14:00:15 <flaper87> #startmeeting Glance
14:00:20 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Feb 25 14:00:15 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is flaper87. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:21 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:23 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'glance'
14:00:25 <flaper87> o/
14:00:26 <avarner> o/
14:00:29 <bunting> o/
14:00:36 <mfedosin> o/
14:00:38 <dshakhray> o/
14:00:51 <kragniz> o/
14:01:00 <nikhil> o/
14:01:02 <kairat> o/
14:01:06 <ninag> o/
14:01:17 <flaper87> ok, I'd call that a quorum :D
14:01:20 <flaper87> #topic Agenda
14:01:23 <flaper87> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda
14:01:24 <rosmaita> o/
14:01:28 <flaper87> There, as usual
14:01:49 <mfedosin> where is agenda? :)
14:01:58 <flaper87> Everything that's not in the agenda, let's keep it for Open Discussion
14:02:04 <mfedosin> ah
14:02:11 <flaper87> there
14:02:16 <flaper87> I forgot to update the date
14:02:19 <flaper87> :D
14:02:20 <mfedosin> yup, that's better
14:02:20 <flaper87> #topic Updates Glare
14:02:34 <mfedosin> okay, let's begin
14:02:49 <mfedosin> first, as it was promised the spec is here
14:03:05 <mfedosin> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/283136/
14:03:09 <flaper87> ++
14:03:32 <mfedosin> after that I have several meetings with folks from murano and app-catalog
14:03:55 <mfedosin> they gave me several advice, but in general they like the proposal
14:04:24 <mfedosin> today we're going to join api-wg meeting with Nikhil
14:04:26 <flaper87> ok, We can start reviewing those specs in a couple of weeks from now. As soon as FF is over and we have a tag
14:04:32 <flaper87> that sounds great
14:04:43 <flaper87> joining the API-WG meeting is definitely good
14:04:47 <mfedosin> after that I'll update the spec based on all comments
14:05:21 <mfedosin> second, Ina Vasilevskaya is back after maternity leave
14:05:40 <mfedosin> And she's happy to join Glance/Glare team again
14:05:46 <flaper87> w0000h000, glad to have her back :D
14:06:21 <mfedosin> there are several administrative issues
14:06:45 <mfedosin> but should get better next week.
14:06:58 <flaper87> ok, got it! All good news
14:07:02 <flaper87> thanks for working on the spec
14:07:12 <mfedosin> np, it's my job :)
14:07:21 <flaper87> let's know the feedback from the api-wg
14:07:24 <flaper87> anything else?
14:07:36 <nikhil> there was some ping
14:07:47 <nikhil> about plugins requirement from murano
14:07:56 <mfedosin> there is a couple of minor things
14:07:58 <nikhil> and that hard coding was tough for them
14:08:11 <nikhil> but that's still in discussion I sup?
14:08:20 <flaper87> plugins as in API extensions ?
14:08:49 <mfedosin> about plugins and API extensions
14:08:50 <nikhil> hm, not exactly. loosely coupling of the code with those of the artifacts types
14:08:56 <mfedosin> We don't like it
14:09:24 <mfedosin> currently we want that all plugins will be placed in glance/objects folder
14:09:32 <flaper87> mmh, understood. I'll have to read their request a bit better
14:09:34 <mfedosin> like oslo.vo requires
14:09:36 <nikhil> I just wanted to point this out, I did not intend to start a discussion (ftr)
14:09:45 <flaper87> ok
14:09:46 <mfedosin> but Murano needs some external
14:09:56 <flaper87> let's move on. We can discuss this further on the spec
14:10:11 <mfedosin> I'll told you about our decision after this meeting in glance channel
14:10:27 <flaper87> ok
14:10:37 <flaper87> #topic updates nova v1->v2
14:10:42 <flaper87> There's not much to update here
14:10:48 <flaper87> This work was moved to Newton
14:10:52 <mfedosin> yeah
14:11:04 <flaper87> the one thing I did want to mention is that we need to schedule a session or something with the nova team
14:11:06 <mfedosin> code is still there, no review at all
14:11:20 <mfedosin> flaper87: ++
14:11:32 <flaper87> Also, we need to start the work on glanceclient to have that compatibility layer
14:11:45 <mfedosin> flaper87: is it a final decision?
