16:00:09 #startmeeting nova 16:00:10 Meeting started Thu Mar 12 16:00:09 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gibi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:11 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:13 The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 16:00:30 o/ 16:00:52 \o 16:01:00 (while on another team meeting) 16:01:25 Yeah, I failed to see this time change coming, so almost all of RH is on our internal team call as well 16:01:47 o/ 16:01:48 #topic new meeting time 16:02:02 artom: sorry to hear that. Can we do someting about it? 16:02:11 artom: is it a permanently booked slot for RH? 16:03:10 gibi: artom: let's discuss this off this meeting 16:03:18 bauzas: ack 16:03:31 then lets get started 16:03:36 #topic Last meeting 16:03:47 Minutes from last meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2020/nova.2020-03-05-14.00.html 16:04:22 You might noticed that since the last meeting I took over the PTL role from Eric 16:04:49 I hope we can have a proper PTL election in April 16:04:58 but until that you stuck with me 16:05:27 Any other business we need to take up from the last meeting? 16:05:40 gibi: thank you for doing that :) 16:06:15 \o 16:06:19 lyarwood: o/ 16:06:28 joined the wrong channel sorry 16:06:28 #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) 16:06:42 we dont have critical bugs 16:06:55 lyarwood: :) i was also looking into different one 16:06:56 but we have an ever growing untriaged bug list 16:07:10 #link 111 new untriaged bugs (+3 since the last meeting): https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 16:07:33 http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/#1844929 & http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/#1813789 keep coming up in my reviews btw 16:07:35 do you have any idea how to tackle it? 16:07:38 gibi: from you ML, idea is to rotate or single bug tracker or somthing 16:07:48 gmann: yepp #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-March/013157.html 16:08:36 I think rotation only works if there is enough people subscribing to it that it is not frequent for a single dev 16:08:48 I can start on this but I would not be able to triage all area bugs and ping interested people for those to triage/discuss? 16:09:16 gmann: trigaing some of the bug already helps 16:09:39 gmann: and it is totally OK to involve others 16:09:39 i mean if 'ping interested people for bugs which i cannot triage to triage/discuss? ' ok? or expectation is to triage all :) 16:09:44 ok 16:09:56 gmann: triage what you can. thanks! 16:09:59 I will start from next week then. 16:10:07 let's see how much help i can do 16:11:16 if other are not subscribing it will be painful. I will try to dedicate my Thrusday morning for bugs 16:11:42 anyhow moving on to lyarwood's issue 16:12:10 gmann: we used to add tags to unknown stuff, then ping experts in that area, but adding the tag is a step forward from being untouched 16:12:39 johnthetubaguy: ok. that is nice. 16:12:52 lyarwood: do you have a way forward with those failing tests or you need help? 16:12:56 i remember the expert list area wise on wiki now 16:13:14 gibi: I don't have a way forward, some ironic folks were also pinging in the channel about these earlier 16:13:20 gibi: raising here for awareness 16:13:31 gibi: I'll try to look again at the posted changes over the next week 16:14:57 lyarwood: if nothing happens then please raise it again next week and I will try to dedicate some time 16:15:06 ack will do thanks 16:15:22 lyarwood: thanks for raising 16:15:33 any other bugs that need discussion? 16:17:05 #topic Release Planning 16:17:27 Started Ussuri cycle highlight doc. So far I only added things that has already been merged. 16:17:33 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/712498/ 16:18:13 anything about releases? 16:18:57 #topic stable branches 16:19:09 rocky is in extended maintenance mode. thanks lyarwood 16:19:20 lyarwood: any newsworthy thing from stable? 16:19:37 I was going to post to the ML about stable/pike and the LM job failing 16:19:43 but nothing other than that 16:19:53 I was going to suggest we make the stable/pike LM job NV btw 16:20:16 lyarwood: thanks 16:20:17 it's EM, I don't have any drive to fix it so unless others do I think it needs to be NV 16:20:22 np 16:20:50 my employer has some commitment towards pike so I will try to look at that and pull in elod as much as I can 16:20:52 +1 16:21:11 but end of the they I'm not against dropping LM job if we cannot fix it 16:21:32 s/dropping/making non voting/ 16:21:46 ack understood 16:22:25 #topic PTG/Summit planning 16:22:34 #link PTG etherpad https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg 16:23:17 I got the news that I cannot travel to Vancouver and I feel the fundation is also close to cancel the event 16:23:22 so 16:23:29 What are your feelings about the possibility of a virtual PTG? 16:23:51 very positive, from where I am sat, kolla have had some success 16:24:00 i think that is good idea. even PTG happen and end up with small number of people 16:24:24 our numbers were too big before, but now I guess it seems like it might be manageable? 