Tuesday, 2014-01-28

*** openstack has joined #openstack-relmgr-office00:02
*** markmcclain has quit IRC00:16
*** markwash has joined #openstack-relmgr-office04:06
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-relmgr-office04:34
*** markwash has quit IRC04:44
*** markwash has joined #openstack-relmgr-office04:56
*** markwash has quit IRC05:22
*** david-lyle has quit IRC08:27
*** SergeyLukjanov_ is now known as SergeyLukjanov09:08
*** SergeyLukjanov is now known as SergeyLukjanov_a11:19
*** SergeyLukjanov_a is now known as SergeyLukjanov11:19
*** markwash has joined #openstack-relmgr-office13:00
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-relmgr-office13:00
ttxmarkmcclain: o/13:01
ttxmarkmcclain: looking at https://launchpad.net/neutron/+milestone/icehouse-313:03
markmcclainyeah.. probably too many items given that our code proposal deadline is Feb 18th13:04
ttxwas neutron gating fixed recently ? Or still working on it ?13:04
markmcclainit is still broken13:04
ttx65 total, but 25 in code review already13:05
markmcclainthe isolated tests are triggering a kernel fault13:05
ttxmarkmcclain: I don't think that's crazy.. but if you can't merge them right now then it wil become crazy very fast13:05
ttxmarkmcclain: you should go through them and prioritize them. Use a lot of "Low" for stuff you have no idea if it will make it, and defer aggressively when the author gives hints that won't be ready by Feb 1813:07
ttxThat will leave us with a number of >=Medium that you can use to prioritize actual work13:07
markmcclainyeah will do13:07
ttxmarkmcclain: the kernel fault is the dnsmasq thing on the ubuntu kernel ?13:08
markmcclainit's really a namespace issue13:08
markmcclainsometimes it happens in dhcp more often the metadata service triggers it13:09
ttxright, but userspace should obviously not trigger kernelspace error13:09
ttxmarkmcclain: did you get some support from the Ubuntu side ?13:09
markmcclainthey are aware of it13:09
markmcclain#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/127338613:10
ttxhmm, I'll see if I can raise prio with whatever influence I've left at Canonical13:10
ttxmarkmcclain: so yeah, if you could straighten out that icehouse-3 page, that would be great13:11
ttxwill make it easier to spot late submissions, too13:11
markmcclainvery true13:11
ttxbecaus ethe current mix is a mix of old untriaged stuff and new deferred stuff13:12
ttxmarkmcclain: ok, that's all I had -- until that's done it's difficult to assess feasibility :)13:14
ttxanyting you'd like to discuss at meeting later ?13:14
markmcclainnot that I can think of right now13:14
ttxmarkmcclain: are you back in GA ?13:15
markmcclainfor this week13:15
ttxmarkmcclain: ok, enjoy13:15
ttxdhellmann_: ping me when around13:16
markmcclainttx: thanks… talk to you later13:16
* dhellmann_ fights with status in irc client13:16
*** dhellmann_ is now known as dhellmann13:16
dhellmannI just set the priorities on a few of those oslo blueprints13:17
ttx"Translated log files" -> that one was recently completed (post i2) ?13:17
* ttx is trying to catch any missing blueprint that sneaked into i213:17
dhellmannhmm, yeah, that one was actually i213:17
ttxI can move it (need to reopen i2 first)13:18
ttxok, oslo looks good13:19
ttxoslo.messaging... could use some assignees on those targeted bugs, otherwise looks good13:21
ttxshameless plug: if you could re-APRV https://review.openstack.org/#/c/69033/ I can cut a new oslo.rootwrap version (1.1)13:21
ttxpeople complain about that missing __init__.py in 1.013:21
dhellmannwhat caused patch 3?13:22
ttxrebase, another patch got in13:22
ttxa typo patch13:22
ttxwill tag once that passes13:23
*** markwash has quit IRC13:23
ttxanything you'd like to discuss at meeting later ?13:23
dhellmannnot this week13:24
dhellmannI do have something I'd like your opinion on13:24
dhellmannI've been rejecting patches to the rpc code in the incubator, encouraging folks to work on oslo.messaging13:24
dhellmannI'm starting to get some pushback on that, since projects aren't porting yet13:24
dhellmannthis will affect the rootwrap code, too, I suppose, although that sees fewer changes overall13:25
ttxthe only project not using it yet is neutron at that point13:25
dhellmannok, so that's easier then13:25
dhellmannrpc is a tougher port13:25