14:11:52 <flaper87> mfedosin: what part?
14:12:00 <mfedosin> compatibility layer
14:12:26 <flaper87> oh, yeah. I mean, we were going to do it anyway. The thing is we wanted to postpone it for after the nova migration happened
14:12:49 <flaper87> We need to work on a compatibility layer that favors v2 and doesn't break v1
14:13:06 <flaper87> and then release it in glanceclient so we can move nova to v2 in N-1
14:13:23 <flaper87> The sooner we start this, the better
14:13:32 <mfedosin> I see
14:13:42 <kairat> So we need to change Mike's code, do we?
14:13:54 <mfedosin> kairat: I hope no
14:13:55 <kairat> And implement migration from scratch>
14:14:03 <kairat> Ok
14:14:03 <flaper87> no
14:14:09 <kairat> That's good
14:14:17 <mfedosin> we can take the code from Nova and put in the client
14:14:26 <flaper87> The compatibility layer should (hopefully) fit into what Mike did
14:14:45 <flaper87> mfedosin: sorta, we might want to change it a bit
14:14:47 <mfedosin> we just need to replace several utilities
14:14:50 <flaper87> anyway, that's the gist
14:14:58 <flaper87> We should have a spec for this, tbh
14:15:02 <flaper87> who wants to take this on?
14:15:13 * mfedosin hides
14:15:20 <flaper87> mfedosin: I won't let you >.>
14:15:27 <flaper87> you have too many things on your plate
14:15:29 <flaper87> :P
14:15:34 <flaper87> no one?
14:15:39 <flaper87> ping? :D
14:15:41 <nikhil> I want to do it
14:15:45 <mfedosin> Cyril's here?
14:15:47 <flaper87> nikhil: w000h000
14:15:49 <nikhil> but don't think people will like my dir in first place
14:15:58 <flaper87> mfedosin: he's not here, I could ping him
14:16:02 <Steap> mfedosin: yeah
14:16:08 <Steap> not the right nick though
14:16:09 <flaper87> oh, he is
14:16:11 <flaper87> :D
14:16:13 <mfedosin> flaper87: it was fast
14:16:27 <flaper87> nikhil: why's that?
14:16:37 <flaper87> Steap: interested in taking the compatibility layer on?
14:16:44 <nikhil> flaper87: I would like to know the details on putting the decision to add compat layer to client
14:16:53 <kairat> ++ to nikhil
14:16:56 <Steap> Wasn't there a feature freeze that blocked us on this ?
14:16:56 <mfedosin> Steap: writing the spec, actually
14:17:06 <flaper87> Steap: it's newton work
14:17:16 <flaper87> we need to write the spec
14:17:16 <nikhil> is this going in Nova or Glance?
14:17:23 <nikhil> seems like we need at both places
14:17:29 <Steap> or glanceclient ?
14:17:39 <Steap> nikhil: why would we have the compatibility layer in both places ?
14:17:40 <nikhil> it's common for client
14:17:50 <flaper87> nikhil: not really. On reason I'm asking for a spec is to also formalize this discussion
14:17:54 <nikhil> Steap: I meant a spec in both places
14:18:02 <flaper87> There have been several discussions about this
14:18:04 <Steap> nikhil: oh right
14:18:05 <nikhil> flaper87: gotcha
14:18:07 <flaper87> especially on IRC
14:18:13 <flaper87> but nothing is in a place we can reference
14:18:15 <nikhil> oh
14:18:17 <Steap> nikhil: a "define the layer" spec in glanceclient and a "use the layer" in Nova ? :p
14:18:21 <flaper87> so, this would be a good way to do that
14:18:26 <nikhil> dates would work! :)
14:18:40 <nikhil> flaper87: ah kk
14:18:41 <flaper87> I'm on the side that thinks this should go into glanceclient
14:18:50 <Steap> makes sense to me
14:18:57 <nikhil> Steap: I think nova is worried about long term eval of this
14:19:08 <nikhil> and for client it's mostly about how to structure the code
14:19:10 <flaper87> and nova shouldn't have any knowledge of this (a.k.a nova.images.glance shouldn't exist)
14:19:13 <Steap> nikhil: what do you mean ?
