21:02:20 #startmeeting 21:02:21 Meeting started Tue Jul 10 21:02:20 2012 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:02:22 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:02:28 Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting 21:02:48 #info First meeting of the F3 era, we'll have a look at sanitizing plans so that they are a realistic view of what we're likely to achieve 21:03:04 Will also talk about the upcoming bug squashing day on Thursday... and give out the results of the G poll... will the Bear Revolt win ? 21:03:16 (or will order prevail) 21:03:25 GO GRIZZLY OR GO HOME!!! 21:03:29 MUTINY 21:03:32 what? order never prevails with openstack ;) 21:03:37 GRIZZLYYY 21:03:37 mtaylor, :P 21:03:41 #topic Actions from previous meeting 21:03:48 * ttx to see how danwent could track bugs outside quantum without creating noise 21:03:54 Not done yet, postponing 21:03:55 I was hoping for gristle 21:04:02 :) 21:04:03 #action ttx to see how danwent could track bugs outside quantum without creating noise 21:04:16 * ttx makes mental note: do not let creiht pick /any/ name 21:04:28 * ttx to formally announce the G poll on ML/twitter etc. 21:04:39 DONE, you have 41 minutes left to cast your vote for the G release name: 21:04:41 I gave up on picking sane names after the first vote :) 21:04:47 https://launchpad.net/~openstack/+polls 21:05:06 #topic Keystone status 21:05:14 heckj: o/ 21:05:17 creiht: which was your first vote? 21:05:18 o/ 21:05:20 #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-3 21:05:34 * heckj used the ttx.py script to clean things up this morning 21:05:45 I think it needs a french accent next 21:05:48 o0 21:05:57 le ttx.py 21:06:21 heckj: I see you recently removed some targets ? 21:06:24 le definitely 21:06:50 heckj: like... no more v3 ? 21:06:53 We reviewed the work pending for F3, and there was just way too much that it was clear we weren't going to get done 21:06:56 no no...en francais 21:07:28 heckj: ++ 21:07:36 V3 is still the focus, as it's a dependency on many of the desired pieces, but I don't want to set the expectation that other projects should start using V3 API at the end of a F3 milestone timeframe 21:08:05 heckj: so the idea is to have a partial v3 implementation in Folsom ? 21:08:12 I'll be sending email about my un-linking of the BP's to the mailing list too - if more commits come in, I'll link them back up. 21:08:56 ttx: My goal is to have V3 fully implemented by the milestone, but given the rate of change lately, I don't think it's likely to be fully there. Something will be - it may be partial, or not fully fleshed out. 21:09:18 but definitely alpha/beta in all cases. 21:09:24 ttx: yes 21:09:34 sounds reasonable. 21:09:48 Other projects: does that create red flags somewhere ? 21:09:52 or general relief ? 21:09:53 heckj, ttx: how do these changes around the v3 implementation affect RBAC/policy implementations across the stack as a whole? 21:10:22 (that being the biggest piece that doesn't exist in v2) 21:11:13 gabrielhurley: policy will still be there, and there's a BP to consolidate a "suggested deployment" setup for all of them. Getting policy CRUD implemented in the API should be there, but we'd be greatly pressing to get the full integration will all the projects there in the next 4 weeks. 21:11:46 so it becomes more of a Grizzly thing to really make that solid, then? 21:11:48 my understanding is that it will make folsom a bit of a transitional release for Keystone, but I'm pretty sure most people can live with that 21:11:50 gabrielhurley: the big V3 related change in policy is sourcing it in keystone. That should be possible, and we can even focus on making that happen earlier rather than later 21:12:06 heckj: yeah, the sourcing is what's important to Horizon 21:12:10 if that happens I think I'm happy 21:12:21 gabrielhurley: noted 21:12:32 heckj: ok good, anything else ? 21:13:21 that's it for me 21:13:33 Questions about Keystone ? 