20:00:18 <markwash> #startmeeting glance
20:00:19 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jul 10 20:00:18 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is markwash. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:00:20 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:00:22 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'glance'
20:00:24 <markwash> o/
20:00:33 <nikhil___> o/
20:00:33 <zhiyan> o/
20:00:42 <TravT> o/
20:00:45 <arnaud> o/
20:01:15 <markwash> okay let's get started
20:01:24 <markwash> agenda here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda
20:01:29 <markwash> #topic bug day
20:01:35 <markwash> we got a little heat on the mailing list recently
20:01:55 <markwash> jokke_: since you added the item to the agenda, here's the mic
20:01:57 * markwash passes the mic
20:02:28 <markwash> oh
20:02:34 <markwash> I guess he didn't o/
20:02:35 <markwash> haha
20:02:44 <arnaud> lol
20:02:52 <arnaud> ok
20:02:54 <markwash> arnaud: any thoughts about bug day from your quarter?
20:02:55 <arnaud> I can take the mic
20:02:57 <ativelkov> o/
20:03:06 <arnaud> so based on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-bug-day
20:03:16 <arnaud> the bug day will happen Week 14-18
20:03:23 <arnaud> which is next week
20:03:31 <arnaud> I will send an email to the ML later today
20:03:39 <markwash> great!
20:03:40 <jokke_> hello
20:03:40 <jokke_> sorry
20:03:48 <arnaud> something to add jokke_ ?
20:03:48 <markwash> jokke_: no worries
20:03:52 <arnaud> for the bug day?
20:03:54 <zhiyan> I have a business travel next week, sorry
20:04:07 <jokke_> no ... I was just hoping we get bit more attendance for that than you and me :)
20:04:12 <arnaud> :)
20:04:26 <markwash> the ML post might recruit a few more
20:04:31 <arnaud> yep
20:04:33 <ashwini> what day in that week?
20:04:46 <nikhil___> Mon or Tue or Wed
20:04:47 <ativelkov> what's the purpose of bug day: a bug triage or bug fixing?
20:05:02 <ativelkov> (or adding new bugs? :))
20:05:06 <nikhil___> triage mostly
20:05:31 <arnaud> what about Tuesday?
20:05:50 <markwash> Tuesday is good for me
20:05:52 <jokke_> I'd vote for Wed ... might have some actions needed at the start of the week due change landing prod
20:05:53 <markwash> Monday is a bit hard
20:06:02 <markwash> Wednesday also works for me
20:06:08 <arnaud> ok so Wed
20:06:11 <nikhil___> +1 -> Tuesday
20:06:13 <nikhil___> :)
20:06:16 <jokke_> if that's ok with you guys
20:06:17 <arnaud> lol
20:06:18 <zhiyan> bug fixing imo. ativelkov
20:06:29 <jokke_> I probably can do Tue as well
20:06:31 <zhiyan> i can try to join at Wed
20:06:36 <jokke_> Mon I really rather not
20:06:42 <arnaud> I mean it can be Tuesday and Wednesday
20:06:49 <nikhil___> +1
20:06:49 <arnaud> but you don't have to be 100% both days
20:06:51 <jokke_> +3
20:07:05 <arnaud> ok so let's do that then
20:07:14 <jokke_> I think we have enough for 2 days anyways
20:07:16 <ativelkov> What are the hours? I'll be happy to join any day, but my time zone is quite far from yours
20:07:21 <jokke_> if not, happy days
20:07:38 <jokke_> ativelkov: which timezone you're at?
20:07:45 <ativelkov> UTC+4
20:08:13 <boris-42> hi all
20:08:19 <markwash> let's at least have a clear kickoff
20:08:22 <jokke_> ativelkov: we can start on your afternoon and I carry that over for the US folks when they wake up :P
20:08:26 <markwash> so I know when to first show up
20:08:47 <zhiyan> mine is utc+8 :P
20:08:56 <ativelkov> jokke_: great, this will do
20:08:58 <jokke_> I'm currently on utc+1
20:09:21 <ativelkov> So, we'll have 24 hours of bugs :)
20:09:26 <markwash> utc-7
20:09:40 <nikhil___> relay
20:09:44 <arnaud> :)
20:09:55 <jokke_> markwash: you need to move 1000miles East :D
20:09:56 * nikhil___ remembers olympics
20:10:08 <nikhil___> jokke_: more like 6K
20:11:16 <markwash> why 1000 east? why not 14000 miles west?
