16:01:17 <rm_work> #startmeeting Octavia
16:01:18 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Apr 15 16:01:17 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is rm_work. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:19 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:01:22 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia'
16:01:23 <rm_work> #chair johnsom
16:01:24 <openstack> Current chairs: johnsom rm_work
16:01:29 <rm_work> #chair cgoncalves
16:01:30 <openstack> Current chairs: cgoncalves johnsom rm_work
16:01:44 <cgoncalves> hi
16:01:47 <johnsom> o/
16:01:48 <gthiemonge> Hi
16:01:51 <haleyb> hi
16:01:53 <ataraday_> hi
16:02:43 <rm_work> hey all!
16:03:07 <rm_work> #topic Announcements
16:03:21 <rm_work> Ussuri RC1 is next week!
16:03:32 * rm_work actually read the agenda page this time
16:03:56 <johnsom> Yeah, we need to get bug fixes in!
16:04:01 <rm_work> so, we need to work extra hard to review a number of outstanding patches that are very important to land
16:04:55 <rm_work> anything else? we'll discuss those in more detail later
16:06:18 <johnsom> We should probably mention that a sqlalchemy release is causing functional test failures.
16:06:35 <johnsom> Just as an FYI. 1.3.16 introduced the issue.
16:07:43 <johnsom> I think that is all I have.
16:07:50 <rm_work> #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review
16:08:53 <johnsom> I have been focused on bug fixing, reviews, and releases this week.
16:09:03 <rm_work> I have a couple of bugs that I'd like to land fixes for -- ranging from super urgent to trivial
16:09:13 <rm_work> super urgent:
16:09:15 <rm_work> #link https://review.opendev.org/719922
16:09:34 <rm_work> totally trivial:
16:09:36 <rm_work> #link https://review.opendev.org/719921
16:09:44 <rm_work> already merging: https://review.opendev.org/718881
16:09:53 <rm_work> (once gate is fixed)
16:10:17 <rm_work> and .... technically a feature but I vote to allow it to merge anyway for rc1: https://review.opendev.org/589180
16:11:20 <cgoncalves> rm_work, on that last change, I commented but did not vote. probably I should have voted to get your attention, sorry
16:11:48 <rm_work> ah k
16:11:49 <gthiemonge> I have some octavia-dashboard backports that are waiting for reviews: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/I3668f3dc5d3eb6a288994386294cc018035540c8+is:open
16:13:09 <openstackgerrit> Ann Taraday proposed openstack/octavia master: Run taskflow jobboard conductor conditionally  https://review.opendev.org/720237
16:13:45 <rm_work> commented coreycb
16:13:46 <rm_work> err
16:13:48 <rm_work> cgoncalves:
16:15:08 <rm_work> cgoncalves: look at the newest code, the retry/delay all moved out to be at a higher level so it's common
16:15:51 <rm_work> i'll fix the date thing
16:16:19 <cgoncalves> rm_work, yep, I suspect that was the fix. thanks
16:17:05 <johnsom> I would say we should have a priority list, but I think the etherpad updates broke our tracking etherpad
16:17:46 <rm_work> :(
16:18:10 <cgoncalves> etherpad is just slow
16:18:39 <openstackgerrit> Adam Harwell proposed openstack/octavia master: Support HTTP and TCP checks in UDP healthmonitor  https://review.opendev.org/589180
16:18:42 <johnsom> There is discussion that the update broken it in the opendev channel
16:18:54 <johnsom> broke, oye
16:19:02 <johnsom> It doesn't load at all for me
16:19:12 <cgoncalves> oh, ok. I could open it a few minutes ago
16:19:16 <cgoncalves> yeah, timed out now
16:20:44 <cgoncalves> rm_work, we are in feature freeze. if you want the UDP health monitor patch in, it probably needs a FFE
16:20:52 <cgoncalves> (Feature Freeze Exception)
16:22:10 <rm_work> and who grants that?
16:22:13 <rm_work> PTL?
16:22:16 * rm_work looks at himself
16:23:32 <rm_work> we lost our last day of merging to gate issues and 75% of our cores being on holiday :D
16:23:36 <cgoncalves> appears to reading https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/release-management.html
16:23:54 <rm_work> cool
16:23:59 <rm_work> i hereby grant a FFE
16:24:15 <rm_work> now that we've settled that... anything else before we move to the next topic?
