 13:04 |
| elodilles | and as you can see there are many without response from team | 13:05 |
| elodilles | i've +2+PTL-Approved+1'd them, so I think it's OK to proceed with them | 13:06 |
| elodilles | if you'll have time to review | 13:06 |
| ttx | Time to fill out the team reponse scorecard at the bottom of the etherpad! | 13:06 |
| elodilles | hmmm, right, let me add details quickly | 13:07 |
| elodilles | done | 13:11 |
| elodilles | move on then: | 13:12 |
| elodilles | 3rd task: 'Catch if there are acl issues in newly created repositories (ttx)' | 13:12 |
| elodilles | * puppet-ceph triggered an issue, but was exempted recently | 13:13 |
| elodilles | * updated aclissues to reflect that: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919928 | 13:13 |
| elodilles | anything to add ttx ? | 13:13 |
| ttx | oh sorry | 13:13 |
| ttx | Not much to add... | 13:14 |
| elodilles | ACK | 13:14 |
| elodilles | 4th task: 'Process Unmaintained transitioning patches for stable/zed (all)' | 13:14 |
| ttx | We could change the code so that it's more granular (per repo instead of per-team) but that will do for now | 13:14 |
| elodilles | ttx: +1 | 13:14 |
| ttx | Linking back to the change with the decision is a great improvement already | 13:14 |
| elodilles | ACK | 13:17 |
| elodilles | so, about the zed to unmaintained/zed: | 13:17 |
| elodilles | https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:zed-unmaintained+is:open | 13:17 |
| elodilles | we still have 2 patches to sort out, | 13:18 |
| elodilles | but these are special cases | 13:19 |
| elodilles | winstackers -> needs EOL rather | 13:19 |
| elodilles | and openstack-ansible patch needs an update | 13:20 |
| elodilles | #action elod to move winstckers to EOL and update OSA zed-unmtained patch | 13:21 |
| elodilles | i'll take care of these ^^^ | 13:21 |
| ttx | sounds good | 13:22 |
| elodilles | these were all of the tasks! | 13:22 |
| elodilles | #topic Assign R-19 and R-18 week tasks | 13:22 |
| ttx | I'm mostly traveling next week | 13:22 |
| elodilles | ACK | 13:23 |
| hberaud | will be a short one week for me too | 13:23 |
| ttx | we need a meeting chair for the meeting in two weeks | 13:23 |
| elodilles | a bit shorter to me, too, though it still will be 4 days to me :) | 13:23 |
| elodilles | thx hberaud :) | 13:24 |
| hberaud | taken | 13:24 |
| elodilles | just like the tasks! thanks everyone! | 13:24 |
| elodilles | move on then | 13:24 |
| elodilles | #topic Review countdown email for week R-19 | 13:24 |
| elodilles | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/relmgmt-weekly-emails | 13:24 |
| elodilles | please review ^^^ | 13:25 |
| elodilles | one thing to mention: | 13:25 |
| elodilles | i'm not sure about the 'goals' | 13:25 |
| elodilles | are they still active goals? | 13:25 |
| elodilles | it looks like stale tasks | 13:25 |
| ttx | yeah, I was about to ask | 13:25 |
| elodilles | e.g. migrate to jammy :S | 13:26 |
| ttx | IIRC last cycle we skipped that mention.. Let me doublecheck | 13:26 |
| elodilles | should be more like noble :) | 13:26 |
| frickler | srbac is still active afaict | 13:26 |
| elodilles | yes, that one is a long standing task, that's true | 13:26 |
| ttx | Lat cycle we just said "Teams should now be focused on feature development." | 13:27 |
| elodilles | so this somewhat feels half-relevant | 13:27 |
| ttx | the TC has not set goals for a while now | 13:27 |
| elodilles | yes | 13:27 |
| frickler | I'll take updating/checking that list to the TC | 13:27 |
| ttx | so I support just saying "feature development" | 13:27 |
| elodilles | at least not 'cycle goals' | 13:27 |
| elodilles | ttx: +1 | 13:27 |
| hberaud | lgtm | 13:27 |
| elodilles | frickler: thanks! | 13:27 |
| elodilles | mail updated | 13:28 |
| ttx | We might want to edit the template if goals are not going to come back | 13:28 |
| frickler | well we have some in the pipeline like eventlet deprecation | 13:29 |
| ttx | lgtm | 13:29 |
| frickler | but no consensus on the path forward yet | 13:29 |
| frickler | +1 to the mail | 13:29 |
| elodilles | yeah, that one, too :S | 13:29 |
| elodilles | anyway, frickler can you update us with info from TC next time? | 13:30 |
| frickler | not sure it will happen that fast, but I'll try to | 13:30 |
| elodilles | we could wait with the template update until that is disclosed | 13:30 |
| elodilles | ACK | 13:30 |
| elodilles | anyway, thanks for the reviews, i'll send the mail after the meeting some time | 13:31 |
| elodilles | #topic Open Discussion | 13:31 |
| elodilles | we have one topic: | 13:31 |
| elodilles | #info (frickler) Automated EOL for feature branches | 13:31 |
| elodilles | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/917788/1 | 13:31 |
| elodilles | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/900810 | 13:32 |
| frickler | I found these while looking at open reviews, not sure how to best proceed | 13:32 |
| elodilles | so these are about feature + bugfix branches | 13:32 |
| frickler | on one hand I'd like to see those feature branches go away, otoh not sure how much we actually want to get involved | 13:32 |
| elodilles | and note, that these are only the branches/deliverables that are listed on releases repo | 13:33 |
| frickler | well https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/917781 would want to add tags for branches that aren't listed currently | 13:34 |
| frickler | if we want to proceed, some agreement on the actual tag name structure would be needed first I guess | 13:36 |
| elodilles | right. so, so far only *deliverables* that are listed in releases repo | 13:36 |
| ttx | No strong opinion, I would be fine not getting involved | 13:36 |
| ttx | we handle master and stable branches already, it feels like that's enough :) | 13:36 |
