18:00:04 #startmeeting keystone 18:00:08 Meeting started Tue Oct 10 18:00:04 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is lbragstad. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:12 The meeting name has been set to 'keystone' 18:00:13 o/ 18:00:13 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-weekly-meeting 18:00:19 o/ 18:00:21 ^ agenda 18:00:22 o/ 18:00:40 ayoung, breton, cmurphy, dstanek, edmondsw, gagehugo, henrynash, hrybacki, knikolla, lamt, lbragstad, lwanderley, kmalloc, rderose, rodrigods, samueldmq, spilla, aselius, dpar ping! 18:00:48 o/ 18:00:49 o/ 18:01:03 o/ 18:02:10 #topic announcements: queens deadline dates 18:02:25 this is the current schedule for queens 18:02:27 #link https://releases.openstack.org/queens/schedule.html 18:02:37 i've proposed a patch to add deadlines for keystone 18:02:44 o/ 18:02:47 which is pretty much a copy paste of all deadlines we used in pike 18:02:49 o/ 18:02:54 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/509835/ 18:03:17 one thing to note is that feature proposal freeze happens over the christmas holiday 18:03:55 i'm curious to get feedback here if we want to bump it a week earlier or later (pending new years, too) 18:04:00 thoughts? 18:04:03 is everyone taking holiday/shutdown over that period? 18:04:19 in my experience, things are pretty quiet that week 18:04:23 lbragstad: ++ 18:04:28 (i don't plan to take much time off over the holiday though) 18:04:39 I guess we can do it one week early as proposed now 18:04:44 lbragstad: aye, then I'd say we push it to the left so we encourage to get stuff done early 18:04:50 samueldmq+1 18:04:52 hrybacki ++ 18:04:58 and if we get something that really needs more time, we can do an exception for it 18:05:00 yeah - and it's feature *proposal* freeze 18:05:05 not feature freeze 18:05:09 +1 18:05:19 exactly. I am fine with that, looks good to me 18:05:23 * cmurphy does not care 18:05:32 ok - that sounds fair 18:05:43 i'll wip that patch and propose the deadline a week earlier 18:05:59 #action lbragstad to bump deadline in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/509835/ to not be christmas week 18:06:23 other than that, does anyone have suggestions for deadlines? 18:06:39 or was everyone relatively happy with the deadlines we had for pike 18:06:53 (if not, please don't hesitate to speak up!) 18:07:06 the other deadlines looked fine imo 18:08:05 i think we've had pretty consistent deadline structure for the last few releases, but i want to make sure we have the opportunity to adjust if folks think it's necessary 18:09:03 if that's the case, leave a comment on the review 18:09:06 #topic announcement: aws iam policy session planning 18:09:19 this is mostly advertising 18:09:36 but i started laying this out for tomorrow so that we can start planning a productive policy session 18:10:15 the plan is to use the policy meeting tomorrow to organize what we want out of that session 18:10:18 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Keystone_Policy_Meeting 18:10:40 i've also started another etherpad 18:10:40 fyi ayoung will be in training and likely off of irc tomorrow 18:11:04 hrybacki: ack 18:11:27 hrybacki: i should make a point to followup with him when he's done with training to get his cases in the etherpad 18:11:57 ideally tomorrow we'll just be figuring out what we want out of the session and organizing resources 18:11:58 lbragstad: ack. He's in Raleigh for the week so he's probably quite board in the evenings and looking for things to do 18:12:04 * hrybacki nods 18:12:10 bored* 18:12:27 cool - that sounds good 18:12:58 by the end of the policy meeting tomorrow, we should have a couple dates proposed, hangout prepared, action items for an AWS account, etc.. 18:13:33 if you want to see how specific things are done in AWS or GKE - feel free to add them to the etherpad https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/analyzing-other-policy-systems 18:13:35 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/analyzing-other-policy-systems 18:14:31 #topic announcement: trello sync 18:14:37 #link https://trello.com/b/5F0h9Hoe/keystone 18:15:00 just fyi - i've added another column to the board as a way to show what needs review 18:15:38 i've also been trying to keep things in sync, if i've missed something you're working on just let me know or go ahead and move it 18:16:00 s/move it/make the necessary changes/ 18:17:16 other than that - how do people feel about the release so far? 18:18:37 * hrybacki hasn't been able to crawl out from his downstream hole to be of much use tbh 18:18:50 hrybacki: hi5 o/ 18:19:05 * cmurphy will go review some things 18:19:14 o/\o 18:19:21 I like the v2 removal 18:19:21 :) 18:19:26 ++ 18:19:41 lbragstad: I like trello. helps keeping priorities with the team 18:19:49 samueldmq: good deal 18:19:50 samueldmq ++ 18:19:52 visually friendly 18:20:05 hopefully it's helpful, i've been using it a lot 18:20:20 * gagehugo wishes his work board was more like trello 18:20:28 yes. seems like people have been doing something similar to that, but with different tools 18:20:30 in different ways 18:20:49 I used to have an etherpad. having a shared place is great 18:20:49 yeah - i'm curious to try storyboard (for real) and see how similar it is, if at all 18:20:53 iirc storyboard has a similar functionality, if we wanted to move to an all-open platform ;) 18:21:01 lbragstad: heh 18:21:05 cmurphy: ++ 18:21:10 january! 