ttxI guess that's the issue when what you end up with is significantly different from what you had in13:26
dhellmannanyway, I'm trying to find some sort of balance between carrying multiple copies of that code and porting consumers to the library13:26
dhellmannthe underlying implementation isn't so different, but the initialization stuff is13:26
ttxI would cut /some/ slack to the ones who haven't ported yet, but not too much13:27
ttxlike critical bugs, security fixes...13:27
dhellmannoh, sure13:27
ttxno features... I suspect the issue is more in the grey area between those two clear-cut groups13:27
dhellmannthis was stuff like help strings and randomly choosing the rabbit connection13:27
ttxwho is left with migration yet to be done ?13:28
dhellmannwell, no one has actually accepted oslo.messaging yet as far as I can tell13:28
dhellmannmarkmc started with nova, and that is taking a lot longer than expected13:28
dhellmanneveryone else seems to be waiting for that as proof that it's worth the effort13:28
ttxhmm. It was "ready" at the end of Grizzly and we deferred it... why is it talking so long in icehouse ?13:29
dhellmannthat's an excellent question13:29
ttx(trying to see how much we can stick to our "everyone migrates in icehouse" stance)13:29
dhellmannI don't expect that to happen at this point13:30
dhellmannI'll be happy if nova takes it, and we get everyone else ported in juno13:30
dhellmannbut I may be more pessimistic than markmc13:30
ttxdhellmann: me neither, but I'd like to know if we can consider this is the fault of consuming projects prioritization, or the fault of oislo.messaging itself13:31
dhellmanna bit of both13:31
dhellmannyou're probably right about the significance of the API changes, although that's pretty much what the incubator is supposed to be for13:31
ttxif the latter, i would certainly be more open to pushing patches to rpc13:31
dhellmannwe've been having discussions about the trouble merging oslo into other projects over the past few days13:31
dhellmannwe have some work to do on our test suite before the nova folks are really going to be happy to just take patches direcctly13:32
dhellmannbut yeah, we may end up having to accept more patches than I would have liked13:32
dhellmannlet's see what happens after messaging lands in nova13:33
ttxdhellmann: yeah. as long as those are patches that don't widen the gap with oslo.messaging13:33
ttxand oslo.messaging is partly to blame with the delay...13:33
dhellmannright, I'm at least going to require them to go into oslo.messaging first13:33
dhellmannconsidering the incubator as our "stable" branch13:33
ttxI was about to write the same thing13:34
ttxyou can borrow the same rules13:34
dhellmannyeah, I've been doing that implicitly, but we may have to make it explicit13:34
ttxcritical bugs, security fixes, no features, and a few low-impact bugs13:34
ttxwith the rule that it must lands in oslo.messaging first13:34
ttxthen when it's adopted by at least one project... lock it down to encourage the others to migrate too13:35
ttxjd__: around?13:35
jd__ttx: o/13:35
dhellmannsorry to run over, thanks for helping work that out13:35
ttxdhellmann: hope this helps :)13:35
dhellmannyes, definitely13:35
ttxjd__: did any of those 'implemented' actually land in icehouse-2 ?13:36
*** dhellmann is now known as dhellmann_13:36
ttxjd__: or did they all land in the last week ?13:37
jd__let  me check13:37
*** dhellmann_ is now known as dhellmann13:37
jd__nothing in i213:37
ttxjd__: OK. Would be great to get sql-unit-tests-on-real-backend landed early in i3, since it's marked essential I would not like it to be caught in a new gate storm13:38
jd__yeah, we were blocked because of oslo.db13:38
jd__I need to rebase this patch and see if it works13:38
ttxis it unblocked now ?13:38
jd__it's being worked on yeah13:38
jd__I'm reviewing the patches :)13:38
ttxit's a large milestone, so please defer as soon as you're reasonably sure it won't make it13:39
ttxand also merge as soon as you can13:39
jd__I've removed a couple already13:39
ttxdo you plan to observe the Feb 18 code proposal deadline ?13:39
jd__we never did so far, not sure what it would buy us13:40
jd__I need convincing arguments :)13:41
ttxjd__: it generally helps in prioritizing reviews and deferring late stuff13:41
