14:04:43 <rosmaita> #startmeeting glance 14:04:44 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr 5 14:04:43 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rosmaita. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:04:45 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:04:46 <smcginnis> o/ 14:04:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'glance' 14:04:52 <abhishekk> o/ 14:04:54 <McClymontS> o/ 14:05:04 <rosmaita> #chair jokke_ 14:05:04 <openstack> Current chairs: jokke_ rosmaita 14:05:56 <rosmaita> hello everyone 14:06:02 <abhishekk> hi 14:06:08 <McClymontS> Hey rosmaita 14:06:31 <rosmaita> kind of want jokke_ around for item #2 14:06:39 <rosmaita> oope 14:06:42 <rosmaita> meaning, oops 14:06:51 <rosmaita> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda 14:06:54 <rosmaita> there's the agenda 14:07:04 <rosmaita> ok, let's skip to item #3 14:07:13 <rosmaita> that's me 14:07:22 <rosmaita> #topic OSSN update proposal 14:07:37 <rosmaita> i have a proposal for updating the OSSNs 14:07:45 <rosmaita> just the ones releate to glance 14:08:20 <rosmaita> would be good to have someone (McClymontS maybe?) go though and update them 14:08:29 <McClymontS> Absolutely 14:08:34 <McClymontS> I'd like to take that item 14:08:35 <rosmaita> check which releases they are applicable to 14:08:43 <rosmaita> (may need to add more recent releases) 14:08:48 <rosmaita> also update the status 14:09:02 <rosmaita> "update" in the sense of i don;t think there's a status field on them 14:09:23 <rosmaita> but indicate whether they've been fixed, and if so what release 14:09:35 <rosmaita> whether they're under discussion, and if so, spec link 14:09:52 <rosmaita> or whether you are on your own as an operator in dealing with it 14:10:01 <rosmaita> anyway, i think that would be helpful 14:10:13 <rosmaita> might need to check with VMT about updating them 14:10:29 <rosmaita> but since they're on the wiki, they should be updatable in principle 14:10:44 <McClymontS> Yeah I will definitely reach out to those teams and go ahead and start looking into what we can update and where 14:10:51 <rosmaita> anyway, scott, you will have to talk to fungi probably about getting write access on the wiki 14:11:10 <rosmaita> (i don't know if they restored it to regular people, there was a spam problem) 14:11:33 <rosmaita> ok, well if McClymontS has accepted taking this on, that's all i've got 14:11:35 <fungi> yeah, can you elaborate on specifically what it's not letting you do? 14:11:56 <McClymontS> Have not even tried yet fungi, just got tasked with it. Will keep you posted if I run into any issues 14:12:04 <rosmaita> McClymontS: you can communicate with fungi directly, i just assumed he won't have write access 14:12:09 <fungi> we've had the spam situation under control for a while now, thankfully 14:12:22 <rosmaita> fungi: excellent news 14:12:32 <fungi> yeah, reach out to me in #openstack-infra if you run into any issues using your wiki account 14:12:39 <fungi> happy to help 14:12:42 <rosmaita> thanks! 14:12:56 <rosmaita> ok, i am item #4 as well 14:13:17 <rosmaita> #topic lack of good error messages due to misconfiguration 14:13:40 <abhishekk> you are everywhere in today's agenda :D 14:13:46 <rosmaita> someone filed a bug and did really nice job troubleshooting this 14:13:57 <rosmaita> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1761185 14:13:57 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1761185 in Glance "Value errors when configuring 'enabled_import_methods' option" [Medium,Triaged] 14:14:07 <rosmaita> found a fix already sitting there: 14:14:16 <rosmaita> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/514114/1 14:14:37 <rosmaita> which was abandoned after scott asked for a test and i had a backward-compat concern 14:14:49 <smcginnis> rosmaita: So the issue is ValueError would now have a different return_code? 14:15:06 <rosmaita> yeah, and i don;t know if it matters 14:15:21 <rosmaita> when you look at the code, it's someone being a bit too clever with python 14:15:27 <rosmaita> (hopefully it wasn't me!) 14:15:31 <smcginnis> :) 14:15:40 <abhishekk> :) 14:15:55 <rosmaita> anyway, the fix is good, it will just change the error code you get b ack 14:16:11 <rosmaita> i don't know if anyone is paying that close attention 14:16:32 <McClymontS> I liked that one just needed a test 14:16:42 <smcginnis> We could just change that to a list and return the index location (with padding to keep consistent) or make it a dict with explicit return codes. 