18:00:44 #startmeeting networking_policy 18:00:45 Meeting started Thu Apr 21 18:00:44 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:46 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:48 The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy' 18:01:04 #info agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/GroupBasedPolicy#April_21st.2C_2016 18:01:30 a note upfront on the mitaka release 18:01:59 we had a rc1 release and i found some issues with our in-tree devstack 18:02:04 that has been fixed since 18:02:43 other than that i am just waiting to merge the devref patch from igordcard once its complete 18:03:25 is there anything else anyone else wants to land any critical fix? 18:04:09 okay 18:04:25 so please note that we have to moved to non-date based version numbering 18:04:50 since we are in the 4th release, the RC tag was 4.0.0.0rc1 18:04:59 and the release version will be 4.0.0 18:05:30 4 for juno/kilo/liberty/ and now Mitaka? 18:05:37 tbachman: right 18:05:43 * tbachman can count :) 18:05:50 lol 18:05:59 basically following the convention used by other projects when they switched from date versioning 18:06:10 SumitNaiksatam: thx 18:06:26 rkukura: does that sound okay based on your interaction with the RHEL packaging team? 18:06:59 I think so, but the epoch will need to be incremented 18:07:17 rkukura: can you elaborate? 18:07:48 The epoch is basically an invisible most significant part of the version number 18:08:09 Since 4 < 2015, we will need to bump the epoch 18:08:35 rkukura: okay, where is that captured? 18:08:38 which will mean 4.x supercedes 2015.x 18:08:49 Its in the spec file for the RPM 18:08:54 rkukura: i though this is somehow handled in pbr 18:09:16 PBR may have something similar, but I don’t know much about PBR 18:09:17 rkukura: ah okay, that makes sense, since i did not see anything in the code tree itself 18:09:24 songole: hemanthravi: hi 18:09:27 rkukura: thanks 18:09:35 hi 18:09:42 It seems what we are doing is just like what all other projects have done, so I’m confident it will work out 18:09:59 rkukura: yes, to the best of my understanding 18:10:05 i would hope to release mitaka by the end of this week 18:10:16 hi 18:10:21 so let me know offline if there are any concerns 18:10:24 ivar-lazzaro: hi 18:10:26 Hi 18:10:40 moving on 18:11:24 rkukura: i am assuming there no more packaging updates or things to discuss immediately? 18:12:01 no update for now 18:12:17 rkukura: okay 18:12:20 #topic Docs 18:12:45 igordcard’s devref patch has been up for review: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/306855 18:12:49 igordcard: there? 18:14:23 i wanted to check with igordcard when he plans to remove the patch from WIP 18:14:33 i believe only the pep8 needs to be fixed 18:14:46 any major concerns with this patch? 18:16:22 if not, then we can look at merging this patch once its out of WIP 18:16:47 #topic NFP Design Spec 18:17:00 #link https://review.openstack.org/239743 18:17:09 i see there are +2s on this 18:17:33 i need to give one more reading, but i am mostly fine with this 18:17:45 addressed so far 18:17:52 the comments so far 18:18:12 hemanthravi: thanks for your patience on this spec, its dragged on for close to six months now 18:18:35 anyone else have any major concerns? 18:19:13 hemanthravi: my understanding is that the implementation patches will have a devref docment which reflects the state of implementation as a followup to this design spec 18:19:40 SumitNaiksatam: will work on the deverf patches 18:19:48 hemanthravi: thanks 18:20:00 the implementation patches are posted 18:20:07 hemanthravi: right 18:20:20 hemanthravi: the devref needs to be part of the implementation patch 18:20:28 hemanthravi: perhaps in the last patch of the chain 18:20:50 if there are no major concerns can this spec be +A'd. I can continue to address any comments that come up 18:20:52 so i guess no more comments on the NFP spec 18:21:26 hemanthravi: yeah i would propose that discussion move to the implementation patches and the devref therein 18:21:51 the spec was meant to facilitate the design discussion to this point 18:22:25 #topic Open Discussion 18:23:08 amit bose has been reviewing the APIC policy driver related patches and has been doing a great job 18:23:24 so we have added him as +2/A core for the APIC patches 18:24:14 i dont see amit here right now, but welcome Amit! 18:24:50 programming note - we dont have the IRC meeting next week since we will be at the OpenStack Austin Summit 18:25:31 most of us will be at the workshop #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/events/6894/developing-deploying-and-consuming-l4-7-network-services-in-an-openstack-cloud 18:25:36 please attend if you get a chance 18:25:45 anything else for today? 18:25:54 SumitNaiksatam: Are any in-person GBP design sessions planned? 18:26:31 rkukura: not yet, but we play it by the ear once we get there 18:26:35 ok 18:26:43 *we can 18:27:20 alright thanks all for attending today, and see you at the Summit next week! 18:27:23 bye! 18:27:35 bye 18:27:39 #endmeeting