16:03:41 #startmeeting openstack_ansible_meeting 16:03:42 Meeting started Thu Mar 23 16:03:41 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is evrardjp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:03:42 o/ 16:03:43 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:03:45 The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_ansible_meeting' 16:03:48 o/ 16:04:12 The agenda for today is 16:04:15 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/openstack-ansible#Agenda_for_next_meeting 16:04:16 o/ 16:04:30 Is there someone against the agenda for today? 16:04:47 or in english, everyone agrees with the topics? 16:04:49 :D 16:04:56 it looks like the agenda is the same as the last two weeks - we haven't cleaned up :/ 16:05:29 Yes. Let me clean that up. 16:06:24 I propose we keep the topics for discussion, except the Operations guide that we'll skip for this time 16:07:15 Ok let's assume the roll call is over, and everyone agrees 16:07:24 PS: I miss asettle gifs. 16:07:36 so 16:07:37 lol 16:07:44 #topic Review action items from last week 16:07:58 palendae will flip coins for names tomorrow for the python package ? 16:08:09 evrardjp: Chosen!\ 16:08:13 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418076/ 16:08:14 woot! 16:08:17 osa_toolkit 16:08:22 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418076/ 16:08:22 And hopefully we'll get a passing gate 16:08:36 good 16:08:42 gate passing will require that we have a general master passing gate, which we do not 16:08:56 odyssey4me: Ah. In that case, I'll just keep rebasing :) 16:09:00 odyssey4me: let's talk about this in open discussion? 16:09:11 Anyway, the name was chosen and in that review 16:09:16 \o/ 16:09:23 tempest tests are failing, and no-one except andymccr has taken the time to look into it, but I think he's been swamped so volunteers to resolve it are welcome 16:09:40 ^ ^ ^ ^ 16:09:53 #action help andymccr to unblock gates 16:09:54 a general sha bump doesn't help because the powervm driver has an issue with incompatible requirements 16:10:08 that's on the way to being resolved 16:10:33 there is also work on ocata 16:10:48 cinder/tempest 16:10:52 but let's talk about that later 16:10:59 first let's finish last week action points 16:11:11 #action andymccr to look into getting an on-boarding room at the summit 16:11:19 that's gonna be for next week. 16:11:28 ok next topic! 16:11:46 #topic Discussion - Operations guide 16:12:05 asettle: being away let's skip this, except if someone wants to add something for her? 16:12:21 (only friendly messages are allowed) 16:12:30 I've nothing to add 16:12:31 nope, except that anyone able should keep reviewing and patching 16:12:43 ok, next topic 16:12:58 #topic Discussion - New periodic jobs 16:13:02 odyssey4me: ? 16:13:15 it's running, it's failing for the same reason as the current master: http://logs.openstack.org/periodic/periodic-openstack-ansible-upgrade-aio-master-ubuntu-xenial/e58e9cf/console.html#_2017-03-23_08_33_38_361490 16:13:43 so basically the upgrade happens from ocata to master, there's nothing except a broken master stopping it from passing as far as I know 16:14:00 I was thinking of adding another test for newton->ocata - thoughts? 16:14:30 it has value for me 16:14:56 making sure we can upgrade to latest official stable is good. 16:15:06 ok, I'll push up the infra change to add it 16:15:13 once that's going right I'll do the mitaka->newton one too 16:15:26 that's fancy :) 16:15:44 can you still get trusty image for mitaka-newton? 16:15:57 that will be a problem 16:16:02 if not now, it oculd 16:16:06 could* 16:16:13 same for N trusty 16:16:14 jmccrory yeah, until mitaka's EOL'd that won't be an issue 16:16:27 ok cool 16:16:53 in the meantime it's not a problem, so let's do it :) 16:17:06 jmccrory logan- we need to revisit the upgrade improvements etherpad and figure out where to go with it 16:17:19 but that's another topic, this one is done :) 16:17:23 ok 16:17:32 #topic Release Planning and Decisions 16:17:34 odyssey4me: ? 16:17:53 releases will happen next week (which will be a minor version bump due to the repo build changes in Newton +) 16:18:09 the repo build changes necessitated a minor revision bump to signal it 16:18:21 that's a minor rev bump for newton and ocata 16:18:46 Integrated build is broken on master, but the sha bump PR should be fixed by https://review.openstack.org/#/c/448674/ - once the dependent patch merges and the SHA is bumped for nova-powervm. 