14:00:37 <rafaelweingartner> #startmeeting cloudkitty 14:00:37 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Mon Jul 12 14:00:37 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rafaelweingartner. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:37 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:37 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'cloudkitty' 14:00:53 <rafaelweingartner> Roll count 14:01:47 <rafaelweingartner> I hope that we have quorum today :) 14:01:56 <mkarpiarz> :) 14:02:11 <rafaelweingartner> Hey Marius, long time no see you 14:02:44 <mkarpiarz> Indeed! 14:03:05 <mkarpiarz> What's on the agenda today? 14:03:16 <rafaelweingartner> https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cloudkitty-meeting-topics 14:03:29 <rafaelweingartner> I would like to discuss the merging process 14:03:30 <mkarpiarz> I've seen some nice features being pushed recently. 14:03:36 <rafaelweingartner> yes 14:03:47 <rafaelweingartner> and I published the reprocessing API already as well 14:03:55 <rafaelweingartner> priteau: are you going to join the meeting? 14:05:05 <priteau> I am here. 14:06:03 <rafaelweingartner> Cool ! 14:06:08 <rafaelweingartner> Shall we begin, then 14:06:15 <adamaquesbi> yes 14:06:19 <rafaelweingartner> #topic Review and merging process 14:06:58 <priteau> yes 14:06:58 <rafaelweingartner> We are a small community of contributors, and one thing that I noticed is that we are taking too long to get things merged. 14:07:09 <rafaelweingartner> One thing that slows the process is the requirement for 2 core reviews. 14:07:48 <rafaelweingartner> However, it is not just that, the process is also slow because, as we can see, there is only a handful of people contributing with the project. 14:08:25 <rafaelweingartner> I have been thinking about this process, and I was going to propose to reduce the requirement for 2 core reviews, but I am not sure if this would help 14:08:30 <rafaelweingartner> what do you guys think? 14:09:39 <adamaquesbi> I think it might help speed up the main stories, but for the smaller ones it's still difficult to get even on reviewer to look at it let alone +1 it 14:11:20 <priteau> I am not sure if the two +2 votes is a written or unwritten rule of OpenStack 14:11:43 <priteau> I think it's useful to keep more eyes on the big changes. Happy to lower the requirements for smaller patches but that's not what is blocking us. 14:11:52 <priteau> The real fix is to get more core reviewers ;-) 14:12:15 <adamaquesbi> it's "encouraged" (https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/review-the-openstack-way.html) 14:12:43 <rafaelweingartner> I see 14:12:52 <rafaelweingartner> I agree with you priteau 14:13:13 <rafaelweingartner> but I am still unsure on how to get more people contributing 14:13:30 <rafaelweingartner> I might be mistaken, but I am see some new names today, adamaquesbi :) 14:13:54 <adamaquesbi> yes ! I am a new contributor (or trying to be at this stage) 14:14:07 <rafaelweingartner> Cool 14:14:11 <priteau> We could also take a look at the review runways model that nova is using 14:14:14 <priteau> https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-runways-rocky 14:14:14 <adamaquesbi> I have been assigned to Cloudkitty by Objectif-libre (Paris, France) 14:14:29 <priteau> adamaquesbi: good to hear that objectif libre is still interested! 14:14:36 <rafaelweingartner> that is very welcome :), look forward to see you around gerrit 14:14:41 <mkarpiarz> Cool, nice to meet you, adamaquesbi! 14:14:45 <adamaquesbi> It is, and our goal is to be even more implicated in the project 14:14:53 <adamaquesbi> Thanks ! 14:15:52 <rafaelweingartner> Welcome 14:16:12 <mkarpiarz> I agree we either need more reviewers or existing reviewers should spend more time reviewing changes. 