14:16:52 <abhishekk> I guess it will not be a concern 14:16:57 <rosmaita> but as a general note, when you introduce KNOWN_EXCEPTIONS into code, you need to have a plan for what to do with unknown exceptions 14:17:01 <rosmaita> :) 14:17:14 <abhishekk> but dict is a good idea 14:17:16 <rosmaita> yeah, jokke_ is very strong on not breaking backward compat 14:17:26 <smcginnis> Anyway, seems like it would not be too difficult to keep it backward compat. 14:17:33 <smcginnis> Just need some tweaks. 14:17:41 <rosmaita> to address smcginnis i think maintaining a map of error codes is the way to do it 14:17:52 <rosmaita> maybe return 99 for unknown code 14:17:53 <abhishekk> ++ 14:17:53 <smcginnis> Explicit is better than implicit. ;) 14:18:14 <rosmaita> agreed 14:18:22 <abhishekk> always 14:18:22 <rosmaita> ok, i will assign myself to this one 14:18:49 <rosmaita> i just worked with a bunch of exit tests on glanceclient, hopefullly a similar test is easy here 14:18:52 <abhishekk> I am sure you will add sufficient tests as well ;) 14:19:04 <rosmaita> will preserve backward compat with a map of exit codes 14:19:10 <rosmaita> cool! 14:19:27 <rosmaita> this is a really bad bug becasue we rely heavily on the oslo_config stuff to validate the config file 14:19:42 <rosmaita> and no one can see the messages! 14:19:53 <rosmaita> ok, thanks for the feedback 14:20:08 <rosmaita> ok, let's go back to #1 14:20:19 <rosmaita> forum proposals 14:20:31 <rosmaita> #topic updates -forum proposals 14:20:45 <rosmaita> my fingers were not ready for so much typing today 14:20:50 <McClymontS> lol 14:20:58 <rosmaita> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-glance-brainstorming 14:21:10 <McClymontS> Love the airport code 14:21:22 <rosmaita> everyone was doing that, i just copied it 14:21:34 <rosmaita> ok, please put some topics on there 14:21:47 <smcginnis> We did it last time in Vancouver too. I'm surprised we haven't mixed up old etherpads yet. 14:22:06 <rosmaita> my thought is that if people can't make the summit, we can use them for a virtual operator mid-cycle meeting 14:22:11 <smcginnis> I know the official forum topic submission is now open. Not sure when that closes. 14:22:20 <smcginnis> rosmaita: ++ 14:22:26 <rosmaita> we did that in pre-summit days, and was usually attended pretty well 14:22:35 <rosmaita> topic submission closes 15 april 14:22:40 <rosmaita> at midnight 14:22:52 <McClymontS> Are my updates reflecting correctly rosmaita? 14:22:53 <smcginnis> rosmaita: Thanks! 14:22:56 <McClymontS> is my name on there? 14:23:04 <smcginnis> yep 14:23:05 <rosmaita> which i do not know if it is 00:00 on 15 april or 23:59 on 15 april 14:23:16 <McClymontS> Perfect, I'll add some comments on those two OSSNs 14:23:21 <smcginnis> Probably safer to go with the earlier one. 14:23:29 <rosmaita> smcginnis agreed 14:24:08 <rosmaita> anyway, just some awareness ... if you have something you would like operator feedback on, or if your company is giving you operator feedback on something, please add it to the pad 14:24:49 <rosmaita> also McClymontS as you said, if you come across old OSSNs that you would like to find out operator impact, or how they are handling them, please add 14:25:13 <McClymontS> Will do, I've been doing some research on that already so I'll toss that on there 14:25:13 <rosmaita> key point is we can use this as an area for both Forum proposals and running our own virtual operator midcycle 14:25:28 <rosmaita> great 14:25:34 <rosmaita> #topic release update 14:26:08 <rosmaita> got 2 releases we'd like to do, the image immport stuff for glanceclient 14:26:17 <rosmaita> and some bugfixes to stable/queens 14:26:23 <rosmaita> glanceclient 14:26:26 <rosmaita> first 14:26:40 <rosmaita> #link https://launchpad.net/python-glanceclient/+milestone/2.10.0 14:27:32 <rosmaita> would be good to get the inprogess stuff done by tomorrow so we cna have a patch ready for stable maint team for their monday meetinbg 14:27:55 <rosmaita> that means jokke_ and smcginnis since i am author of these 14:28:08 <smcginnis> I'll take a look! 14:28:24 <rosmaita> smcginnis thanks! 