19:07:20 #startmeeting openstackclient 19:07:21 Meeting started Thu Aug 6 19:07:20 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is stevemar. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:07:22 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 19:07:24 The meeting name has been set to 'openstackclient' 19:07:32 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/OpenStackClient 19:07:35 o/ 19:08:23 o/ 19:08:28 \o/ 19:08:36 terrylhowe: chat about what we want 1.6.0 to look like and work our way backward? 19:08:46 sure 19:09:05 for sure, i want the rest of the volume commands in 19:09:26 jiaxi and heha are working on a patch each 19:09:58 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/204364/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/204325/ 19:10:25 and i think at that point, we're parity with volume v1 and v2 - or pretty darn close anyway 19:12:02 should we wait for those two? might be a while. 19:12:28 they are fairly straightforward 19:12:42 i'll do the list one if you do the set/unset one :P 19:13:01 we could get them approved in an hour or two :P 19:13:02 I'm still not sure about the display_name in the list volumes v2, I'll test it later after the meeting 19:13:19 thought the display_name changed to names in the volume v2 api 19:13:24 *name 19:13:28 lhcheng: i think it did 19:13:48 i'll be exercising a bunch of the volume v2 commands manually soon 19:13:48 I think so too 19:13:56 just to make sure we're not being silly 19:14:20 secondly, i'm OK with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/203280/ not making the cut 19:14:32 dtroyer had some fairly large concerns about it 19:14:50 okay, I'll try to play around with the commands too 19:15:43 and lastly we should review + play around with the logging patch from the folks at fujitsu 19:15:56 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186720/ 19:16:50 i think once those 3 are in, we can cut 1.6.0 19:16:59 The docs on the log patch, I’m not happy with using operation_log: I don’t like either 19:17:13 I’d love to get the log patch through though 19:17:29 terrylhowe: propose another name 19:18:05 well part of the problem I don’t think this is going to work with our current command line options overriding OCC 19:18:21 my proposed othername would be ‘openstackclient’ 19:18:30 this will probably be our largest release, 30 bugs and 2 blueprints 19:18:51 and a change in cliff, too 19:18:52 yeh, pretty producting release 19:19:02 so get ready for something to break lol 19:19:03 we are still waiting on cliff, no? 19:19:50 did it not release? 19:19:55 yeh, we need another cliff release 19:19:56 dhellmann: q about cliff release? 19:20:14 last release was 6/9 and we were waiting on something I think 19:22:25 yeah, we're waiting on the --help fix, and the git style help when you have a typo 19:22:52 #action stevemar to bug dhellmann about a cliff release 19:23:01 were we waiting on another lib... 19:23:24 occ released 19:23:29 oh occ 19:23:32 it released? 19:23:36 yes 19:24:02 yeah, we're using 1.4.0 now 19:24:21 * lhcheng sneaks out for office meeting 19:24:30 * stevemar waves bye to lhcheng 19:24:45 terrylhowe: so i think we're getting super close 19:24:52 yes 19:25:00 i'll focus on the volume stuff 19:25:05 lets get those + logging in 19:25:07 and call it 19:25:32 I’ll work on getting that logging stuff through 19:25:45 cool, i'll focus on OSC for a day or two to get it in shape 19:25:54 * stevemar apologizes to keystone 19:26:17 end meeting early, lets get those patches in 19:26:30 did you have anything else you wanted to chat about? 19:29:17 I was jsut looking at the latest bugs and I don’t see much that needs to be discussed 19:29:36 I guess I am g2g 19:29:53 you guys broke everything! 19:30:00 https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-gate/+bug/1482350 19:30:00 Launchpad bug 1482350 in OpenStack-Gate "gate-tempest-dsvm-large-ops fails in stable/juno due to uncapped dep problems with osc" [Undecided,Confirmed] 19:30:00 Launchpad bug 1482350 in openstack-gate "gate-tempest-dsvm-large-ops fails in stable/juno due to uncapped dep problems with osc" [Undecided,Confirmed] 19:30:02 Launchpad bug 1482350 in openstack-gate "gate-tempest-dsvm-large-ops fails in stable/juno due to uncapped dep problems with osc" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1482350 19:30:43 oh, is that all 19:31:21 mriedem: ohhh 19:32:08 we need to do a quick cap on ksc for