18:21:18 aha, cool. would be nice to try it out 18:21:31 we have a deployment for it in our ecosystem, right? 18:21:39 https://storyboard.openstack.org/ 18:21:40 yeah - infra manages one already 18:21:56 #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/board/list 18:21:59 but per the discussion at the PTG, they are still in the process of migrating projects to it 18:22:37 i guess the thing i like most about having something like trello is that it help maintain the context of everything we said we were going to do for a release 18:22:53 it has both boards and work lists ... seems interesting 18:23:21 lbragstad: yes, establishing the process/habit of using that for tracking is far more important than the specific tool we use 18:23:23 imo 18:23:30 ++ 18:23:34 agreed 18:23:46 * hrybacki nods 18:24:09 if there's anything i can do to help facilitate upstream involvement, don't hesitate to ask 18:24:26 or if we need to reshuffle things 18:25:07 #topic TripleO brekage -- API v2 removal post-mortem 18:25:11 hrybacki: o/ 18:25:14 o/ 18:25:44 this is just more of an awarenss bit, there was a hiccup within TripleO after the removal that we didn't see in time 18:25:44 I like the topic name. v2.0 post-mortem 18:25:58 broke a lot of ci unfortunately (tripleo based) 18:26:08 hrybacki: did it get all fixed already? 18:26:20 samueldmq: aye, there were two fixes to instack 18:26:34 and I submitted ~13 patches against the openstack puppet modules setting defaults 18:26:44 hrybacki: what is instack? 18:26:48 some had already ported to v3 18:26:51 hrybacki: cool, thanks for that. 18:27:04 samueldmq: it's what prepares the undercloud for a tripleo deployment 18:27:13 * samueldmq nods 18:27:17 aforementioned change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/510535/ 18:27:34 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1721366 was the main bug for tracking 18:27:35 Launchpad bug 1721366 in tripleo "Keystone v2.0 APIs have been removed, TripleO config is incomplete" [Critical,Fix released] - Assigned to yatin (yatinkarel) 18:27:51 only question I have is, could we have communicated this change betteR? 18:28:42 that was all I had lbragstad 18:28:43 didn't we send ML annoucements? warnings? 18:28:45 depreaction notices? 18:28:59 samueldmq: we did. I honestly don't think people believed it would get yanked 18:29:03 yeah - deprecation notices are standard and usually the first line 18:29:18 it was deprecated for a long time. <-- might be something to keep in mind 18:29:26 did we send mailing list announcements though? 18:29:28 maybe some projects just did not realize how much of a change that was 18:29:37 and it's a very uncommon change in OpenStack 18:29:50 i think we sent a ML thread - let me dig it up 18:29:59 cmurphy: I thought we did. At a minimum I know it was in Lance and others' PTG summary/blogs 18:30:20 I was not surprised someone got bitten, unfortunately 18:30:28 cmurphy you have my vote btw -- happy to see your name on email earlier 18:30:41 hrybacki: haha ty 18:31:01 samueldmq: same. Lots of moving parts. Was a slap in my face when the RH prod line broke for 36 hours though =/ 18:31:51 i did send this a while ago 18:31:53 we knew v2 was likely to break things. 18:31:59 to both operators and -dev 18:32:01 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-March/113166.html 18:32:02 this is why we telegraphed so far in advance 18:32:19 the fact that things still broke shows that the community was not paying attention 18:32:33 it happens 18:32:57 but some projects def. were not attentive on this front. 