16:02:40 <ttx> #startmeeting incub_sync
16:02:41 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Feb 26 16:02:40 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:02:42 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:02:45 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'incub_sync'
16:02:46 <ttx> #topic Barbican
16:03:08 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/barbican/+milestone/kilo-3
16:03:17 <ttx> gee, that's a lot of essentials :)
16:03:29 <ttx> and feels a bit late overall :)
16:04:18 <redrobot> Yeah... the spec process took long for some of these
16:05:02 <redrobot> but a lot of folks committed to landing these by k-3
16:05:21 <ttx> ok, we'll see
16:05:31 <ttx> you might want to add assignees to the ones without
16:06:05 <redrobot> ttx yep, I'll get those assigned.
16:06:06 <ttx> fwiw previously "integrated" projects are almost all running a FPF Thursday next week
16:06:15 <ttx> FPF = all feature code must be up for review
16:06:20 <ttx> leaving 2 weeks for final review
16:06:27 <ttx> before feature freeze
16:06:49 <ttx> but you can skip that if you don't expect to be overwhelmed by reviews
16:07:17 <ttx> In other news, a bit of evolution on how I intend to run release tracking in Liberty:
16:07:25 <ttx> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Cycle_Management/Liberty_Tracking
16:07:39 <ttx> You can read when you have some time and let me know at another sync what you think of it
16:07:53 <redrobot> ok, I'll take a look at that for sure
16:07:59 <ttx> This is also valid for bswartz Kiall and flaper87 ^
16:08:07 <bswartz> yeah I saw it
16:08:09 <ttx> alright.. questions ?
16:09:01 <redrobot> nope, no questions this week.
16:09:05 <redrobot> thanks ttx
16:09:23 <ttx> bswartz: o/
16:09:27 <ttx> #topic Manila
16:09:27 <bswartz> hey
16:09:33 * flaper87 reads
16:09:36 <flaper87> damn, it's thrusday
16:09:41 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/manila/+milestone/kilo-3
16:09:44 <bswartz> I started looking at out list of BPs in the last 10 minutes
16:09:44 <ttx> again
16:09:53 <ttx> It looks nice already
16:09:59 <bswartz> it's gotten longer since we last talked
16:10:02 <ttx> A few undefined/unknowns to clean up
16:10:06 <bswartz> yeah
16:10:14 <ttx> but otherwise nice progress
16:10:22 <bswartz> so I have one problems with BPs in LP
16:10:32 <ttx> I like when things getmerged as yhou go, rather than pile up unreviewed until the end
16:10:35 <bswartz> they don't seem to change state automatically when code merges
16:10:43 <ttx> bswartz: they don't
16:10:57 <bswartz> so I have to periodically go through and mark things implemented
16:11:07 <ttx> there is no code for that because people rarely use the commit message codes appropriately
16:11:20 <bswartz> ok
16:11:28 <bswartz> well I need to do it again this afternoon
16:11:35 <bswartz> because this list is too long for my liking
16:11:42 <ttx> i.e. people tend to use "Implements" in a commit message when the review actually doesn't close the blueprint
16:11:51 <ttx> We could revisit that, I guess
16:11:53 <bswartz> we have a small core team
16:12:14 <ttx> we need to simplify updating BP status if https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Cycle_Management/Liberty_Tracking is the way forward
16:12:46 <bswartz> so manila is enforcing a FPF next week
16:12:50 <bswartz> I saw you talking about that
16:12:56 <ttx> so setting some code like "Blueprint-compltion: 50%" that would translate itno whatever code in LP we'll use to match that
16:13:13 <bswartz> hmm
16:13:21 <bswartz> would that text go in the git commit?
16:13:37 <ttx> that's one way to do it
16:13:55 <ttx> because "implements" and "partial-implements" are not realiably used
16:14:01 <bswartz> does anything at all trigger in LP when a patch merges?
16:14:13 <ttx> bswartz: currently nothing
16:14:25 <bswartz> I thought that bugs got closed or something
16:14:28 <ttx> but we have the framework to make things happen (we close bugs for example)
16:14:36 <ttx> oh, sorry
16:14:49 <ttx> yes, on patch-merge we have the bug-update script run
16:14:57 <ttx> on patch-propose, we update bugs and BPs
16:15:08 <bswartz> okay, so that script could be extended to do more, but it just does bugs today
16:15:12 <ttx> 'that's all jeepyb scripts from our infra
16:15:34 <bswartz> going through and updating BPs manually isn't that bad
16:15:39 <ttx> right. That was the plan but cats would not use "Implements" safely and the update would be a bit unreliable
16:15:45 <bswartz> but it's one of those things that scale poorly as the team gets bigger
16:15:51 <bswartz> scales*
16:15:56 <ttx> ideally it would be up to the assignee to keep that up to date, not you
16:16:16 <ttx> Anyway, I'll let you continue to clean that one up
16:16:23 <ttx> So you want to do FPF ?
16:16:27 <bswartz> yes
16:16:37 <ttx> expect unhappy people on that day :)
16:16:39 <bswartz> in fact I've been telling people about it for 3 weeks in a row now so it's no surprise to anyone
16:16:54 <ttx> good!
16:17:20 <bswartz> I expect some exceptions will be made, but I don't tell people that
16:17:24 <ttx> That generally results in shorter RC1 (less release-critical bugs) and you can open Liberty earlier
16:17:34 <ttx> so it's not necessarily blocking people for a longer time
16:17:34 <bswartz> yeah
16:17:47 <bswartz> hey I dropped in on the TC meeting this week
16:17:48 <ttx> alright -- anything else ?
