22:04:15 <armax> #startmeeting neutron_drivers
22:04:15 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Nov 10 22:04:15 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is armax. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:04:16 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:04:18 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers'
22:04:32 <HenryG> armax: only for this hour
22:04:36 <armax> how many of you want to start with a joke about the newly US president elect?
22:04:45 <armax> no-one?
22:04:45 <ihrachys> I already did
22:05:00 <armax> ihrachys: I must have missed it
22:05:56 <armax> so let’s tackle the ‘easy’ part
22:06:16 <armax> we have fewer assessments in flight
22:06:21 <armax> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/neutron-specs+branch:master+topic:stadium-implosion
22:07:08 <armax> once the individual ones merge, I’ll respin the summary once more and I will apply a lot more scrutiny on the outstanding work items required by the subprojects that are kept in the governance list
22:07:34 <ihrachys> bagpipe is probably ready to go. I was thinking maybe calico needed some time to show progress, but I haven't seen any, so maybe we can land that one as well.
22:07:47 <armax> the final stage of the consolidation process is to contribute API/OSC mappings to neutron-lib and python-neutronclient respectively
22:07:58 <armax> ihrachys: ack
22:08:04 <armax> I have not heard from neiljerram
22:08:24 <ihrachys> for fwaas, they are working hard and show a lot of progress, but I don't think the last bits they may land would make a difference in their fate either. so time to +A all?
22:09:19 <ihrachys> no objections? then I will press the button for three.
22:10:02 <neiljerram> ihrachys, I am here if you need!
22:10:15 <neiljerram> sorry, armax
22:10:16 <armax> ihrachys: bear in mind that assessments, aside for some glaring exception are not meant to express a verdict of in and out
22:10:44 <ihrachys> sure thing. they are still useful to fill in the summary, so better have them more or less current
22:10:54 <armax> ihrachys: aye
22:11:11 <armax> neiljerram: we were wondering if anything changed on your end as far as networking-calico
22:12:00 <armax> johnsom: did you refresh the governance change for octavia/lbaas?
22:12:03 <neiljerram> armax, I believe I made quite a bit of progress during the summit.  For example, there is now a working dsvm-tempest test that runs a useful set of tests
22:12:22 <armax> neiljerram: that’s impressive
22:12:25 <neiljerram> armax, Also sorted out Python 3 support
22:12:26 <johnsom> armax not yet, got distracted with a gate issue (xenial change)
22:12:56 <neiljerram> armax, Since Barcelona I haven't had quite so much time, but I am trying to keep moving things forward.
22:13:10 <ihrachys> neiljerram: I think you should update armax on the assessment review about all the changes that happened. otherwise your progress is not visible at all.
22:13:28 <armax> ihrachys: +1
22:13:40 <neiljerram> ihrachys, yes indeed, I am meaning to do that; will do that tonight or tomorrow morning
22:14:03 <neiljerram> armax, ihrachys sorry for not getting to that yet
22:14:38 <armax> neiljerram: no worries, let’s see where you are at, and make a judgement call
22:15:09 <armax> time *is* running out
22:15:18 <armax> johnsom: thanks
22:15:40 <neiljerram> armax, understood - I'll get on this right away
22:16:04 <armax> so let’s hold on networking-calico for now and see if we can nudge in the rest by today/tomorrow
22:16:40 <amuller> o/
22:16:54 <armax> another thing I wanted to bring to the attention of my fellow drivers is the way we are considering to approach to neutron-lib releases
22:17:26 <armax> up until now we worked hard to put deprecations in place etc
22:18:02 <kevinbenton> Make neutron lib unstable?
22:18:13 <armax> with the aim of reducing breakages and disruption to subprojects, but that didn’t seem to have worked generally well
22:18:22 <ihrachys> kevinbenton: make neutron repo unstable
22:18:24 <dasm> kevinbenton: too late. it was released as 1.0.0 :P
22:18:52 <armax> as we still see occasional breakges when deprecations are removed
22:19:11 <armax> which begs the question as to why we bother putting deprecations in the codebase in the first place
22:19:20 <dasm> armax: fyi about deprecations. i've sent a message on ML, but probably no one will read it, tho: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-November/107140.html
22:19:27 <amuller> did you check how many breakages deprecations did prevent though?