21:14:05 #topic Swift status 21:14:10 hi 21:14:10 #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.5.1 21:14:21 notmyname: Hi! Target date was pushed back to July 30 ? 21:14:27 yes it was 21:14:34 Anything specific you wait the completion of ? 21:14:47 we won't be able to get the additional QA this week that we normally have, so I pushed it back 21:15:06 it's (slightly) possible that we may have it sooner, but I pushed it 2 weeks to be sae 21:15:08 safe 21:15:17 oh, so it's more a QA sync issue than a missing needed feature ? 21:15:21 y 21:15:22 ya 21:15:43 and I hope, long-term, the recently proposed swift integration into tempest will help alleviate that 21:15:48 Would you include https://blueprints.launchpad.net/swift/+spec/keystone-middleware in it if it's ready by then ? 21:16:01 absolutely 21:16:20 Sounds good. 21:16:34 notmyname: anything else you wanted to mention ? 21:16:41 ya, let me find a link 21:17:26 #link WIP 1.5.1 changelog until LP is updated https://github.com/notmyname/swift/blob/1.5.1-changelog/CHANGELOG 21:17:49 cool, thx 21:18:11 one more thing 21:18:43 I'll be talking to the swift core devs this week about integrating swift with the devstack gates. nothing to say there, just stuff being done 21:19:01 Noted. Other questions on Swift ? 21:19:37 #topic Glance status 21:19:43 bcwaldon: o/ 21:19:49 ttx: hey hey 21:19:49 #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/folsom-3 21:19:55 * ttx preventively refreshes 21:20:01 ttx: you're safe today 21:20:16 OK, so there are (still) several things I don't really like here :) 21:20:22 ttx: I know :( 21:20:31 First, the 5 essential blueprints make me a bit nervous. 21:20:44 ttx: BUT I was working on https://launchpad.net/python-glanceclient ! 21:20:49 but I guess if the ETA on them is reasonable it's not such a big deal 21:21:03 ttx: I'm going to spend my afternoon figuring out what can happen in F3 21:21:21 ttx: what's the OS policy on features after F3? 21:21:44 essential stuff gets post-F3 pre-RC1 exceptions 21:21:46 we have a STONITH protocol for features after f3 21:21:53 and each of those exceptions lowers the general quality of the release 21:22:01 vishy: I don't appreciate that 21:22:07 vishy: define: STONITH 21:22:28 ttx: ok, just wanted to make sure we were on the same page 21:22:35 Shoot the other node in the head (in this case the other node is the new feature) 21:22:35 STONITH: Shoot The Other Node In The Head 21:22:40 :| 21:22:43 STNFITH 21:22:47 :| 21:23:04 ttx: SO, it will look better within 24 hours, I promise 21:23:06 bcwaldon: so if any of those look like they might not get completed before the end of the month... I would go the heckj route and question whether they should really be in Folsom 21:23:18 ttx: some of them are planned refactorings 21:23:39 yes, the glance client stuff is clearly on hte map... and the rest is V2 stuff afaict 21:23:41 ttx: I just need to look at each one and classify whether it can or can't get done after F3 21:24:27 bcwaldon: default answer is "cannot". 21:24:34 ttx: ok 21:24:57 ttx: I did want to talk about python-glaneclient 21:24:58 I really would like if we could not have feature freeze exceptions unless Murphy strikes 21:25:14 i.e. keep the option for spectucular failures rather than business as usual 21:25:28 ttx: since we aren't releasing client libs on the same schedule, they aren't really affected by FF and milestones 21:25:34 indeed. 21:25:48 ttx: ok, and I think we need to decide who has the power to release client libs 21:25:55 ttx: as I now want to do it 21:25:58 bcwaldon: ++ would like to see that nailed down 21:26:06 bcwaldon: the PTL should decide when it makes sense 21:26:14 ttx: I've already decided that 21:26:18 ttx: i just need to be able to push a button 21:26:23 bcwaldon: the ptl /could/ ask me if I see any reason why that's a bad idea just now 21:26:25 ttx: are you going to be that button? 