14:00:06 <abhishekk> #startmeeting glance
14:00:07 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr 23 14:00:06 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is abhishekk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:07 <abhishekk> #topic roll call
14:00:08 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:11 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'glance'
14:00:16 <abhishekk> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda
14:00:17 <jokke_> o/
14:00:19 <abhishekk> o/
14:00:40 <abhishekk> wait for couple of minutes
14:00:42 <smcginnis> o/
14:00:42 <rosmaita> (i am only partially here) o-
14:00:50 <abhishekk> cool, lets start
14:01:09 <abhishekk> #topic Updates
14:01:25 <abhishekk> I have created Virtual PTG timing doodle
14:01:54 <abhishekk> Kindly update the same with your preferable time slots
14:02:10 <abhishekk> I need to update the same in https://ethercalc.openstack.org/126u8ek25noy
14:02:16 <abhishekk> Link for doodle is
14:02:25 <abhishekk> #link https://doodle.com/poll/6a46283tii7gt2aa
14:02:42 <abhishekk> I have also send mail about the same on openstack-discuss
14:03:09 <abhishekk> Virtual PTG will be held between 1-5 June
14:03:18 <abhishekk> Moving ahead
14:03:26 <abhishekk> #topic release/periodic jobs update
14:03:36 <abhishekk> RC1 is tagged
14:04:04 <abhishekk> which includes some doc changes and skipped functional test
14:04:40 <abhishekk> Thanks for all the reviews
14:04:54 <jokke_> ok, can we fix what ever is breaking that test before release or will it be soething like 20.0.1?
14:05:17 <abhishekk> jokke_, at the moment no clue for why it is failing
14:05:27 <abhishekk> I have added my understanding in the commit message
14:05:39 <abhishekk> it is something related to early closing of connection
14:06:13 <abhishekk> Regarding periodic job we have 2 failures related to oslo
14:06:36 <abhishekk> test_best_match_language_expected test is failing due to testtools.matchers._impl.MismatchError: 'it' != None
14:06:45 <jokke_> abhishekk: but we do have bug open for it?
14:06:53 <abhishekk> jokke_, yes
14:06:57 <jokke_> gr8
14:07:03 <abhishekk> let me provide the link
14:07:28 <jokke_> I thought that translation thing got fixed already, I'm pretty sure I +2W'd the patch
14:07:38 <abhishekk> #link https://launchpad.net/bugs/1873735
14:07:38 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1873735 in Glance "Functional test 'test_image_member_lifecycle_for_multiple_stores' fails intermittently for py37" [High,New] - Assigned to Abhishek Kekane (abhishek-kekane)
14:07:54 <smcginnis> There was some issue fixed a few hours ago that was impact legacy zuul v2 jobs.
14:08:00 <smcginnis> Not sure if that is relevant here.
14:08:16 <abhishekk> smcginnis, will have a look
14:09:03 <abhishekk> I am going to find all skipped tests and revisit them if I can fix those
14:09:25 <abhishekk> Moving ahead
14:09:29 <abhishekk> #topic glance-specs freeze
14:09:30 <jokke_> abhishekk: ping me if you need help
14:09:34 <abhishekk> jokke_, ack
14:09:50 <abhishekk> I want to reintroduce spec freeze again
14:10:46 <abhishekk> Earlier we were not following spec freeze as we want to ensure everything should be addressed at any moment, which also was to attract cross-project members for contribution
14:11:27 <abhishekk> But this cycle we had some specs, lite-specs which were left unnoticed till M3 release
14:11:34 <jokke_> I'm fine with either way. I think both have their pros and conns
14:11:49 <abhishekk> I want to avoid this in coming cycle
14:11:53 <jokke_> ++
14:12:07 <abhishekk> Owner of the specs should push for review within this timeline
14:12:21 <jokke_> it's easier to avoid thing falling between cracks when there is freeze and people pushing for it
14:12:50 <abhishekk> and also reviewer should put his vote with reason before it was rejected or moved to next cycle
14:13:17 <abhishekk> I will start reminding core members for reviews 2 weeks before specs-freeze
14:13:37 <abhishekk> I hope all members are agree with this decision
14:13:41 <rosmaita> what did we ever decide about 'checksum' deprecation?
14:14:12 <rosmaita> but yeah, i agree with your proposal
14:14:44 <abhishekk> rosmaita, sorry I felt to provide proper attention towards some specs this time
14:14:46 <jokke_> rosmaita: I think that's one of those things ... I don't think we ever did
14:14:49 <smcginnis> Yes, proposal makes sense to me.