ttxbut if you have a good relationship with all proposers, then you don't really need that help13:41
jd__so far I do indeed13:41
ttx(a feb &8 deadline basically helps you reject code proposed after that with a good reason)13:42
jd__I never felt we were big enough to impose that so far13:42
ttxmore useful for big projects and/or projects with a lot of "external" contributions13:42
jd__that's what I thought :)13:42
ttxjd__: we'll see how fast you burn those items next week13:42
ttxanything you'd like to discuss at meeting tonight ?13:43
* jd__ crosses fingers13:43
ttx(you did 4 in i1+i2 and you have 28 in i-3)13:44
ttxbut then you already have 3 done !13:44
ttxjd__: thx, and see you there13:44
ttxjgriffith: around ?13:45
*** markwash has joined #openstack-relmgr-office13:49
ttxjgriffith: ping me when around13:51
*** markmcclain has quit IRC13:57
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-relmgr-office13:57
jgriffithttx: ping14:02
ttxjgriffith: o/14:02
ttxWere those 2 "implemented" really implemented post icehouse-2 ?14:02
jgriffithJan 2514:03
jgriffiththat should be just comitted14:04
ttxCould you reveiw those "undefined" and give them a prio (or remove them from milestone) before meeting ?14:04
ttxthat will let us easily identify additions from now on14:04
ttx(one of them is missing an assignee, fwiw)14:05
ttxotherwise the plan is ambitious but not completely crazy, since 10 of them have code proposed already14:05
jgriffithI have been talking with EMC on these I'll update14:05
jgriffithand prioritize the others14:05
ttxif you convert those early on and use the Feb 18 deadline wisely... you could be in good shape14:05
jgriffithwe'll see :)14:06
jgriffithFeb 18'th is just around the corner14:06
ttxnah... 3 full weeks!14:06
ttxand that's just to get code proposed.14:06
jgriffithfair enough14:07
ttxanything you'd like to discuss at meeting today ?14:07
jgriffithdon't think I have anything this week14:07
ttxok. We skip the TC meeting btw14:07
jgriffithYeah, saw your email14:07
jgriffithworks fine for me14:08
ttxjgriffith: ok then, see you later14:08
jgriffithttx: have a good one14:08
* jgriffith goes to wake up and get coffee14:08
dolphmttx: o/15:02
ttxdolphm: hi!15:02
dolphmgive me a couple minutes - changing venues15:03
ttxsure. Will be looking @ https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/icehouse-315:03
ttxLooking at the Implemented one to check if they were not actually merged in i215:06
ttxdolphm: looks like they weren't15:07
ttxhttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/identity-providers seems to have a few more open changes though15:07
ttxlike https://review.openstack.org/#/c/69244/ ?15:07
dolphmhmm, those should maybe be referencing saml-id15:08
ttxok, bad reference then15:08
dolphmor bugs, it looks like15:08
ttxephemeral-pki-tokens: do you know when work will be started on this one ?15:08
dolphmwe're waiting on revocation-events for that one15:09
dolphmbut morganfainberg most likely15:09
dolphmit'll also be a very small effort (new config option to disable an existing behavior)15:09
dolphmand some docs15:10
ttxno-check-id is marked blocked but https://review.openstack.org/#/c/68453/ merged... (was marked as one of the unblockers)15:10
ttxwhat is it blocking on now ?15:10
dolphmooh, one sec15:11
dolphmyay, that's no longer blocked15:11
ttxok, will let you fix it15:11
ttxdolphm: ok, that's all I had -- anything you'd like to discuss at meeting ?15:12
dolphmthat's the only one i wanted to raise15:12
ttxdolphm: cool then, see you there15:12
dolphmthat's now a legitimate "recheck no bug" on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/54647/ ... but that's been disabled right?15:12
ttxdolphm: no, recheck no bug shall still be available15:13
ttxat least that's what I use to refresh old bug checks15:13
ttxrussellb: around ?15:13
dolphmttx: cool, thanks!15:14
ttxhah. 15315:14
russellbyeah :)15:14
russellbabove post is my current plan to trim that with a series of deadlines15:14
* ttx reads15:14
russellbi've emailed nova-drivers directly as well, asking for help in the next week in advance of deadline #115:14
ttxok, sounds good15:15
russellbi've also told nova-drivers to start bumping priority on key blueprints15:15
russellband abandon the -core sponsor thing for now15:15
ttxforklift-scheduler-breakout has no assignee15:16
