15:00:10 #startmeeting oslo 15:00:11 Meeting started Mon Mar 26 15:00:10 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bnemec. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:12 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:14 The meeting name has been set to 'oslo' 15:00:18 courtesy ping for amotoki, amrith, bknudson, bnemec, crushil, dansmith, dhellmann 15:00:18 courtesy ping for dims, dougwig, e0ne, electrocucaracha, flaper87, garyk, gcb 15:00:18 courtesy ping for GheRivero, haypo, jd__, jecarey, johnsom, jungleboyj, kgiusti 15:00:18 courtesy ping for kragniz, lhx_, lifeless, lxsli, Nakato, ozamiatin, raildo 15:00:18 courtesy ping for rbradfor, redrobot, rpodolyaka, sergmelikyan, sileht, spamaps, sreshetnyak 15:00:20 courtesy ping for stevemar, therve, thinrichs, toabctl, viktors, zhiyan, zxy 15:00:22 courtesy ping for zzzeek 15:00:30 o/ 15:00:37 o/ 15:00:40 o/ 15:01:33 o/ 15:01:43 hi 15:02:19 #topic Red flags for/from liaisons 15:03:09 Don't think Cinder has anything. 15:03:34 I'm not aware of anything from the Oslo side either. 15:04:07 We can probably move on then. 15:04:25 #topic Releases for Rocky 15:04:56 I didn't do the full weekly release last week. Will start that again this week. 15:05:31 I guess oslo.db was released last week to fix the requirements issue. 15:06:13 I'm planning to include oslo.config in the next release set too as the remained of dhellmann's config location changes have merged. 15:06:48 And while we're talking releases, fungi had mentioned last week that pbr hasn't been released in a long time. 15:06:55 I think since last summer. 15:07:37 There was some discussion with stephenfin about how the sphinx changes factor into that. 15:08:04 bnemec: pbr is good to go as soon as those two fixes land 15:08:24 yeah, we didn't release pbr recently ,then we can pick up more features 15:08:27 yeah, tat would be awesome 15:08:41 and thanks stephenfin for jumping on the fire drill there with sphinx integration 15:08:57 stephenfin: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552100 is the last thing then? 15:09:03 fungi: np :) 15:09:11 bnemec: Correct 15:09:29 At least, until Sphinx 1.8 is released, heh 15:09:35 Cool, those will hopefully merge shortly. 15:09:59 Once those are in I will release pbr. 15:10:11 #action bnemec to release pbr after https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552100 merges 15:10:19 Spot on. I've removed stuff so it should be a MAJOR version (4.0?) 15:10:43 I'll have to look at the git history, but that seems likely. 15:11:47 That's all I had for releases. Anything else? 15:12:45 #topic Action items from last meeting 15:13:09 I approved the oslo.limit spec and that's been working its way through governance. 15:13:23 I think it merged last week? 15:13:34 If not it should be soon. 15:14:02 I did not update the new library process docs though. :-/ 15:14:10 Will keep that on my todo list. 15:14:30 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552907/ 15:15:26 Yeah, I was thinking of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/550496/ which has merged. 15:15:52 So we should be good proceed with oslo.limit. 15:16:12 yeah, I saw the update in TC report :-) 15:16:42 I still haven't gotten to the config migration spec either. 15:17:20 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/520043/ 15:18:13 Don't see namnh so not sure if the testing doc for that got updated. 15:18:35 And finally, the MultiConfigParser is no more, at least as far as Oslo is concerned. 