21:26:52 ttx: I'm fine with whatever, I just want to get moving 21:26:54 bcwaldon: no, normally taylor shall give you the ability to push tags to gerrit, which is all it takes 21:26:56 bcwaldon: ++ to PTLs having their finger on the button and not having a bottleneck/bus factor to contend with... 21:27:09 mtaylor* 21:27:19 ttx: hmm, so if mtaylor isn't around, we can't release? 21:27:31 ttx: or do I just need to get him to add me to some magical group 21:27:45 bcwaldon: no ;) mtaylor just adds you to magic group once and for all 21:27:59 bcwaldon: so pushing a release is just a command away for you 21:28:03 ttx: ok, works for me 21:28:12 ttx: ATTENTION PTLs! Read that ^ 21:28:21 ttx: that's all for me, then :) 21:28:35 bcwaldon: again, asking me before doing it can't hurt. Like some security issue might be near the end of the tube 21:28:43 ttx: definitely 21:28:44 works for me 21:28:44 but it's not blocking 21:28:59 ttx: best effort will be given 21:29:00 so if tere is anythign urgent, you can do it 21:29:19 bcwaldon: had another remark about the F3 plan... 21:29:21 The second thing I don't like is the unassigned stuff. At this point, if nobody committed to doing the work, it won't get done. 21:29:29 Or do all those mean "I'll do them if nobody signs up for them" ? 21:29:36 ttx: do you want all PTLs just to be in openstack-release? 21:29:44 ttx: or you want me to make a separate group? 21:29:52 mtaylor: I'd prefer not. You could reuse the drivers group 21:29:55 ttx: I'm going to do as many of them as I can if nobody picks them up 21:29:56 ttx: or you want me to add each ptl to each project 21:30:02 or just make a group with the PTL only 21:30:03 ttx: I have soft commitments for some of them 21:30:11 ttx: k. glance-drivers gets tag push on glance and python-glanceclient then? 21:30:27 mtaylor: if bcwaldon is ok wit hit. 21:30:31 or with it 21:30:47 bcwaldon: would be good to have hard commitments at least for the essential one :) 21:30:55 I'm not glance-drivers makes sense 21:31:06 sure* 21:31:22 ok, done with Glance... 21:31:26 bcwaldon: Anything else ? 21:31:28 mtaylor: at a minimum, I would like PTLs and release team to be able to do it 21:31:30 ttx: no sir 21:31:37 bcwaldon: release team has it everywhere 21:31:44 mtaylor: lets talk about this later 21:31:46 bcwaldon: I'll give ptl the magic power per-project 21:31:46 mtaylor: sssh, that's our secret. 21:31:48 bck 21:31:54 oops 21:32:15 the idea is to retsrict it to people that actually know that pushing a tag will trigger a PyPI upload. 21:32:33 somehow some people ignore that, go figure. 21:32:38 Questions on Glance ? 21:33:11 #topic Quantum status 21:33:16 danwent: yo 21:33:19 hey 21:33:21 #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-3 21:33:27 don't let your eyes bulge too much 21:33:33 OK, so this one clearly falls in the "optimistic" category, with 31! targeted blueprints 21:33:39 As a data point, you completed 16 in F1+F2 :) 21:33:49 yup, but our team is much bigger now. 21:33:55 just focus on things that are essential or high 21:34:00 heh, ok 21:34:14 anything at medium is not critical to the project, but someone said they were going to do it, so I'm taking them at their word and am targeting it for F-3 21:34:24 danwent: there were a number of them that weren't inthe series goal = Folsom, you should spot them using ttx.py 21:34:37 i think i cleaned those all up this morning with ttx.py 21:34:41 ok 21:34:43 unless someone has added more since then 21:34:47 (always possible) 21:34:52 will do another pass 21:35:17 danwent: ok, I guess we'll refine as we close the F3 deadline 21:35:33 as we get closer to, I mean 21:35:52 yeah. we're going to be more demanding about people creating specs up front for any high or above item, which should help us keep tabs on the progress those issues are making early in the milestone period. 21:36:11 and publicly shame those who said they would do it but didn't 21:36:25 that's the idea (which reminds me, i need to finish my spec....) 21:36:42 Looking at the 3 remaining essential blueprints... 