16:17:54 <bswartz> I saw the discussion about the release tag
16:18:09 <ttx> hmm.. which one?
16:18:19 <bswartz> is the TC going to close on the definition of the release tag before going and defining others?
16:18:27 <bswartz> the discussion in the TC meeting
16:18:29 <ttx> oh, the release tags.
16:18:44 <ttx> no, we can add tags in parallel
16:18:56 <bswartz> from your blog post I sort of expected half a dozen or more tags
16:19:09 <ttx> I hope to come back from the Ops Summit with plenty of tags
16:19:15 <bswartz> everyone is still wondering how tags are going to play out
16:19:24 <ttx> one step at a time :)
16:19:36 <bswartz> when is this ops summit?
16:19:49 <ttx> It's in 11 days in PHL
16:19:54 <bswartz> okay cool
16:20:03 <bswartz> that's it from me
16:20:26 <ttx> col, have a nice week!
16:20:31 <ttx> cool*
16:20:35 <bswartz> you too
16:20:37 <ttx> flaper87: around?
16:21:50 <flaper87> ttx: yes
16:21:57 <ttx> #topic Zaqar
16:22:04 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/zaqar/+milestone/kilo-3
16:22:19 <ttx> Looks like good progress to me
16:22:33 <flaper87> yeah, unfortunatelly we've been having "gate illness"
16:22:42 <ttx> is it solved now ?
16:22:42 <flaper87> in the last week so, some progress was slowed down
16:22:46 <flaper87> almost
16:22:49 <flaper87> I'm debugging the last one
16:22:53 <ttx> Planning to enforce FPF next week ?
16:23:00 <ttx> or just review as-needed ?
16:23:25 <flaper87> just review as-needed
16:23:30 <ttx> ok
16:23:35 <flaper87> we're not far from our goal so I'm happy
16:23:39 <flaper87> considering how many we are
16:23:49 <ttx> That's all I had (with the wiki link above)
16:24:02 <ttx> any question on your side ?
16:24:07 <flaper87> no, sir!
16:24:09 <flaper87> thank you!
16:24:14 <ttx> alright! Have a great week
16:24:17 <ttx> and travel
16:24:23 <flaper87> ttx: thanks :)
16:24:24 <ttx> Kiall: you there ,
16:24:25 <ttx> ?
16:24:58 <Kiall> hey ttx
16:25:02 <ttx> #topic Designate
16:25:10 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/designate/+milestone/kilo-3
16:25:23 <ttx> You seem a bit alone there
16:25:42 <Kiall> lol - there's one missing from the page ;) rest of the team is working on bugs and stability
16:25:46 <ttx> Still feeling like you can deliver those ?
16:25:58 <ttx> stability is good
16:26:25 <Kiall> Yep, we've been working through stability more than anything else after some of the bigger k1/k2 things have left us not so stable
16:26:27 <ttx> (which is why I'd like to push less emphasis on velocity, as part of https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Cycle_Management/Liberty_Tracking)
16:26:52 <ttx> ok, nice
16:27:18 <ttx> what else... I ssupect you won't self-enforce a FPF on yourself that would be silly
16:27:33 <Kiall> Lol, I might do ;)
16:28:38 <ttx> alright -- questions on your side ?
16:29:01 <Kiall> Not today, though I probably will after reading that wiki page ;)
16:29:13 <ttx> hehe yes
16:29:35 <ttx> that will basically impact how many projects I feel comfortable "coordinating" releases for
16:29:51 <ttx> Currently in fact I'm handling all of the incubated ones
16:30:02 <ttx> so the release:cooridnated tag (if accpeted) would apply to you
16:30:24 <ttx> (basically making you equivalent tagging-wise to the previously "integrated" projects
16:30:34 <Kiall> Okay, your thinking you continue to look after the incub projects then through L?
16:30:54 <ttx> well, I plan to look after the release:coorinated projects, which is a set the team (me) defines
16:31:03 <ttx> coordinated*
16:31:11 <Kiall> Sure, that makes sense..
16:31:15 <ttx> I still have to see how much I think I can chew
16:31:25 <ttx> but simplifying tracking would help me take more
16:31:36 <ttx> That would be if you want to, obviously
16:31:45 <Kiall> Looking at the wiki, weekly sync would be out, and as-neccessary syncs happen instead.. e.g. close to a release etc
16:31:48 <ttx> I won't force anyone to be coordinated by me for sure
16:32:05 <ttx> yeah, we basically wouldn't care so much tracking in-progress work
16:32:13 <ttx> just tracking when to tag and what's in it
16:32:34 <Kiall> That makes more sense to me.. Most of the time, planning 6-8 months in advance just fails..
16:32:35 <ttx> trying to apply to features what we do for bugs (autocollecting all the complete ones and associate them to the milestone)
16:33:06 <ttx> that still means you need to keep the state of blueprints current (at least so that we know when they are completed)
16:33:24 <ttx> but no longer targeting them to a specific milestone, or needing to defer them once they miss
16:33:35 <ttx> which is like 80% of out 1:1
16:33:47 <ttx> anyone, I need to run.
16:33:54 <ttx> "anyway", I mean
16:33:59 <Kiall> Sure - Cya :) Thanks!
16:33:59 <ttx> have a great week!
16:34:02 <Kiall> you too
16:34:03 <ttx> #endmeeting