21:01:09 <ttx> #startmeeting project
21:01:10 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Sep 11 21:01:09 2012 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:01:11 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:01:12 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'project'
21:01:18 <ttx> Classic agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting
21:01:26 <ttx> #info We'll make RC1 decisions and review buglist for each project
21:01:34 <ttx> The idea being to differentiate between release blockers and targets of opportunity...
21:01:42 <ttx> So that I can clearly tell when it's "good enough"
21:01:46 <heckj> o/
21:01:50 <ttx> #topic Keystone status
21:01:53 <ttx> heckj: hi!
21:01:58 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-rc1
21:02:02 <heckj> howdy
21:02:11 <ttx> So we have two bugs (+ one security issue to be addressed tomorrow)
21:02:19 <ttx> Bug 980085 - review @ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12752/
21:02:21 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 980085 in keystone "ldap Identity backend TenantAPI bugs" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/980085
21:02:28 <ttx> That one should be done soon ?
21:02:30 <heckj> yep - very in progress and reviews getting done on those ASAP
21:02:39 <ttx> Bug 1022614 - review @ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12605/
21:02:40 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1022614 in keystone "Document Memcache server needed system time setting" [Wishlist,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1022614
21:02:44 <heckj> aiming to ahve them all completed and wrapped within 48 hours
21:03:03 <ttx> heckj: There is one being reviewed that might make sense to include as well:
21:03:03 <jgriffith> o/
21:03:09 <ttx> bug 1006777 - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12499/
21:03:10 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1006777 in keystone "GET /v2.0/tokens/{token_id}/endpoints not implemented" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1006777
21:03:35 <heckj> ttx: yep - good call - updating
21:03:35 <ttx> heckj: if you agree I'll set the milestone target
21:03:38 <ttx> ok
21:04:01 <ttx> heckj: OK, so we should be able to cut Keystone Folsom-RC1 tomorrow or Thursday ?
21:04:12 <heckj> ttx: that's what we're aiming for
21:04:23 <ttx> #info Keystone RC1 ETA Wednesday/Thursday
21:04:32 <heckj> ttx: are we handling release notes in any consolidated fashion?
21:04:46 <ttx> heckj: yes, we should have a wiki page
21:04:49 <heckj> Got email from Lauren wanting to pull them together across the projects for Folsom release
21:05:00 <heckj> ttx: do we have that yet - you creating and we edit?
21:05:10 <ttx> #action ttx to create Folsom Release Notes base wiki page
21:05:14 <ttx> heckj: In other news, how is document-deployment-suggestions-policy going ?
21:05:18 <heckj> bcwaldon is ahead of the curve here, making the rest of us look back pbbbbbbb
21:05:47 <heckj> ttx: poorly - I've made no progress on it in the past week, and I expected to be able to put more time against it
21:06:08 <heckj> I unlinked it from the milestone as a critical to have before release thing, but still aim to do that with the doc reviews for keystone for annegentle
21:06:27 <ttx> heckj: if your RC1 is that good, you should have plenty of time for doc :)
21:06:32 <ttx> heckj: anything else ?
21:06:37 <heckj> heh, I hope - nothing els
21:06:42 <ttx> Questions about Keystone ?
21:07:03 <ttx> #topic Swift status
21:07:07 <ttx> notmyname: o/
21:07:14 <ttx> Action from previous meeting:
21:07:19 <ttx> * notmyname to go through 1.7.0 features and target blueprints accordingly
21:07:29 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.7.0
21:07:40 <ttx> notmyname: still in progress ?
21:08:20 <notmyname> hi
21:08:33 <notmyname> I haven't had a chance to do the blueprints yet
21:08:40 <ttx> #action notmyname to go through 1.7.0 features and target blueprints accordingly
21:08:49 <ttx> How is 1.7.0 QA going so far ?
21:09:10 <ttx> Still on track for a release on thursday ?
21:09:26 <notmyname> good. we may have a patch that needs to be backported, but I'm waiting for more info (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12737/)
21:09:52 <notmyname> if that one doesn't need to be backported (ie we don't know if it's an actual swift bug yet), then we should be good to go
21:10:18 <ttx> notmyname: if it needs to be backported, just target the bug to 1.7.0 so we can track it
21:10:28 <ttx> notmyname: anything else ?
21:10:32 <notmyname> that's all from me
21:10:39 <ttx> Questions on Swift ?