| hberaud | +1 with ttx | 13:36 |
| frickler | well we kind of added the handling of unmaintained branches already | 13:37 |
| hberaud | at first glance I think it complexify things more than something else | 13:38 |
| frickler | which aren't directly release related, so maybe we already crossed a line there | 13:38 |
| ttx | I'm fine with the tooling handling it | 13:39 |
| elodilles | frickler: true, series-eol and series-eom were not directly release related, but still, they are somewhat closer i'd say | 13:39 |
| ttx | But I would not necessarily track those | 13:40 |
| hberaud | feature branches, are just feature branches, not sure to see the point with eoling them... | 13:40 |
| frickler | so you'd just delete them without a trace? | 13:40 |
| hberaud | yeah | 13:41 |
| frickler | and you'd let teams do that manually? or how would there be tooling for that if we have no record? | 13:42 |
| ttx | That's an option. They were meant as glorified sets of changes | 13:42 |
| hberaud | manually | 13:42 |
| frickler | and does the same hold for bugfix branches or are those different? | 13:42 |
| hberaud | good question, I think bugfix branches are slightly different use cases | 13:43 |
| hberaud | IMO | 13:43 |
| elodilles | ironic team handled bugfix branches manually, but by some accident, our tooling re-created some of the branches, so i think that's where the automation idea came from, mainly. (that bug i think (and hope) is fixed in our tooling) | 13:45 |
| hberaud | a feature branch, if implementation on it is done, is supposed to be reintegrated somewhere in the official branches | 13:45 |
| ttx | yeah I could see making a case for eoling bugfix branches | 13:45 |
| hberaud | a feat branch is IMO a temp branch dedicated to develop a feature and basta | 13:46 |
| elodilles | yepp that makes sense ^^^ | 13:46 |
| hberaud | but naming and semnatic can diverge between teams... maybe they are seeing feature branches like bugfix branches... don't know | 13:47 |
| hberaud | but that's my definition of a feature branch | 13:47 |
| frickler | ok so let's maybe check with timburke whether they can agree to that | 13:47 |
| hberaud | something temporary | 13:47 |
| hberaud | ok | 13:47 |
| frickler | and then I'll try with rpittau to proceed with the bugfix patch | 13:48 |
| elodilles | frickler: ACK, thanks in advance! | 13:48 |
| elodilles | anything else to discuss? | 13:49 |
| hberaud | nope | 13:49 |
| frickler | well we had gmann's proposal for eoling stable branches of retired projects | 13:50 |
| frickler | (half my idea I admit) | 13:50 |
| frickler | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/919608 | 13:50 |
| ttx | makes sense I think? | 13:52 |
| elodilles | oh, i haven't reviewed that yet | 13:52 |
| elodilles | to me it's a bit too harsh to directly EOL those stable branches, but I don't object if that is the decision | 13:52 |
| elodilles | i mean, we close the option to people show up as maintainers for those repos | 13:53 |
| elodilles | but i know that it is quite unlikely | 13:53 |
| frickler | there should be at least 6 months of inactivity before retirement happens | 13:53 |
| elodilles | and even inactivity haven't come out of the blue :) | 13:54 |
| elodilles | so that's true | 13:54 |
| frickler | and a repo could always be un-retired again | 13:54 |
| elodilles | i mean some of these repos were just inactive through multiple cycles :/ | 13:54 |
| hberaud | It won't hurt IMO | 13:54 |
| frickler | the opposing concern that on not doing this, people could continue using the stable branch without noticing the retirement | 13:55 |
| elodilles | so as I said, i don't object o:) | 13:55 |
| elodilles | frickler: that's also true | 13:55 |
| elodilles | anyway, feel free to ping me for reviews to those EOL patches and I can +2 them | 13:56 |
| frickler | those still need to be created iiuc, but will do | 13:56 |
| elodilles | ++ | 13:56 |
| frickler | gmann: ^^ | 13:56 |
| elodilles | any other topic to the remaining 3 minutes? :) | 13:57 |
| ttx | would not mind having them back before jumpiung on my next meeting :) | 13:57 |
| elodilles | :) | 13:57 |
| elodilles | thanks everyone then! o/ | 13:58 |
| elodilles | #endmeeting | 13:58 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Fri May 17 13:58:06 2024 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 13:58 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2024/releaseteam.2024-05-17-13.00.html | 13:58 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2024/releaseteam.2024-05-17-13.00.txt | 13:58 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2024/releaseteam.2024-05-17-13.00.log.html | 13:58 |
| ttx | Thanks elodilles ! | 13:58 |
| hberaud | thanks elodilles | 13:58 |
| elodilles | o/ | 13:58 |
| frickler | thx all | 13:58 |
| fungi | in theory, at least, successful feature branches should get merged back to the master branch and then deleted at that time | 14:35 |
| ykarel | review please for ovsdbapp release https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919916 | 14:43 |
| gmann | frickler: thanks for bringing that. | 17:01 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/releases master: Retire Solum: mark deliverables retired https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919225 | 17:41 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/releases master: Retire Murano: mark deliverables retired https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919373 | 17:44 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/releases master: Retire ec2-api: mark deliverables retired https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/919401 | 17:55 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!