21:00:03 <mikal> #startmeeting nova 21:00:03 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jul 2 21:00:03 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mikal. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:00:04 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:00:07 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 21:00:12 <alaski> o/ 21:00:15 <mriedem> hi 21:00:15 <mikal> abhishekk mikal tjones cburgess jgrimm adrian_otto funzo mjturek jcookekhugen irina_pov krtaylor danpb alexpilotti flip214 jaypipes gilliard garyk edleafe dims moshele anteaya Nisha sileht claudiub lxsli neiljerram markus_z swamireddy alevine tonyb andreykurilin ndipanov sc68cal akuriata artom jlvillal mnestratov kashyap aloga rgeragnov: ping 21:00:15 <beagles> o/ 21:00:17 <tpatil> o/ 21:00:20 <dansmith> o/* <-- holding a firework 21:00:20 <alex_xu> o/ 21:00:20 <sc68cal> o/ 21:00:24 <mikal> Heh 21:00:25 <melwitt_> o/ 21:00:28 <sc68cal> dansmith: heh 21:00:36 <tjones1> o/ 21:00:44 <mikal> So, I am under orders to keep this short so the Americans can go and blow stuff up 21:00:48 <mikal> So let's do that thing 21:00:48 <llu-laptop> o/ 21:00:52 <dansmith> hehe 21:00:53 <mikal> #topic Release Status 21:01:08 <mikal> July 16 is non-priority feature proposal freeze 21:01:26 <mikal> Which as well as being a mouthful means if you are working on a non-priority non-bug fix, the code needs to be proposed by then 21:01:46 <mikal> We're also working through spec freeze exception requests, for which there is an etherpad 21:01:53 <mikal> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-spec-freeze-exceptions 21:02:26 <mikal> We're under orders to discuss blocked spec freeze exceptions here 21:02:29 * mikal scans the etherpad 21:02:58 <mikal> Its not clear to me how blocked is defined in this context 21:03:01 <mikal> Thoughts people? 21:03:14 <dansmith> I honestly wasn't sure there was anything going on in there other than proposals 21:03:31 <mikal> Yeah, I thought this was people asking for review "votes" 21:03:37 <mikal> There is a lot there, which is a bit scary 21:03:38 <dansmith> I guess john +2'd something in there 21:04:01 <mikal> So, I guess take a look at the listed reviews ASAP 21:04:07 <mikal> And we can discuss them in gerrit as required 21:04:22 <dansmith> I see precisely one vote for one thing 21:04:25 <alaski> is there an exception deadline? 21:04:29 <dansmith> aside from anonymous +1s 21:04:31 <dansmith> alaski: today 21:04:43 <alaski> for voting, or proposing? 21:04:44 <claudiub|2> o/ 21:04:44 <mikal> alaski: final review is "tomorrow" according to the agenda 21:04:48 <alaski> ahh, okay 21:04:52 <mikal> So yes, I guess the close of this week 21:04:52 <dansmith> I thought it was Jul 2? 21:04:56 <mikal> Which kind of sucks for Americans 21:05:15 <mikal> dansmith: I just obey the agenda... Not sure if its been extended deliberately or not. 21:05:34 <mikal> Unless anyone wants to discuss a specific proposal I think we should move on? 21:05:45 <tpatil> I would like to discuss about Improving performance of UnShelve API specs 21:05:49 <mikal> And promise to just keep reviewing during gaps in our Freedom Explosions? 21:05:51 <dansmith> Ideally we would have all spec exceptions voted on by 2nd July, and 21:05:56 <dansmith> from the email ^ 21:06:00 <dansmith> so today is the proposal deadline 21:06:06 <dansmith> tomorrow is the merge deadline I guess 21:06:17 <alex_xu> I hope get some review for custom cpu model https://review.openstack.org/#/c/168982/, it already get agreement on the direction, just need some review 21:06:19 <mikal> tpatil: what's the review URL? 21:06:28 <tpatil> #link : I would like to discuss about Improving performance of UnShelve API specs 21:06:36 <tpatil> sorry 21:06:50 <dansmith> the shelve things are really not in the critical path, IMHO 21:06:54 <tpatil> #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135387/13 21:07:13 <tpatil> we have been trying to get this thing from last release cycle 21:07:19 <dansmith> alex_xu: I don't think I'd characterize that as "agreed on direction" 21:07:29 <tpatil> I would appreciate if it's consider for this release cycle atleast 21:07:42 <tpatil> considered 21:07:46 <alex_xu> dansmith: emm...no...how can I get agreed on that 21:08:14 <mikal> tpatil: well, it has been considered right? I see heaps of discussion on it in gerrit 21:08:26 <mikal> tpatil: so much in fact that I can't immediately see what the current concerns are 21:08:35 <dansmith> alex_xu: the last reviewer was me on Jun 24.. I guess it feels to me like it's a sticky situation and there isn't a lot of real support for it :/ 21:08:49 <tpatil> mikal: right, we have addressed alaski's concern in PS 13. 