14:00:23 #startmeeting monasca 14:00:24 Meeting started Wed Oct 4 14:00:23 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is witek. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:25 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:28 The meeting name has been set to 'monasca' 14:00:52 Hello everyone 14:00:56 o/ 14:00:57 hi 14:00:58 hi 14:00:58 o/ 14:01:18 Link to agenda: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/monasca-team-meeting-agenda 14:01:37 #topic monasca-agent python3 compatible 14:01:37 may we switch discussion topics, I'm busy reading a document but I'll need to have your opionon on the agent 14:01:53 ok 14:02:19 so you want to move the first point to later? 14:03:43 #topic remove monasca-api Java implementation 14:04:22 we have discussed during our meet-up deprecation of Java in monasca-api 14:04:43 I would like to go further and completely remove the code 14:05:03 wanted to ask you, if there are any objections to that? 14:05:15 witek: it occurred to me that essentially deprecates Vertica 14:05:53 jgu_: yes, Vertica is only in Java 14:06:00 jgu_: that is going to be deprecated any way 14:06:00 we are not ready for deprecating Vertica yet 14:06:37 our current release is still in Vertica until Cassandra is merged in 14:07:00 jgu_: this is what I was about to say 14:07:09 OK, that's important reason 14:07:22 we still need the java, so I thing that a deprecation period is needed 14:07:37 sc: agreed 14:08:08 jgu_: there is a good reason I'm looking closer to your work ;-) 14:08:16 good, we'll mark it deprecated then and leave in the repo for one more release 14:08:48 this is OK for me 14:08:50 one more release after queens? 14:09:22 as soon as we have Cassandra 14:09:42 that sounds good :-) 14:10:47 #topic Remove keystone auth cache dir 14:11:07 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/509311/ 14:11:59 after upstream changes in devstack it doesn't seem a blocker anymore 14:12:05 but a good change anyway 14:12:39 it was still broken yesterday evening. which upstream change from devstack? 14:13:20 Kien has cited in review 14:13:22 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/509307/ 14:14:31 they reverted the devstack change :-) 14:14:38 cool 14:15:42 but they'll remove it anyway so your change can be merged as soon as the gates are functional again 14:16:11 #topic Zuul v3 migration 14:16:33 https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/zuulv3.html 14:16:57 OpenStack infra has upgraded Zuul 14:17:19 unfortunately it impacts our CI jobs as you can see 14:18:08 we have 2 engineers working on migrating the configuration 14:19:13 they have also switched on the old Zuul v2 jobs today again, so perhaps we could have some temporary solution in short term 14:20:50 sc: can we now move to Python 3 topic? 14:22:24 yes 14:22:37 #topic monasca-agent python3 compatible 14:22:46 there are two options 14:23:18 1) use a fork of supervisor that is python 3 compatible but not python 2 compatible 14:23:44 2) get rid of supervisor and add a contrib directory to the project with the suggested systemd configurations 14:24:05 which aproach do you prefer? 14:24:26 2) 14:24:28 Much as it pains me (I'm generally not fond of things depending on systemd), I vote for (2). 14:24:36 could you give the reference to the fork? 14:24:58 (I'm even less fond of supervisor) 14:25:12 just a second 14:25:18 I the link 14:25:47 supervisor is not in global requirements 14:26:00 and I guess it could be difficult to get it in 14:26:06 no 14:27:14 orgsea/supervisor-py3k 14:27:34 https://github.com/orgsea/supervisor-py3k 14:27:38 thanks 14:28:03 if I understood correctly this is not py2 compatible 14:29:12 for option 2) isn't monasca_setup taking care of generating systemd config? 14:30:30 witek: I don't remember if so we need to change the generated systemd configurations in a way that collected and forwarder are started in the right order and the restarted if broken 14:31:04 yes, I think it's also my preference 14:31:10 the devstack plugin has systemd configuration 14:31:11 witek: optionally, yes. But that creates a service file that assumes supervisor is used. 14:31:44 jgr: sure, we'd have to update it 14:31:48 witek: are you proposing to patch monasca_setup? 14:31:54 So monasca_setup would need to be changed to create 3 units instead of one. 14:32:12 correct 14:32:24 my idea is to get systemd configuration out 14:32:26 is supervisor-py3k under development? 14:32:36 explicitly available in the repo 14:33:08 akiraY: it looks like it's under development for now... 14:33:17 https://github.com/orgsea/supervisor-py3k/blob/master/setup.py 14:33:34 something like our friends in cloudkitty are doing: 14:33:40 https://github.com/openstack/cloudkitty/blob/master/contrib/init/cloudkitty-processor.service 14:33:48 akiraY: and I'm a bit worried that "for now" may turn into "freshly abandoned" at some stage (it looks like a one man project). 14:34:06 me, too. 14:35:07 I'm for solution 2), too but now the question is: monasca_setup or external config files? 14:35:50 monasca_setup is fine by me as long as it remains optional (the way it is right now). 14:35:55 I like the monasca_setup approach, where you can set an option if you want to generate service files or not 14:36:21 explicit files can be added to the repo anyway 14:36:42 OK, so now I know where to break things :-) 14:37:05 I.e. we'll provide our own unit files in our monasca-agent package and are not overly keen on monasca-setup messing with these :-) 14:37:44 :) 14:37:59 sc: do you want to work on this? 14:38:30 I'm adding to my personal backlog 14:38:44 great, thanks 14:39:19 anything else to this topic? 14:40:02 do we have other topics? 14:40:12 Yes https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/queens/policy-in-code.html 14:40:28 #topic policy in code 14:40:43 I haven't looked to it yet 14:40:43 I'm currently working on a spec for this, but I'm also trolling for volunteers... :-) 14:41:18 I'll check with our team 14:41:28 I.e. I'm happy to do a writeup of what needs doing in the spec, but I don't think I'll have the capacity to do the implementation as well (the agent domain thing is more than enough, I think...) 14:42:30 your help with writing things up would be great 14:42:47 No worries, I'll do it :-) 14:42:58 btw. your first spec is in good shape, I guess 14:43:13 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/507110/ 14:43:52 please, have a look, would be great to have that merged soon 14:44:42 And I still need to check how this impacts the events API... 14:44:53 (or how the events API affects it) 14:45:05 I'll try to make some time for that tomorrow. 14:45:39 should be similar to logs 14:46:13 Ok. That sounds like it definitely has an impact. 14:47:44 is there anyone else, who wants to work on "policy in code" community goal? 14:48:48 some other topics? 14:48:57 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/501601/ 14:49:45 I'll put 'recheck' after ci will work well. 14:50:33 has added myself to review 14:50:42 thank you. 14:51:59 ok, if there are no more topics, we may be closing 14:52:41 thanks you 14:52:47 thank you 14:52:54 thanks 14:52:55 Thank you! 14:52:57 have a nice rest of the week 14:53:02 and see you 14:53:17 #endmeeting