21:36:42 ttx: SDD - Shame Driven Development 21:36:59 danwent: Would like to make sure those will be delivered "early enough" in this milestone timeframe. Do you have an ETA for quantum-v2-public-networks and quantum-l3-fwd-nat ? 21:37:02 sounds like a great book 21:37:23 gabrielhurley: I actually do Sarcasm-driven development 21:37:36 I'm hoping for a review 3 weeks into the cycle on those. 21:37:56 likely the l3 BP will be split into several, with non-essential items being handled separately 21:38:02 so..; before the end of the month ? 21:38:30 at the end of the month, yes :) 21:38:33 danwent: sounds good to me. Anything else ? 21:38:40 i doubt it will be much before :) 21:39:05 Questions on Quantum ? 21:39:22 #topic Nova status 21:39:27 #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-3 21:39:46 vishy: o/ 21:39:53 22 blueprints targeted, compared to 20 implemented during F1+F2 21:40:07 That said, lots of those are actually Low-prio or globally in progress so it's not as bad as it looks ? 21:40:23 yes i think it is ok. the high/essential ones look pretty good 21:40:25 vishy: remove-deprecated-auth is almost done! All the changes are in review (gate failing right now) 21:40:33 they are mostly done 21:40:47 Ideally we would move a few "High" to "Medium" to better rank their priorities, but meh 21:41:01 A few highlights from ttx.py: 21:41:02 the only one that I'm particularly concerned about are no-db-messaging / no-db-compute 21:41:16 yes, not much progress there and a bit lae in the cycle for that anyway 21:41:28 These two need to have their priority set and series goal set to "Folsom" if you approve them: 21:41:34 * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/add-support-for-pci-passthrough-and-sr-iov 21:41:40 * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/network-adapter-hotplug 21:41:51 russelb promised to work on that during this milestone now that the roc stuff is done. 21:41:59 (that last one has no assignee, so I wonder if it's serious) 21:42:49 vishy: please assess them before next week 21:43:09 did it now 21:43:12 put them both low 21:43:15 vishy: Anything else ? 21:43:46 #info Cinder was just promoted to core project so it will get its own topic starting next week 21:43:49 nope 21:44:00 jgriffith: you'll have to become a regular for this meeting now :) 21:44:07 Questions on Nova ? 21:44:20 ttx: Have been anyway 21:44:24 heh 21:44:29 #topic Horizon status 21:44:32 ttx: \o (I'm filling in for devcamcar) 21:44:36 gabrielhurley: awesome 21:44:42 #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-3 21:45:02 I think we're looking pretty realistic. 21:45:03 Plan looks good, realistic and clear :) 21:45:09 why thank you :-) 21:45:11 I don't really have concerns here. Anything you wanted to mention ? Help needed somewhere ? 21:45:32 the only thing to mention is the policy/rbac blueprint which is dependent on keystone as we discussed earlier: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/ext-roles 21:45:44 (currently marked as "blocked") 21:46:03 heckj and I are gonna work on making it happen, though 21:46:13 ok 21:46:19 more help is always good ;-) 21:46:23 Questions for Horizon ? 21:47:03 #topic G naming results 21:47:09 And the winner is... 21:47:21 Rules are here to be broken, let's go with "Grizzly" 88/46 21:47:49 bcwaldon: you win 21:47:55 LIKE A BOSS 21:48:01 viva la bear flag revolt! 21:48:07 grizzly like the chew, or grizzly like the yamaha atv? 21:48:19 grizzly like the jk0 21:48:21 grizzly like the flats 21:48:22 Gazelle was the other pick but people chose chaos over order 21:48:24 \o/ 21:48:25 <_0x44> Keep in mind, that per the last "bear" release we had... "ZZ" is silent. 