14:28:49 <rosmaita> open question about https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758718 ... that one doesn't have a patch proposed for stable/queens yet 14:28:50 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1758718 in Glance Client queens "image-import needs to fail faster" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Brian Rosmaita (brian-rosmaita) 14:28:58 <rosmaita> has not been merged to master 14:29:14 <rosmaita> i don't know if there's an issue about it or not 14:29:23 <abhishekk> Does it need a rebase or good to go? 14:29:33 <rosmaita> jokke_ has a patch up that abhishekk mentions in the comments to handle some of this on glance side 14:29:43 <rosmaita> but i think we need these changes anyway 14:29:52 <rosmaita> abhishekk i think it is ok, but i will check 14:30:31 <smcginnis> rosmaita: I agree. Even if we improve it on the server side, the client could still be used to talk to a service that does not have that change. 14:30:37 <rosmaita> i don't see the orange dot on the review 14:30:43 <rosmaita> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/556292/ 14:30:57 <rosmaita> i have been keeping it rebased on the other patch that just merged into master 14:31:11 <abhishekk> great then, 14:32:06 <rosmaita> i think i addressed all erno's concerns, but would be good for him to review 14:32:09 <rosmaita> jokke_ ^^ 14:32:24 <rosmaita> ok, onto glance bugfixes for stable/queens 14:32:38 <abhishekk> ok then jokke and smcginnis can have a look again on those 14:32:39 <rosmaita> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/queens-stable-1 14:33:52 <rosmaita> i marked #1754104 as critical even though it's docs because there are a lot of duplicates being filed on thatone 14:33:54 <smcginnis> abhishekk: We could use your eyes on the patch to master: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/556292/ 14:34:06 <smcginnis> That would need to get merged first before we can do anything in queens. 14:34:52 <abhishekk> smcginnis, I have verified that jokke_'s concern has been addressed and checked functionally as well 14:35:02 <smcginnis> Great! 14:35:21 <rosmaita> smcginnis and abhishekk : here's the doc patch to master: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/558932/ 14:35:37 <rosmaita> would like to backport that to queens becasue of that bug i mentioned above 14:36:00 <abhishekk> rosmaita, I have verified that patch and looks good to me 14:36:17 <smcginnis> Yep, looks good. 14:36:36 <rosmaita> cool, i will cherry pick to stable/queens after it merges 14:37:01 <rosmaita> abhishekk i will +2 your https://review.openstack.org/#/c/559073/ as soon as it passes tests 14:37:26 <abhishekk> rosmaita, sounds good 14:37:52 <rosmaita> ok, my question was is there anything else anyone is aware of that should go into queens-stable-1 release? 14:38:02 <abhishekk> between as I said new functional test patch is also working now 14:38:22 <rosmaita> abhishekk : nice 14:38:47 <rosmaita> do you think we should get those tests into stable queens? 14:39:27 <abhishekk> rosmaita, i guess it will be good to have if it fits to stable policies 14:39:40 <rosmaita> smcginnis: ^^ 14:40:17 <abhishekk> smcginnis, we are talking about this #link https://review.openstack.org/558187 14:40:19 <rosmaita> abhishekk: i was thinking the same thing, might be good to have as protection against something changing in some library or something 14:40:36 <abhishekk> agree 14:40:46 <McClymontS> Also agreed 14:41:33 <abhishekk> we can move ahead, limited time for next items 14:41:41 <smcginnis> Yeah, good to backport tests. 