14:14:57 <jokke_> :(
14:15:04 <abhishekk> But I will ensure this will not repeated in next cycle
14:15:39 <abhishekk> Cool, thank you, I will mark this spec-freeze date in our priority patch
14:16:06 <rosmaita> i think we still have time for checksum deprecation because it's not a code change, just an announcement
14:16:15 <rosmaita> in ussuri, i mean
14:17:18 <abhishekk> jokke_, what's your take on that, as per the rules if everyone is not agree then I can not merge this lite-spec
14:18:19 <abhishekk> rosmaita, I will propose new PS as per your suggestion for victoria specs directory
14:19:50 <abhishekk> jokke_, leave your opinion on the specs
14:19:54 <rosmaita> abhishekk: sorry i am distracted
14:20:09 <rosmaita> so is the idea that we cannot deprecate this in ussuri ?
14:20:25 <smcginnis> If it's just announcing the deprecation, I think it would be good to get in.
14:20:30 <jokke_> abhishekk: you're the PTL. That was something tht was introduced IIRC when rosmaita was PTL and I stood behind it specially when the group got smaller and smaller
14:20:55 <rosmaita> yes, the idea was that i wanted every core to look at every spec
14:21:13 <rosmaita> so that we didn't get multiple image locations situation happening again
14:21:17 <abhishekk> rosmaita, my last comment was related to my patch to create victoria specs directory
14:21:20 <jokke_> yes ... the main thing was that we wanted everyone being on board and knowing what's going on
14:21:44 <rosmaita> right, so when we lost people, we were not clueless
14:22:23 <abhishekk> Agree, but again picture is different this time, rosmaita is cinder PTL, smcginnis also busy with his work
14:22:24 <rosmaita> abhishekk: i think for that kind of thing, specs-repo-maintenance, we can treat them like doc changes, just one +2
14:23:07 <abhishekk> rosmaita, ack
14:23:09 <jokke_> but tbh the PTL only able to merge specs is driving to the same goal, making sure we don't flag things agreed before making sure everyone has had their eyes on it
14:23:28 <abhishekk> right
14:24:07 <rosmaita> the current policy in cinder is that a spec only requires two +2s, but the ptl has the option to require more approvals for complex or controversial specs
14:24:11 <jokke_> yeah, what comes to the housekeeping of specs repo, I definitely don't expect seeing everyone on those. There was specific reason why I asked if rosmaita can find time to review it
14:24:51 <abhishekk> What I am saying is we don't have much proposals to work other than 3/4 of us
14:24:59 <jokke_> the gerrit +w rules just are applied on the repo not content specific
14:26:27 <abhishekk> We can manage these reviews easily in between us within the time line
14:27:42 <abhishekk> I guess whoami-rajat is also here for some discussion
14:28:18 <whoami-rajat> i'm currently in a meeting
14:28:40 <abhishekk> lets move ahead, jokke_ please add your opinion about checksum deprecation on the lite-specs so that we can decide
14:29:04 <jokke_> abhishekk: in my opinion the specs side is probably the most important thing for PTL in the big picture so I think you should drive that how you feel the best to keep it under control
14:29:22 <jokke_> abhishekk: the rest of us can adjust as long as we know you got the ball ;)
14:29:40 <abhishekk> jokke_, ok
14:29:42 <rosmaita> jokke_: ++
14:30:42 <abhishekk> #topic Open discussion
14:31:09 <abhishekk> jokke_, rosmaita kindly feel the doodle when you get some time
14:31:25 <jokke_> abhishekk: yes, definitely on my todolist
14:31:29 <jokke_> at the top
14:31:37 <rosmaita> abhishekk: ack, will try to make glance & coinder not conflict
14:31:40 <abhishekk> jokke_, mostly we are the two who will be there for discussion
14:31:52 <abhishekk> rosmaita, great
14:32:00 <smcginnis> Unfortunately true. :]
14:32:22 <abhishekk> smcginnis, no worries, I will keep you updated on important discussions
14:33:58 <smcginnis> Thanks!
14:34:07 <jokke_> lets make this work ... I think the biggest challenge and drawback will be how we sort out the beer sessions :D
14:34:26 <abhishekk> lol
14:34:27 <jokke_> missing ye guys! :)
14:34:27 <smcginnis> Of course, will try to participate. This virtual format may actually make that more possible than in the past.