21:11:17 <ttx> #info potential 1.7.0 backport at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12737/
21:11:22 <ttx> #topic Glance status
21:11:27 <ttx> bcwaldon: yo
21:11:31 <bcwaldon> hey
21:11:32 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/folsom-rc1
21:11:40 * ttx refreshes
21:11:44 <heckj> heh
21:11:46 <ttx> 1 bug left on your list:
21:11:57 <bcwaldon> trying to cram it through the gate now
21:11:59 <ttx> bug 997658 - being reverified @ https://review.openstack.org/12760
21:12:00 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 997658 in glance "glance fails to upload to S3 store" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/997658
21:12:15 <bcwaldon> I've started filing bugs on all the transient failures
21:12:34 <ttx> bcwaldon: if it lands before the end of meeting, could we cut the release branch together ?
21:12:41 <ttx> bcwaldon: or you prefer to wait tomorrow ?
21:12:43 <bcwaldon> ttx: yes, but only if we do it together
21:13:05 <ttx> bcwaldon: then I do RC1 if the list is still complete by the time I get up
21:13:12 <bcwaldon> ttx: works for me
21:13:24 <ttx> awesome, will ping you at end of meeting
21:13:29 <ttx> bcwaldon: Anything else ?
21:13:34 <bcwaldon> ttx: no sir
21:13:39 <ttx> Questions on Glance ?
21:13:46 <bcwaldon> OH
21:13:52 <ttx> #info Glance RC1 probably tomorrow
21:13:57 <bcwaldon> wanted to tell everyone that I released glanceclient v0.5.1 yesterday
21:14:10 <bcwaldon> now I'm done ;)
21:14:31 <ttx> #info glanceclient v0.5.1 released yesterday
21:14:38 <ttx> #topic Quantum status
21:14:44 <ttx> danwent: hey
21:14:45 <danwent> hey
21:14:50 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-rc1
21:15:00 <ttx> 2 bugs left:
21:15:02 <danwent> yup, that's where i spend all my time :)
21:15:05 <ttx> bug 1048681 - under review @ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12714/
21:15:06 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1048681 in quantum "quantum agent using a namespace does not work with nec plugin" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1048681
21:15:13 <ttx> bug 1047742 - under review @ https://review.openstack.org/12657
21:15:13 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1047742 in quantum "admin unable to create VM and attach to tenant net" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1047742
21:15:28 <danwent> this one we have a patch that we're OK with, but we think there's a cleaner way to do it.  Will have this resolved in several hours
21:15:31 <ttx> danwent: should land today / early tomorrow ?
21:16:06 <danwent> the other bug is something that we're going to drop.  we were trying to support a use case where an admin spins up a VM on behalf of a user in nova, and plugs into a user's private network.
21:16:36 <danwent> but nova doesn't seem to have a way for an admin to create a vm on behalf of a user, so we're dropping it.
21:16:37 <ttx> danwent: yeah, sounds a bit stretched
21:16:47 <danwent> just need to confirm with salv
21:16:52 <ttx> In the review pipe, I noticed one you might consider adding to folsom-rc1:
21:16:57 <ttx> bug 1048903 - under review @ https://review.openstack.org/11975
21:16:57 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1048903 in quantum "Create .mailmap file" [Wishlist,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1048903
21:17:07 <ttx> almost in anyway
21:17:12 <salv-mobile> salv confirms
21:17:23 <danwent> ttx: sure, can merge that
21:17:41 <ttx> danwent: will target this one and untarget 1047742
21:17:46 <danwent> k
21:17:50 <ttx> danwent: Looks like you're almost done, should be ready for Folsom-RC1 tomorrow ?
21:18:00 <danwent> yes, should be ready in a few hours
21:18:05 <danwent> i want to get it released ASAP
21:18:15 <danwent> so maybe when you wake up tomorrow?
21:18:33 <ttx> danwent: I need some time coordinated with you to cut the release branch
21:18:42 <ttx> so probably when YOU get up tomorrow
21:19:12 <danwent> ok, I will email you, but I can stay up late tonight so we can do it when you get up :)
21:19:32 <ttx> danwent: on https://bugs.launchpad.net/quantum/+bug/1047742 should we also drop the Nova task ? Mark both Invalid ?
21:19:32 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1047742 in quantum "admin unable to create VM and attach to tenant net" [High,In progress]
21:19:39 <danwent> yes
21:19:50 <ttx> danwent: ack on staying up late tonight
21:20:07 <ttx> danwent: just untargeted or invalid ?