16:24:25 yeah, and there is no harm in giving try. 16:24:25 yup same, a time limited (~4 hour slot per day) virtual PTG would be a great way to go given the situation 16:24:41 of course, its going to suck for some people being up a silly o'clock 16:24:43 I cannot really commit to a full video experience due to timezone issues. 16:25:12 a movable 4 hour slot might make that easier but yeah it's always going to awkward with timezones 16:25:22 i have had some good experice with remote attending midcycles 16:25:27 its not quite as intrusive as several days away though 16:25:37 I imagine topic are pre-discussed via ML and if a topic needs some face time then the involved people fined a timeslot 16:25:41 but im not sure how it would work for a full ptg were all are remote 16:25:48 i think its worth considering however 16:25:57 I provided my opinions 16:26:09 kolla have done it, it didn't seem too bad with full remote 16:26:10 there is a fondation wide converstaion too 16:26:24 so if the ptg is cancled we will have a different choice 16:26:29 the problem is tooling that doesn't exclude, etc, etc 16:26:33 either do no ptg or a virutal one 16:26:50 bauzas: I just saw your mail 16:26:53 fwiw, I'm bit afraid of having a virtual PTG that would be a video meeting within say, US TZ 16:27:05 gibi: +1 of careful topic picks and time votes 16:27:07 I did this for a midcycle 16:27:08 sean-k-mooney: but virtual one will be project own arrangement or foundation can do. 16:27:30 gmann: that is not clear currnetly 16:27:31 i did see foundation can do in ML but may be once we decide no PTG 16:27:34 yeah 16:27:42 gmann: if the fondation cancels the physical ptg 16:27:42 and I had issues with 16:27:51 then they may be able to help arrage a virtual one 16:28:03 i have canceled QA one due to attendance but not thought of virtual one yet 16:29:01 people might want to follow http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-March/013127.html 16:29:02 I think we can start the whole thing on the ML like a pre-ptg so everybody will have a way get involved 16:29:17 sean-k-mooney: thanks 16:29:49 the pre-ptg emails is something we can do in either case 16:29:53 +1 16:29:55 sean-k-mooney: yeah 16:29:56 i find them hard to follow 16:30:08 sean-k-mooney: me too but it is better than nothing 16:30:08 but i know other like it 16:30:13 ya 16:30:38 sean-k-mooney: or we can just ping people to start discussing things on the etherpad 16:31:24 anyhow we have still plenty of weeks to figure it out. but it is good that start the thinking 16:31:34 I will summarize this back to the ML thread 16:31:37 I like the idea of a spec with disagreement being a good start to a video conversation, but yeah, another time 16:31:50 johnthetubaguy: sure, that is a good indication 16:32:07 it means you did the pre work :) 16:32:09 #action gibi to make a virtual ptg proposal to the ML thread with more detals 16:32:47 #topic Sub/related team Highlights 16:32:54 Placement (tetsuro) 16:33:11 I saw melwitt and tetsuro working on the consumer_types series 16:33:22 but I think that is basically all 16:34:01 API (gmann) 16:34:10 I did not send the updates on ML. API BPs are going with normal review and policy refresh: many of the patches are merged. I will continue on those 16:34:39 there is nothing else from my side this week. may be johnthetubaguy can add something if he has any 16:34:44 gmann: policy refresh is exciting, been needing this for years :) 16:35:12 yeah, I will burn more policy before cmg Monday 16:35:16 nothing more from me 16:35:18 I'm happy to see that it is moving forward 16:35:25 thanks 16:35:37 #topic Stuck Reviews 16:35:47 nothing on the agenda 16:36:11 anything to add now? 16:36:55 a quick one from me, not sure if this is the right section 16:36:59 #topic Open discussion 16:37:07 lyarwood: go 16:37:26 https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+topic:workaround_native_luksv1 - I'm trying to land some workaround options, I'm not sure if these need a bug or specless BP at the moment 16:38:07 gibi: regardless I was going to ask for reviews shortly anyway but wanted to first workaround how to track this 16:38:17 gibi: if a spec is required I'll punt to V 16:39:06 lyarwood: I saw workaround flags appearing in bugfixs before 16:39:27 like https://review.opendev.org/#/c/618478/ 16:39:42 gibi: ack I can write up a bug for this ten 16:39:44 then* 16:40:05 ack, bug works for me 16:40:05 gibi: thanks 16:40:29 and as I already promissed I will look at the fixes as it needs a non RH core 16:40:47 https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:bp/virt-bfv-instance-rescue - is also ready for non-RH core review FWIW 16:41:29 lyarwood: noted :) 16:41:50 many many thanks gibi, I hate begging for reviews but I guess needs must at the moment :) 16:42:06 non RH core situation is not pretty so I understand 16:43:00 anything else to discuss? 16:43:46 going once 16:44:31 going twice 16:44:44 thank you all. see you around 16:44:56 thanks gibi for chair 16:45:02 #endmeeting