16:00:11 <gthiemonge> #startmeeting Octavia
16:00:11 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Jun 15 16:00:11 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is gthiemonge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:11 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:11 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia'
16:00:14 <gthiemonge> Hi!
16:00:25 <johnsom> o/
16:00:31 <tweining> o/
16:01:23 <gthiemonge> #topic Announcements
16:01:49 <gthiemonge> I don't have any announcements... anyone? johnsom?
16:02:20 <johnsom> Just that the taskflow fix is almost landed. Upper-constraints is in the gate jobs.
16:02:31 <johnsom> So we should be able to start landing the gate fixes today
16:02:47 <tweining> hm, the naming scheme for the next cycle changed, right? I read somthing on the ML I think
16:02:54 <gthiemonge> johnsom: thanks for working on it ;-)
16:03:01 <johnsom> Yes
16:03:01 <tweining> year.sth
16:03:52 <gthiemonge> yeah it is in "[all][tc] Change OpenStack release naming policy proposal" on the ML
16:04:04 <johnsom> #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20220524-release-identification-process.html
16:04:40 <tweining> k, seems not really new though
16:05:23 <gthiemonge> yeah but I don't think we mentioned it in a previous meeting
16:05:29 <johnsom> Basically removes the public vote process for picking a "name".
16:05:57 <tweining> also I think tick-tock got a new name as well, but I don't remember
16:06:40 <johnsom> I need to re-read that as I still don't have tick-tock in my brain.
16:07:16 <gthiemonge> yeah same here
16:08:01 <gthiemonge> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/840354/4/resolutions/20220210-release-cadence-adjustment.rst
16:08:17 <gthiemonge> "SLURP"
16:08:45 <tweining> right. an awful name if you ask me ;)
16:09:07 <gthiemonge> haha, I agree
16:09:23 <johnsom> some of these recent TC docs have been hard to read. The rbac goal is rough reading too
16:11:19 <gthiemonge> #topic CI Status
16:11:34 <gthiemonge> johnsom already mentioned the taskflow/pylint issues on master and stable branches
16:11:49 <gthiemonge> there's also a DIB issue on train and ussuri
16:11:53 <johnsom> Some of the pylint fixes have one +2 already
16:11:59 <johnsom> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/845044
16:12:07 <johnsom> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/845043
16:12:13 <gthiemonge> johnsom: yeah I will CR+2/W+1 them when the one on mater is merged/ready
16:12:20 <johnsom> The stable branches are not impacted by the networkx/taskflow issue
16:13:00 <gthiemonge> ah ok
16:13:15 <gthiemonge> thanks for the patches johnsom ;-)
16:13:32 <gthiemonge> regarding train and ussuri, we're pulling DIB from the master branch and DIB has removed the support for py36
16:13:47 <gthiemonge> the workaround/fix is to checkout the latest commit that supports py36
16:13:52 <gthiemonge> #link https://review.opendev.org/q/Id763dee0cc048d3d5fe601ce51097581d3c1c4e3
16:14:05 <johnsom> DIB is branchless sadly
16:14:56 <gthiemonge> yeah, old DIB releases have this git issue (permission issue), and new releases don't work with py36
16:14:59 <johnsom> There are tags though
16:15:21 <gthiemonge> yeah we could use tags
16:15:51 <gthiemonge> let me know in the review if you prefer another solution
16:16:12 <johnsom> Not sure it matters that much. The SHA is probably fine.
16:17:19 <gthiemonge> ok
16:17:34 <gthiemonge> #topic Recheck policy
16:17:41 <gthiemonge> another CI/gerrit related topic
16:17:48 <gthiemonge> we were asked to be really careful with "bare" rechecks in gerrit
16:18:15 <gthiemonge> during the PTG we had a discussion on adding a reason to the recheck messages
16:18:28 <gthiemonge> ex: recheck octavia-v2-dsvm-scenario story-2009887
16:18:49 <gthiemonge> (don't need a story, reason could be: mirror issue, nova timeout, etc...)
