21:01:44 <markmc> #startmeeting project 21:01:45 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Aug 28 21:01:44 2012 UTC. The chair is markmc. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:01:46 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:01:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'project' 21:01:56 <bcwaldon> markmc: I'm here! 21:02:00 <markmc> ttx has put me in charge, run away :) 21:02:03 <markmc> bcwaldon, thanks 21:02:03 <jgriffith> Howdy 21:02:07 <gabrielhurley> markmc: I'll be representing Horizon today. 21:02:08 <markmc> who else? 21:02:17 <markmc> gabrielhurley, cool 21:02:34 <markmc> heckj, vishy, notmyname, ? 21:02:35 <annegentle> o/ 21:02:46 <markmc> #info We are under FeatureFreeze for everything but Swift, so please take extra care in reviews 21:02:46 <markmc> #info Core reviewers should flag changes that add a new feature, modify the behavior without fixing a bug, modify translatable strings or add/modify a configuration option 21:02:46 <markmc> #link http://wiki.openstack.org/FolsomReleaseSchedule 21:02:49 <heckj> o/ 21:02:53 <vishy> o/ 21:02:54 <notmyname> here 21:02:58 <markmc> awesome 21:03:00 <markmc> #topic Actions from previous meeting 21:03:07 <markmc> ok, these were all project specific 21:03:13 <markmc> will cover them in the project sections 21:03:22 <markmc> oh ... anyone with time constraints that want to go first? 21:03:38 <markmc> ok 21:03:38 <markmc> #topic Keystone status 21:03:45 <markmc> action - heckj to go through keystone buglist and target release blockers to RC1 where appropriate 21:03:52 <heckj> will do 21:04:01 <markmc> looks like you've made progress on that? 21:04:05 <heckj> currently working against a security fix that will be going in (and backported to essex/stable) 21:04:08 <markmc> that was last weeks action 21:04:15 <markmc> cool 21:04:20 <markmc> #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-rc1 21:04:23 <heckj> reviewed, but doing it each week to keep track of new bugs reported 21:04:37 <markmc> cool 21:04:48 <markmc> there's a bunch of high priority bugs not targeted 21:04:56 <markmc> should any of those be targeted to rc1? 21:05:13 <heckj> markmc: many of those can't be resolved without API changes I'm afraid 21:05:30 <markmc> heckj, ah, interesting 21:05:48 <markmc> heckj, incompat API changes, or just API additions? 21:05:53 <heckj> we've got two criticals that are in flight - those will be targeted 21:05:59 <heckj> incompat API changes 21:06:05 <markmc> ah 21:06:14 <markmc> we've been talking about how to handle them for nova too 21:06:26 <markmc> maybe a blueprint for the next major API version to coallate them 21:06:39 <markmc> would be nice to figure out how to get them off the high priority list 21:06:46 <heckj> markmc - that's exactly where we have them targetted now - feature branch is in progress with V3 API to resolve 21:06:55 <markmc> cool, ok 21:07:08 <markmc> anything else of concern? 21:07:16 <markmc> solid progress towards rc1? 21:07:20 <markmc> any help needed? 21:07:53 <heckj> uncertain of the doc status for deployment style documentation - need to review that deeply. Could definitely use some help there 21:08:05 <markmc> heckj, got a link? 21:08:09 <heckj> i believe raphael has been doing some of that 21:08:20 * heckj looking 21:08:35 <annegentle> #help keystone deployment style documentation needed 21:08:48 <heckj> yeah - no blueprint or link 21:08:48 <markmc> thanks annegentle :) 21:08:54 * markmc moves on 21:08:57 <markmc> thanks heckj 21:08:58 <markmc> #topic Swift status 21:09:01 <markmc> notmyname, hey 21:09:04 <notmyname> hi 21:09:08 <markmc> last weeks action - notmyname to send an email to openstack-dev with 2.0 thoughts 21:09:13 <markmc> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2012-August/000919.html 21:09:17 <markmc> that's it ^^ ? 21:09:20 <notmyname> yup, done 21:09:26 <markmc> cool 21:09:34 <markmc> so 1.7.0 targetted mid september? 