russellbto try to identify the key ones out of the list15:16
russellbah, i'm going to go ahead and defer that15:16
russellbplan is to aim to have it ready for early juno right now15:16
russellblots of critical unassigned bugs ... all gate things, mostly actually being worked, just not assigned to a specific person15:17
ttxIs recover-stuck-state completed with the merging of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/55660/ ?15:18
russellbstill some patches on there not merged15:18
russellbthe last 2 on the list15:19
russellba different topic, under a bug'15:19
ttxOK, we shall see better in one week15:19
russellball the unprioritized ones should disappear (or be prioritized)15:20
russellbthat's a big chunk15:20
ttxI would still advise to merge as much as you can of those "needs code review" while the gate is fluid15:20
* russellb nods15:20
russellbi haven't sent out any nagging nova-core "please do more reviews" emails this cycle15:21
russellbi don't have an easy way to do that anymore :(15:21
russellbused to use launchpad for that15:21
russellbi did that last cycle, it helps, heh15:21
ttxthe meeting today has a "Code proposal deadline" topic, based on your email15:22
russellbgreat, thanks15:22
russellbwas going to ask for that to be added15:22
russellbi don't think i have anything else for today's meeting ...15:22
ttxnope. I still owe you some velocity analysis15:23
ttxprobably will have time to do it for next meeting15:23
russellbwe could do a weekly "state of the gate" ... much better now obviously15:23
russellbOK cool, i've been meaning to look at it some more too15:23
russellbwe're obviously way down in nova in terms of blueprints15:23
russellbbeen meaning to look at patch velocity15:23
russellbalso heads up ... going to start a nova-network / neutron thread on openstack-dev this week, perhaps today15:24
ttxalso in your case adding one more week wouldn't have made a lot more blueprints completed15:24
russellbyeah, personally i've still be focusing on infra/qa/gate stuff15:24
ttxrussellb: yep, and it showed.15:24
ttxanyway, see you at meeting today. No TC meeting btw15:24
russellbsounds good, thanks!15:25
russellband sorry for the messy roadmap15:25
ttxdavid-lyle_: ping me when around15:26
russellbi think review process / using statuses helped make it a little more organized, but still room for improvement15:28
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-relmgr-office15:41
david-lylettx: apologies, I had a snowy commute15:41
ttxdavid-lyle: sorry just a sec15:43
ttxdavid-lyle: hi!15:45
david-lylettx: hello15:45
ttxYou have 4 blueprints implemented in there -- were they all merged post icehouse-2 ?15:46
ttx(i.e. in the last 7 days ?)15:46
david-lylettx: yes, hung up in gate15:46
david-lylewhen milestone was cut15:46
david-lyleOur list is too big, starting to clean it up, still a ways to go15:46
ttxdatatable-row-groups is marked deferred, does that mean it should be moved out of icehouse- 3 ? Or that it was deferred to i3 ?15:47
david-lyleI need to ask the developer.  I think he just got focused on something else15:47
david-lylethat may move out of icehouse, but I will change the status when I understand what he meant15:47
ttxyeah, so the idea will be to refine as you go. When you think it won't make it, defer15:48
ttxRBAC support for network is High / Not started, still feelin confident on that one ?15:49
david-lyleyes, that will be in15:49
ttxok. django-angular-integration needs an assignee, too15:49
david-lylemay be a group effort, but we need it15:49
david-lyleI think the drafter is the assignee, saw that last night, going to check in the Horizon meeting today15:50
ttxok. Otherwise looks good15:51
ttxanything you'd like to discuss at meeting later today ?15:51
david-lyleno, I have a process question though15:51
david-lylehow do I propose some UX folks for a Horizon ATC exception?15:51
david-lyleWe have 3 people who have contributed a lot to the icehouse release from a design perspective15:52
ttxthe easiest would be to propose a patch to http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/extra-atcs15:52
ttxthen it will automatically get onto the TC radar15:52
david-lyleok, two are already on there, should I update their experation date?15:53
david-lylethat looks better15:53
ttxno, they will renew in September15:53
