16:00:13 #startmeeting oslo 16:00:14 Meeting started Mon Jun 13 16:00:13 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is harlowja_at_home. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:16 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:18 The meeting name has been set to 'oslo' 16:00:20 ding ding 16:00:20 lol 16:00:27 courtesy ping for GheRivero, amotoki, amrith, bknudson, bnemec, dansmith, dhellmann, dims, dougwig, e0ne, flaper87, garyk, haypo, 16:00:27 courtesy ping for ihrachyshka, jd__, jecarey, johnsom, jungleboyj, kgiusti, kragniz, lifeless, lintan, ozamiatin, redrobot, rpodolyaka, spamaps 16:00:27 courtesy ping for sergmelikyan, sreshetnyak, sileht, sreshetnyak, stevemar, therve, thinrichs, toabctl, viktors, zhiyan, zzzeek, gcb, Nakato 16:00:30 ding ding ding 16:00:31 hello 16:00:32 meeting time ding ding 16:00:33 lol 16:00:34 o/ 16:00:38 o/ 16:00:40 o/ 16:00:48 ding ding a ling 16:01:04 o/ 16:01:09 \o/ 16:01:12 | 16:01:19 /\ 16:01:20 harlowja_at_home, did you see my ping from earlier this morning? 16:01:27 0/ 16:01:30 amrith, probably at the other computer, so not yet :-P 16:01:47 harlowja, at the OSLO meeting today I'd like to raise the issue of isotime() that I'd summarized in an email to the ML (http://markmail.org/message/xosf5h7gvhqdwtz7) and some code that is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326655/ 16:01:58 everyone's favorite subject :) 16:02:03 :-/ fun fun, ha 16:02:21 o/ 16:02:34 #topic Red flags for/from liaisons 16:03:03 anything to say is busted (besides isotime, ha) 16:03:35 No red flags from trove excecpt for isotime :) 16:03:51 ;) 16:04:01 no red flags from murano 16:04:10 cool 16:04:27 nothing on neutron side. we had octavia stable/liberty breakage due to taskflow changes, but that was solved by a backports. 16:05:07 yup yup, think octavia folks had that one also, bug that new taskflow change made visible (from my understanding) 16:05:16 (bug in neutron/octavia afaik) 16:05:27 yeah 16:05:41 I think it's octavia bug, just surfaced by taskflow 16:05:51 oh u said neutron octavia, not a different one, same bug, lol 16:05:53 but since I did not know much about either, I reached to oslo :) 16:05:56 its early, i need more cofeee 16:06:26 ya, thx ihrachys hopefully all cleared up 16:07:43 #topic New periodic jobs 16:07:58 So a few new projects are now on http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/?groupKey=build_name&resolutionKey=hour&searchProject=-with-oslo 16:08:16 I was thinking that other projects that use oslo (murano oshykhkerimov might want to be in that?) 16:09:12 * ihrachys is confused by that website 16:09:14 if people feel its useful; https://review.openstack.org/#/c/320151/ is what 16:09:19 *is what's needed to do this 16:09:28 so what does that project do? 16:09:33 so neutron jobs are claimed to be 39% failing 16:09:38 but when I drill down, it's all green 16:09:41 ihrachys, ya, click the link 16:10:02 harlowja_at_home: which one? 16:10:03 the history i think just takes a while to clear 16:10:10 *never mind u drilled down 16:10:23 i think it keeps a history that isn't in the drill down 16:10:27 so you mean it's all good now? 16:10:30 ya 16:10:30 ok 16:10:40 we also have the job on grafana dashboard we have for neutron 16:10:44 pretty useful 16:10:46 cool 16:10:57 the board: http://grafana.openstack.org/dashboard/db/neutron-failure-rate 16:11:01 amrith, so what it does is run the project using the master of oslo libraries 16:11:03 it's in "Periodic Jobs" dash 16:11:43 hmmm 16:11:45 typically amrith the master of oslo libraries are not as well tested in projects (there is gating on oslo lib commits, but its a little more limited in its 'finding all the problems') 16:12:08 so this periodic job set helps the oslo folks know about issues that may pop up before a oslo lib release happens 16:12:14 so we can fix that, or undo a commit or .. 16:12:17 can third party CI's leverage this capability as well 16:12:27 unsure 16:12:46 * harlowja_at_home doesn't see a trove one on that dashboard, probably would be useful 16:12:55 so is the beneficiary of this the project (trove) or oslo? 16:13:00 yes, trove isn't there 16:13:01 both? 16:13:07 but more oslo i think amrith 16:13:38 it would benefit projects like trove as it's being proactive on changes before they are officially released. 16:13:59 harlowja_at_home: if you are talking about adding murano periodic jobs - I can for sure discuss it with murano team 16:14:10 but looking at the review you suggested, 320151, it looks like it will add another job to the project gate, yes? 16:14:52 not the project gate afaik, just this periodic one 16:15:09 there is some voodoo that happens under the covers that dims probably knows more that ensures its not in the projects own gate 16:15:23 we do like the voodoo here 16:15:24 lol 16:15:47 yes, looking at some octavia commits, I don't see them running the jobs 16:15:52 right 16:16:26 it must be something pushing a dummy change to the project and running jsut this test (maybe) 16:16:28 neat 16:16:43 voodoo i tell u (only dims knows the voodoo, lol) 16:17:04 * harlowja_at_home i should learn the voodoo sometime 16:17:50 anyway, feel free to clone https://review.openstack.org/#/c/320151/ for trove and that will help detect any possible oslo libs doing things badly (or other) 16:18:14 out of curiousity, why doesn't the oslo team just clone it for all projects that use oslo? 16:18:22 it won't impact the projects gate/check jobs 16:18:33 so it shouldn't be an issue for all projects, yes? 16:19:00 it's a good question and i should ask about that when i can get in contact with dims 16:19:21 unsure if it/why that wasn't done from the start 16:19:23 sorry, dims is busy. he's attending the annual conference of voodoo practitioners. 