16:00:32 <gibi> #startmeeting nova 16:00:33 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr 23 16:00:32 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gibi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:34 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:35 <gibi> o/ 16:00:36 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 16:00:39 <stephenfin> o/ 16:00:41 <bauzas> \o 16:00:45 <gmann> o/ 16:00:56 <lyarwood> o/ 16:00:59 <melwitt> o/ 16:01:17 <gibi> what a nice crowd 16:01:24 <artom> ~o~ 16:01:37 <dansmith> o/ 16:01:40 <gibi> #topic Last meeting 16:01:46 <gibi> #link Minutes from last meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2020/nova.2020-04-16-16.00.log.html 16:01:51 <gibi> we agreed not to bump compute RPC to 6.0 in Ussuri 16:02:05 <gibi> anything else we need to bring back from last meeting? 16:02:08 <aarents> o/ 16:02:35 <gibi> #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) 16:02:42 <gibi> No Critical bugs 16:02:47 <gibi> #link 53 new untriaged bugs (-18 since the last meeting): https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 16:02:56 <bauzas> 51 even ;) 16:03:03 <gibi> \o/ 16:03:11 <gibi> (my data is from my morning) 16:03:15 <gibi> we need to keep an eye of possible regressions as Ussuri release is in 3 weeks 16:03:24 <gibi> RC critical bugs are tagged with ussuri-rc-potential #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=ussuri-rc-potential 16:03:41 <gibi> but don't have any at the moment 16:03:54 <gibi> anything else about bugs? 16:05:27 <gibi> #topic Release Planning 16:05:33 <gibi> TODOs are tracked in the etherpad #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-ussuri-rc-potential 16:05:39 <gibi> The work on bp policy-defaults-refresh has been finished. This was the last feature we wanted for Ussuri. 16:05:52 <gibi> We will cut Ussuri RC1 today 16:06:04 <gibi> Reno prelude patch merged. Thanks bauzas. 16:06:10 <bauzas> np 16:06:14 <gibi> a small follow up for the prelude is on the gate 16:06:17 <bauzas> the FUP is on its way 16:06:25 <melwitt> ++ 16:06:38 <gibi> compute RPC alias patch has been merged. thanks takashi 16:06:39 <gmann> ++ 16:06:42 <melwitt> to add the policy doc link right 16:06:46 <gibi> melwitt: right 16:06:50 <bauzas> we need a second core for https://review.opendev.org/#/c/718630/2 16:06:59 <melwitt> cool 16:07:03 <gibi> We still need to merge the revert of the turned off DB unit test https://review.opendev.org/#/c/718630/ 16:07:10 <bauzas> yup, this 16:07:10 <gibi> yinx 16:07:11 <gibi> :) 16:07:16 <melwitt> ah yes, I can look at that 16:07:22 <bauzas> and then we can cut RC1 16:07:30 <gibi> yes. that is the last patch I track 16:07:33 <gmann> policy doc link on nova highlight for ussuri is also merged 16:07:44 <bauzas> gmann: yup, hence the FUP patch for the reno prelude 16:07:45 <gibi> gmann: thanks for that as well 16:07:50 <bauzas> oh this 16:07:53 <bauzas> my bad 16:08:05 <gibi> if anybody has anything that holds of RC1 then please tell me 16:08:09 <gmann> np! 16:08:34 <gibi> Last possible RC date for Ussuri is 8th May, two weeks from now. 16:08:40 <gibi> I'm not tracking any RC2 potential issues at the moment 16:08:46 <gibi> Please tag any RC critical bug with ussuri-rc-potential tag in launchpad 16:08:53 <bauzas> only regressions FTW 16:09:02 <gibi> yes 16:09:13 <artom> Noob question - is there doc that says what's rc critical? 16:09:28 <bauzas> artom: tl;dr: only Ussuri regressions 16:09:37 <artom> Understood 16:09:40 <sean-k-mooney> will it break upgrades or a new regreesssion 16:09:59 <melwitt> and if we have something like a regression, we usually also take the opportunity to add missing docs if there are any, fwiw 16:10:08 <bauzas> that and gate failures of course 16:10:49 <gibi> good summar 16:10:50 <gibi> y 16:10:51 <gibi> htanks 16:11:16 <gibi> zigo will start debian packaging as soon as RC1 is cut so we might get feedback from there 16:11:31 <bauzas> ie. hold your stable/ussuri backports until GA, please :-) 16:11:48 <gibi> + ^^ 16:11:49 <artom> Unless it's rc ;) 16:11:52 <artom> (right?) 16:11:55 <gibi> right 16:12:01 <artom> \o/ 16:12:10 <gibi> RC2 potential fixes needs to land on master first then backported to stable/ussuri 16:12:36 <gibi> anything else about the upcoming release? 16:13:30 <gibi> #topic Stable Branches 16:13:54 <gibi> stable/train 20.2.0 has been released 16:14:11 <gibi> lyarwood: anything else worth to mention from stable? 16:14:25 <bauzas> should we also tag stable/stein ? 