20:11:23 <markwash> okay
20:11:24 <jokke_> we have 265 open bugs which of 105 are still at New
20:11:48 <jokke_> so I'm pretty sure we have enough to do even passing the stick on
20:11:55 <markwash> +1
20:12:30 <arnaud> also I think we need to do a better job at tagging
20:12:34 <arnaud> the bugs
20:12:42 <jokke_> ##openstack-glance-bugs?
20:12:56 <arnaud> 9 propose-close
20:12:56 <arnaud> 9 low-hanging-fruit
20:12:56 <arnaud> 5 db
20:12:56 <arnaud> 4 testing
20:12:59 <arnaud> ...
20:13:19 <jokke_> arnaud: we also would need to document the tags
20:13:38 <arnaud> good point
20:13:49 <markwash> I'm guessing we'll get a lot out of propose-close as we go through that list
20:13:50 <jokke_> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Bug_Tags has only propose-close after I put it there
20:13:59 <jokke_> markwash: hopefully
20:14:23 <markwash> so, we're trying for two days? did I hear that correctly?
20:14:27 <nikhil___> why no on #openstack-glance ?
20:15:08 <arnaud> yep markwash
20:15:11 <jokke_> nikhil___: I was just thinking to have the bug off from our normal daily chat + off from review announcements
20:15:12 <nikhil___> one more question are those 2 days as per UTC time?
20:15:24 <jokke_> markwash: correct Tue+Wed
20:15:45 <jokke_> markwash: When do you want to do Kickoff?
20:15:56 <nikhil___> jokke_: ah k
20:15:57 <markwash> okay, sounds good, let see that email to the list, I think folks can respond with their general plans for the 2 day timeframe
20:16:25 <jokke_> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Bug_Tags
20:16:37 <markwash> jokke_: I'm not sure, I think we just want to keep people mutually engaged, so probably we can do that if people give a sense of when they'll start in a response on the ML
20:16:48 <markwash> so let's pass on a kickoff
20:16:58 <markwash> and just try to keep visibility high
20:17:09 <markwash> sound okay?
20:17:12 <jokke_> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-bug-day
20:17:20 <jokke_> markwash: sounds good to me
20:17:40 <markwash> okay great
20:17:43 <markwash> next up!
20:17:55 <markwash> #topic functional testing to tempest
20:18:13 <markwash> jokke_: this is your item
20:18:22 <markwash> but nikhil___ has some info too, I imagine
20:18:23 <jokke_> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106146
20:18:41 <jokke_> I think nikhil___ you were driving this ... I just brought it to agenda
20:18:46 <markwash> gotcha
20:18:47 <markwash> thanks
20:18:59 <markwash> anybody not on board with this plan?
20:19:47 <nikhil___> jokke_: oh glad you brought it up
20:19:53 <jokke_> My plan was to ask around when we will start, but nikhil___ proposed the spec in between ... so my only quiestion would be timing?
20:20:10 <nikhil___> think many people have interest in this
20:20:20 <nikhil___> zhiyan: hemanth__ ^ ?
20:20:40 <ativelkov> Will this move only glance/tests/functional? Or glance/tests/integration as well?
20:20:45 <nikhil___> jokke_: oops 0:-)
20:20:52 <zhiyan> nikhil___: yes
20:21:10 <markwash> I think it will save the need for some of the legacy tests in glance/tests/functional, perhaps
20:21:10 <hemanth__> nikhil___: sure
20:21:26 <markwash> since the main goal of those legacy tests was retiring a lot of glance/tests/functional
20:21:52 <markwash> but I strongly encourage people to second guess me on that position :-)
20:22:03 <nikhil___> jokke_: zhiyan hemanth__ : haven't added any other assignees to that yet, if you all wanted to add your name and push a PS ?
20:22:34 <jokke_> I would prefer us not to throw all the functionals to tempest at least to start with
20:22:48 <nikhil___> markwash: agree, tentatively that seems like the approach we want to take.