21:20:24 <ttx> #info Quantum RC1 probably tomorrow
21:20:38 <danwent> untarget for now
21:20:39 <danwent> i'll let salv-mobile determine if there's scope for work later
21:20:45 <ttx> ack
21:20:49 <ttx> danwent: Anything else ?
21:20:53 <danwent> nope
21:21:00 <danwent> we're working to get docs out
21:21:01 <ttx> Questions on Quantum ?
21:21:09 <danwent> as the questions about quantum are pooring in on the ML :)
21:21:12 <danwent> pouring
21:21:33 <ttx> #topic Cinder status
21:21:39 <ttx> jgriffith: o/
21:21:44 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/folsom-rc1
21:21:52 <jgriffith> ttx: hello
21:21:58 <ttx> One bug left on your list:
21:22:02 <ttx> bug 979020 - under review @ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12396/
21:22:03 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 979020 in cinder "Volumes stuck in "error deleted" state when using device mapper" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/979020
21:22:05 <jgriffith> ttx: kinda
21:22:10 <ttx> Looks like we should discuss this one a bit
21:22:21 <jgriffith> Yeah... here's the skinny
21:22:31 <jgriffith> I thought my work around would solve this (zero out on create)
21:22:38 <jgriffith> and it does.. *most* of the time
21:22:54 <ttx> jgriffith: isn't that bug 1023755 ?
21:22:55 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1023755 in nova "Unable to delete the volume snapshot" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1023755
21:22:56 <jgriffith> but it honks things up in tempest/devstack etc because now create can take a long time
21:23:11 <jgriffith> ttx: yes
21:23:36 <jgriffith> These are all lvm kernel bugs
21:23:37 <ttx> jgriffith: I comme,ted on te Nova port of it -- I'm unconvinced
21:23:56 <jgriffith> ttx: You were correct to be so
21:24:13 <jgriffith> ttx: It's on the ubuntu kernel teams radar but I'm a bit concerned obviously
21:24:14 <ttx> jgriffith: basically those are bugs outside openstack, with no perfect workaround
21:24:15 * markmc doesn't like the idea of us working around random kernel bugs
21:24:20 <jgriffith> ttx: You got it
21:24:24 <jgriffith> markmc: agreed
21:24:31 <jgriffith> markmc: ttx I'd like to revert my work around
21:24:39 <ttx> jgriffith: sounds good to me
21:24:45 <jgriffith> there's no point in messing with it now
21:25:01 <ttx> jgriffith: does that affect bug 979020 ?
21:25:01 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 979020 in cinder "Volumes stuck in "error deleted" state when using device mapper" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/979020
21:25:51 <jgriffith> This one may be slightly different, but as per my last comment I'm inclined to agree with markmc
21:26:04 <jgriffith> I'd like to investigate doing an lvchange rather than rip it out
21:26:21 <ttx> ok, let's keep it on map then
21:26:31 <ttx> You have a few other reviews in the pipe:
21:26:34 <jgriffith> Yes, it needs to stay
21:26:38 <ttx> If we should wait for those before pushing RC1, they should have a bug and be targeted
21:26:44 <jgriffith> yes... a good number
21:26:45 <ttx> no bug, sync from openstack-common - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12410/
21:26:57 <jgriffith> So none of the sync issues have bugs associated
21:26:57 <ttx> bug 1042904 - under review @ https://review.openstack.org/12067
21:26:58 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1042904 in nova "can't update volume and snapshot display_name" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1042904
21:27:07 <jgriffith> and that's the bulk of what you've got there
21:27:14 <ttx> no bug, Storwize/SVC driver config options - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12779/
21:27:40 <jgriffith> ttx: correct, I've declined it in cinder w/ comment that it needs bug in nova and cinder
21:27:42 <ttx> jgriffith: could you go through them and create a bug / target it where you think those should be blockers ?
21:28:23 <jgriffith> ttx: yes... BUT for example sync common
21:28:54 <jgriffith> ttx: there are a couple that are related to this sort of thing
21:29:15 <jgriffith> ttx: I'll create bugs saying they're out of sync of something, or I'll just approve them right now and get them through
21:29:35 <ttx> if you approve them right now, no pb
21:29:40 <jgriffith> k
21:29:44 <ttx> the trick is that the bug lets us track it's completed
21:29:48 <jgriffith> The only one I wanted to check with nova folks on
21:30:00 <ttx> which, due to the delay in gate... is always tricky to ensure
21:30:02 <jgriffith> ttx: understood, but this syncing stuff is kinda screwing up the idea
21:30:22 <jgriffith> ttx: but I'll see what I can do to give us some record keeping
21:30:26 <ttx> jgriffith: so better have a bug to remind everyone we are waiting on that :)
21:30:34 <ttx> jgriffith: Anything else ?