14:19:17 <nikhil> it will be impact on developers
14:19:18 <Steap> flaper87: yeah
14:19:24 <Steap> flaper87: it should be abstracted in glanceclient
14:19:53 <flaper87> Steap: yup, that's what we need to work on in glanceclient
14:19:57 <flaper87> ok, let's move on
14:20:08 <nikhil> I am skeptical to put this in client tbh (but will have to read the logs)
14:20:09 <flaper87> WE can discuss this further in -glance
14:20:28 <flaper87> nikhil: I wish I remembered when this was discussed, really. :(
14:20:33 <flaper87> I remember some in-person discussions
14:20:39 <nikhil> np
14:20:46 <flaper87> And also over the reviews of mike's work
14:20:51 <flaper87> and IRC with other nova folks
14:20:53 <flaper87> anyway
14:20:59 <flaper87> We need to formalize this discussion
14:21:03 <flaper87> hence the request for a spec
14:21:13 <flaper87> #topic Cross prj updates
14:21:16 <nikhil> o/
14:21:28 <nikhil> Just a small update
14:21:47 <nikhil> The Cross prj initiative on quotas has started getting momentum
14:22:01 <rosmaita> watch out!
14:22:04 <nikhil> initial spec
14:22:10 <nikhil> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284454/
14:22:18 <nikhil> and a weekly meeting
14:22:28 <nikhil> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284478/
14:22:29 <flaper87> that's good news
14:22:38 <nikhil> I will announce to ML in a few
14:23:15 <nikhil> Nothing to discuss on the spec itself yet
14:23:29 <flaper87> nice, glad to see this moving forward
14:23:35 <nikhil> if there is interest, I can make it a point to buzz you prior to mtg :)
14:23:38 <flaper87> it's been a long standing open task for several projects
14:23:38 <nikhil> (done)
14:23:51 <nikhil> agreed
14:24:07 <flaper87> I'm interested but I don't think I've the bandwidth to follow that mtg too :(
14:24:15 <flaper87> plus, you'll update us anyway
14:24:17 * flaper87 ducks
14:24:28 * flaper87 ducks two times
14:24:34 <flaper87> ok moving on
14:24:37 <nikhil> heh
14:24:44 <flaper87> #topic Design Summit sessions allocation
14:24:48 <flaper87> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/087433.html
14:24:56 <flaper87> Sent that email... yday I htink
14:24:58 <flaper87> think, even
14:25:06 <flaper87> pls, if you have an opinion, do chime in
14:25:17 <flaper87> nikhil: proposed we increase the number of workrooms to 6
14:25:20 <flaper87> we had 5 in tokyo
14:25:33 <nikhil> I did
14:25:43 <nikhil> What are the tentative FB sessions for us?
14:26:30 <flaper87> OTOH, I guess it'd be something like Import Refactor, Quotas and something else (perhaps the compat layer so we can invite osclient folks )
14:26:40 <flaper87> but again, nothing has been discussed yet on this
14:26:53 <mfedosin> Maybe Glare will require 2 :)
14:26:58 <nikhil> hmm
14:27:02 <flaper87> I'd love to talk more with ppl that are going to run for the PTL position
14:27:06 <flaper87> it's better to plan that way
14:27:17 <nikhil> I think we will need 1/2 Workroom session for tasks (tbh)
14:27:22 <flaper87> mfedosin: I think Glare can use  a workroom session
14:27:39 <flaper87> In tokyo, we made a very good use of the meetup time
14:27:43 <nikhil> flaper87: he meant 2 W for Glare (I think)
14:27:46 <flaper87> we split the time and the team
14:28:03 <flaper87> mfedosin: oh, ok. weeeeeeell, I guess we could use 1 and some meetup time
14:28:26 <flaper87> It's quite blury still. I'll start putting more serious thoughts on this and come up with a plan for next week
14:28:32 <flaper87> Since next week is FF anyway
14:28:35 <mfedosin> I wanted to have a session about Glare architecture and another one with murano, app-catalog and heat
14:28:53 <flaper87> That said, I want us to be very very careful with requesting more time as there are more projects this time around
14:28:56 <nikhil> oh then , prolly 1 FB and 1 W
14:29:01 <flaper87> so, just trying to be a good citizen
14:29:09 <nikhil> yes, makes sense
14:29:21 <nikhil> I was trying to be cautious that we didn't miss on imp topics
14:29:25 <flaper87> mfedosin: in tokyo we shared the meetup time with app-catalog too
14:29:33 <nikhil> we are making some changes to glance and they are big ones!