14:41:43 <rosmaita> sure, abhishek why don' 14:41:52 <rosmaita> t you file a bug for missing functional tests 14:41:55 <abhishekk> i will check other patches if they needs to be backport 14:42:08 <rosmaita> and then we can target it for rocky-1 and stable-queens-1 14:42:08 <abhishekk> rosmaita, sure thing 14:42:15 <abhishekk> I will do that later tonight 14:42:24 <rosmaita> and then jokke_ can un-target it if he disagrees 14:42:30 <rosmaita> ok, great 14:42:37 <abhishekk> (once reach to home) 14:42:45 <rosmaita> don't forget to update the closes-bug tag on your patch 14:42:55 <abhishekk> sure thing 14:42:58 <rosmaita> ty 14:43:12 <rosmaita> #topic open discussion 14:43:31 <rosmaita> just noted the patch that fixed the doc job failures 14:43:47 <rosmaita> it was an order of loading libraries thing 14:44:26 <rosmaita> ok, still need approval on my split the glanceclient functional tests patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553641/ 14:44:28 <abhishekk> i was banging my head to find the reason 14:44:40 <rosmaita> we need it merged before we can pull v1 out of glance 14:44:55 <rosmaita> abhishekk eventlet and monkey-patching have a lot to answer for! 14:45:19 <abhishekk> agree 14:45:32 <rosmaita> ok, i may put up a patch to remove our non-voting functional-identity-v3 gate job 14:45:52 <rosmaita> our "regualr" job is actually using identity-v3 14:45:57 <rosmaita> (default value changed in devstack) 14:46:09 <abhishekk> makes sense then 14:46:23 <rosmaita> yeah, i don'tlknow why i put it on the agenda 14:46:36 <rosmaita> ok one last thing and then i will shut up 14:46:45 <rosmaita> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468179/ 14:47:09 <rosmaita> that's my "fix 00sn-0075" spec ... i just want to see from our team if the proposal is ok 14:47:19 <rosmaita> before i send out to the operators list again 14:47:32 <abhishekk> will take a look 14:47:40 <rosmaita> they are probably sick of hearing about it as well! 14:47:52 <rosmaita> abhishekk thanks 14:47:56 <rosmaita> smcginnis could probably use your opinion too 14:48:12 <rosmaita> each of the prior proposals has basically become an alternative on the spec 14:48:44 <rosmaita> that's all from me ... anyone else got anything? 14:48:51 <abhishekk> I have a review request for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529083/ 14:49:16 <abhishekk> rosmaita, smcginnis, McClymontS ^^^ when you get some spare time 14:49:33 <rosmaita> will do 14:49:41 <abhishekk> thank you 14:49:44 <McClymontS> Ack, will go take a look soon 14:49:56 <abhishekk> thank you 14:51:06 <rosmaita> yeah, it would be good to get that fixed soon, and that patch has been sitting for quite a while 14:51:28 <abhishekk> May be next week we can revisit rocky-1 priorities to keep track? 14:51:58 <rosmaita> we have 8 moinutes, maybe we should do it now 14:52:06 <rosmaita> rocky-1 is week of 16 april 14:52:12 <abhishekk> ok 14:52:13 <rosmaita> so next thursday will be a bit late! 14:52:26 <rosmaita> #topic rocky-1 priority review 14:52:48 <abhishekk> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-rocky-priorities 14:52:52 <rosmaita> ty 14:53:52 <rosmaita> i got nothin' for tempest import tests 14:53:58 <abhishekk> May be we can shift tempest tests to rocky-2? 14:54:11 <rosmaita> probably 14:54:33 <smcginnis> Those might be tricky. 14:54:41 <rosmaita> i would like to review the multihash stuff for glance_store 14:55:21 <McClymontS> Multihash will definitely need another sitdown 14:55:38 <rosmaita> i may have some partial discovery stuff, need to review bhagyashri's member-schema change first though 14:56:03 <rosmaita> McClymontS do you have a patch up for glance_Store 14:56:13 <McClymontS> Its dated at this point 14:56:17 <McClymontS> we can look at it together 14:56:28 <abhishekk> ok, so we still have 10 working days in hand (what we can do in it) 14:56:44 <rosmaita> that's ok, let me make it a point to to read it tomorrow and let's meet monday to discuss, if that works for you 14:56:53 <McClymontS> yeah we can talk about it then 14:56:57 <rosmaita> cool 14:57:12 <smcginnis> Has anyone put up a WIP for the API v1 removal to see if tests pass? 14:57:14 <rosmaita> i don't feel too bad about the tempest tests since we are getting in some functional and unit tests for image import 14:57:15 <abhishekk> shuffle of items, i guess scrubber pending delete restore is ready so we can target it to r-1? 14:57:41 <rosmaita> abhishekk : good point, i have lost track of those patches 14:58:06 <abhishekk> may be in r-2 i will have a look on tempests tests 14:59:05 <smcginnis> 1 minute warning 14:59:06 <abhishekk> lets revisit it again in next week 14:59:22 <abhishekk> thank you all :) 14:59:32 <rosmaita> ok, well jokke_ can send out info on priorities email 14:59:38 <rosmaita> thanks everyone 14:59:44 <McClymontS> Thanks guys 14:59:46 <smcginnis> Thanks! 14:59:56 <rosmaita> #dndmeeting 15:00:04 <rosmaita> #endmeeting