17:01:28 <krtaylor> #startmeeting ironic-qa
17:01:29 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Dec  2 17:01:28 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is krtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:31 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:01:33 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ironic_qa'
17:01:34 <jroll> ohai
17:01:44 <krtaylor> anyone here for ironic qa meeting?
17:01:48 <thingee> o/
17:01:49 <sambetts> o/ yup
17:01:51 <sinval> \o
17:02:02 <[1]cdearborn> \o/
17:02:07 <liliars> o/
17:02:08 <jroll> /o\
17:02:15 <krtaylor> ah, ok, whew  :)
17:02:31 <krtaylor> hi everyone
17:03:00 <krtaylor> I am running the meeting this week, I am assuming jlvillal is still in class
17:03:13 <krtaylor> here is the agenda, which is very light
17:03:20 <mjturek1> o/
17:03:25 <krtaylor> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic-QA
17:03:56 <krtaylor> so this may be a short one
17:04:16 <krtaylor> anyone have anything to add to grenade or functional status?
17:04:53 <sinval> about functional, I started a simple change (WIP) for publishing driver interfaces functional tests
17:05:25 <krtaylor> sinval, great, link?
17:06:02 <jroll> sinval: yeah, looking at those, any reason not to make them part of tempest runs? AIUI functional tests aren't meant to deal with hardware and such
17:06:02 <sinval> there you go: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/249515/
17:06:10 <jroll> (I feel like we talked about this once already though)
17:06:33 <krtaylor> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/249515/
17:07:18 <sinval> jroll, I have some thoughts about this, would be nice to have you suggestions on the patch, I'll update it, since I'm more aware how the functional tests thing is working in Ironic and python-ironicclient, so, yes
17:07:22 <rpioso> o/
17:07:26 <jroll> sinval: sure thing
17:07:27 * krtaylor looks
17:08:25 <rajinir_> o/
17:08:27 <sinval> the code is still not finished, it is just a sketch for ideas and discussion...
17:08:52 <krtaylor> #topic Grenade and Functional testing
17:09:01 <krtaylor> forgot to do that...
17:10:35 <krtaylor> ok, anything else on this topic?
17:11:07 <krtaylor> sinval, I'll review that also
17:11:17 <sinval> krtaylor, thanks
17:11:44 <krtaylor> ok, well, onward then
17:11:54 <krtaylor> #topic third party CI
17:12:07 <krtaylor> so, the spec got a bunch of great reviews
17:12:51 <krtaylor> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/241294/
17:13:16 <krtaylor> I had assumed that we were going to merge and deal with the specifics in the docs
17:13:39 <krtaylor> but, I can address these in the spec and push a new version if needed
17:13:42 <krtaylor> comments?
17:13:56 <jroll> krtaylor: yeah, can you push a new one and we can land it?
17:14:01 <jroll> I'm sad that isn't merged yet :(
17:14:36 <thingee> seems like there is enough consensus without showstoppers
17:15:07 <thingee> also would like to note communication went out last monday to the list as well to driver maintainers I've identified via git http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/080867.html
17:15:34 <krtaylor> yes, that was on my list to thingee
17:15:36 <jroll> thingee: \o/ thank you for that
17:15:38 <krtaylor> thanks for that
17:15:39 <liliars> yeah, I saw that, thxx thingee
17:15:51 <thingee> krtaylor: sorry for jumping ahead :)
17:15:57 <krtaylor> also thingee did this -> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Ironic/Testing#Third_Party_CI
17:16:13 <thingee> thanks all for the help in getting this out.
17:16:13 <krtaylor> since we are at it, thanks for that too!
17:17:52 <krtaylor> jroll, I'll be happy to address the comments and push a new version of the spec, and to seek approval quickly
17:18:15 <jroll> krtaylor: yeah, I'll be around for a bit tomorrow morning, otherwise can review monday if you just ping me
17:19:02 <jroll> (ping me when it's up, that is)
17:19:21 <krtaylor> will do
17:19:56 <krtaylor> thingee, any questions or comments off the maillist, I haven't seen any traffic on it
17:20:24 <krtaylor> re: the driver communication email
17:21:00 <thingee> nope
17:21:16 <thingee> they will come though
17:21:28 <thingee> unfortunately as we near the deadline
17:21:31 <krtaylor> without doubt :)
17:21:56 <krtaylor> ok, well, anything else on this?
17:22:22 <liliars> I'm happy to say our team managed to overcome network issues and our CI is finally able to test a deploy workflow \o/ just finishing some automatizing scripts for that and we'll put it up
17:22:52 <liliars> if anyone has got issues and want some tips, feel free to ping me and (I guess hah) sinval :)
17:22:56 <sambetts> \o/
17:22:58 <krtaylor> liliars, amazing how close we are, my team has just done the same
17:22:59 <sinval> We also saw new statements on CI spec regarding the tests that every CI should run (dsvm-pxe_ipa), we need to work on this
17:23:07 <krtaylor> maurosr, mjturek1 ^^
17:23:17 <liliars> krtaylor, cool!!
17:23:40 <mjturek1> yep, hoping to be commenting soon :)
17:23:49 <krtaylor> we are expecting to start soon
17:23:54 <krtaylor> yes :)
17:24:14 <sambetts> my progress has been slowed re: the cisco ci because of a lack of space for equipment, more progress should be happening in the new year :(
17:24:47 <krtaylor> excellent, any other systems coming online soon?
17:25:44 * krtaylor is interested in comparing notes for how the CI systems were set up
17:26:08 <krtaylor> ok, anything else?
17:26:16 <krtaylor> next then
17:26:21 <krtaylor> #topic General QA and Open Discussion
17:26:39 <sambetts> do we need to reiterate Anita's message?
