15:01:55 #startmeeting neutron_upgrades 15:01:56 Meeting started Mon Feb 1 15:01:55 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rossella_s. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:57 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:02:00 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_upgrades' 15:02:02 hello 15:02:05 hi all! thanks for joining 15:02:39 Ihar is traveling today so I will replace him 15:02:53 #topic Announcements 15:03:00 rossella_s: go for it! :) 15:03:53 as you might have read in the dev mailing list there will be an upgrade code sprint in Brno, March 14-16 15:04:05 I hope to see you all there! 15:04:16 rossella_s: tentative 15:04:24 * pc_m lurking 15:04:54 rossella_s: I'm planning to be there, needs to get approval for travelling 15:04:59 mhickey, right, I should have stated it more clearly 15:05:11 korzen, go for it 15:05:42 I need approval too 15:06:11 I guess it's time to start asking for it 15:06:13 let's move on 15:06:16 #topic partial grenade 15:06:59 sc68cal seems to be not here 15:08:21 I don't have any fresh info, only what was shared in the dev mailing list...there are still test failures when ssh-ing into an instance, might be another MTU issue 15:08:45 #topic versioned objects 15:09:46 I pushed an update for the port object patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/253641/ mhickey helped me in fixing the UT failures 15:10:33 Hi. Re OVO: electrocucaracha and saisriki are selecting two other OVO objects to convert. They will update the wiki asap. 15:10:39 now we have the allowed_address_pairs extension that is included in the port object, to make sure we can manage extension the right way 15:11:39 roaet, we discussed that earlier, we want to start porting port and network. After we finish the port for those objects we can start moving to other ones 15:11:42 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/264273 subnet OVO thanks for the review rossella_s :) I have replied and pushed new patch, still working on UT and final touches 15:11:54 korzen, thanks a lot! 15:12:19 rossella_s: ok so don't start on the other objects. Got it. I'll have them look at those patches and help where they can. 15:12:48 roaet, I think that SubnetPool OVO can be taken 15:12:56 I did not start working on it 15:12:57 roaet, it would be great if electrocucaracha and saisriki join our meeting 15:13:13 korzen, would you mind updating the backlog then? 15:13:13 rossella_s: extrac dhcp opt https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273072/, patch on the way to fix gate and ut issues. 15:13:47 rossella_s, OK I will add it to the backlog 15:13:56 There appear to be many objects in work. korzen I will tell them to check out SubnetPool. 15:13:57 mhickey, how are the UT for the other patches going? can you update us since you were so brave to volunteer to fix them? 15:14:12 rossella_sok... 15:14:40 allowed address pairs (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/268274/): has now passed 15:15:16 roaet, there are only 2 objects: port and network...of course the objects that compose them need to be ported too. Please tell them that we can coordinate better if they join this meeting. 15:15:19 port (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/253641): I will need to take a look at. still an issue 15:15:36 dhcp extra: details above ^^^ 15:15:49 thanks mhickey ! 15:15:52 Thats it for the moment 15:16:04 no problem! :) 15:16:11 dguitarbite, do you have any update? 15:16:41 rossella_s: Not much done as of now. 15:16:45 rossella_s: one last thing... 15:17:32 dguitarbite, I can't see your name in the list under Object implementation in the team page, can you update it if you are working on some object please? 15:17:34 rossella_s: I have some code written but not good enough to discuss it for the time being. I should send a PR by day after if time permits. 15:17:45 rossella_s: yes, Ill do that. 15:18:01 dguitarbite, thanks 15:18:09 mhickey, go on please :) 15:18:59 I just tried to get the ut's working on port and allowed address pairs patches. I will tackle the good review comments from korzen and others shortly. 15:19:44 mhickey, good job! 15:19:52 dguitarbite, which port extension are you working on? 15:20:16 Security Groups and port security both of them. I thought its one task here. 15:20:28 rossella_s: I can give away port security I have not touched anything in there yet 15:20:37 dguitarbite, nope it's two separate extensions 15:21:10 dguitarbite, ok, then please update the team page accordingly 15:21:18 dguitarbite, thanks! 15:21:25 rossella_s: Ok, Ill update it. No sweat 15:22:18 anything else regarding objects? 15:22:42 I've got 2 opens 15:23:03 @rossella_s, myself and electrocucaracha just joined 15:23:13 1) support for multiple primary keys 15:23:19 saisriki, electrocucaracha welcome! 