14:29:37 <mfedosin> it was on Friday
14:29:42 <nikhil> for example a lot of folks ask me about tasks
14:29:53 <nikhil> and image sharing
14:30:02 <flaper87> Also, considering the size of the glance team, there's so much we can plan for Newton, which means limiting the number of session might end up being good
14:30:04 <flaper87> hahaha
14:30:17 <rosmaita> flaper87: nikhil: is friday set aside for working meetings like in tokyo?
14:30:36 <nikhil> I think the contri meetup is on friday
14:30:39 <flaper87> That said, we should also use the time at the summit to discuss things that *must* be discussed face to face
14:30:41 <flaper87> rosmaita: yes
14:30:50 <flaper87> rosmaita: we have a full day
14:30:54 <flaper87> just like in tokyo
14:30:58 <rosmaita> ok, everyone please make travel plans so that you can spend a full day
14:31:07 <flaper87> ah yeah, that too
14:31:13 <flaper87> do not live on friday at 8am
14:31:17 <rosmaita> we got a lot done in tokyo (though you wouldn't know it from the import refactor)
14:31:22 <nikhil> leave*
14:31:28 <nikhil> but surely live :D
14:31:31 <flaper87> lol, leave*
14:31:33 <flaper87> hahaha
14:31:36 <flaper87> nikhil: thanks :D
14:31:42 <nikhil> ;)
14:31:52 <flaper87> my brain is full of Freudian slips
14:31:56 <flaper87> rosmaita: I agree
14:32:05 <flaper87> I found the meetup in Tokyo to be super super helpful
14:32:12 <flaper87> ok
14:32:15 <flaper87> put some thoughts
14:32:26 <flaper87> I'll start an etherpad and send an email so we can start collecting topics
14:32:34 <nikhil> I think the next week in Austin is some sort of festival
14:32:42 <nikhil> so that might be worth considering as well
14:32:49 <flaper87> The week after the summit?
14:32:53 <nikhil> I think so
14:33:04 <flaper87> nnnnnice, good thing I'm booked for like a gazillion of days there
14:33:06 <flaper87> hahahaha
14:33:09 * nikhil double checking (remembers vaguely)
14:33:14 <flaper87> anyway, moving on
14:33:28 <flaper87> #topic Non client libraries freeze
14:33:49 <flaper87> Unfortunately, I think I forgot to mention this last week but this week is the non client libraries freeze
14:34:13 <flaper87> This means that this week libraries like glance_store can be released for the last time during the Mitaka timeframe
14:34:22 <flaper87> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251851/
14:34:28 <flaper87> Some patches landed yday
14:34:34 <mfedosin> so kairat work with Swift driver moved to Newton
14:34:45 <mfedosin> it's sad
14:34:48 <flaper87> but there are 2 big ones for the "trusts" work  that still can make it
14:34:55 <flaper87> mfedosin: check the link >.>
14:35:02 <mfedosin> flaper87: ah
14:35:02 <flaper87> We have until tomorrow to release it
14:35:09 <nikhil> oh sorry, I was too tired last night to review that one
14:35:21 <flaper87> I never do releases on friday but I'm happy to stay "on call" during the weekend in case things go south
14:35:22 <nikhil> flaper87: is that still on?
14:35:45 <nikhil> (I'll be online during the weekend too)
14:35:50 <flaper87> not sure if sabari is around but there was also the vmware on python-requests one
14:35:51 <kairat> i got some comments from mclaren, but nothing more then.
14:36:07 <kairat> so it would be perfect to have some comments tomorrow
14:36:08 <flaper87> kairat: it's a big one :)
14:36:33 <kairat> I am personally will try to review all patches for glance_store tomorrow
14:36:33 <mfedosin> actually big two
14:36:37 <flaper87> I'll review them with my limited knowledge of how the swift store works
14:36:41 <flaper87> mfedosin: right
14:36:47 <flaper87> it's always a problem with big patches
14:36:53 <mfedosin> here's the second part https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251850/11
14:36:57 <flaper87> no promises made, it's possible they won't make it
14:37:02 <nikhil> can we have a list of the ones we are targeting ?