17:26:46 <krtaylor> which one?
17:26:55 <jroll> sambetts: do iiiiit
17:27:11 <krtaylor> not to announce on -dev?
17:27:22 <sambetts> yeah and to use the third party wiki
17:27:51 <mjturek1> sorry, might be out of the loop. Not announce what exactly?
17:27:55 <krtaylor> yeah, the history there is that when we started seeing a lot of systems come up, there was a lot of noise, so we started the wiki
17:28:33 <krtaylor> mjturek1, there was an ironic CI system announce they were reporting
17:28:44 <jroll> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-November/080808.html
17:28:58 <jroll> ^ that
17:29:14 <mjturek1> ahhhhh  got it, thanks jroll and krtaylor
17:29:14 <krtaylor> I tried for some time to get active status displayed on theta wiki page, but it is difficult because of the wiki formatting
17:29:45 <krtaylor> that wiki page is meant to list all active CI systems and their status
17:30:22 <krtaylor> there are instructions there that show hoe to update the status working around some of the wiki strangeness
17:30:39 <sambetts> we've also got this https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicCI for CI development updates
17:31:17 <krtaylor> yes, and cinder and other projects also have sub-driver testing pages, we can as well
17:31:57 <sambetts> How does this get updated? http://stackalytics.com/report/driverlog?project_id=openstack%2Fironic
17:32:09 <sinval> krtaylor, +1
17:32:24 <jroll> sambetts: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/DriverLog#How_To:_Add_a_new_driver_to_DriverLog
17:32:31 <krtaylor> sambetts, there is a patch to add your system
17:32:34 <krtaylor> yes that ^^^
17:33:03 <jroll> that's pretty out of date, does anyone want to take an action to update that (besides CI updates)?
17:33:26 <sambetts> haha I was about to say should we update it with all the drivers we know about now
17:33:34 <krtaylor> the list or the instructions?
17:34:18 <sambetts> It should be updated with all the drivers listed https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicCI
17:34:40 <sambetts> and then we should have instructions to tell those implementing CI to update their status on there
17:35:17 <krtaylor> the "official" list is the wiki at: #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems
17:36:25 <krtaylor> I would think that stackalytics would mine that...somehow
17:36:44 <jroll> well, that's the official CI list, not driver list, yeah?
17:36:47 <krtaylor> but, alas, multiple places to keep the info synced
17:37:17 <krtaylor> jroll, good point, but there are few systems that have more than one driver
17:38:06 <sambetts> driverlog looks like a nice way to store the info because its a repo full of data, and anything could use that data
17:38:10 <jroll> krtaylor: but there are many drivers without CI systems :P
17:38:25 <krtaylor> hehheh how true
17:39:26 <krtaylor> for us, let's start with our etherpad/wiki and see what we need to add to stackalytics
17:39:56 <krtaylor> as far as I know, stackalytics isn't used for any official purpose for infra or anything
17:40:00 <sambetts> ok :)
17:41:03 <jroll> sure
17:41:42 <krtaylor> sinval, re: pxe_ipa tests
17:42:00 <krtaylor> we were not planning on having ipa testing initially
17:42:46 <sinval> krtaylor, ok thanks
17:45:15 <krtaylor> sinval, so what should be our required base set of tests
17:45:32 <krtaylor> feel free to add that as a comment in the spec
17:45:52 <krtaylor> but the requirement is for N remember  :)
17:45:58 <jroll> whoa whoa wait
17:46:06 <jroll> "we were not planning on having ipa testing initially" ???
17:46:23 <jroll> the bash ramdisk is deprecated, and the recommended deploy ramdisk is IPA
17:46:29 <jroll> there's no reason not to use that for testing
17:46:52 <krtaylor> jroll, we (as in PowerKVM), we don't (yet) support IPA
17:46:59 <jroll> the *agent driver* is different, but dsvm-pxe_ipa is basically our baseline tempest job right now
17:47:02 <jroll> oh.
17:47:45 <krtaylor> I guess what I was poking at was - is that a problem for any other system to have that by N
17:47:46 <sinval> krtaylor: ok, will do, I thought that we were going to discuss about that during the docs development, but talk during the spec sounds reasonable
17:48:07 <krtaylor> sinval, looks like we have another round of comments on the spec :)
17:48:24 <jroll> krtaylor: it's the only supported deployment mechanism by the end of N, so...
17:48:52 <jroll> there shouldn't be any reason why a system doesn't support it, curious why powerkvm can't
17:49:20 <jroll> or why a driver couldn't support it
17:49:56 <krtaylor> jroll, it is probably close for us (powerkvm), we have been focused on IPMI initially to get our test system set up
17:50:16 <jroll> krtaylor: dsvm-pxe_ipa is just pxe_ipmitool with an IPA ramdisk
17:51:10 <krtaylor> yes, we haven't got around to trying that yet
17:51:13 <jroll> which is kind of the "default" or "recommended" deployment right now; which is why we chose it as the baseline test for CI
17:51:14 <jroll> ok
17:51:18 <jroll> it's just linux :D
17:51:32 <krtaylor> yes, but different platform :)
17:52:25 <jroll> indeed
17:52:27 <jroll> :P
17:52:52 <krtaylor> I'll roll up/answer the latest comments on the CI spec, any other actions?
17:53:12 <jroll> +1, thanks for doing that
17:53:30 <krtaylor> it seems we are winding down, anything else?
17:53:36 <sinval> 5 minutes
17:53:41 <sambetts> nothing from me
17:54:12 <krtaylor> thanks everyone, it was another good meeting
17:54:34 <liliars> thanks krtaylor! bye everyone
17:54:39 <sambetts> o/
17:54:50 <krtaylor> #endmeeting