ttxjust add new ones at the bottom with expiration in February 201515:54
david-lyleok, sounds good.  I'll try to get that posted today15:54
ttxthe commit message can contain justification15:54
ttxok, see you there15:54
david-lyleok, thanks15:54
notmynamettx: can we go ahead with a swift update16:05
ttxon a call right now16:05
* notmyname will be back later, then16:06
*** SergeyLukjanov is now known as SergeyLukjanov_16:09
ttxnotmyname: available now if you are16:25
notmynamettx: here16:26
ttxnotmyname: hi!16:26
notmynamegood morning afternoon and goodnight16:26
ttxhad a question about https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/126234116:26
ttxit's targeted to 1.12.016:27
ttxbut not fixed yet ?16:27
notmynameit's in https://github.com/openstack/swift/commit/ace2aa33b19b3ff5abfb3f624414f422f8723b4116:28
notmynamemark as done16:28
notmyname1.12.0 should be good to go. I'll send my announcement email as soon as you do the tagging16:28
ttxok, let me do that now16:28
notmyname(we'll I'll send out the announce email in a couple of hours. I've got to drive to San Jose shortly. I'll do it from a coffee shop there.)16:29
ttxwaiting for https://jenkins01.openstack.org/job/swift-tarball/5/ to complete16:30
notmynameas to future plans, here's what I've been thinking...16:30
notmynamethe biggest push for the rest of icehouse is getting multi-ring support (ie replicated storage policies) into swift. we've got about 9 weeks until the Icehouse RC16:31
ttxAll set at https://launchpad.net/swift/icehouse/1.12.016:31
notmynameI'll expect the last pieces to be written and merged to the feature/ec branch in the next ~3 weeks, then about 3 weeks to get feature/ec merged into master, then ~3 weeks again for sussing out anything and getting the RC16:32
notmynamettx: thanks, I'll do the release email this morning16:32
ttxnotmyname: sounds like good timing16:32
notmynameas to swift releases, we may have a 1.13 late feb and then a 1.14 as the RC/final (numbers to be determined later)16:33
notmynamebut we'll have at least one more16:33
notmynamemostly that depends on what lands before the storage policy work is merged16:33
ttxdo you want me to create a placeholder for 1.13.0 ? Or we'll do that later ?16:33
notmynameif there is a bunch (eg the account ACLs that will land next week), then we may do a final pre-storage policy release before the icehouse rc16:34
ttx(or will you just use next-icehouse for the time being ?)16:34
notmynamego ahead. we'll need it anyway, and having the placeholder allows using the -next for a potential N+2 release16:35
*** hub_cap has joined #openstack-relmgr-office16:35
ttxok, will do16:35
ttxyour plan sounds good to me16:35
notmynameand FYI, I blogged about the general status yesterday at https://swiftstack.com/blog/2014/01/27/openstack-swift-storage-policies/16:35
ttxI read that one. anything you'd like to discuss at meeting today ?16:36
ttxi'll cover last week postmortem and gate status already16:36
notmynameI'm somewhat interested in the common logging topic, but I'll have to catch up on the logs. I'll be giving a talk today during the meeting time16:36
notmynameI'm also interested in progress being made on reducing the overlapping tests in the gate16:37
notmynameI saw that proposed, but it hasn't been implemented yet16:37
notmyname(proposed on the mailing list)16:37
ttxok, will raise it during atht segment16:37
ttxhave a good drive16:37
notmynameanything else from your side?16:38
ttxnotmyname: nope, I'm good16:38
notmynameme too16:38
ttxtalk to you later.16:38
ttxmarkwash: ready whenever you are16:39
markwashttx: hi! I'm at the glance summit atm16:39
markwashso maybe extra-lightweight today?16:39
ttxok, let me see if I need you for anything16:40
ttxmarkwash: nothing urgent. Talk to you next week16:40
markwashttx <316:40
markwashttx: go storyboard!16:40
ttxhub_cap: ready whenever you are.16:41
hub_capjust so u know, bp's are clean, amcrn did it yest16:47
hub_capive tol the guys to focus on reviews in i3 and the rest in gerrit can go to hell for now :)16:47
ttxLooks all good ansd reasonable to me16:47
hub_capyea im not sure about the oslo-rpc one, i might have to take it16:48
ttxhub_cap: was wondering if redis support should not be considered to have landed in i2 ?16:48
hub_capi dont think flaper (sp?) was workign on that16:48