18:33:14 I heard that trove is also still using keystone v2 18:33:15 lbragstad: that's not a "THIS IS HAPPENING ON $RELEASE" it's a gentle poking that it might happen soon 18:33:46 the TC acceptance of removal was on a very clear timeline 18:33:49 the trove guys agreed that they need to move to v3, though, so I hope they are just working on that 18:33:51 true - digging to see if another one was sent 18:34:20 the subject should be : "BE PREPARED: REMOVE OF THE V2.0 API!!!!", not "Removal of the v2.0 API" 18:34:32 REMOVAL* :-) 18:34:38 it's also not tagged [all] 18:35:06 yeah - that could have been tagged/messaged better 18:35:09 i think this is something we can do better at for v4 :) 18:35:10 cmurphy: ++ those could have been points we could've improved 18:35:40 I agree. not like the fault is only of our message, but could have been slightly better 18:35:50 yeah - that's on me 18:35:55 we did our best 18:36:04 v3 will not be removed, even if we have v45 18:36:06 v4* 18:36:07 lbragstad: s/me/us/ 18:36:08 and communicated early. we've been talking about removing it a lot 18:36:13 cmurphy: ++ 18:36:14 v2.0 was removed for a lot of reasons. 18:36:21 lbragstad: that's on the group as a whole :) I know at least once I asked myself if we'd properly informed the community after the fact 18:36:23 this is not likely to ever happen again 18:36:34 at least not as long as I expect ot be working on openstack 18:36:56 but - we could take the same precaution with similar situations (like when we remove the uuid token provider) 18:37:03 or sql persistence layer 18:37:22 that's why we talk about it now. let's make sure we do it better next time 18:37:27 those would be good examples of where we could exercise that level of verbosity 18:37:28 whenever we need to communicate such a change 18:37:30 we have done those removals before 18:37:32 less of an issue 18:37:35 pki/pkiz/etc 18:37:47 this was a public facing api, that is a *big* deal 18:38:07 we aren't doing any harm by being communicative regardless of the impact of a change 18:38:16 if devstack is configured sanely, and puppet/ansible gets the changes, we are fine 18:38:33 we communicate it, but honestly, i don't think we could have handled v2.0 better 18:38:58 it's been telegraphed we are removing this for... years 18:39:20 i would say that we definitely took measures to stay in touch with defcore/refstack/tc though (thanks kmalloc!) 18:39:29 ++ 18:39:30 kmalloc: puppet at least was caught off guard for some things, that's what causes the tripleo breakage 18:39:45 aye, that was probably the problem. We told folks it was happening but should have told them that it /did/ happen 18:39:53 cmurphy: we cannot expect to personally reach out to ever single team. 18:39:54 cmurphy: and mistral (ptg fire drill) 18:40:14 aha - that's right 18:40:31 we used ML, we used TC, we used deprecation warnings 18:40:41 we used devstack, etc. 18:41:03 we used IRC. there is only so far we can go. 18:41:51 yeah, if we did something wrong, we still did it all 99% right 18:42:12 so we did a great job, maybe not perfect, but still great 18:42:43 so - question 18:43:04 outside of API removals (which are super rare) what classifies as needing verbose ML threads to -dev and -operators 18:43:06 ? 18:43:40 a good question 18:43:48 to operators, change of defaults 18:44:11 so changing configuration options or policy defaults 18:44:28 removal of driver support? 18:44:55 change of defaults, deprecation of features/backends, removal(s) 18:45:19 yes, like anything that might affect what they may run today upon upgrade 18:45:29 lbragstad FYI, it already merged but I just added a few more comments on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/500141 that bear consideration 18:45:34 around exactly this 18:46:31 edmondsw: thanks! 18:48:43 sounds like we agreed on the need to be more verbose when advertising removals on mailing lists 18:49:03 hrybacki: anything else you want to work through? 18:49:10 nope, thanks all! 18:49:17 cool 18:49:20 #topic open discussion 18:49:45 and the floor is open 18:50:22 do we have forum topics for sydney? 18:50:32 cmurphy was just gonna ask that haha 18:50:44 we do - i submitted at least three proposals 18:50:53 also do we have a "keystone project update" thing for sydney as well? 18:51:52 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/SYD-keystone-forum-sessions 18:52:09 #link http://forumtopics.openstack.org/ 18:52:32 #link http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/36 18:52:38 #link http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/37 18:52:48 #link http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/39 18:53:13 ah still unreviewed 18:53:21 eek, I take it back. Things are still using the v2 api: https://logs.rdoproject.org/openstack-periodic-4hr/periodic-tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-1ctlr_1comp-featureset020-master/28b28c1/undercloud/var/log/nova/nova-compute.log.txt.gz#_2017-10-10_18_07_36_272 18:55:29 hrybacki: that must be coming up in a job? 18:56:05 lbragstad: aye it is. But we've already tracked it down to an issue within puppet-nova -- patch en route 18:56:20 nice 18:57:23 * hrybacki has nothing else 18:58:07 cool - office hours starting in just a few minutes 18:58:13 #endmeeting