16:19:38 ya, he's doing some exorcism or something 16:19:41 afaik 16:19:57 where to stick the pin in the voodoo doll 16:20:19 ya, i heard thats the seminar at the conference 16:20:56 amrith, i'll followup with u on those questions 16:21:08 #topic Newton releases 16:21:23 so anything in need of a critical release? 16:21:45 otherwise i'll just get a release-all-the-changes out today (or tommorow if i don't get around to it today) 16:22:13 harlowja_at_home, please see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/329086/ 16:22:22 amrith, thx 16:23:27 ok, assuming no critical releases needed then, or bug fixes or all that (which is fine) 16:24:14 #topic Exorcism of oslo-incubator 16:24:24 back on that exorcism topic 16:24:34 https://github.com/openstack/oslo-incubator is officially gone 16:25:06 16:25:06 lol 16:25:21 * harlowja_at_home why nobody clapping 16:25:41 great that it's finally gone. 16:25:41 * rbradfor claps 16:25:44 it's an exorcism; no one claps at an exorcism 16:25:49 amrith, lol 16:25:55 i didn't take the seminar 16:26:05 am I the only one who's actually been to an exorcism? 16:26:10 errrr 16:26:20 i think so? 16:26:26 thanks for harlowja_at_home and gcb that +1 a number of incubator cleanups in projects that prompted them to getting merged 16:26:52 rbradfor, the shutdown of this should help, in fact i'll send out a mailing list note for this, whats your link again 16:27:02 i'll include that, now that its like dead-dead that might help get those changes in 16:27:18 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo-libraries-adoption 16:27:20 thx 16:28:17 cool, i'll write that up shortly and get that out 16:28:47 #topic Time to talk about isotime 16:28:59 hmm, who would want to do that? 16:29:02 amrith, sooooo, rolls the mic to amrith 16:29:11 thanks harlowja_at_home :) 16:29:13 #link http://openstack.markmail.org/thread/xosf5h7gvhqdwtz7 16:29:20 I sent this email out to the ML some days ago 16:29:30 in particular, I'd like to get the following (here) 16:29:44 1. reviews of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326655/1/trove/common/timeutils.py by the folks here 16:30:00 2. some opinions on whether this code (which I've proposed for Trove) can't make it back into oslo 16:30:04 zulu time ? 16:30:08 yes 16:30:09 interesting, lol 16:30:21 so the issue(s) as I see them are this 16:30:22 http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Zulu-the-Most-Fearsome-Black-Warriors-2.jpg ? 16:30:37 isotime was intentionally naive or should I say willfully naive 16:30:49 and that caused some problems for people who passed it aware timestamps 16:31:00 k 16:31:05 however, just using datetime.datetime.isoformat() meant that projects would have issues 16:31:14 * dims casts a spell at harlowja_at_home and amrith 16:31:28 i have magic resistance level 10 16:31:29 lol 16:31:30 because the perfectly valid UTC times with the Z suffix were replaced by also valid +00:00 suffixes 16:31:52 so people started cloning the deprecated code instead of following the advice to use datetime.datetime.isoformat() 16:31:57 so I've tried to split the difference 16:32:10 effectively, I've implemented isoformat() which produces the Z suffix for UTC time. 16:32:26 * amrith takes a break 16:32:33 it's better to go with an existing standard than to make your own. So if isoformat isn't broken then use that. 16:32:58 well, isoformat isn't broken, and nor is this. it is not a new standard 16:33:06 it is a valid iso8601 date format to have a Z suffix 16:33:12 just as it is to have a +00:00 suffix 16:33:22 it sounds like maybe we should have kept isotime, or at least replaced it with something to be consistent 16:33:32 dhellmann, I agree 16:33:40 I think we should have a TC decision to pick a timestamp format 16:33:51 this should be an easy one. 16:33:52 even if we had isoformat() and replaced +00:00 with Z on a flag, that'd have been a legacy format 16:34:01 * dhellmann shows bknudson the door 16:34:04 well, iso8601 is a timestamp format 16:34:20 iso8601 is not specific enough 16:34:20 amrith, if Z is a valid suffix has this been proposed as a fix to python datetime itsself. 16:34:26 and isoformat() and the proposed isotime() are consistent with it 16:34:41 rbradfor, there's nothing broken with python datetime 16:34:45 this seems like one of those cases where we thought removing something "trivial" would be easy, but we didn't realize the effect it would have 16:34:47 probably 99% of all strings are consistent with iso8601 16:34:48 so what would I propose to fix? 16:34:52 perhaps we should just put it back 16:35:42 bknudson, I disagree. iso8601 is specific that there are just 4 time formats that are valid if you want to specify a timezone 16:35:42