14:34:56 <abhishekk> jokke_, same here
14:35:06 <abhishekk> smcginnis, ++
14:36:15 <abhishekk> I wanted to discuss something in Open discussion but it slipped out of my mind :(
14:36:27 <abhishekk> Not able to recollect it
14:36:31 <smcginnis> I've done that so many times. :)
14:36:39 <abhishekk> :D
14:36:56 <jokke_> same
14:37:39 <abhishekk> will ping on openstack-glance if i remember it :D
14:38:01 <jokke_> normally I rember it either about the time when I'm going to bed or taking care of something else time sensitive so I'm not adding it to the next agenda either ;)
14:38:15 <abhishekk> haha
14:38:49 <abhishekk> I usually note it down somewhere but due to horrific couple of days I forgot to note it down
14:39:09 <jokke_> mhm ... you definitely have had enough distractions for this week
14:39:14 <rosmaita> yeah, you have had a rough week
14:39:31 <abhishekk> yes
14:40:03 <abhishekk> ok, do we have anything else for discussion?
14:40:06 <jokke_> I have nothing else
14:40:23 <abhishekk> rosmaita, smcginnis ?
14:40:28 <smcginnis> Nothing from me.
14:40:39 <jokke_> oh I do
14:40:43 <abhishekk> :D
14:40:45 <rosmaita> nothing here ... though jokke_ please leave comment on checksum spec-lite
14:40:56 <jokke_> just to mention if you guys have time to stuble upon it
14:41:13 <jokke_> apparently our swift driver is broken with SSL and security enforced
14:41:26 <jokke_> I'm trying to replicate it to figure out what's going on there
14:41:36 <abhishekk> ohh, do we have bug for this?
14:41:58 <jokke_> abhishekk: I think we do ... will dig it out ... it's what zigo pinged last Fri
14:42:06 <smcginnis> I wonder if it's even worth testing UNsecure configurations. I would think we would want security enabled by default and covered by default with testing.
14:42:40 <jokke_> also apparently our API starts crapping out if one of the stores in multi-store is not available ... something I'm also trying to reproduce to test and file a bug about
14:42:48 <abhishekk> I have went through your discussion on IRC but forget to followup with you
14:43:05 <jokke_> smcginnis: so the security enforced is that it accepts only valid certs
14:43:12 <zigo> jokke_: abhishekk: Yeah, it doesn't take into account the ca file that I've passed on, at least on Train.
14:43:15 <abhishekk> jokke_, is it about 500 issue on listing any command
14:43:17 <jokke_> which apparently is not that widely used case
14:43:21 <jokke_> abhishekk: yeah
14:43:27 <jokke_> the second one is
14:44:11 <jokke_> zigo: so I haven't forgotten it, just havent got to bottom if it either yet
14:44:14 <abhishekk> jokke_, I have configured 5 file stores and for testing revert logic on imports I am manually deleting one of the directory
14:44:24 <zigo> Good, good!
14:44:25 <abhishekk> but I am not getting any error due to it
14:44:49 <abhishekk> zigo, what about current master, have you tried it?
14:45:10 <jokke_> abhishekk: I was told about it regarding ceph so it might be something rbd specific ... but like said haven't reproduced it yet to see what's going on
14:45:17 <zigo> abhishekk: Not yet, but I'm about to try ussuri, as the RC1 are out for all projects.
14:45:30 <abhishekk> zigo, ack
14:45:44 <jokke_> zigo: please keep me updated on #openstack-glance if you don't mind
14:45:58 <jokke_> I'm spending some time on these two
14:46:00 <zigo> I'm not sure when that will be...
14:46:05 <abhishekk> I will also try to setup environment with train
14:46:07 <zigo> The release keeps me busy these days.
14:46:23 <abhishekk> zigo, could you paste the bug link here?
14:46:29 <jokke_> zigo: no worries ... just let me know when you do ... I try to focus the train for now
14:46:39 <zigo> No bug opened yet, but I can open one right away.
14:46:47 <zigo> Storyboard or Launchpad?
14:46:50 <abhishekk> that will be good,
14:46:53 <abhishekk> launchpad
14:46:54 <jokke_> launchpad
14:48:56 <zigo> https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1874458
14:48:56 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1874458 in Glance "Glance doesn't take into account swift_store_cacert" [Undecided,New]
14:48:56 <abhishekk> anything else guys?
14:49:02 <abhishekk> zigo, thank you
14:49:04 <zigo> Not sure if the title is good enough though ...
14:49:20 <jokke_> nope, now I'm really done
14:49:53 <jokke_> zigo: we can change all that when we figure out what's actually going on there ... now we have someplace to track our findings :D
14:50:06 <abhishekk> +1
14:50:44 <abhishekk> lets wrap it up
14:50:47 <abhishekk> thank you all
14:51:40 <abhishekk> #endmeeting