21:10:08 <notmyname> tentatively schedule for sept 13 for the folsom RC. I'm not sure how QA will go. but QA takes priority over the date 21:10:35 <markmc> cool, ok 21:10:43 <notmyname> "how it will go" == "potential scheduling difficulty" 21:10:48 <markmc> how far could QA push the date out potentially? a week? more? 21:11:07 <markmc> also, planning on adding a milestone page and targeting bugs etc. ? 21:11:18 * markmc isn't sure if swift uses such things 21:11:46 <notmyname> I don't know right now. since the QA is RAX internal for now, it's up to the internal schedules of RAX cloud files team 21:11:47 * annegentle notes last week's hint at a 1.6.1 from ttx 21:12:10 <annegentle> 21:15:40 <ttx> if there are so many changes it might make sense to include 1.6.1 in Folsom 21:12:22 <markmc> ah, good point 21:12:29 <markmc> notmyname, is that feasible as a backup plan? 21:12:38 <annegentle> does anyone here know if 1.7 is acceptable by packagers? 21:12:42 <notmyname> as of right now, folsom would include either 1.6.0 or 1.7.0 with a strong preference to 1.7 21:12:52 <notmyname> there is no such thing yet as 1.6.1 21:13:26 <markmc> likely to have a more clear picture next week? 21:14:20 <notmyname> I would hope so 21:14:31 <markmc> at some point soon I guess we'd have to just say it'll be 1.6.0 21:14:40 <markmc> since folks will need some notice of what to expect in folsom 21:14:51 <markmc> ok, revisit next week then 21:14:55 <markmc> anything else? 21:15:29 <notmyname> I don't think so. 21:15:41 <markmc> ok, thanks 21:15:44 <markmc> #topic Glance status 21:15:49 <markmc> mr bcwaldon 21:15:54 <bcwaldon> markmc: yes sir 21:15:56 <markmc> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/folsom-rc1 21:16:09 <markmc> glance seems in good shape? 21:16:16 <bcwaldon> markmc: yes, very 21:16:28 <bcwaldon> I could use some help on the oustanding review, though! 21:16:33 <bcwaldon> reviews* 21:16:33 <bcwaldon> ! 21:16:46 <markmc> #help glance needs review help! 21:16:58 <markmc> bug #1039818 has no assignee - is that something you'd like nova folks to handle? 21:16:58 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1039818 in glance "v2 API should provide image properties Nova depends on" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1039818 21:17:25 <bcwaldon> markmc: if somebody wants to take it on, I'd be more than happy 21:17:43 <markmc> #help someone from nova could help with bug #1039818 21:17:50 * markmc hands gold star to bcwaldon 21:17:53 <markmc> anything else? 21:17:56 <bcwaldon> markmc: aw, thanks 21:17:58 <bcwaldon> markmc: not from me 21:18:02 <markmc> cool 21:18:09 <markmc> #topic Quantum status 21:18:17 <markmc> last weeks actions ... 21:18:19 <markmc> danwent/ttx to discuss XML support FFE status 21:18:19 <markmc> danwent and team to triage all bugs and build the RC bug list 21:18:27 <markmc> danwent, oh hai - forgot to ask are you there? 21:18:29 <danwent> done and one 21:18:31 <danwent> done 21:18:36 <danwent> i am now :) 21:18:39 <markmc> cool 21:18:45 <markmc> so no FFE for XML support? 21:19:07 <danwent> nope. we did a purge of a lot of things that were iffy yesterday so we could focus on core functionality and docs 21:19:11 <danwent> that was one of the victims 21:19:14 <markmc> #info no FFE for XML support 21:19:16 <markmc> ok 21:19:18 <markmc> #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-rc1 21:19:25 <markmc> only one bp remaining ... test-agent? 