15:19:00 I have a patch open with networking-cisco to move it there, but they plan to remove their use of it in Rocky anyway so they haven't accepted it yet. 15:19:21 #link https://review.openstack.org/554617 15:20:12 That's it for the action items from last week. 15:20:50 #topic Remove zmq driver from oslo.messaging 15:21:09 yep. 15:21:22 We discussed this at the PTG, but because the zmq unit tests are now starting to fail in oslo.messaging we're bumping the priority on this. 15:21:34 The driver hasn't had a contribution for over a year now. 15:22:04 And is broken as far as we can tell. :-) 15:22:05 I'm writing an email to the operator's and dev's mailing list about this. 15:22:28 If anyone is willing to take ownership, please step forward. :) 15:22:42 but be aware: it clocks in at over 5,000 lines of code 15:22:57 which is more than double the rabbit driver size 15:23:24 Yeah, I don't anticipate that anyone is in this meeting who cares about it, but this way it will be in the meeting notes in case anyone happens to look through them. 15:23:45 If anyone comes forward we should still move it out-of-tree 15:23:58 o/ 15:24:14 I think the TLDR is that we're going to remove the zeromq driver from oslo.messaging and if anyone still needs it they should let us know ASAP. 15:24:39 bnemec: don't we have to announce it as being deprecated first? 15:24:44 #action Anyone still using the zeromq oslo.messaging driver contact kgiusti or bnemec 15:25:02 bnemec: this hasn't been done yet to my knowledge 15:25:11 kgiusti: It's broken and we're shutting off the tests. 15:25:20 At least that was my understanding of the discussion this morning. 15:25:33 bnemec: agreed - we def need to shut off the tests now 15:25:49 I can do either today (delete or just disable the tests) so let me know which you prefer. 15:26:12 bnemec: but I thought libraries had a formal feature deprecation process? 15:26:27 bnemec: not saying that it's a good idea to keep the driver around if it can't pass tests BTW 15:26:31 I'm a little uncomfortable removing something without deprecation, but in this case I'm not sure anyone benefits from having it there. 15:26:49 if we know it doesn't work, we can't really be breaking anyone's production deployment, right? 15:27:17 I would think not. 15:27:23 dhellmann: we know it doesn't pass tests, whether there's some restricted use case in the wild is unknown 15:27:30 I suppose that's true 15:27:41 ok, so just marking the tests with skips for today then? 15:27:47 and announcing the impending deletion? 15:27:54 dhellmann: +1 let's start there. 15:27:55 I'm good with that plan. 15:27:59 ok 15:28:14 should I mark them as skips or just delete them? 15:28:16 the tests that is 15:28:38 dhellmann: nuke em from orbit 15:28:43 wfm 15:28:46 ansmith: ? 15:28:51 +1 15:28:54 * bnemec prefers to take off first 15:29:06 No sense nuking yourself in the process. ;-) 15:29:42 #action dhellmann to delete zeromq tests from oslo.messaging 15:30:15 #action kgiusti announce on operator's and dev ml 15:30:37 are there separate zmq test jobs? 15:31:09 dhellmann: yeah 15:31:28 ok, I can remove those, too 15:31:47 dhellmann: well - sorry there are none outside of oslo's if that's what you mean 15:32:05 ansmith: we'll want to remove devstack support too, I can take that 15:32:32 kgiusti : I meant any at all, and found the ones in repo, so it's to know I don't need to look elsewhere 15:33:22 dhellmann: I don't know of any other projects using zmq in their gates 15:33:56 dhellmann: there's just the devstack plugin, which we'll remove once the driver itself goes 15:34:34 there are some legacy jobs defiined in the openstack-zuul-jobs repo 15:34:35 So our standard deprecation policy would say that this needs to stick around until T. 15:34:46 legacy-tempest-dsvm-full-zmq 15:35:29 that's used by devstack-plugin-zmq 15:35:33 in project-config 15:35:45 if you're going to handle the devstack parts, I can leave that to you 15:35:56 dhellmann: +1 15:36:18 Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/oslo.messaging master: add lower-constraints job https://review.openstack.org/556066 15:36:19 Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/oslo.messaging master: remove zmq tests https://review.openstack.org/556561 15:36:26 bnemec: bleh 15:36:32 #link patch to remove zmq tests https://review.openstack.org/556561 15:36:58 I'm feeling like we should make an exception since we believe this is broken anyway. 15:37:19 bnemec: yeah, it's not like we're going to fix anything between now and then. 15:37:19 I agree. That means we need to make more noise about it, but I think we can move ahead. 