21:30:45 <jgriffith> Yes... nova folks:  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12067/
21:30:56 <jgriffith> There's an equiv nova version of this
21:31:06 <ttx> jgriffith: so looks like your RC1 is more likely to hit Thursday/Friday
21:31:13 <jgriffith> I was inclined to kick it out because it's late in the game for nova
21:31:26 <jgriffith> ttx: yes, Thurs/Fri please, hoping to get something on the LVM issue
21:31:30 <ttx> bug 1042904
21:31:31 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1042904 in nova "can't update volume and snapshot display_name" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1042904
21:31:45 <ttx> vishy: ^
21:32:06 <jgriffith> This isn't a critical bug in my book but I don't mind it going in.  But we have to sync up so I defer to nova
21:32:09 <ttx> jgriffith: nova review @ https://review.openstack.org/12816
21:32:25 <jgriffith> ttx: yep, that's the one
21:32:32 <ttx> jgriffith: let's discuss that under Nova
21:32:44 <ttx> Questions on Cinder ?
21:32:57 <ttx> #info Cinder RC1 probably Thursday/Friday
21:33:27 <ttx> #topic Nova status
21:33:34 <ttx> vishy: around?
21:33:40 <vishy> yes
21:33:41 <vishy> hi
21:33:47 <ttx> vishy: hi!
21:33:50 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-rc1
21:33:51 <markmc> one good thing to note - only 12 untriaged bugs! :)
21:33:56 <ttx> Yeah!
21:33:58 <vishy> markmc: yay!
21:34:22 <ttx> We still have 20 bugs on the folsom-rc1 list though, which is a bit too much...
21:34:39 <ttx> so I think we need to pare down the list to start focusing on the release-critical issues, if we want to reach RC1 anytime soon
21:34:46 * markmc nods
21:34:52 <ttx> Looking at unassigned ones: some of them I think are not release-critical, so should be dropped from list unless someone picks them up now:
21:34:57 <ttx> bug 1048565
21:34:58 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1048565 in nova "Invalid JSON request is returning 500 ERROR instead of Bad Request 400 exception" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1048565
21:35:17 <markmc> also bug 1042215
21:35:17 <ttx> bug 1042215
21:35:17 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1042215 in nova "Add unit testing coverage for nova.volume.cinder.API" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1042215
21:35:22 <markmc> wow
21:35:23 <ttx> bug 1046054
21:35:24 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1046054 in nova "Security groups leak across tenants for admin users" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1046054
21:35:35 <ttx> any takers ?
21:36:02 <ttx> Those three might need more attention and be kept on-list:
21:36:08 <ttx> bug 1001075
21:36:09 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1001075 in nova "nova-network fails to start: missing CIDR (with Quantum/Linux bridge plugin)" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1001075
21:36:20 <ttx> bug 1046236
21:36:21 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1046236 in nova "Folsom - Quota exceeded error messages for instance quota exceeded are not proper" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1046236
21:36:52 <eglynn_> I'll grab 1046236, had my nose in that code fairly recently ...
21:36:55 <ttx> bug 979020 - I guess we should drop it now ?
21:36:56 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 979020 in cinder "Volumes stuck in "error deleted" state when using device mapper" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/979020
21:37:14 <vishy> bug 1048565 -- this one seems like it should be a very simple fix
21:37:14 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1048565 in nova "Invalid JSON request is returning 500 ERROR instead of Bad Request 400 exception" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1048565
21:37:15 <ttx> eglynn_: thanks !
21:37:48 <vishy> bug 1046054 that one seems fairly simple too
21:37:48 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1046054 in nova "Security groups leak across tenants for admin users" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1046054
21:37:59 <vishy> there is no need to show all secgroups to an admin
21:38:20 <ttx> vishy: want to keep all those in ? and review that Thursday ?
21:38:28 <vishy> bug 979020 just needs sync of code from cinder i think
21:38:28 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 979020 in cinder "Volumes stuck in "error deleted" state when using device mapper" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/979020
21:38:57 <ttx> vishy: right, when jgriffith decides on the best course of action there
21:39:10 <vishy> k so lets assign that to him for now
21:39:29 <jgriffith> done
21:39:35 <ttx> vishy: what about 1001075 ?