14:37:11 <flaper87> mfedosin: I posted the top most one
14:37:21 <flaper87> nikhil: I think just that one, TBH
14:37:34 <flaper87> I don't think we've bandwidth for anything else today/tomorrow
14:37:35 <nikhil> great
14:38:15 <flaper87> ok, moving on
14:38:31 <flaper87> #topic Preparing for Feature Freeze
14:38:43 <flaper87> Now, next week is FF
14:38:50 <flaper87> yup, it's that time of the cycle again
14:38:55 <flaper87> crazy, isn't it?
14:38:59 <flaper87> Anyway
14:39:09 <flaper87> we don't have that many pending features in glance
14:39:24 <mfedosin> filters
14:39:30 <mfedosin> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/248359/
14:39:31 <flaper87> mfedosin: I said "that many"
14:39:42 <mfedosin> there are 6 filters :)
14:39:44 * flaper87 takes mfedosin's keyboard
14:39:51 <flaper87> hahahha
14:39:53 <flaper87> jokes apart
14:40:05 <flaper87> yeha, filters is perhaps the biggest one we have now
14:40:21 <flaper87> so, I wanted to propose having a review sprint on Monday (as early in the week as possible)
14:40:45 <kairat> ++ to review day
14:41:03 <mfedosin> filters review day :)))
14:41:05 <flaper87> In addition to that day, I was thinking we should have reviews days every week until the end of the cycle
14:41:12 <flaper87> but I'll let that for open discussion
14:41:14 <flaper87> :D
14:41:21 <kairat> I would love it personally
14:41:48 <flaper87> All that said, I'm hoping to cut M-3 on Wednesday so, let's target that as a deadline
14:42:03 <flaper87> It'd be awesome to be able to do it on Tuesday but that might be too tight
14:42:21 <flaper87> Questions ?
14:42:28 <flaper87> otherwise we can move on
14:43:21 <flaper87> ok, moving on
14:43:25 <flaper87> #topic Spec lite proposal
14:43:30 <flaper87> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/282517/
14:43:33 <flaper87> jokke_: wrote this
14:43:35 <flaper87> :D
14:44:16 <flaper87> The proposal is quite small
14:44:20 <flaper87> and easy to review and adopt
14:44:28 <flaper87> LEt's drop comments there
14:44:44 <flaper87> if there are no complaints, I'll proceed with approving it
14:45:14 <flaper87> ok, unless there are comments, I think we can go into Open Discussion
14:45:27 <flaper87> or as I prefer to call it: "Go nuts section"
14:45:37 <mclaren> do we say why we're changing the spec lite process?
14:46:01 <flaper87> mclaren: I think it's in the commit message
14:46:13 <flaper87> if it's not, we can then put it there
14:46:50 <flaper87> unless I misunderstood your question and you're actually asking why we're changing it
14:47:31 <flaper87> mclaren: ^
14:47:33 <bunting> I'm intrested why
14:47:52 <mclaren> I don't see anything in the commit message. It adds overhead, so explaining the advantages would be useful
14:48:06 <kairat> Perhaps it is worth mention in spec itself
14:48:18 <kairat> to explain future supporters why it was chosen
14:48:32 <kairat> and not to spent their time
14:48:43 <flaper87> The TL;DR is: Using bugs doesn't seemed to work. Triaging them was sometihng we did in the drivers meeting which we don't have anymore. Using specs encourages a more distributed review process across core reviewers
14:48:56 <flaper87> but yeah, I think we should have this in the spec
14:48:56 <rosmaita> let's just slap that into the commit message
14:49:03 <flaper87> erm, commit message
14:49:16 <flaper87> I don't think we need to put this in the contributions guidelines
14:49:25 <rosmaita> +1 to keep out of guidelines
14:50:20 <flaper87> I'll ping jokke_ and ask him to write this down
14:50:30 <jokke_> also ... moving it to the glance-specs repo, we get all our specs listed in the same website
14:50:35 <flaper87> maybe not using his words because we know what that commit message will look like
14:50:38 <flaper87> jokke_: oh, HAI!