16:19:06 We have some tempest issues in stable/ocata causing cinder jobs to fail, but the PR to bump tempest SHA in the role is broken atm (thinking about that I need to actually edit the tests repo instead – will fix quickly. 16:19:17 by 'I' it means andymccr :) I'm literally copying and pasting his update 16:19:27 Upgrade jobs are all working except cinder on Ocata (which should merge once the above fixes) and then they’ll be set to voting. 16:19:36 The cinderv3 work is still pending, the nova patch needs to merge: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446508/ - then backports 16:20:07 it's a complete update from andymccr, including non release conversations :) 16:20:14 I feel like he is here. 16:20:37 Anyway, please have a look! 16:20:54 ok next topic 16:20:57 #topic Blueprint work 16:21:30 Any information to give there? Nothing pending except upgrade testing and operations guide? 16:22:12 ok let's move to something else 16:22:28 #topic Open discussion 16:22:47 Has anyone something to say? I feel like it's only odyssey4me and me talking today 16:22:56 :p 16:23:00 I don't really have anything today 16:23:08 Seems like a lot of people are busy with other things 16:23:09 We are sitting next to each other at the office, I don't need that to talk to him. :p 16:23:28 waiting my turn 16:23:36 now would be it. 16:23:46 evrardjp: Talking there wouldn't be documented though :) 16:23:46 xgerman it's open discussion, so it's anyone's turn 16:24:04 palendae: fair point, fair point! 16:24:10 ok, #link https://review.openstack.org/447151 16:24:58 the trove people have some questions about the communities stance on networks bridging vm and control plane. 16:25:06 Massive commit scope :p 16:25:51 the communities, you mean general trove users, or our deployers? 16:25:52 I am wondering if I need to add things for Octavia besides the iptables firewall? 16:26:05 community he means OSA 16:26:12 developers 16:27:13 I am generally supportive of the solution xgerman is persuing here but we need folks to look and think hard about it 16:27:17 so the question is how to bring consensus on the two roles "way of integrating with osa"? 16:27:35 yep 16:27:35 this looks like it's working towards the ideal we discussed at the PTG 16:28:18 yeah, I laid my thinking out in the response that there should be a security guide so operators can judge for themselves which risks they are taking 16:28:55 I agree 16:29:03 xgerman: agreed. i just was pointing out the roles should be doing similar things 16:29:14 I will review this, but I don't think it's a bad starting point 16:29:19 agreed with kylek3h too there 16:29:37 kylek3h: do you see other roles except trove that could have issues? 16:29:56 not at the moment. our focus has been on trove 16:30:05 that could be a "osa community goal" in the future to move the role to this standard 16:30:14 whatever the "this" means. 16:30:16 I knew cue had similar issues but that project has been abandoned 16:30:44 ok 16:31:06 xgerman this is looking way, way better and seems to address the concerns we raised early on 16:31:38 kylek3h from what I see so far, this is a good approach which provides the right flexibility between doing the nasty things for testing or small environments, but being able to break it out for larger environments 16:31:57 #action review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/447151 and talk about shared "osa community goals" for network integration best practices next week (useful for trove and octavia) 16:32:24 I would be very interested in you guys tying a similar approach and helping to fix up the model to be responsibly secure for the small/test environments 16:32:47 when I looked at the OSA docs there were chapters on networking but no text - so I assume that will be filled and I can go light on detals in my doc 16:32:51 odyssey4me: yeah. i have Ravi working on a similar approach for trove 16:33:05 kylek3h: woot 16:33:06 good 16:33:09 xgerman what docs are you referring to? 16:34:13 xgerman if you're browsing the docs through github you will miss many things - make sure you're browsing the *published* docs 16:34:27 #link https://docs.openstack.org/developer/openstack-ansible/draft-operations-guide/maintenance-tasks/network-maintain.html 16:34:47 ah, but that's the *draft* operations guide 16:34:51 it's still being populated 16:35:07 the deploy guide has networking info in it 16:35:21 Probably work to be