15:23:30 korzen, good point 15:23:38 2) Add IP address type decorator for sqlalchemy, nova style 15:23:48 korzen, very good points 15:24:03 someone interested? 15:24:18 korzen, for the first one if I good remember you have a way to handle that in the network ovo, we just need to make it general 15:25:29 rossella_s yea, not so much general I think 15:25:46 korzen: I can take a look at IP address type decorator for sqlalchemy 15:26:03 thanks saisriki ! 15:26:24 rossella_s, do you think it can be merged in Mitaka? the IP address decorator? 15:26:40 it would require the migration script 15:27:57 korzen, we can make it but we need to work on it and finish it up quickly 15:28:28 saisriki thanks, the details are in my commit: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/264273/10/neutron/objects/subnet.py@151 15:29:06 it would be beneficial to have it ready in Mitaka, the IP address and IP network CIDR 15:29:20 I guess, the idea for me and electrocucaracha was to look at OVO migration of SubnetPools 15:29:47 I don't think I can work on two items at the same time!!\ 15:30:20 saisriki, feel free to pick the item that it's most convenient for you. We have plenty of work to distribute 15:30:37 rossella_s: thank you 15:31:02 saisriki, I will take a look in near future in the IP address decorator so feel free to start the SubnetPool OVO first 15:31:15 korzen, thanks for stepping up 15:31:16 korzen: ok, thanks!!\ 15:32:09 anything else? 15:32:44 3 15:32:46 2 15:32:47 1 15:32:48 me 15:32:58 sorry, I have the patch for the documentation 15:33:14 electrocucarach_, can you paste the link? 15:33:15 should I create a bug and attach that patch to that bug? 15:33:19 please 15:34:11 well, this is the commit that I did in my own repo... but should I create the bug in launchpad? 15:34:12 https://github.com/electrocucaracha/neutron/commit/a1e0ad83539cb912b3b51dbacedfe7c417d9d7a9 15:34:55 electrocucarach_, yes please create the bug 15:34:58 It's for autogenerate the db schemas in the documentation 15:35:20 electrocucarach_, that's a very nice improvement, thanks for that! 15:35:47 well, that was the idea of roaet 15:35:57 thanks roaet too 15:36:26 anything else? 15:36:37 no 15:36:40 no 15:36:55 so let's move on 15:37:06 #topic open discussion 15:37:40 there's one thing to discuss if we want to have a specif tag to track the ovo work 15:37:47 I think this was asked by pc_m 15:38:19 s/tag/rfe sorry 15:38:22 yeah, could just be a bug # so that items can be tracked, or use a tag on the commits. 15:38:38 pc_m: good idea 15:38:47 for me it is a good step, lets inform others what we are working on 15:39:09 it seems we all agree here 15:39:09 Agree a tag is a good idea 15:39:23 cool 15:39:40 that was easy. pc_m thanks for your input! 15:39:50 sure 15:40:07 helps those lurking to see what is going on :) 15:40:37 pc_m, I perfectly agree...it actually helps people involved too to keep track of what's going on 15:40:38 the question is are we going to have 1 RFE 15:40:47 or RFE per OVO 15:40:53 welcome pc_m 15:41:08 korzen, I think one RFE...we can then use the Partial-bug tag in the commit 15:41:10 mhickey: hi 15:41:12 korzen, I think ihrachys suggested 1? 15:41:31 Could just use a topic on the commits 15:41:39 rossella_s mhickey, ok fine for me 15:42:06 Or a bug so that there is a place to see the commits. The topic is nice for searches. (could do both, if desired). 15:42:51 pc_m, a topic requires a blueprint 15:43:02 ah 15:43:24 I thought you could create one w/o. 15:44:20 Maybe it's a manually process, if not using a BP. 15:44:24 pc_m, well the topic is set by the branch name you use 15:44:43 pc_m, for convention we use to set the topic to bp/bp_name 15:44:57 rossella_s: I used to do it for bugs too. 15:45:25 we can agree that we set a specific topic for ovo but there's no way to reinforce it...I think it's better to use an RFE then 15:46:03 it would most like need to be a team convention. 15:46:33 likely 15:47:02 yep...so I prefer using "stardard" way to group patches, either RFE or blueprint... 15:47:23 rossella_s: sure. np. just a thought 15:48:12 pc_m, mine it's just a thought too 15:49:04 anything else we want to discuss? 15:49:28 ok, from me 15:49:56 about https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273517 OVO common enum classes for IP version and IPv6 modes 15:50:10 korzen: yes 15:50:38 like I said in the review, we should sync with Ihar on that one, he requested the strict versioning 15:50:55 korzen: sure, I agree. 15:51:17 korzen, agreed, let's wait for his feedback 15:51:31 I'm ok with both approaches: the integer or enum field 15:51:39 korzen: I am just caught between whether 2 int values are worth it. 15:52:18 korzen: thanks! :) 15:52:26 anything else? 15:53:08 3 15:53:10 2 15:53:12 1 15:53:17 bye, thanks rossella_s 15:53:31 thanks all for attending! 15:53:34 bye, thx all :) 15:53:47 I am very happy regarding the progress so let's keep going like this! 15:53:48 thank you 15:53:52 #endmeeting