hub_capim not sure what u mean ttx.. u mean its saying impld in 3 but shoudlve been 2 ?16:49
ttxmost patches I tracked it down to a series opf patches that were merged before we cut i216:49
ttxmost patches I tracked it down to were merged before we cut i216:49
hub_capok let me look at the i2 (its in gh right?)16:49
ttxhmm https://review.openstack.org/#/c/53481/ landed on Jan 2316:50
ttxso probably after i216:50
ttxyes b2 would be the tag16:50
hub_capi was pretty sure it was after16:50
ttxok, ignore me16:50
hub_capok but then this conversation will be quite one sided16:51
* hub_cap waits for the rimshot16:51
ttxYour plan looks good, just a few dependency issues16:51
ttxcassandra-db-support (Low, dmakogon, icehouse-3) depends on trove-refactoring-for-better-pluggability (Undefined, dukhlov, ongoing)16:51
ttxsingle-instance-mongodb-ga (Low, ikhudoshyn, icehouse-3) depends on base-mongodb-image (Medium, ikhudoshyn, No milestone)16:51
ttxIf those are true dependencies you should consider moving them to i316:52
hub_caplol what16:52
hub_capill clean those 2 bp's up16:52
ttxhmm, igore that last one, the dependent BP is actually in trove-integration16:52
ttxbut the first one remains16:52
ttxok, aotherwise looks all fine and dandy16:53
ttxanything you wanted to discuss at meeting later ?16:53
hub_capok great. yea i think ill close the better-plugability bp16:53
hub_capummmm... man i always thin of stuff thru the wk and randomly forget16:53
ttxOh. And should https://bugs.launchpad.net/trove/+bug/1252897 be targeted to i3 ?16:53
hub_capso as of now no16:53
ttxit's critical, but targeted to "next"16:54
hub_capnaw lets take off critical16:54
ttxok, that works for me16:54
hub_capits just a bug16:54
ttxok then, talk to you later at meeting16:54
hub_capif i remember anythign for the meeting ill hit u up16:54
hub_capoh i do have a q16:55
hub_caphow si the bp/bug replacment comin16:55
ttxsprinting on Thu/Fri to move on16:55
hub_capok, so is this somethign we could be using in ~3mo?16:58
ttxhub_cap: some will17:00
ttxWe'll see how fast it goes17:00
hub_capid be happy to help guinea pig it since trove still has less usage than other projects :)17:01
hub_capok welp have a good few hrs.17:02
*** SergeyLukjanov_ is now known as SergeyLukjanov17:36
*** sdague has quit IRC18:51
*** sdague has joined #openstack-relmgr-office18:56
*** dolphm is now known as dolphm_afk19:18
ttxstevebaker: ping me when around19:22
ttxstevebaker: still not around ?19:38
*** david-lyle has quit IRC19:42
stevebakerttx: sorry, here now19:44
ttxstevebaker: hi! quick run19:44
ttxDoesn't look too bad, just way too many things19:45
ttxwas adopt-stack merged post-i2 ?19:45
ttxhmm, the answer is yes19:45
ttxso you can refine as you go... but aggressively defer as soon as you know it won't be ready19:46
stevebakerI expect a lot of those bugs will be deferred to post i-319:46
ttx3 BP are missing an assignee, could be good candidates for early deferral :)19:46
ttxhttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/i18n-messages needs to be triaged19:46
stevebakerpuppet and chef should be small19:46
ttxand then you have a few dep issues:19:46
ttxupdate-failure-recovery (High, zaneb, icehouse-3) depends on resource-template-api (Undefined, No assignee, No milestone)19:47
ttxand also on retry-failed-update (Low, clint-fewbar, icehouse-3)19:47
ttxx-auth-trust (Low, shardy, icehouse-3) depends on trusts-chained-delegation (Undefined, No assignee, No milestone)19:47
stevebakerI think resource-template-api is new19:47
stevebakerI'll update it19:47
ttxso add milestone adn adjust priority accordingly19:47
stevebakerI'll go through and fix those before the meeting19:48
ttxthat's all I had19:48
ttxanythign you'd like to discuss in 72 min ?19:48
stevebakerI can't think of anything19:49
ttxok then, see you there :)19:49
stevebakerok, later19:49
*** hub_cap has left #openstack-relmgr-office20:32
*** markwash has quit IRC21:02
*** dolphm_afk is now known as dolphm21:28
*** SergeyLukjanov is now known as SergeyLukjanov_21:59
*** mattoliverau has quit IRC22:52
*** mattoliverau has joined #openstack-relmgr-office23:01
*** openstack has joined #openstack-relmgr-office23:03
*** frankbutt has joined #openstack-relmgr-office23:59
*** frankbutt has left #openstack-relmgr-office23:59

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!