21:19:54 <danwent> yes, an that is testing only, so not a big deal. we need it to get better devstack coverage though, which is why we're keeping it in folsom 21:20:04 <danwent> there is one bug that i wanted to highlight though: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1039400 21:20:05 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1039400 in quantum "nova security groups issues with quantum-v2-api integration" [Critical,Confirmed] 21:20:23 <danwent> the complexity of the interaction between quantum + nova security groups is worse than we thought 21:20:54 <danwent> Salvatore is working on this. The change should be contained to quantum-specific code in nova, but I wanted to give the nova folks a heads up 21:21:44 <markmc> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1039400 - nova security groups issues with quantum-v2-api integration 21:21:56 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1039400 in quantum "nova security groups issues with quantum-v2-api integration" [Critical,Confirmed] 21:22:00 <markmc> ok, a bit much to digest at first glance, but sounds scary 21:22:07 <markmc> eta on patches? 21:22:20 <danwent> hoping by thursday 21:22:25 <markmc> ok 21:22:31 <markmc> how bad is it if it doesn't make it? 21:22:37 <danwent> pretty bad :) 21:22:52 <markmc> yeah, especially since this is the first release with quantum in core 21:22:57 <danwent> yup. 21:23:03 <markmc> anything else of concern on the nova integration front? 21:23:10 <danwent> this is very do-able, i just feel bad b/c nova core devs will have to reivew 21:23:10 * markmc sees some good discussion on-list 21:23:43 <danwent> other than that, docs are actually my biggest concern 21:24:01 <markmc> quantum docs in general, or nova/quantum integration docs? 21:24:20 <danwent> quantum docs in general. so much has changed since essex. 21:24:34 <danwent> garyk, salvatore and I are point on this. 21:24:47 <markmc> ok, and you're looking for more help? 21:24:51 <annegentle> danwent: you do have a nice outline going for the admin docs. But I share your concerns, esp. since nova-network has to remain documented in the Compute Admin guide. 21:25:06 <danwent> annegentle: agreed. 21:25:21 <annegentle> danwent: your API guide looks to be in good shape, is that a good assessment? 21:25:26 <danwent> markmc: i'll be pinging core devs for help on sections that they wrote the feature 21:25:30 <danwent> just mentioning it as a risk 21:25:41 <markmc> ok, thanks 21:25:43 <danwent> annegentle: yes, salv-orlando rocked on that one. 21:25:57 <danwent> this is more admin guide that i'm concerned about. install, setup, basic use cases, etc. 21:26:01 <markmc> on the test-agent bp, are you looking to extend FFE by another week? 21:26:08 <annegentle> #help admin and deployment docs for Quantum needed (install, setup, basic use cases, etc.) 21:26:13 <markmc> FFE technically ends today 21:26:19 <markmc> but as you said, it's for testing 21:26:21 <danwent> no. i've told nati that it has to be merged by thursday, or its out. 21:26:27 <markmc> ok, good 21:26:41 <markmc> anything else? 21:26:49 <danwent> not that i can think of 21:26:53 <gabrielhurley> quick note related to quantum-nova integration, this review is blocking a possible FFE blueprint for horizon (public network support): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11796/ I know people are working on it, I just wanted to call it out. 21:27:32 <danwent> gabrielhurley: thanks for pointing that out 21:27:55 <markmc> #info https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11796/ blocking horizon's public network support 21:28:26 <markmc> ok 21:28:29 * markmc moves on 21:28:36 <markmc> #topic Cinder status 21:28:44 <markmc> last weeks action ... 21:28:44 <jgriffith> :) 21:28:45 <markmc> jgriffith and Cinder team to triage new bugs and come up with a list of release blockers 21:28:57 <markmc> looks like you've done some of that? 21:29:01 <jgriffith> https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1038062 21:29:02 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1038062 in cinder "TgtAdm is broken" [Undecided,In progress] 21:29:13 <jgriffith> That's the last blocker (for now) 21:29:30 <markmc> jgriffith, blocker but unprioritized and not targeted? :) 21:29:30 <jgriffith> We're closer, but not where I want it yet 21:29:40 <jgriffith> markmc: Doh.. fixing now 21:29:42 <markmc> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/folsom-rc1 21:30:03 <jgriffith> done 21:30:11 <markmc> #info https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1038062 "TgtAdm is broken" is a blocker 21:30:12 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1038062 in cinder "TgtAdm is broken" [Critical,Confirmed] 21:30:22 <markmc> jgriffith, how concerned are you about #1038062? 