14:50:41 <jokke_> ;)
14:51:08 <flaper87> jokke_: ah listing, that was the other one. That one is actually super useful
14:51:28 <flaper87> ok, 10mins left
14:51:28 <jokke_> so one does not need to go hunting closed bugs and merged specs to figure out what new functionality has gone in
14:51:47 <flaper87> #topic Open Discussion
14:51:52 <mfedosin> what about deprecating use_user_token?
14:51:54 <mfedosin> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237742/
14:52:04 <flaper87> So, I mentioned that I'd like to have 1 review day per week until the end of the cycle
14:52:14 <flaper87> I obviously don't expect everyone to sign up for this
14:52:24 <flaper87> but it'd be cool to establish a day for this.
14:52:35 <flaper87> The upcoming weeks will require bug fixing and reviews like crazy
14:52:44 <rosmaita> i guess monday is as good as any
14:52:57 <flaper87> rosmaita:
14:53:00 <flaper87> ops
14:53:01 <flaper87> rosmaita: ++
14:53:08 <nikhil> mfedosin: that's a breaking change afaict
14:53:27 <flaper87> on another note, a CVE fix broke something on how locations work: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280789/
14:53:39 <flaper87> we need to help reviewing that fix
14:53:41 <flaper87> jokke_: ^
14:53:56 <jokke_> flaper87: I'm aware of that :(
14:54:07 <flaper87> jokke_: :(
14:54:10 <kairat> do we have trusts now to avoid using that option?
14:54:24 <kairat> mfedosin, ^
14:54:29 <mfedosin> yes
14:54:35 <kairat> Ok, good
14:54:44 <mfedosin> this option was introduced to work with registry
14:54:47 <nikhil> kairat: I think in some deployments may not be able to use trusts
14:54:52 <mfedosin> when token expires
14:54:57 <nikhil> correct
14:55:08 <mfedosin> but it doesn't work
14:55:17 <nikhil> so there's a dependency here
14:55:24 <mfedosin> if you disable it, you cloud will die
14:55:36 <kairat> Also v2 is deprecated already
14:55:40 <mfedosin> because every person will behave as an admin
14:55:44 <nikhil> it works for when the operation is concise (like trusts) performed using nova
14:55:48 <kairat> we need to consider that during Newton
14:56:15 <mfedosin> please read
14:56:17 <mfedosin> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OSSN/OSSN-0060
14:56:26 <nikhil> for long running operations if the token is invalid and then this will allow the image to go to active (given you have the right setup)
14:57:41 <nikhil> but there's no getting rid of it yet so those who are using it will keep using it
14:57:51 <nikhil> is the intention to remote it in Mitaka like the OSSN says?
14:58:15 <nikhil> and that's what I am aiming to talk about
14:58:31 <mfedosin> no
14:58:36 <rosmaita> sorry to interrupt, but looks like we are running out of time ... please open your browsers to:
14:58:36 <nikhil> if we remove it then we need to send proper communication that people need to adopt trusts
14:58:39 <mfedosin> we will remove it in Newton
14:58:39 <rosmaita> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/087519.html
14:58:42 <rosmaita> it will take you 3 minutes to read, there's a link to an etherpad with more stuff if you want to dig, but it would be good to have a consensus on what the recommended behavior should be, since it's different in v1 and v2
14:58:49 <mfedosin> in Mitaka we deprecate it
14:58:49 <flaper87> I need to take a better look at mfedosin's patch
14:58:57 <flaper87> rosmaita: ++
14:59:02 <nikhil> I remember that bug (btw)
14:59:21 <nikhil> and I think hemanthm agreed with the deprecation
14:59:30 <mfedosin> rosmaita: yeahm thanks. we need to remember about it in compat layer
14:59:53 <flaper87> ok, that's it
14:59:56 <flaper87> thank you all!
14:59:57 <nikhil> I am just not sure the wider impact on this so removing in newton might be okay, let's start the broadcast on the deprecation this release
14:59:58 <flaper87> tty next week
15:00:03 <flaper87> and REVIEW ALL THE PATCHES
15:00:03 <nikhil> ok, thanks
15:00:06 <flaper87> PRETTY PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!
15:00:11 <flaper87> #endmeeting