22:20:05 <armax> I don’t want to ban them altogether, but I suppose we can use them on a case by case basis rather than all over the place
22:20:47 <armax> amuller: the ones that are prevented are equivalent to breakages that are promptly fixed
22:21:17 <armax> thanks dasm
22:22:27 <ihrachys> I think it's worth noting https://review.openstack.org/#/c/331338/ in this context
22:22:27 <armax> that said, and as dasm pointed out in his email, I think we should at least make an effort at identifying the potential troublemakers during our team meetings
22:22:40 <armax> ihrachys: aye
22:22:49 <armax> for a moment I read I think it’s worth nothing
22:22:51 <ihrachys> that patch is meant to capture the approach we take for neutron-lib rehoming
22:23:55 <armax> ihrachys: I’ll have another pass later today
22:24:49 <armax> another potential disruption ahead, as johnsom has alluded a bit before is the switch to xenial
22:25:10 <armax> we have a deadline to honor
22:25:37 <kevinbenton> where haven't we switched yet?
22:25:54 <amuller> functional, fullstack
22:25:55 <armax> I’ll try to coordinate with various folks on how to complete the switch to xenial, and I would invite you guys to stay alert and give review priority to any patch that help with the transition
22:26:04 <amuller> jlibosva, omer are working on it
22:26:09 <armax> kevinbenton: a few places, ihrachys has started these etherpad
22:26:10 <armax> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/moving-neutron-jobs-to-xenial
22:26:29 <ihrachys> not me, ajo, but yeah
22:26:47 <clarkb> as an outsider looking in it would be great if you could avoid baking in assumptions about the kernel and all that again
22:26:48 <armax> amuller: I haven’t had a chance to touch base with kuba yet but my suggestion is to give priority to gate jobs
22:26:53 <ihrachys> it's nice we see patches there; I will give them some love tomorrow.
22:26:56 <clarkb> just about everything else has just worked becuse it avoids that
22:27:09 <armax> clarkb: you are everywhere!
22:29:29 <ihrachys> I assume kuba is on the hook to drive it? ;)
22:29:40 <armax> one more thing I have on my agenda is an announcement in relation to the PTG
22:29:44 <kevinbenton> clarkb: which kernel assumptions caused issues?
22:30:04 <armax> when asked I proposed we take 3 days allocated for Neutron
22:30:11 <clarkb> kevinbenton: the version of OVS being built couldn't build against a old but newer than trusty kernel
22:30:19 <armax> which under the current arrangement happen to be Wed-Fri
22:30:24 <clarkb> I think 4.3 or something was the newest it could build against
22:30:32 <amuller> kevinbenton: A good place to start would be to run check experimental and looking at the failure list of the functional job, and https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/moving-neutron-jobs-to-xenial
22:30:47 <ihrachys> armax: are cross project sessions before our days?
22:30:53 <armax> ihrachys: yes
22:30:58 <ihrachys> good
22:31:29 <armax> so, my general question is: do we want to have officially 2 days or 3 days? If we shoot for 3 there’s a chance that people stay 2 days fully
22:32:32 <amuller> Last mid cycle was 3, no?
22:32:39 <ihrachys> the last midcycle with 3 days was fine
22:36:06 <armax> ok
22:36:44 <armax> I have nothing else on my agenda
22:36:57 <armax> anyone wants to raise any topic for discussion?
22:37:46 <carl_baldwin> Not me
22:37:55 <HenryG> nope
22:37:59 <clarkb> not sure if this i sthe right venue
22:38:08 <clarkb> but nova net is no longer default in devstack gate as of a couple hours ago
22:38:18 <clarkb> so you may see new random neutron things not working or it might all just work fine :)
22:38:41 <armax> clarkb: I am on the lookout in case something goes south
22:38:47 <amuller> clarkb: Thanks for alerting
22:39:26 <armax> ok
22:39:29 <dasm> can i just mention neverending story: feature classification? it's really, really low priority, but would be good to have it merged. i think it's already done.
22:39:57 <armax> dasm: I would at least like a chance to review, I am guilty for not having done that so far
22:40:02 <armax> but it’s on my radar
22:40:04 <dasm> armax: ack
22:40:06 <dasm> thanks
22:40:22 <armax> if only things would work the way they should I’d have more spare time on my hands ;)
22:41:02 <dasm> armax: cloning could help, but i'm not sure if anyone invented it already
22:41:10 <armax> I did want to have a look at it this week but I got preempted in reviewing tricircle application to the big tent
22:41:38 <armax> if anyone is interested:
22:41:51 <armax> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/338796/
22:42:06 <armax> and on that note
22:42:13 <armax> have a good one folks
22:42:15 <armax> #endmeeting