20:22:51 <zhiyan> +1 :)
20:23:06 <jokke_> I think that's something we would need to discuss what funtionals and perhaps integrations we want to move
20:23:09 <nikhil___> jokke_: +1 , if we can do it in staggered fashion
20:23:18 <markwash> okay, so maybe we can take cleaning up integration tests as a followup?
20:23:25 <jokke_> +1
20:23:43 <markwash> fine by me
20:24:13 <markwash> back to the question of when
20:24:20 <markwash> what's our goal? j2?
20:24:29 <jokke_> can we embed also re-enablement of some tests ... I've noticed that we have quite a few tests skipped with comments "skipped until bug 100xxxxx gets resolved"
20:24:30 <markwash> j3?
20:24:30 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 100 in launchpad "uploading po file overwrites authors list" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/100
20:24:42 <nikhil___> +1 -> j3
20:24:47 <markwash> pipe down uvirtbot
20:25:02 <jokke_> markwash: how about j2 non-voting j3 fully in game tests removed from codebase?
20:25:14 <zhiyan> nikhil___: may i know where you want to move those test cases to tempest? api or scenario?
20:25:33 <nikhil___> jokke_: only concern, I'd is not to raise TC's hope of adding more tests to tempest
20:25:33 <jokke_> or do we have ready place for them?
20:25:58 <nikhil___> on the other hand whatever helps, I guess
20:25:58 <markwash> I think the TC is only tracking the binary image data coverage part
20:26:18 <markwash> they probably are happy leaving the rest of it to us
20:26:20 <jokke_> markwash: that's the one that is there already? :P
20:26:48 <markwash> jokke_: sorry, what do you mean exactly?
20:26:54 <nikhil___> markwash: while talking on the qe channel, I heard murmurs of not enough Glance tests in tempest and that someone got correlated with the wiki
20:27:27 <markwash> jokke_: fwiw I like that timetable you proposed
20:27:33 <nikhil___> s/someone/somehow/gc
20:27:38 <markwash> I'd like to see some concrete progress in j2
20:27:46 <jokke_> markwash: I think it was last or previous week mentioned that the tempest tests for glance are already using binary data, no?
20:28:14 <markwash> ah, perhaps
20:28:47 <markwash> so I know nikhil___ is looking into that binary data testing stuff, he can confirm when he has enough info
20:28:59 <nikhil___> ah
20:29:01 <markwash> it sounded like there was at least something we should add to the tests to satisfy the gaps
20:29:08 <zhiyan1> (I just disconnected from irc and now back, by this id, hum, networking is kill me, again)
20:29:19 <nikhil___> what markwash said :)
20:29:43 <markwash> apart from that effort, who is looking to help with adding the glance functional tests to tempest?
20:29:53 <markwash> that probably needs to happen before we remove the tests from glance
20:30:05 <zhiyan1> nikhil___: i just said i like join this efforts
20:30:12 <markwash> zhiyan1: great
20:30:14 <jokke_> I need some pointers where to start with, but will be more than happy to help
20:30:24 <markwash> okay I guess we'll see people patch their names into the glance-spec
20:30:31 <markwash> so we'll have people and a timetable
20:30:33 <markwash> sounds good to me
20:30:40 <markwash> ready for next topic?
20:30:43 <zhiyan1> may i know where you want to move those test cases to tempest? api or scenario?
20:30:48 <zhiyan1> nikhil___: ^
20:31:03 <zhiyan1> (i'm not sure i posted this msg successfully)
20:31:09 <markwash> zhiyan1: I'm a little in the dark about tempest's structure--do you have a recommendation?
20:31:27 <jokke_> same here
20:31:28 <zhiyan1> frankly, me too. will check it
20:31:50 <nikhil___> zhiyan1: markwash jokke_ : think we should plan to attend the openstack-qe team meeting later today to figure it out
20:31:58 <nikhil___> or some/one of us :)
20:32:06 <jokke_> @ which time is that?