stable/juno? 19:32:19 mriedem: i hate stable branches 19:32:30 and how we do crazy things with dependencies 19:32:31 “stable” 19:32:36 forreal 19:32:48 mriedem: do we need to cap ksc? 19:32:51 for juno 19:32:52 yeah 19:32:59 why isn't there a stable/juno branch for osc? 19:33:19 no idea 19:33:21 sorry to barge into your meeting, but i felt like being dramatic 19:33:31 we can yap in -dev 19:33:41 mriedem: it's fine, we were going to finish up 19:34:07 mriedem: we only made one for stable/kilo because thats when all the libraries were making stable branches 19:34:33 dhellmann made the branch i think, around the same time he made stable branches for all oslo libraries 19:34:48 i guess we didn't need one for juno at the time 19:34:49 hrm, 19:34:54 yeah novaclient doesn't have a stable/juno branch either 19:35:02 osc 1.0.1 has uncapped deps i guess 19:35:08 and that's the cap for osc in stable/juno 19:35:12 python-*clients only got stable releases last release i think 19:35:41 mtreinish: maybe https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/stable/juno/global-requirements.txt#L119 needs to be <1.2 19:35:48 *<1.1 19:35:53 so we could do a 1.0.2 19:36:13 mriedem: yeah, we weren't think of capping deps back in our 1.0.1 days 19:36:13 we'd need a stable/juno for osc to cap it's reqs and release 1.0.2 though 19:36:25 things were so willy nilly back in those days 19:36:35 so willy and so nilly 19:36:39 yeh, I’ve never understood why there is a bug number in those 19:37:38 ok, so it sounds like the path forward is (1) stable/juno branch for osc, (2) cap reqs on stable/juno for osc, (3) release that as 1.0.2, (4) raise cap in g-r to <1.1 19:38:09 stevemar: are you in the release group for osc? 19:38:17 I don’t think I am 19:38:31 terrylhowe: i am, but i've never released it before, dtroyer always did it 19:38:44 i had a TODO to chat with dhellmann about the process 19:39:06 looks like now is the time! 19:39:10 mriedem: maybe, I don't know enough about what changed between 1.0.1 and 1.2 to weigh on whether thats a good idea or not 19:39:17 <1.1 19:39:21 mtreinish: yeah, we'd have to look i guess 19:39:28 stevemar: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/Client_Release_Process 19:39:39 mriedem: i mean I guess we can push a test patch to find out one way or the other 19:39:48 I think theres a tempest job on g-r 19:39:57 git tag -s 1.0.2&& git push gerrit 1.0.2 19:40:14 mtreinish: yeah, we have some other steps before we get there though 19:40:23 i have the steps in here https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stable-tracker 19:41:03 it's 2:40 and my wife wants to go test drive cars, doesn't she know juno is wedged and it's not a good time?! 19:41:50 stevemar: terrylhowe: what would we create a stable/juno branch from? the 1.0.1 tag? 19:42:03 the sha1 I guess 19:42:11 yeh, teh tag 19:42:25 i guess there is a 1.0.2 already 19:42:51 will semver allow 1.0.1.1? 19:43:00 s/semver/pbr 19:43:16 mriedem: can you explain more about step 3? "release that as 1.0.2"? did you think we didn't have 1.0.2? 19:43:26 stevemar: yeah 19:43:43 mriedem: yeah, we do, i see now... 1.0.1.1 might work 19:43:56 i'm not so sure on 1.0.1.1 19:44:00 pbr 0.11 might barf 19:44:26 right, we're limited to old pbr since we're in juno land 19:44:29 lifeless: will pbr 0.11 with semver allow a release of 1.0.1.1? 19:44:38 uughh 19:44:47 stevemar: no, it's just that pbr since 0.11 started enforcing that 19:44:54 latest pbr would barf too i think 19:45:43 well this is getting ugly fast 19:46:32 things might work with a 1.0.5 with a capped ksc 19:46:36 i'm also wondering why this only started blowing up since 8/5 19:47:07 i don't really see anything related released yesterday 19:47:59 might it be easier to limit the ksc/ksm/novaclient versions in juno? 19:48:22 or we'll still need a stable/juno release of osc anyway? 19:49:21 those are already all capped 19:49:31 it's osc 1.0.1 that is bringing in novaclient 2.26 19:49:36 since it's uncapped in osc 1.0.1 19:50:14 dhellmann: are you around? 19:51:08 mriedem: we called his name a few times during the meeting and he normally replies, but not today 19:51:24 ok, and mordred is on vacation i think 19:51:38 so, i'm going to tinker with 1.0.1.1 in setup.cfg of osc 1.0.1 and see how that works 19:51:51 go for it, i'll be online to help 19:53:06 any other topics? or dramatic entrances? 19:53:59 * terrylhowe : looks around nervously 19:54:11 #endmeeting