21:30:41 <jgriffith> I'll have it fixed in the next 24 hours 21:30:51 <jgriffith> Just how much it's going to take to fix it 21:30:54 <markmc> ok, cool 21:30:59 <jgriffith> I may end up dropping the iscsi_targets table 21:31:05 <jgriffith> depending on the screams that result 21:31:20 <markmc> implications of dropping the table? 21:31:24 <jgriffith> I should probably get with vishy offline and advice 21:31:34 <jgriffith> Means changing the way we manage iscsi connections 21:31:46 <jgriffith> specifically the delete aspect 21:32:01 <jgriffith> trouble is the new persistent targets won't let us specify a tid on creation 21:32:22 <markmc> ok, not following the detail here 21:32:33 <jgriffith> So in a nutshell: 21:32:36 <markmc> hope we have something figured out by next week, sounds scary 21:33:01 <jgriffith> I have it figured out, just hoping to find a less disruptive fix 21:33:05 <markmc> doh 21:33:22 <gabrielhurley> markmc: lol... so scary you had to leave? ;-) 21:33:26 <jgriffith> LOL 21:33:29 <markmc> heh 21:33:37 * markmc blames gnome :) 21:33:45 <jgriffith> I can provide more detail if desired, or offline 21:33:48 <markmc> jgriffith, btw, https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1041334 is targeted but not prioritized 21:33:49 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1041334 in tempest "lvremove failure on volume delete when creating and deleting volumes with the same name" [Undecided,In progress] 21:34:12 <jgriffith> This is actually the same bug 21:34:18 <jgriffith> same root cause at any rate 21:34:24 <jgriffith> I'll update to reflect that 21:34:25 <markmc> heh, ok 21:34:45 <markmc> also, there's 8 untriaged bugs still which is a fairly high proportion 21:35:00 <markmc> would be good to make sure there's nothing terrifying in there 21:35:14 <markmc> ok, cool stuff 21:35:16 <markmc> anything else? 21:35:20 <jgriffith> there minimal issues, all in review 21:35:35 <jgriffith> nope... just telling people NO on new features now :( 21:35:47 <markmc> that's a good plan 21:36:05 <jgriffith> If Ben doesn't fix his two I'll just fix them end of week and close them 21:36:27 <markmc> jgriffith, by untriaged, I meant these: https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 21:36:48 <jgriffith> yep, I'll clean those up as well 21:36:56 <markmc> cool, ok 21:37:03 <markmc> thanks jgriffith 21:37:09 <markmc> #topic Nova status 21:37:10 <jgriffith> thank you! 21:37:12 <markmc> vishy! 21:37:21 <markmc> last weeks actions ... 21:37:28 <markmc> 1) nova-core and ttx to review FFE for entry point stuff by Thursday 21:37:38 <markmc> that's done, decided to delay until grizzly 21:37:44 <markmc> 2) vishy to find a way to get untriaged bugcount to 0 21:37:58 <markmc> we've made solid enough progress, but still have ~50 untriaged 21:38:04 <markmc> down from ~110 last week AFAIR 21:38:12 <markmc> #help nova needs bug triagers! 21:38:20 <markmc> vishy, there? 21:38:45 <markmc> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-rc1 21:38:57 <vishy> hi 21:39:02 <markmc> ok, we had 2 FFEs 21:39:12 <markmc> os-api-network-create and project-specific-flavors 21:39:16 <markmc> both merged, right? 21:39:38 <vishy> yes 21:39:44 <vishy> just marked the other implemented 21:39:53 <markmc> great, thanks 21:39:55 <vishy> we are past feature freeze and into bug fixing now 21:40:10 <markmc> awesome 21:40:16 <markmc> how are we looking on the bugs front? 