14:16:51 <rafaelweingartner> I mean, I try to review everything I can 14:17:04 <rafaelweingartner> but sometimes, we fall short of a second pair of eyes on patches 14:17:44 <rafaelweingartner> the nova process is interesting, but I am not sure how it would work for us 14:17:55 <rafaelweingartner> for instance, if I propose a patch, let's say the reprocessing API 14:17:56 <mkarpiarz> I can only help when I'm not working on something else and I know Pierre is involved in other OpenStack projects as well. 14:18:10 <rafaelweingartner> then somobody else would need to review it 14:18:33 <rafaelweingartner> mkarpiarz: exactly! 14:18:38 <priteau> rafaelweingartner: I think it's about defining focus (let's all look at the same patches at the same time) and deadlines 14:19:07 <adamaquesbi> I agree with @priteau 14:19:13 <priteau> I have been out of the office due to house move recently, and had to catch up with various work projects last week. Going forward I should have more time for reviews. 14:20:30 <rafaelweingartner> priteau: how can we sync/define the same target for use? I mean, should we try to somehow e-mail each other and, for instance, define a target patch for a month? 14:20:34 <rafaelweingartner> or something like that 14:20:59 <priteau> I would suggest an Etherpad to avoid email back and forth 14:21:16 <priteau> And one large patch per two-week period (between each IRC meeting) 14:21:44 <rafaelweingartner> That sounds good to me 14:22:35 <adamaquesbi> what about smaller patches ? 14:23:56 <priteau> I would like that we approve trivial patches quickly, so they don't stay polluting our review queue 14:24:40 <priteau> I suggest a bi-weekly run over the trivial patches to make them go away 14:25:11 <adamaquesbi> meaning two times a week, or once every two weeks ? 14:25:22 <priteau> every two weeks, at the IRC meeting 14:25:27 <priteau> For example please approve https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-dashboard/+/800034 14:25:32 <rafaelweingartner> once every two weeks 14:25:40 <priteau> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-tempest-plugin/+/792313 14:25:42 <priteau> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-tempest-plugin/+/791138 14:25:55 <priteau> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-specs/+/791137 14:28:52 <priteau> Should we try this at least for the next month? 14:28:59 <rafaelweingartner> I would say so 14:29:11 <rafaelweingartner> do we define a target patch for this process? 14:29:16 <rafaelweingartner> then we can sync back in our next meeting 14:29:29 <priteau> yes, would be gerat 14:30:29 <priteau> I suppose it's one of these: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/cloudkitty+status:open+label:Review-Priority%252B1 14:33:30 <rafaelweingartner> what if we start with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/684734? 14:33:34 <rafaelweingartner> that is a long standing one 14:33:58 <rafaelweingartner> and, if that gets merged, it would trigger this other: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/684747 14:34:21 <opendevreview> Merged openstack/cloudkitty-specs master: setup.cfg: Replace dashes with underscores https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-specs/+/791137 14:34:27 <priteau> Do you feel they are more important than your own features? 14:34:48 <rafaelweingartner> no I do not, but I do not like to see these legacy things there :) 14:35:01 <rafaelweingartner> I actually find the reporcessing API way more important 14:35:21 <priteau> Time is limited so I would prefer to focus on features that we want to see in CloudKitty :) 14:35:50 <rafaelweingartner> alright, so, what about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/786651? 14:36:10 <priteau> Sounds good, I started working on it before this meeting 14:36:18 <opendevreview> Merged openstack/cloudkitty-dashboard master: Moving IRC network reference to OFTC https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-dashboard/+/800034 14:36:23 <rafaelweingartner> it is an interesting feature that enables people to handle unexpected swaps in assumed ever growing metrics 14:36:42 <adamaquesbi> sounds good 14:37:01 <rafaelweingartner> it is a plan then 14:38:22 <rafaelweingartner> Ok, I added it to etherpad already as the target review of the meeting 14:39:03 <priteau> Do you have a link to this etherpad? 