20:32:08 <nikhil___> it's at 22UTC iirc
20:32:22 <zhiyan1> nikhil___: good idea
20:32:34 <jokke_> I'll see if I stay awake :D
20:32:38 <markwash> I cannot make that unfortunately, but I look forward to hearing back :-)
20:32:52 <markwash> if somebody wants to dive in and propose a change to tempest, though
20:32:58 <markwash> I'm sure the tempest core folks would give us some pointers
20:33:07 <markwash> if we accidentally picked the wrong spot the first time :-)
20:33:12 <jokke_> :P
20:33:14 <nikhil___> markwash: np, last time mtreinish asked me to join to discuss a bit more however I was waiting on creating that spec to give a better picture :)
20:33:21 <boris-42> markwash guys you should make more rally benchmarks as well!
20:33:22 <boris-42> =)
20:33:49 <jokke_> boris-42: you're more than welcome to contribute ;D
20:33:55 <boris-42> jokke_ where?)
20:34:10 <jokke_> ^^
20:34:11 * nikhil___ hides
20:34:18 <boris-42> lol
20:34:25 <markwash> boris-42 has provided us the framework :-)
20:34:36 <boris-42> markwash and integration in gates
20:34:40 <boris-42> with reports=)
20:34:50 <jokke_> markwash: and apparently just volunteered to extend that :)
20:34:53 <zhiyan1> yeah, seems it's useful to catch perf issue
20:35:04 <markwash> all right, let see if the details of tempest testing can coagulate around that spec, I think we can move on
20:35:08 <boris-42> markwash btw we have base support of SLA=)
20:35:12 <arnaud> boris-42, where can we find the reports?
20:35:22 <boris-42> arnaud https://github.com/stackforge/rally
20:35:26 <markwash> #topic rally and osprofiler
20:35:33 <markwash> boris-42: ping
20:35:33 <markwash> :-)
20:35:36 <boris-42> markwash pong lol
20:35:37 <boris-42> =)
20:35:44 <boris-42> markwash so as I don't sleep=)
20:36:01 <markwash> boris-42: can you link us in again to your glance osprofiler integration change
20:36:04 <boris-42> probably some of us know that I am annoying everybody with requests to merge my patches ASAP
20:36:05 <boris-42> =)
20:36:06 <markwash> sorry, I lost the link
20:36:21 <boris-42> markwash https://github.com/stackforge/osprofiler
20:36:30 <zhiyan1> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105635/
20:36:31 <boris-42> ^ So this is the repo of project
20:36:52 <boris-42> and this is already merged in glance https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103362/
20:37:06 <boris-42> So lemme introduce you guys in what is osprofilre
20:37:12 <boris-42> and what are future plans
20:37:16 <markwash> zhiyan1: thanks!
20:37:48 <boris-42> Major difference from cProfiler and osprofiler that our goal is to build one trace of points
20:37:57 <boris-42> that goes through all services and projects
20:38:14 <boris-42> e.g. nova during booting of VM requests images from glance
20:38:30 <boris-42> okay it's simpler to show lol
20:38:41 <markwash> +1
20:38:43 <jokke_> shoot
20:38:47 <arnaud> where we find an example of report?
20:38:52 <markwash> the trace view is great
20:38:55 <boris-42> https://gist.github.com/boris-42/c3c3ee1c2c7db40de236
20:38:59 <boris-42> ^ this is plain text
20:39:08 <boris-42> e.g. json with tree of objects
20:39:29 <boris-42> in info goes everything from tracepoint that you would like to put
20:39:42 <boris-42> and this can be presented in different ways
20:39:51 <markwash> boris-42: do you have a link to share that shows the overall timing view of a request?
20:39:52 <boris-42> http://pavlovic.me/rally/profiler/ one is this
20:40:03 <boris-42> markwash ^ you mean this ?
20:40:12 <markwash> yes that's it
20:40:22 <boris-42> actually I am planing to use a bit different thing
20:40:30 <boris-42> http://bl.ocks.org/kerryrodden/7090426
20:40:37 <boris-42> ^ this seems much better
20:40:50 <arnaud> f a n c y
20:40:59 <markwash> haha yes
20:41:06 <boris-42> so the major super cool stuff about profiler is
20:41:09 <boris-42> that it works out of box
20:41:17 <boris-42> it can be turned on always even in production
20:41:22 <jokke_> boris-42: that looks nifty
20:41:23 <boris-42> and it won't produce any load
20:41:32 <boris-42> unit it is triggered
20:41:42 <boris-42> by special headers in HTTP request
20:41:58 <zhiyan1> boris-42: the result looks pretty good , btw, that's the unit of "finished" and "start" field?