21:40:29 * markmc notes 7 unassigned targeted bugs 21:41:12 <markmc> the unfixed high/critical ones look mostly related to quantum 21:41:49 <vishy> these are mostly new 21:41:53 <vishy> I haven't looked over them yet 21:42:26 <markmc> ok, well only 1 critical is promising 21:42:34 <markmc> bug triage seems to be the big concern 21:42:42 <markmc> anything else you're particularly concerned about? 21:42:45 <markmc> or need help with? 21:42:51 <vishy> xml :) 21:43:11 <markmc> that clown show? 21:43:22 <markmc> ok, I guess we cover that in the thursday meetings 21:43:27 <markmc> do you see it as a release blocker? 21:43:33 <markmc> we're not talking regressions here, are we? 21:43:55 <vishy> markmc: not regressions 21:44:08 <vishy> markmc: just trying to find out what works and fix the broken parts 21:44:21 <markmc> ok, well that probably moves it out of release blocker territory 21:44:31 <markmc> i.e. if we could release essex with broken xml ... :) 21:44:39 <markmc> but would be awesome to have it in good shape 21:45:10 <markmc> vishy, how aware of you about what's going on on the quantum integration front? 21:45:19 <markmc> that sounds like release blocker territory 21:45:24 * markmc hasn't been following closely 21:45:36 <vishy> markmc: I agree. I need to sync up with danwent and find out 21:45:44 <markmc> vishy, ok, cool 21:46:03 <markmc> vishy, and note jgriffith's cinder/iscsi issue above 21:46:26 <markmc> ok, good 21:46:35 <markmc> overall, not terrifying 21:46:41 <markmc> which is probably as good as it gets with nova :) 21:46:43 <danwent> vishy: its not all that serious. just that there will be a non-trivial review headed your way later this week. 21:47:02 <vishy> danwent: ok 21:47:07 <danwent> vishy: wil ping you offline 21:47:13 <vishy> danwent: great 21:47:16 <markmc> anything else? 21:47:47 <markmc> cool 21:47:49 * markmc moves on 21:47:52 <markmc> #topic Horizon status 21:47:55 <markmc> gabrielhurley, hey 21:47:56 <gabrielhurley> Aye sir 21:48:17 <markmc> any FFEs? you mentioned the quantum public network support? 21:48:25 <markmc> #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-rc1 21:48:30 <gabrielhurley> yep, there's a review pending for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-public-network 21:48:36 <gabrielhurley> blocked by the nova review I linked earlier 21:48:50 <gabrielhurley> it's pretty minor as far as an FFE, so if the others land I'll see to it that it's good 21:49:02 <markmc> cool 21:49:11 <markmc> are you happy to land it before the nova patch? 21:49:19 <markmc> e.g. if we know the nova API for it won't change? 21:49:30 <gabrielhurley> no, if that doesn't go in the horizon feature is a no-go 21:49:42 <markmc> ok 21:49:46 <gabrielhurley> so I'd rather see everything else land first just to be safe 21:50:13 <markmc> sounds like there's good progress there, so hopefully it and the horizon patch will land by this time next week 21:50:19 <gabrielhurley> that's my impression 21:50:20 <jgriffith> ls 21:50:28 <markmc> cool 21:50:34 <gabrielhurley> bug-wise, we didn't fix as many this week as I'd have liked, but new ones aren't being reported at any alarming rate and what's left are minor, so that's a positive sign. 21:50:46 <markmc> yeah, was about to say 21:50:54 <markmc> a bunch targeted but no critical/high 21:50:54 <gabrielhurley> I've been on top of the triage as they come in 21:50:57 <gabrielhurley> yeah 21:51:03 <gabrielhurley> the list is only +1 since last week 21:51:13 <gabrielhurley> I've spent more time supporting people on Essex, lol 21:51:22 <markmc> the high priority bugs are all grizzly? 21:51:22 <markmc> https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bugs?search=Search&field.importance=High&field.status=New&field.status=Incomplete&field.status=Confirmed&field.status=Triaged&field.status=In+Progress&field.status=Fix+Committed 21:51:30 <markmc> uggh, nasty link 21:51:34 <gabrielhurley> that's a n awful URL 21:51:51 <markmc> just clicked on the "High importance bugs" link 21:51:52 <gabrielhurley> yeah, those are all for later 21:51:59 <gabrielhurley> one of those is fixed... 