16:14:27 <lyarwood> gibi: we have a few stable/stein reviews to go before releasing a version there as well 16:14:32 <bauzas> ah 16:14:41 <lyarwood> #link https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/stein 16:14:55 <lyarwood> iirc the top 4 16:15:00 <bauzas> b/c/ stable branches will be a bit on-hold for 2 weeks since stable/ussuri will only be there for regressions 16:15:16 <bauzas> good opportunity to focus on stable branches then :) 16:15:25 <gibi> lyarwood: thanks 16:16:03 <gibi> #topic Sub/related team Highlights 16:16:15 <gibi> Placement (tetsuro) 16:17:30 <gibi> API (gmann) 16:17:38 <gmann> one update - brin pushed the updates on delete-on-termination PUT (was PATCH) spec to match the implementation. - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/722194/ 16:18:09 <gmann> we can wait for moving the specs into implemented folder for this ^^ 16:18:19 <gibi> gmann: good point 16:18:19 <gmann> i think sean-k-mooney is going to do that ? if i remember 16:18:21 <sean-k-mooney> sure 16:18:25 <gibi> sean-k-mooney: thanks! 16:18:32 <gmann> thanks 16:18:39 <gmann> that's all from my side. 16:18:43 <gibi> #topic Stuck Reviews 16:18:59 <gibi> nothing on the agenda 16:19:07 <gibi> any review to talk about? 16:19:13 <dansmith> gibi: I had a bunch of comments on that d-o-t spec update, btw 16:19:43 <bauzas> then I wouldn't want to hold the specs implemented change from sean-k-mooney 16:19:45 <gibi> dansmith: thanks for the review 16:20:07 <dansmith> we could move all to implemented other than that one and then move it when it's finished 16:20:08 <bauzas> we could just have brin's change depending on sean-k-mooney's one 16:20:19 <sean-k-mooney> bauzas: the train one is making it way through the gate https://review.opendev.org/#/c/706276/ but i need to rebase teh ussuri one anyway https://review.opendev.org/#/c/721278/ 16:20:34 <gmann> dansmith: +1 that also works 16:20:53 <bauzas> I just feel it's good to just say what we've done asap 16:20:58 <bauzas> and just fix things later 16:21:03 <bauzas> but just a 2cts 16:21:06 <sean-k-mooney> i wont have the ussuri one rebased today so ill do it on monday 16:21:07 <bauzas> moving on 16:21:28 <gibi> OK 16:21:36 <gibi> #topic Virtual PTG planning 16:21:48 <gibi> summary mail #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-April/014148.html 16:21:55 <gibi> I need to book slots in the common schedule so we need to know how much slots we need, and what time slots we want to use 16:21:59 <gibi> Please fill the doodle (link in the ML post) 16:22:06 <gibi> Current PTG topics are in #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg 16:22:11 <gibi> Please add your topics 16:22:15 <gibi> I will ask each topic proposer to either start an ML thread or propose a spec for his/her topic before the PTG so that we can have focused discussion during the PTG 16:23:14 <bauzas> gibi: well, how many slots are you thinking we should take ? 16:23:29 <bauzas> fwiw, I personally raised the fact that a one-week schedule is tight 16:23:30 <gibi> based on the current etherpad we need one nova-neutron cross slot 16:23:43 <gibi> and expecting 2-3 for the reset 16:23:44 <gibi> rest 16:23:51 <bauzas> and I'm afraid of any virtual PTG fatigue we would get 16:24:08 <gibi> depending on how much we can close before the PTG and how much new topic will pop up 16:24:53 <gibi> bauzas: I'm open to have discusson after the week of the PTG too if more time is needed 16:25:04 <bauzas> so, 4 slots meaning 4 hours of discussion ? 16:25:26 <gibi> that is my current estimate but please challenge it 16:25:43 <sean-k-mooney> bauzas: each slot is 4 hours i think 16:25:53 <gibi> sean-k-mooney: no, we can book hour by hour 16:25:58 <bauzas> sean-k-mooney: that's not what I see from the agenda 16:26:11 <gibi> agenda #link https://ethercalc.openstack.org/126u8ek25noy 16:26:12 <sean-k-mooney> yes i know we can book hour by hour sorry i ment the windows 16:26:21 <sean-k-mooney> they windows are 4 hour blocks with gaps 16:26:22 <bauzas> ok, this sounds doable then 16:26:29 <gmann> i think 4 hours is max any team can book in a day 16:26:36 <bauzas> per day indeed 16:26:49 <bauzas> but if we stick with 4 slots, I'd propose to only have 2 slots per day 16:27:06 <gibi> I might try to do a booking like one hour meeting, one hour break, one hour meeting 16:27:12 <bauzas> and we could think of a 3rd day with a 2-hour slots as extra time 16:27:21 <sean-k-mooney> by the way i created https://github.com/SeanMooney/ptg-cal to convert that spread sheet into ical files 16:27:35 <bauzas> gibi: one hour is IMHO too much constrained 16:27:43 <sean-k-mooney> ill need to update it slightly but once its popluated i can send out the slots 16:27:52 <gibi> sean-k-mooney: thanks 16:28:02 <gmann> sean-k-mooney: nice. 16:28:04 <gibi> bauzas: would be better a 1.5 hour slot + 0.5 hour break? 