14:01:24 #startmeeting Glance 14:01:25 Meeting started Thu Jan 29 14:01:24 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sigmavirus24. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:26 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:01:28 The meeting name has been set to 'glance' 14:01:58 So it looks like today is going to be a very light day on participation and topics to discuss 14:02:16 I don't think many are here 14:02:34 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda 14:02:45 #topic TODOs/Updates 14:02:54 Anyone have anything to discuss for this? 14:02:58 o/ 14:03:06 * flaper87 thought there was no meeting today 14:03:20 No worries flaper87 14:03:28 Any TODOs/Updates from you flaper87 ? 14:03:51 the client patch landed (with the `--limit` fix) 14:03:58 I need to add it to the to-release list of things 14:04:10 Good 14:04:17 other than that, I don't have many updates. I'd like us to talk a bit about what we'll do with changes-since 14:04:28 since we need to make a final decision there 14:04:31 and 14:04:36 flaper87: probably wait until more people are around for that 14:04:40 Come back around to that? 14:04:50 just in case some folks missed this: We decieded to push the glance v1->v2 changes to L 14:04:51 (It won't be long I promise) 14:04:59 flaper87: in Nova you mean :) 14:05:06 yup 14:05:18 kragniz: sigmavirus24 yup, we definitely need more ppl for that 14:05:32 * flaper87 proposed the push back himself 14:05:40 * flaper87 sometimes doesn't understand himself 14:05:43 but oh well. 14:05:54 On my end the policy spec implementation is going slower than I expected but I think I'm picking up momentum. Still not sure it'll be ready for k-2 though 14:05:57 other than that, I think I'm ok 14:06:06 Also I still have feedback from stevelle and zhiyan to address on it 14:06:17 kragniz: any updates you'd like ot include? 14:06:33 for swift retry spec, I'm going to wait for feedback from stuart before pushing any new changes 14:06:59 Seems fair kragniz 14:07:05 that's about it 14:07:15 #topic Reviews/Bugs/Releases 14:07:24 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/148575 14:07:53 I think we should just use oslo.middleware 14:07:59 I've been meaning to get back to that review 14:08:02 I feel quite strongly we should not create more code duplication 14:08:09 So that healthcheck middleware that jokke_ implemented (I pinged him but he's still not here) was cribbed mostly from swift but oslo.middleware now has a heftier implementation available 14:08:36 * flaper87 has no idea what heftier means 14:08:47 I think jokke_ is thoroughly set against that, so if it is the decision of the glance team to use oslo.middleware, someone else may need to implement it 14:09:04 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/137416/ <- these babies need some love 14:09:05 flaper87: the oslo.middleware version does a lot more (database checks, and other checks that I'm forgetting) 14:09:08 It's a lot more code 14:09:11 flaper87: bigger 14:09:16 ah ok, nice 14:09:22 * flaper87 learnt something today 14:09:25 (as every other day) 14:09:29 yeah, I agree 14:09:39 flaper87: I agree. That review is wonderful 14:10:00 I'm with y'all re using oslo.middleware right away 14:10:22 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/150992/ 14:10:31 If anyone was having issues with grenade yesterday, you can recheck now I think 14:10:44 That review was merged and pinned oslo.vmware to <0.9.0 because of another requirements clash 14:10:50 awesome 14:11:03 * sigmavirus24 is thinking the oslo libraries should all be capped in stable/juno at this point maybe 14:11:08 nice, the taskflow patch got stuck on that 14:11:16 That's the second release this week that broke the gate 14:11:22 (With the exact same problem too) 14:11:42 sigmavirus24: wasn't there talk of stable oslo branches? 14:11:43 Oh one other review I want people to look at while I have you all gathered here 14:11:48 * kragniz may be making things up 14:12:08 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80178/ 14:12:21 kragniz: I don't think so. The main discussion around oslo has been py26 compat 14:12:43 okay 14:12:56 Btw, there are some glance_store patches that also need discussion 14:13:09 For example: remove cinder? remove py26 support? remove gridfs ? 14:13:16 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/137310/ 14:13:20 ^ Remove py26 support 14:13:25 (I was just looking for that one flaper87 :)) 14:13:37 For the latest two, I think we pretty much agreed on doing that 14:13:45 the first one, however, needs some extra discussion 14:13:53 we can't remove py26 support yet, right? 