21:09:01 <tpatil> Want people to review specs and give some feedback 21:09:15 <alaski> I will review the shelving one again before I leave today 21:09:27 <tpatil> Thanks, alaski 21:09:28 <mikal> alaski: thanks 21:09:30 <mikal> I'll read it too 21:09:37 <alex_xu> dansmith: emm...I think all the reviewer think we need abstract cpu capabilities, that is the direction we agreed? The rest is how to implement it. 21:09:40 <mikal> Its already on the request for exception list, so we should be doing that thing anyways 21:09:40 <tpatil> Thanks, mikal 21:09:50 <llu-laptop> spec 'Add new API to list compute node metric names' wants reviews. It was discussed during Vancouver summit and take-out then was to wait for Jay Pipe's input. Now Jay has given his +1 on this spec. 21:10:01 <tpatil> mikal: great 21:10:02 <llu-laptop> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/180049/ 21:10:17 <dansmith> alex_xu: I'm not so sure about that 21:10:22 <melwitt_> the service group api spec had a lot of discussion and has one +2 already so I was thinking probably that one is good to go 21:10:30 <mikal> llu-laptop: ahhh, API ones are interesting in that the freeze might not apply if its a bug fix 21:10:39 <mikal> llu-laptop: but this one looks like a feature to me? 21:10:49 <malini> @dansmith, there is a need for cpu-info, an improvement on what is there today, pave the way for something better 21:10:54 <llu-laptop> mikal: it's not a bug fix, it's adding new api 21:11:42 <malini> In Kilo it was heavily debated, if there is improvement and a plan to make it robust, better than analysis paralysis 21:11:43 <mikal> llu-laptop: can you address Jay's nits, and I'll add it to the list I try to review today 21:12:00 <llu-laptop> mikal: sure 21:12:14 <dansmith> mikal: that one is pretty small, 21:12:22 <dansmith> mikal: and probably the best candidate I've seen so far 21:12:32 <malini> Alex_xu, Chris (windriver) and others at Intel really are working towards addressing concerns and making this happen 21:12:36 <mikal> dansmith: cool, I havne't read it yet to be hoenst 21:12:38 <malini> we need your help 21:12:42 <mikal> So yeah, we have a list of these things 21:12:53 <mikal> And specs-core is meant to be reviewing based on that list 21:13:01 <mikal> And all the ones that have been brought up are correctly listed 21:13:14 <mikal> So I feel like we just need to give the process more time to do those reviews? 21:13:57 <beagles> I'd like to point out https://review.openstack.org/#/c/193668/ - judging by the notes on the etherpad there may have been conversations or decisions on this already that I'm not aware of 21:14:38 <dansmith> this one terrifies me, 21:14:45 <dansmith> in that it's big, complicated, cross-project, and very very new 21:14:46 <mikal> beagles: I am unaware of any such conversations, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen 21:15:02 * beagles nods 21:15:06 <dansmith> but, I think it's also something that will mostly be not a nova thing until the end when we go try to merge nova changes to use it 21:15:10 <mikal> If that one is big and complicated its it a good candidate for discussion at the mid-cycle? 21:15:23 <mikal> Sorry, is it? 21:15:25 <dansmith> well, midcycle is too late 21:15:40 <mikal> The bits outside nova are already done? 21:15:41 <mriedem> the library can always be worked as POC on the side 21:15:47 <dansmith> no 21:15:54 <dansmith> mikal: this has only been a thought for like 1.5 weeks or so 21:16:06 <dansmith> mikal: jaypipes rage-coded something over a weekend 21:16:14 <mikal> Yeah, so it seems premature to be landing the nova bits then 21:16:14 <dansmith> to go with the spec 21:16:27 <mriedem> it's also neutron changes 21:16:37 <dansmith> right, it's just a large scope 21:16:48 <dansmith> so like I said above, 21:16:52 <beagles> yeah... it's kind of tough. We *could* say land one side and then the next but that worries me 21:17:01 <beagles> it isn't really done until both sides work 21:17:05 <dansmith> the library work seems like it could go and and mature this cycle and the spec is actually for M to make nova _use_ it 21:17:22 <dansmith> s/and the/and then the/ 21:17:25 <mikal> Yeah, that's kind of what I meant by the mid-cycle thing 21:17:32 <mikal> If this is happening outside nova, and aimed at M 21:17:37 <dansmith> mikal: cool, I thought you meant midcycle for discussion of the spec 21:17:42 <mikal> Then what we need to do is talk through what we'd want to see from it 21:17:50 <mikal> And make sure we're on the same page as them 21:18:02 <mikal> dansmith: nah, just check pointing the direction of external work 21:18:10 <dansmith> then..yes 21:18:17 <mriedem> and mestery will be at our midcycle i think 21:18:18 <mriedem> so yeah 21:18:19 <mriedem> punt 21:18:35 <mikal> Can we put something to that effect into the etherpad then please? 