20:42:13 <boris-42> zhiyan1 milisecs
20:42:24 <boris-42> 10^-3 secs
20:42:40 <zhiyan1> boris-42: thanks
20:42:53 <markwash> and the key thing is those headers are actually secure in the sense that
20:43:01 <boris-42> markwash yep they are secure
20:43:12 <boris-42> markwash you have to know HMAC key that is specified in api-paste.ini
20:43:18 <boris-42> to be able to send proper headers
20:43:21 <markwash> you have to have a private key in order to trigger a trace generation
20:43:25 <boris-42> yep yep
20:43:46 <markwash> so with this private key situation, the idea is to have the default for osprofiler integration to be "on"
20:44:03 <markwash> and that's the main thing I wanted people to know about
20:44:13 <boris-42> markwash and one more thing
20:44:15 <zhiyan1> boris-42: so the value of "SECRET_KEY" in glance-api-paste.ini you proposed is a hardcode value? or just a env name
20:44:16 <boris-42> if it is on by default
20:44:27 <boris-42> zhiyan1 it's hardcoded
20:44:36 <boris-42> zhiyan1 and should be the same in all projects
20:44:38 <zhiyan1> operator needs to change it as needed right?
20:44:42 <zhiyan1> ok
20:44:44 <zhiyan1> got
20:44:45 <boris-42> zhiyan1 yep like passwords
20:44:45 <boris-42> -)
20:44:53 <boris-42> don't use 12345 as a pass
20:44:54 <boris-42> =)
20:44:55 <jokke_> so is this trace done only on the requests where the trigger is?
20:45:00 <boris-42> jokke_ yep
20:45:08 <jokke_> Not like you put it on and need to remember to turn it off as well
20:45:09 <boris-42> jokke_ but it can be extended in future
20:45:13 <jokke_> oh cool
20:45:16 <jokke_> no I like that
20:45:19 <jokke_> ;)
20:45:23 <boris-42> I mean we can extend it
20:45:27 <boris-42> to trace every X request
20:45:35 <boris-42> and collect useful info for opertors
20:45:35 <zhiyan1> boris-42: so those trace data will be send out from glance by message right?
20:45:43 <boris-42> zhiyan1 it's first implementation
20:45:51 <boris-42> based on Ceilometer + oslo.messaging
20:46:07 <boris-42> in future probably we will be able to use something else
20:46:08 <zhiyan1> so it will spend some overhead , iiuc right?
20:46:22 <boris-42> zhiyan1 yep if it is triggered
20:46:27 <boris-42> zhiyan1 it will produce overhead
20:46:35 <markwash> (lets give this a few more minutes, we need to spend some time on the Graffiti and Artifacts stuff)
20:46:49 <boris-42> markwash ok
20:46:52 <markwash> I think if folks can follow up with questions on the review it would be most helpful
20:46:53 <zhiyan1> ok markwash
20:46:57 <boris-42> Btw
20:46:59 <boris-42> one more thing
20:47:12 <markwash> as it stands, we have a config option deployers can use to turn *off* profiling completely
20:47:15 <boris-42> if it will be turned on by default we will be able to add support profiling in rally gates
20:47:26 <markwash> and they can also (with more difficulty) rip it out of the paste config
20:47:50 <boris-42> so you will be able to get traces during benchmark in nice report
20:47:52 <boris-42> automatically
20:47:54 <zhiyan1> markwash: so what about disable it by default? (seems you like enable it)
20:48:05 <boris-42> e.g. put any amount of traces + put proper benchmark (via plugging) + and run it
20:48:11 <boris-42> and get all that you need=)
20:48:29 <boris-42> so we will get rid of holly wars about perfromance=)
20:48:37 <markwash> I want it on by default so that its on in the gates and is generally useable by folks without having to restart services
20:48:58 <markwash> and I think the crypto story is good enough to allow us to turn it on by default
20:48:59 <boris-42> zhiyan1 yep as it doesn't produce any overhhead
20:49:04 <boris-42> zhiyan1 why not keeping it on?)