16:19:03 <gthiemonge> in the last 30 days, it seems that many rechecks didn't include a reason
16:19:21 <gthiemonge> there's an etherpad that gathers all the recurrent CI issues in Octavia:
16:19:27 <gthiemonge> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/octavia-ci-failures
16:19:39 <gthiemonge> if we find new "random" issues, we shouldadd them to this etherpad
16:20:28 <gthiemonge> and don't hesitate, let me know if you don't know why a job has failed
16:20:31 <tweining> hm, my impression was that there were no recheck without reason since PTG
16:20:46 <gthiemonge> tweining: they have a script :D
16:21:24 <gthiemonge> but I need to check the output of the script before sharing the numbers :D
16:21:57 <johnsom> Yeah
16:23:30 <gthiemonge> and now...
16:23:41 <gthiemonge> #topic Octavia Forum at the OpenInfra summit
16:23:58 <johnsom> Surprise!
16:24:13 <gthiemonge> none of us (I mean the active contributors here) were at the OpenInfra summit but there was a Operator Forum on Octavia
16:24:24 <gthiemonge> and there's an etherpad with the notes:
16:24:32 <gthiemonge> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/oif-summit-berlin-2022-forum-lbaas
16:24:37 <gthiemonge> quick summary
16:24:43 <gthiemonge> lot of complaints towards octavia
16:24:53 <gthiemonge> many non-sense issues
16:25:14 <johnsom> It wasn't on the official forum list either, so maybe just a session?
16:25:15 <gthiemonge> (no UDP support, no security between the control plane and the amphora VMs)
16:25:41 <johnsom> Yeah, there was definitely some mis-information captured there.
16:25:41 <gthiemonge> yeah, and we were not asked to participate to this session
16:26:41 <gthiemonge> one good thing: it seesm they have found the link to storyboard
16:26:42 <johnsom> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Berlin2022
16:26:49 <johnsom> I was tracking this page, which it was not on
16:26:58 <tweining> forum organizers should align those sessions better with the project teams in advance.
16:27:44 <johnsom> Anyway, I added some after-the-fact comments to the etherpad to try to clarify some of the comments there.
16:27:50 <gthiemonge> johnsom: thanks
16:28:53 <gthiemonge> Let's hope those people will at least create stories if they have issues with Octavia
16:29:27 <johnsom> Yeah, it would be great if we got more operator feedback.
16:29:47 <johnsom> We have one core reviewer that is an operator, and a few others drop in every once in a while.
16:32:28 <gthiemonge> #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review
16:33:24 <tweining> well, I could repeat my list from last time.
16:33:35 <tweining> ;) since then nothing has changed.
16:33:36 <gthiemonge> I was not really active this last week... I need to check my review backlog
16:34:03 <tweining> that one would be a good start:
16:34:06 <tweining> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia-lib/+/835049
16:34:14 <gthiemonge> tweining: I reviewed your failover threshold patch
16:34:30 <tweining> cool. thanks
16:34:36 <gthiemonge> yeah I gave it +1 because we're waiting for this octavia-lib patch
16:36:07 <gthiemonge> I aalso need to take another look at the notification patch
16:36:49 <johnsom> FYI, taskflow upper-constraints just merged. I will recheck pylint
16:37:25 <gthiemonge> Nice!
16:37:30 <johnsom> Oh, bummer, someone rechecked early, so have to wait....
16:38:13 <gthiemonge> :'(
16:38:42 <tweining> it's good that the whole release process is automated using Gerrit and Zuul, but it can take some time.
16:39:34 <gthiemonge> #topic Open Discussion
16:39:42 <gthiemonge> any other topics folks?
16:40:58 <gthiemonge> nop?
16:41:10 <gthiemonge> ack
16:41:13 <tweining> not really
16:41:19 <gthiemonge> thanks everyone
16:41:24 <gthiemonge> #endmeeting