14:39:55 <rafaelweingartner> I used the same etherpad that we use for meeting 14:40:03 <rafaelweingartner> should we create one just for these patches? 14:40:36 <priteau> Should be fine, as long as we know where it is 14:41:41 <rafaelweingartner> Yes, that is why I thought that using the same etherpad would facilitate things 14:41:53 <rafaelweingartner> So, moving on, I would like to brifly discuss Xena release 14:41:54 <rafaelweingartner> #topic Xena release 14:42:28 <rafaelweingartner> the open patches that I have, I think that they are interesting to get into this release, but I am not sure if it is feasible for us to review all of them 14:42:44 <rafaelweingartner> therefore, I would like to at least define one target major feature 14:42:55 <rafaelweingartner> for me, the most interesting is the reprocessing API 14:43:10 <rafaelweingartner> therefore, this is one thing that I would like to work towards to get into Xena 14:43:13 <priteau> I think for me too 14:43:31 <rafaelweingartner> do you guys have other preferences? 14:44:31 <adamaquesbi> I have been looking at the work that's been done on CK the last few weeks/months, and I too think that the API should be dealt with first 14:45:15 <rafaelweingartner> Cool, it seems that we are on the same page 14:45:24 <rafaelweingartner> maybe we can target it, after the custom gnocchi query 14:45:30 <adamaquesbi> yes 14:45:35 <rafaelweingartner> that patch is quite long, specially the unit testing part 14:45:52 <rafaelweingartner> I tried to cover all of the processing/reprocessing code with unit testings, as it is a sensitive piece of code 14:46:04 <adamaquesbi> we can divide it into two patches then maybe ? 14:46:18 <mkarpiarz> Personally I'd like this one to be merged since I've tested it and can confirm it's working: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/778922 14:46:57 <rafaelweingartner> mkarpiarz: that is a quick win, I would say 14:47:17 <rafaelweingartner> it is smaller, and easier to review, than the others I guess 14:47:40 <priteau> I will try to review it before tackling the big gnocchi one 14:48:07 <mkarpiarz> Cool, do we need another +2 or +1 then? 14:48:18 <rafaelweingartner> awesome thanks 14:48:23 <mkarpiarz> Ah, thanks priteau. 14:48:42 <rafaelweingartner> Do you guys have some other review priorities to ask for? 14:49:23 <mkarpiarz> Nope. 14:49:27 <adamaquesbi> I do have a minor patch : https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/775359 14:51:47 <priteau> adamaquesbi: you don't need the big comment block with Proposed fix for story#2006672, task#36940 14:51:54 <rafaelweingartner> Ok 14:52:14 <adamaquesbi> Alright, should I remove it ? 14:52:26 <rafaelweingartner> i think that we can post the comments there 14:52:41 <adamaquesbi> I have some comments in other projects too 14:52:46 <rafaelweingartner> and discuss the code changes in the patch, otherwise it will become a bit complicated to track suggestions 14:53:51 <priteau> I'll post comments on Gerrit 14:53:54 <rafaelweingartner> guys, we are running out of time. Therefore, before we close it for today. I will open for general topics then. 14:53:56 <rafaelweingartner> #topic AOB 14:54:47 <priteau> The next virtual PTG will take place October 18-22, 2021. 14:55:10 <mkarpiarz> Ah, thanks for the reminder! 14:55:21 <opendevreview> adam aquesbi proposed openstack/cloudkitty master: Avoid DivByZero if there is no metrics to collect https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/775359 14:55:27 <priteau> Registration: https://openinfra-ptg.eventbrite.com/ 14:55:51 <priteau> We should start thinking about date/time. I think it worked well when we used time of the IRC meeting 14:56:44 <rafaelweingartner> yes 14:56:56 <priteau> To signup your team, you must complete BOTH the survey[1] AND reserve time in the ethercalc[2] by end of day July 21. 14:56:56 <rafaelweingartner> I put it in the agenda for the next meeting 14:57:32 <rafaelweingartner> I will have to close now 14:57:33 <rafaelweingartner> Thank you guys for participating. Have a nice week. 14:57:37 <priteau> We need to sign up *before* the next meeting 14:57:42 <rafaelweingartner> #endmeeting