21:48:36 <_0x44> Grizzly Hills is actually pronounced "Greely Hills" 21:48:47 <_0x44> s/Hills/Flats/ 21:48:59 we should have went with Gort 21:49:26 gristle 21:49:48 creiht: +1 :) 21:50:01 creiht: alas... too late 21:50:05 bcwaldon: I'll amend the rules so that order can be restored 21:50:17 ttx: call it the 'waldon clause' 21:50:26 #info G stands for Grizzly 21:50:31 ttx: or the 'bill of brians' 21:50:38 or the Waldon exception 21:50:46 fine with me 21:50:49 #topic Other Team reports 21:50:59 annegentle, jaypipes, mtaylor: anything you wanted to mention ? 21:51:28 held the doc meeting yesterday, notes available at http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-09-20.03.html 21:51:47 anything particular you want to highlight ? 21:52:02 couple of items - the DocImpact flag isn't working, my test of it failed. clarkb and the CI team suspects we need a better mailing list to handle incoming notifications 21:52:37 - please review the prototype docs translation process posted to the mailing list yesterday (thanks jaypipes for input!) 21:53:29 - I've uncovered a problem with old html files remaining that Google sinks its hooks into, https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1022712, working it myself 21:53:29 Launchpad bug 1022712 in openstack-manuals "About 111 orphaned HTML files still can come up in Google searches" [High,Confirmed] 21:53:44 ttx: I'm working on getting setuptools-git rolled out everywhere 21:53:56 ttx: and pre-versioning rolled out to the server projects 21:53:57 mtaylor: sounds like the right moment. 21:54:25 - also will send a note to the mailing list to discuss info architecture around three basics of OpenStack - Compute | Storage | Networking and how to shape docs 21:54:28 mtaylor: does that make us free from Final=True ? 21:54:56 ttx: yup 21:55:07 ttx: I've got a patch pending for glance, will update the one for nova rsn 21:55:29 annegentle: ok, anything else ? 21:55:31 ttx: it also puts most of the logic from create-tarball into the projects themselves 21:55:55 Final note: we need more documentation updates for folsom - essex looks great now, but without the DocImpact flag I'm having difficulty scoping and prioritizing work for Folsom. 21:56:13 My request is that you log doc bugs in openstack-manuals for specific known needed updates. 21:56:24 annegentle: did oubiwann get the info he needed to create that new list? 21:56:29 Until we get DocImpact working. Does that sound reasonable? 21:56:41 annegentle: certainly. 21:56:41 ttx: oh - also, I've got some stuff coming up for review for folks releated to global dep list 21:56:59 clarkb: was that request via email or IRC? I didn't' catch it, sorry oubiwann 21:57:04 mtaylor: sounds good 21:57:09 ttx: I did a pass comparing what we install via packages for devstack vs. what we say we require in the pip-reuqires 21:57:11 it's not hte same 21:57:18 bcwaldon: ^^ you're going to love it :) 21:57:28 awesome 21:57:33 #topic Bug squashing day 21:57:35 yeah. I was thrilled 21:57:40 We'll have a bug squashing day, all day Thursday. 21:57:46 yay bug squash! Join me at Tech Ranch in Austin. 21:57:47 Join us on #openstack-bugday on that day ! 21:57:53 #link http://wiki.openstack.org/BugDays/20120712BugSquashing 21:57:59 We'll try to close as many bugs as possible, either by fixing or marking them Invalid 21:58:11 #link http://www.meetup.com/OpenStack-Austin/events/72740812/ 21:58:15 annegentle mentioned the in-person meetup in Austin, maybe others ? 21:59:03 #topic Open discussion 21:59:21 last words before I close ? 21:59:36 * creiht sighs 21:59:40 ttx: that was for you :) 21:59:54 glad you missed me :) 22:00:01 jeblair: you need to send that flag design to Todd Morey so that we have it on the next summit T-shitrs 22:00:05 creiht: heh 22:00:12 * creiht hopes everyone realizes the above was a joke 22:00:28 hi 22:00:43 that's the highest res picture i can find online. :( 22:01:00 jeblair: I'm sure that won't stop an artist like you. 22:01:06 (sadly, the original flag was burned in the fire that followed the 1906 earthquake) 22:01:31 and on those sad words 22:01:33 #endmeeting