20:49:27 <markwash> okay, but I think I need to cut it off here, so we can have some time to check in with ativelkov and TravT
20:49:40 <boris-42> markwash ok good
20:49:47 <markwash> thanks guys, let's follow up on the review
20:49:59 <markwash> #topic Graffiti / Catalog
20:50:11 <TravT> re: Graffiti
20:50:13 <markwash> TravT, lakshmiS, et al: still around?
20:50:15 <TravT> We've started posting code and I'm about to post an update to the spec based on review comments and things we've discovered in development.
20:50:26 <TravT> Glance: #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105904
20:50:32 <TravT> python-glanceClient -  #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105231/
20:50:49 <TravT> And a coupld of Horizon ones in progress
20:51:07 <TravT> #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99761/   #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/104063/
20:51:29 <arnaud> great TravT
20:51:53 <TravT> Everything is work in progress, but we're always open to feedback.
20:52:03 <markwash> excellent
20:52:10 <markwash> I look forward to the update to the spec
20:52:39 <wayne__> one question that has come up is, we've added CRUD methods to glance/db/sqlalchemy/api.py...do we need to add similar support to the registry/api.py?
20:53:11 <markwash> I think that is necessary, yes
20:53:12 <jokke_> wayne__: yes please
20:53:19 <zhiyan1> yes
20:53:21 <wayne__> ok
20:53:30 <markwash> it would be nice to add them to the simple db api as well
20:53:31 <zhiyan1> and simple
20:53:41 <wayne__> and is the glance/db/simple used primarily for testing?
20:53:41 <zhiyan1> yes
20:54:12 <markwash> any other questions or notes for now?
20:54:20 <lakshmiS> Some early reviews on the code submitted will be helpful since we are trying to get ourselves familiar
20:54:32 <markwash> good point
20:54:47 <markwash> okay, let's move along, only a little time left
20:54:52 <markwash> #topic artifact repository
20:55:19 <markwash> btw the mission statement change was approved
20:55:22 <markwash> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98002/
20:55:27 <markwash> ativelkov: any notes for us today?
20:55:34 <ativelkov> Work is in progress here. Modeling the common metadata fileds. DB, migrations, API, all the stuff
20:55:35 <TravT> \o/
20:55:50 <ativelkov> Will post first changesets soon and update the spec accordingly
20:55:57 * jokke_ appalauds
20:56:14 <ativelkov> Got the idea about the in-plugin reference management
20:56:48 <ativelkov> For now I want only the static references to exist, however the plugins will get the interface to do the queries during artifact imports
20:56:54 <markwash> ativelkov: do you think that approach will work out, at least initially?
20:57:06 <zhiyan1> ativelkov: sound great, looking forward to view them
20:57:37 <markwash> ativelkov: okay, so for now you're saying, artifacts can resolve dynamic lookups to static during import
20:57:49 <ativelkov> markwash: exatcly
20:57:56 <markwash> okay
20:58:11 <ativelkov> Hope it should be fine for Heat
20:58:22 <markwash> I might need to negotiate some breathing room around that, but I don't think you're moving in the wrong direction at all
20:58:33 <markwash> so I think we're in good shape
20:58:45 <markwash> s/need to/try to/
20:58:46 <markwash> :-)
20:58:46 <ativelkov> If not, we'll have to provide a way for plugins to expose custom API methods
20:59:03 <ativelkov> Which is doable but rises securty questions
20:59:24 * markwash nods
20:59:30 <markwash> okay, thanks folks!
20:59:31 <jokke_> -1 on that if possible
20:59:35 <markwash> #topic open discussion
20:59:40 <markwash> 1 minute!
20:59:46 <markwash> actually we don't usually have followers in this late timeslot
20:59:47 <jokke_> thanks markwash that was productive hour
20:59:52 <markwash> just a bunch of people who need to go to bed :-)
21:00:02 <zhiyan1> markwash: i need some edu, to know how to enable auto-config-gen in gate
21:00:35 <zhiyan1> let's move to glance irc room
21:00:41 <ativelkov> Did we get any volunteer to fix https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1315321 ? I remember it was discussed last week but didn't see the result
21:00:42 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1315321 in glance "image_size_cap not checked in v2" [Undecided,In progress]
21:01:05 <markwash> ativelkov: hmm, not yet
21:01:34 <markwash> thanks everybody
21:01:37 <markwash> #endmeeting