21:52:04 <gabrielhurley> that needs to be bumped into Folsom 21:52:21 <gabrielhurley> target fixed 21:52:44 <markmc> just a bit odd for high priority bugs to not be targeted :) 21:52:55 <markmc> e.g. https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/961761 has been around for 6+ months 21:52:56 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 961761 in horizon "If nova-network is down, Access and Security panel hangs" [High,Confirmed] 21:52:58 <markmc> anyhow 21:52:59 <gabrielhurley> what, you expect long-term planning? ;-) 21:53:03 <markmc> awesome job on triaging :) 21:53:09 <markmc> want to help with nova triaging? :) 21:53:24 <gabrielhurley> 961761 is one of those "there's not really much to do about it" bugs. 21:53:29 <gabrielhurley> ha, no thanks 21:53:33 <markmc> anything else on horizon? 21:53:39 <gabrielhurley> not that I can think of. things are good. 21:53:43 <markmc> thanks 21:53:45 <markmc> #topic Other team reports (docs, CI...) 21:53:53 <annegentle> o/ 21:53:56 <markmc> hey 21:54:09 <annegentle> Our bug/task list is triaged for folsom 21:54:15 <markmc> got a link? 21:54:17 <annegentle> about 24 bugs/tasks marked High 21:54:34 <annegentle> #link https://launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+milestone/folsom 21:54:50 <annegentle> I want to note that 10 of them are noting the lack of Compute API extension documents. 21:54:57 <annegentle> I'm also seeking design work on api.openstack.org to give it navigation and direct links. 21:55:07 <annegentle> #help design work on api.openstack.org to give it navigation and direct links 21:55:34 <annegentle> #help review docs at https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/openstack-manuals,n,z 21:55:37 <annegentle> that's all I got! 21:55:40 <markmc> ok, cool stuff 21:55:53 <markmc> things are in good shape? or desperately need help? 21:56:21 <annegentle> oh I'm a worrier so I tend towards the desperately need help :) 21:56:44 <markmc> heh, ok 21:56:52 <markmc> thanks annegentle 21:56:56 <annegentle> we're relying heavily on projects (Quantum, Keystone, and Cinder) to do their own doc work and reviews 21:57:27 <markmc> ok - danwent and heckj did mention that 21:57:38 <markmc> jgriffith, you aware that you guys are on the hook for cinder docs? 21:57:44 <jgriffith> Oh yes 21:57:49 <markmc> heh, ok 21:57:52 <jgriffith> :) 21:58:01 <markmc> any other teams to report? 21:58:16 * markmc has nothing much on stable branch or openstack-common front 21:58:28 <markmc> both need help with reviews 21:58:43 <markmc> ok, moving on ... 21:58:44 <markmc> #topic Open discussion 21:58:51 <markmc> anybody? 21:59:24 <annegentle> 8/30 is the deadline for proposals for the non-blueprinty side of the Summit 21:59:41 <markmc> #info 8/30 is the deadline for proposals for the non-blueprinty side of the Summit 21:59:47 <markmc> indeedy 21:59:55 <annegentle> #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/san-diego-2012/call-for-speakers/ 22:00:06 <markmc> so, I guess there was non-blueprinty stuff at last years summit 22:00:23 <markmc> should that kind of stuff move to this part of the conf? 22:00:24 * annegentle is allergic to "conference" 22:00:30 <markmc> or is it roughly the same as last year? 22:00:52 <annegentle> it's all the Summit this time, just different ways to propose talks and more tracks 22:01:17 * markmc admits to being slightly confused :) 22:01:26 <annegentle> #info tax will open proposal system for blueprint talks around Sept. 7th 22:01:40 <annegentle> not tax. anyway. :) 22:01:42 <markmc> #info ttx will open proposal system for blueprint talks around Sept. 7th 22:01:43 <markmc> :) 22:01:54 <markmc> ok, thanks 22:02:08 <markmc> meeting over, except I should go back over and add action items 22:02:15 <markmc> thanks everyone 22:02:19 <markmc> is there another meeting now? 22:02:44 <markmc> meh, I'll add action items to the wiki :) 22:02:47 <markmc> #endmeeting