16:24:16 <cgoncalves> it would be wise in this specific case to coordinate with other cores
16:24:46 <rm_work> I mean, the other cores are necessarily involved as they have to +2/+A :D so
16:24:49 <rm_work> that's kinda implied
16:25:12 <rm_work> I grant the exception, if you agree you vote
16:25:20 <cgoncalves> ok
16:25:27 <rm_work> granting the FFE does nothing if you don't merge it ^_^
16:26:31 <rm_work> cool, so next:
16:26:34 <rm_work> #topic Open Discussion
16:27:41 <rm_work> anything?
16:27:52 <cgoncalves> yes
16:27:56 <johnsom> There is an agenda item still
16:28:04 <rm_work> ah there it is
16:28:12 <cgoncalves> I added this to the agenda: How to handle https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711275/ (see Carlos' comments in Gerrit)
16:28:44 <cgoncalves> so this ^ patch depends on an octavia-lib patch that is available in 1.5.0+
16:29:18 <cgoncalves> train has octavia-lib==1.4.0 in upper-constraints.txt
16:30:02 <cgoncalves> so I am not sure how we could backport the octavia-lib patch to stable/train, release a new version of octavia-lib and have it available in train for octavia to consume
16:30:24 <cgoncalves> https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/stable/train/upper-constraints.txt#L141
16:31:00 <johnsom> Yeah, umm, You can't backport a new positional parameter to a method in octaiva-lib. That could break drivers
16:31:26 <cgoncalves> very good point
16:31:30 <rm_work> yeah we may just be stuck
16:32:24 <cgoncalves> +1
16:33:27 <cgoncalves> in any case, how would we backport bug fixes to octavia-lib stable branches and have them released if u-c.txt has it set to ==1.4.0?
16:34:16 <johnsom> Yeah, it would require a UC bump
16:36:19 <cgoncalves> problem could we might have to bump more than once :/
16:36:40 <cgoncalves> if there's no other way, so be it
16:38:18 <rm_work> yeah i'm not totally sure i understand what the issue is, i'd have to try doing it maybe
16:39:43 <johnsom> We have some strange relationships with octavia-lib versions I sure would like to figure out a better way to handle....
16:43:53 <cgoncalves> train neutron-lib: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/679986/
16:46:40 <cgoncalves> others also bumping versions in stable branches u-c.txt: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/requirements+NOT+branch:master
16:47:02 <johnsom> Yeah, you pretty much have to be able to do so for bug fixes
16:47:42 <johnsom> So, another topic we might want to discuss: Add skip to the tests for sqlalchemy.
16:47:45 <cgoncalves> yeah, ok. I just wanted to make sure it is possible and how to handle it
16:48:11 <johnsom> I would propose we do so as we know the issue is limited to the tests (sqlite) to unblock the gates
16:49:13 <cgoncalves> sounds reasonable
16:49:28 <rm_work> ok
16:49:56 <johnsom> Ok, I will propose one
16:51:26 <xgerman> Wonder if we should do a virtual video happy hour?
16:53:35 <rm_work> i'm down at some point
16:53:41 <rm_work> tho my schedule is lulz :P
16:53:52 <cgoncalves> +1. xgerman brings the beer
16:54:05 <rm_work> we all bring the beer :D
16:54:08 <xgerman> :beer
16:54:12 <rm_work> for ourselves. because we are all in quarantine.
16:54:28 <xgerman> I have all kind of slack emoji beers
16:56:14 <xgerman> We can use poll to figure out the times…
16:56:24 <johnsom> Sure, sounds good.
16:56:48 <johnsom> It also sounds like the PTG will be virtual, so maybe we will have good participation there as well.
16:57:08 <xgerman> Uh, oh, no trip to Vancouber :-(
16:57:23 <rm_work> :(
16:57:39 <rm_work> yeah i was really looking forward to that
16:57:41 <cgoncalves> such a cool city
16:58:04 <rm_work> ok well thanks everyone, meeting time about up
16:58:06 <johnsom> #link https://www.openstack.org/events/opendev-ptg-2020/
16:59:27 <johnsom> o/
17:00:40 <johnsom> #endmeeting