15:37:29 that does make me feel better about starting by just removing the tests 15:38:14 What about a one cycle deprecation and remove in S? 15:38:50 bnemec: deprecated and unsupported, remove in S - I can live with that. 15:38:50 hmm 15:38:58 yeah, I can support that 15:39:08 plan, that is, not driver :-) 15:39:24 dhellmann: you got my hopes up ;) 15:39:26 Heh 15:39:43 kgiusti: Can you communicate that in your email then? 15:39:55 bnemec: most certainly 15:40:29 Basically I think it looks just as bad for us to carry known-broken code that we don't plan to fix as to short-circuit the deprecation period. 15:40:49 So let's tear off the band-aid and get it over with. 15:40:59 bnemec: +1 15:41:58 bnemec: agree 15:42:35 #action deprecate the zeromq driver in Rocky, remove it in S 15:43:15 Okay, sounds like we've got a plan and I think people have ample warning that this broken thing is going away. 15:43:53 That's it for topics. 15:43:57 #topic Open discussion 15:44:46 I have a bunch of patches up to add jobs to run py3 unit test jobs against all of the libraries using the lower bounds of their requirements 15:44:48 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:requirements-stop-syncing+status:open 15:45:05 I'm hoping those are not controversial and that we can get them approved relatively quickly 15:45:20 Yeah, I saw those patch bombs from over the weekend. :-) 15:45:41 Do we want to apply a single approver policy to those? 15:45:48 wfm 15:46:19 I think all of them are passing except oslo.messaging 15:46:40 oh, and oslo.service 15:46:44 there's something odd there 15:46:44 Yeah, and the regular unit tests are failing there too, IIRC. 15:49:04 #action Oslo cores to single approve lower-bounds tests where they are passing 15:50:12 I guess I should note that there are quite a few untriaged bugs in Oslo too. 15:50:14 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 15:50:26 I started working through that on Friday and will continue this week. 15:51:09 Any help is welcome. :-) 15:52:22 A number of them can probably be closed or marked incomplete if they're very old, to request that the reporter confirm the bug is still present. 15:52:35 We discussed that at the PTG for oslo.messaging too. 15:53:14 #info proposing kgiusti for oslo-core 15:53:15 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128736.html 15:53:25 +1! 15:53:27 we should discuss that on the ML 15:53:29 thanks 15:53:38 +1 15:53:52 * bnemec will respond on the list too 15:54:01 Merged openstack-dev/pbr master: update parse test to use reliable comparison https://review.openstack.org/555808 15:54:02 Merged openstack-dev/pbr master: builddoc: Treat '[pbr] autodoc_tree_excludes' as a multi-line opt https://review.openstack.org/552100 15:54:09 \o/ Ship it! 15:54:57 Actually, on that note I noticed pbr wasn't in the oslo deliverables list in the releases repo. 15:55:07 I'm planning to add it since that is something that falls under our purview. 15:55:23 #action bnemec add pbr to oslo release deliverables 15:55:47 is it not on the separate list you keep? or is the team value in the deliverable file not set correctly? 15:56:32 dhellmann: It's actually not present in https://github.com/openstack/releases/tree/master/deliverables/rocky at all. 15:56:45 bnemec : it's under _independent 15:57:07 https://github.com/openstack/releases/blob/master/deliverables/_independent/pbr.yaml 15:57:11 dhellmann: Huh. It didn't show up when I listed all the oslo changes. 15:57:30 oh, the series defaults to the current value so it is probably being filtered out 15:57:49 you might want to run "list-deliverables --series independent" and see what you get 15:57:52 there may be multiple 15:58:12 Yeah, will try that. 15:58:14 #undo 15:58:15 Removing item from minutes: #link https://github.com/openstack/releases/blob/master/deliverables/_independent/pbr.yaml 15:58:28 Oops, that's not what I wanted to do. 15:58:51 Oh well, I'll add it to my offline todo list. :-) 15:59:27 Okay, time's just about up. Anything else? 16:00:05 nothing here 16:00:25 Okay, thanks for joining everyone! 16:00:27 #endmeeting