21:18:47 <mikal> Given people want to leave early I feel like we should move on 21:18:50 <mikal> Anything else here? 21:18:55 <mriedem> i'll say something in the etherpad 21:18:59 <mikal> Ta 21:19:04 <beagles> thanks 21:19:46 <mikal> #topic Traditional Reminders 21:19:53 <mikal> So, the agenda asks me to remind you that... 21:19:54 <malini> sorry to raise https://review.openstack.org/#/c/168982/ again, but no further discussion. it has been heavily debated, do not want this to fall into analysis paralysis but allow to implement 21:21:11 <malini> mikal, pinging again for the cpu-info BP that Alex xu requested feature free exception on 21:21:31 <tonyb> malini: that was discussed here already 21:21:35 <mikal> malini: yep, its on the list for consideration, I don't think there's a lot else I can do for it in this meeting 21:21:53 <mikal> So, reminders 21:22:09 <mikal> Yuo should be reviewing with the priority review list in mind 21:22:12 <mikal> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-nova-priorities-tracking 21:22:25 <mikal> You probably have action items from the summit you should feel bad about 21:22:29 <mikal> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-nova-liberty-summit-action-items 21:22:39 <mikal> The registration deadline for the mid-cycle is July 7 (next week) 21:22:47 <mikal> Any other reminder things? 21:22:54 <malini> thanks tonyb and mikal for the ack 21:23:27 <mikal> #topic Stable branch 21:23:38 <mriedem> stable is hunky dory 21:23:39 <mikal> Icehouse has now been eol'ed I believe? 21:23:44 <mriedem> yeah, working toward 21:23:48 <mikal> But that's informational 21:24:00 <mikal> malini: oh, I thought fungi has actually done it now? 21:24:05 <mriedem> yeah it's done 21:24:07 <mriedem> just looked 21:24:08 <mikal> Cool 21:24:17 <mikal> #topic Gate status 21:24:20 <mriedem> hunky dory 21:24:23 <mikal> The gate has been perfect! 21:24:26 <mikal> Perfectly broken 21:24:29 <mriedem> if you're not neuitron or horizon 21:24:42 <mikal> Well, it was exciting earlier in the week 21:24:45 <mriedem> gate is fine excluding the first half of this week 21:24:46 <mikal> But its sorted now right? 21:24:47 <mriedem> yes 21:24:51 <mriedem> no recent oslo releases 21:24:58 <mikal> Thanks for chasing that when it was all wonky 21:25:00 <mikal> Heh 21:25:08 <mikal> #topic Open Discussion 21:25:15 <mikal> Ok, we can talk, or we can go an explode things. 21:25:17 <mikal> Thoughts? 21:25:19 <malini> mikal -- :-) no no, ack in my remark here in meeting, would very much like the +2s on the BP, not there yet! 21:25:33 <shhfeng> sorry to raise https://review.openstack.org/#/c/192622 , it enable pci api 21:25:58 <claudiub|2> yeah, I have a few spec exceptions that have +2s already. 21:26:02 <mikal> malini: yep, people are reviewing it. It might take some time though. 21:26:17 <mikal> claudiub|2: and they're on the etherpad, yes? 21:26:24 <claudiub|2> mikal: yeah. 21:26:27 <mikal> claudiub|2: cool 21:27:21 <shhfeng> we have implement the underly pci logical and API code, just need to enable this api. 21:27:53 <mikal> shhfeng: is it on the spec freeze exception etherpad? 21:28:30 <mriedem> early mark 21:28:30 <alex_xu> all the code for pci api already in the nova tree, just need enable, so coding should be easy 21:28:40 <shhfeng> mikal, yes. 21:28:53 <mikal> shhfeng: cool, we it should get considered as part of the process then 21:28:54 <mriedem> testing? 21:29:03 <mikal> I think we could let people go do 4th of July prep now, yes? 21:29:09 <mriedem> sure 21:29:28 <shhfeng> mikal, great. 21:29:30 <mikal> I insist that all fireworks are renamed Freedom Explosions though 21:29:49 <mriedem> freedomcrackers 21:29:50 <mikal> Its like a little burst of freedom in the sky 21:29:56 <mikal> And with that... 21:29:56 <mriedem> or your hand 21:29:58 <mikal> #endmeeting