14:14:08 kragniz: not sure, we did it in glance and all server projects 14:14:10 kragniz: that was my impression, yes 14:14:17 flaper87: so the server projects are fine 14:14:21 The libraries are not iirc 14:14:23 since juno supports py26 and depends on py26 14:14:29 oslo libraris not, yes. 14:14:32 The libraries are used at least in juno 14:14:34 glance_store, rather 14:14:50 flaper87: unless we're capping stable/juno's requirement on glance_store (or have already done so) 14:14:58 that was the goal, AFAICT 14:15:06 to cap stable branches 14:15:10 sigmavirus24, flaper87 : there is work going on now to cap all of the juno requirements 14:15:10 lemme dig more on that 14:15:19 jogo and dtroyer are working on it 14:15:21 awesome 14:15:26 * flaper87 attended that session 14:15:28 cool 14:15:32 but my memory is terrible 14:15:40 flaper87: https://github.com/openstack/glance/blob/stable/juno/requirements.txt#L60 14:15:46 and I'll look into an oslo.middleware release for you today or monday 14:15:56 dhellmann: good to know 14:15:58 Thanks 14:16:16 so if glance_store is capped on stable, we can remove py26? 14:16:22 sigmavirus24: I think we can cap glance_sotre for juno after the next release 14:16:26 kragniz: ^ 14:16:28 kragniz: that seems the reasonable way to do it 14:16:32 the next glance_store release, that is 14:16:35 okay 14:16:37 flaper87: right 14:16:51 And currently https://github.com/openstack/glance_store/blob/master/requirements.txt#L11 won't bite us :) 14:17:07 (That's been the requirement causing problems for oslo.{vmware,messaging}) 14:17:37 sigmavirus24: we can actually remove that requirement 14:17:39 I'll do that 14:17:52 we needed it for a different oslo-inc lib 14:17:58 we now just have context 14:18:03 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144631/ 14:18:07 (which we can remove later since oslo.context exists) 14:18:10 ^ That should be an easy review to workflow 14:18:19 or was that in utils? ARGH, my memory sucks 14:18:37 flaper87: you do too much :) 14:18:45 sigmavirus24: are you abusing my +2 powers right now? 14:18:49 * flaper87 has to be careful 14:18:53 approved the last one 14:19:02 sigmavirus24: and yes, I should realllyy do fewer things 14:19:04 :( 14:19:32 flaper87: I may be 14:19:44 lol 14:20:00 Any other reviews to point out specifically? 14:20:05 if we're approving namespace changes, this would be nice to have in: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/145238/ 14:20:19 since a few others depend on it 14:20:23 flaper87: while we have you trapped here ;) 14:21:34 LOL 14:22:06 kragniz: I'll take a look at that one in a bit 14:22:12 flaper87: cool 14:22:20 no rush 14:22:23 That whole topic needs some review love 14:22:25 :) 14:22:33 yup 14:22:49 * kragniz isn't having fun with porting glance to oslo_log 14:23:13 it's never fun but needed 14:23:18 As for bugs 14:23:20 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance-store/+bug/1415679 14:23:35 I'd really like to understand why s3 depends on eventlet 14:23:37 oh lord 14:23:38 That's one I didn't try to replicate last night but I added glance-store to it because it seemed most likely to be there 14:25:31 Seemed like one we might also want to debug before kilo is finally released 14:25:42 mmh, yeah 14:25:42 Anyone have other bugs/blueprints/reviews? 14:25:46 nope 14:25:48 https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1412798 14:25:55 can anyone reproduce this? 14:25:57 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance-store/+bug/1415679 14:26:04 #link https://review.openstack.org/151261 14:26:06 fresh ^ 14:26:07 kragniz: I haven't tried yet, but I will 14:26:12 sigmavirus24: thanks 14:27:41 Anything else? 14:27:53 not from me 14:27:56 I think 14:28:24 #topic Open Discussion 14:28:55 Doesn't seem like many more people showed up flaper87 but if you still want us to discuss that topic, we might as well 14:29:13 nah, it can wait 14:29:16 (changes-since == that topic) 14:29:25 I'd like to go through git-log and read the logs 14:29:36 probably there's some more info in those reviews 14:29:44 that will give us more context to make a final decision 14:30:53 oh, one quick thing 14:31:06 do we want hacking checks for the new oslo imports? 14:31:19 I see nova and neutron are adding them 14:31:23 sure 14:31:26 kragniz: crib those from nova? 14:31:26 why not 14:31:28 :D 14:31:35 sigmavirus24: that's my thought 14:31:37 :P 14:31:38 Before we do that 14:31:56 dhellmann: won't the old namespaces give deprecation warnings on newer versions of the oslo.* libraries? 14:32:12 sigmavirus24: yes, they do 14:32:59 I wonder if it'd be easier to catch those warnings in tests and fail if they're raised as an alternative method 14:33:21 hmm 14:33:37 you'd have to configure that particular warning to be handled as an error 14:34:22 once for each library, which isn't a lot 14:35:32 I think a simple regex hacking rule would be fine 14:35:46 I'm also wondering if there's value in having tests fail vs having tox -epep8 fail =P 14:35:48 (nova's proposed new rule: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146294/20/nova/hacking/checks.py) 14:36:17 (gerrit is really slow again today for me) 14:37:07 kragniz: yeah looks like it should work 14:37:15 it's short and simple 14:37:47 but yeah, that's not a pressing concern 14:38:57 Should we close the meeting early? 14:39:00 just checking no one morally opposed it 14:39:01 sure 14:39:14 I don't think we have much more to talk about 14:39:46 flaper87: objections? 14:39:49 nope 14:39:57 * flaper87 reads the backlog after saying nope 14:40:13 so yeah, no objections 14:40:14 :P 14:40:22 #endmeeting