16:28:05 <bauzas> gibi: we did this a while ago with Design Summit fishblows 16:28:22 <bauzas> and this was really strechy 16:28:32 <dansmith> mm, fishblows 16:28:52 <bauzas> was it 50-min-ish ? can't exactly remember how long it was 16:29:10 <artom> Dolphins use fishblows 16:29:17 <gibi> lol 16:29:43 <bauzas> but anway, I was thinking we could try to have a productivity during 2 hours with a 10-min break without being too much strained IMHO 16:29:49 <sean-k-mooney> we can sub schdulin withing the slots once we book them so we can just put a break in the aggenda for that slot if we need too 16:29:51 <gibi> bauzas: my point is that I want to have breaks between slots to have a way to stretch 16:29:52 <bauzas> oh lol, pardon my French 16:30:02 <artom> gibi, ++ to that 16:30:20 <bauzas> gibi: I'm just worried that being around for 3 hours could be challenging for some folks not in a good TZ 16:30:50 <gibi> agree ^^ so please everybody fill the doodle :) 16:30:52 <bauzas> compared to a 2-hour long meeting with a short break 16:31:27 <gibi> 2 hour slot in 50 + 10 + 60 split works for me 16:31:40 <gibi> and then repeate that for two consecutive day 16:31:56 <gibi> and have third overflow day 16:32:02 <bauzas> this sounds reasonable 16:32:30 <bauzas> and the foundation told us we could continue discussing the week after if we really need - or we could just hangouts 16:32:36 <gibi> yepp 16:32:46 <gibi> anything else for the virtual PTG? 16:33:04 <sean-k-mooney> do we know what tool we will be using yet 16:33:08 <sean-k-mooney> or is that still tbd 16:33:26 <bauzas> I wish they would use Jitsi 16:33:31 <gibi> I don't know about the tooling 16:33:40 <gmann> tbd, zoom is most probably but not final yet 16:33:42 <sean-k-mooney> they were lookign in to jitsi yes 16:33:56 <gibi> I can use hangouts / zoom / MS Teams or anything that is free 16:34:06 <sean-k-mooney> gmann: i was assuming zoom was out due to the secutity issues recently raised 16:34:14 <sean-k-mooney> anywy if its TBD we can move on 16:34:17 <gibi> sure 16:34:19 <gmann> yeah 16:34:23 <bauzas> yeah and I'd be afraid they'd turn into proprietary software too 16:34:39 <bauzas> for a foundation named OpenDEv 16:34:43 <bauzas> but meh 16:34:43 <artom> Presumably it'll have to be Chinese-firewall friendly 16:35:07 <gibi> #topic Open discussion 16:35:13 <gibi> bauzas: your turn 16:35:22 <bauzas> well, nothing big to propose 16:35:38 <bauzas> I'm about to send a ML thread to the list asking for volunteers to run a libvirt subteam 16:35:49 <bauzas> we had a couple of open changes in the past but no connection between people 16:36:09 <bauzas> I thought it would be nice to just give them a bit of organization 16:36:40 <bauzas> nothing really official but rather following the subteam principles 16:36:47 <bauzas> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova#Nova_subteams 16:36:51 <aarents> yeah I would be happy to humbly participate if possible 16:37:02 <bauzas> cool thanks! 16:37:24 <bauzas> the idea is just to self organize and see what we need in terms of coordination 16:37:30 <bauzas> I'm not a big fan of meetings 16:37:45 <bauzas> but we can do multiple things, depending on what participants want 16:37:59 <bauzas> maybe having a tracking etherpad would be a good start 16:38:00 <gibi> I support your idea of the subteam 16:38:27 <gibi> If I can help it any way then let me know 16:38:39 <bauzas> okay, then I'll setup the birds of a feather and send the email 16:38:59 <gibi> cool. I will add your subteam to the meeting agenda 16:39:05 <bauzas> once we gather a list of participants, we'll organize ourselves for the next nova meeting 16:39:06 * gmann need to update API subteam meeting wiki with 'no separate API meeting now ' 16:39:27 <bauzas> gmann: yeah, honestly, we could run office hours 16:39:47 <bauzas> I just feel that there should still be *some* live coordination 16:39:47 <gmann> true 16:40:10 <bauzas> I just don't want to paper over 16:40:32 <bauzas> anyway, this is sold, I'll send an email after the meeting 16:40:37 <gibi> bauzas: thanks 16:40:44 <gibi> anything else to discuss? 16:42:03 <gibi> then thank you for joining 16:42:13 <sean-k-mooney> o/ 16:42:17 <gibi> #endmeeting