done there, in a different section than the existing one 16:35:23 as does the neutron role, and others 16:35:23 #link https://docs.openstack.org/developer/openstack-ansible/draft-operations-guide/maintenance-tasks/firewalls.html 16:35:50 but, to be clear, the intent it never to duplicate any upstream information 16:36:19 all we ever decribe is how we lay things out and how to interact with OSA's deployment... any details about how octavia works should be submitted upstream 16:36:37 we should only ever do a basic intro and point to upstream docs 16:36:41 yes, I was more thinking how networks are defined in OSA. kyle3h had a comment and my thinking was to defer that to upcoming network guides 16:36:44 agreed 16:36:57 and agreed 16:37:06 networks being defined in OSA should be something in our docs 16:37:19 https://docs.openstack.org/project-deploy-guide/openstack-ansible/draft/overview-network-arch.html 16:37:25 https://docs.openstack.org/project-deploy-guide/openstack-ansible/draft/app-networking.html 16:38:09 that brings me to another topic actually - we currently have two examples in the docs, but I think we'll need to have more 16:38:21 +1 16:38:38 we have a 'test' and 'production' example - I think we're going to have to rename those and add a 'ceph' example, and probably others 16:38:39 I was able to figure it out but I also had some help ;-) 16:38:59 Octavia example? 16:39:29 I think perhaps an octavia example should perhaps be combined with something like autoscaling or whatever 16:39:40 k 16:39:43 perhaps ironic, magnum, ocatavia 16:40:12 + heat, telemetry for autoscaling 16:40:17 the point with the examples is to illustrate how to adjust based on the special things we can do 16:40:29 it makes sense to me 16:40:45 the 'test' and 'prod' examples were trying to illustrate different configs needed for the amount of NIC's and the storage subsystem 16:42:24 ok I think we are drifting from xgerman main topic, but it's good ! 16:42:29 productivitay 16:42:32 \o/ 16:43:13 yeah, documentation is a priority for the Octavia team 16:43:22 anyone else? logan- jmccrory? Need to add something to the agenda for next week, or need help on anything? 16:44:00 nope i've got nothing. good first stab at the iptables work xgerman, thanks. going to think about that some and compare to how i've got mine setup now 16:44:39 great. 16:45:00 you're also using it for octavia? Else generic work can also be documented 16:45:02 would be good to get this in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/445334/ rally is broken in newton without it 16:45:16 #action review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/445334/ 16:45:21 no mine is generic across all of the other basic osa containers 16:46:04 logan-: do you want to move it to ops, this way you don't have to maintain it alone, or is specific? 16:46:04 there are a bunch of small reviews in play, it'd be great if we could plow through those asap 16:46:27 don't forget to look at the next page of reviews ;) 16:46:35 :-) 16:46:39 i wouldn't mind pushing it to ops. will take a look at getting it into a review 16:47:48 I don't force anything logan-, I'm just trying to help. 16:48:28 yeah i think it would at the very least be helpful to have a port mapping of everything to reference later if we get a role template together 16:48:37 yeah 16:48:46 2.3 is gonna make role templates really easy btw 16:49:15 it's gonna be without any code change, as there is a env var for the boilerplate path. 16:49:57 ok, anything to wrap up? 16:49:58 interesting 16:50:25 oh that's one more than, the lxc connection plugin in 2.3 blows up. i did some digging and will added what i found in the review testing it, but basically they moved to using a constant for the remote file and use that more consistently 16:50:31 2.3 is gonna be an interesting one with long running connections, etc. 16:51:44 jmccrory: well that's not a bad thing to be more consistent. If you have a link I'd be happy to have a look at it. 16:52:11 sure, i'll add more details later today here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446173/ 16:52:21 cloudnull ^ 16:52:28 jmccrory: the refactor of connection systems in ansible 2.3 is a proof we may need to focus more on our plugins. 16:52:34 * cloudnull looking 16:54:01 ok anything else? 16:54:16 looks like we're pretty much out of time to discuss this - I'd say we move it to the channel 16:54:55 ok thank you everyone! 16:54:57 #endmeeting