21:40:30 <vishy> danwent: do you have someone who can look at it? https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1001075
21:40:32 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1001075 in nova "nova-network fails to start: missing CIDR (with Quantum/Linux bridge plugin)" [Medium,Confirmed]
21:40:51 <danwent> vishy: I will look at it.
21:40:54 <vishy> it looks like the network is somehow getting created without a cidr?
21:40:59 <vishy> danwent: cool thanks
21:41:08 <danwent> vishy: not sure its a valid setup, will respond on bug
21:41:10 <ttx> So the only one unassigned is bug 1046054
21:41:11 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1046054 in nova "Security groups leak across tenants for admin users" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1046054
21:41:30 <vishy> danwent: great thanks
21:41:51 <ttx> vishy: you'll look into it and dispatch ?
21:42:01 <vishy> ttx: yes i will take it right now
21:42:15 <ttx> Cool. I wanted to have a closer look into three bugs:
21:42:22 <ttx> bug 1002814 - fix proposed looks risky
21:42:22 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1002814 in nova "Instance stuck in reboot on libvirt failure" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1002814
21:42:58 <ttx> vishy: oh, I see you took it
21:43:09 <ttx> vishy: feeling confident it's not too disruptive ?
21:43:32 <ttx> as in... changes behavior in potentially weird ways ?
21:43:50 <vishy> ttx: I think it is relatively minor
21:43:58 <vishy> ttx: but we will see what happens in review
21:44:05 <ttx> bug 1039665 (https://review.openstack.org/11923)
21:44:05 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1039665 in nova "Creating quantum L2 networks (without subnets) doesn't work as expected" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1039665
21:44:13 <ttx> This one may not be appropriate at this point
21:44:20 <ttx> as noted in review
21:44:52 <ttx> Should we remove the bug from RC1 ?
21:46:32 <vishy> hmm
21:46:50 <vishy> so there is apparently no way to fix the bug without the potentially invasive rewrite: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11923/
21:46:59 <vishy> i think the rewrite is good, but it might be a little risky
21:47:27 <vishy> so i guess our options are: a) mark it as a known issue, put the fix in after folsom and mark it for backport once it has been running for a bit
21:47:38 <vishy> or b) merge it and risk potential breakage
21:47:46 <ttx> I vote a
21:48:00 <vishy> The bug doesn't really seem nasty enough risk b to me
21:48:09 <vishy> ok so lets untarget it and mark it in the release notes
21:48:11 <lifeless> :q
21:48:14 <ttx> ack
21:48:16 <lifeless> Doh!, sorry.
21:48:16 <ttx> Finally bug 1048869 (https://review.openstack.org/12749)
21:48:17 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1048869 in nova "Regular user can't boot with requested ip" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1048869
21:48:38 <ttx> markmc rightly pointed the change in behavior ?
21:48:41 <vishy> what is the issue with that one?
21:49:33 <ttx> Was wondering if there was clear consensus this was a bug
21:49:35 <vishy> so the behavior of locking it down is configurable by a) disabling os-networks extension or b) setting a policy to admin only
21:50:01 <vishy> ttx: it is definitely a bug because even if it is limited to admins by default, it should be using policy not erroring based on a db call
21:50:18 <ttx> I guess that can be solved from within the review. Just wanted to single it out
21:50:30 <vishy> i can put the default policy to restrict it to admins if we are worried about behavior changing, but I would argue that is a bad default
21:51:00 <ttx> vishy: ok, let's work out a solution in the review itself
21:51:05 <ttx> jgriffith mentioned bug 1042904
21:51:05 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1042904 in nova "can't update volume and snapshot display_name" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1042904
21:51:20 * markmc wasn't objecting to fixing bug #1048869 - just a comment on the fix
21:51:20 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1048869 in nova "Regular user can't boot with requested ip" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1048869
21:52:06 <ttx> Nova and Cinder should coordinate whether they want it in RC1 or not
21:52:12 <ttx> (1042904)
21:52:16 <ttx> opinions ?
21:52:30 <vishy> if it is in cinder we should merge it
21:52:50 <ttx> vishy: I think jgriffith point was that he was about to drop it ?
21:52:52 <jgriffith> vishy: I shot it down pending input from you guys on whether you wanted to deal with it at this stage or not
21:53:11 <vishy> jgriffith: it seems like a lot to add this late so if you are ok waiting, we can put it in grizzly
21:53:26 <jgriffith> vishy: I'm fine with waiting.. clay on the other hand :)
21:53:34 <vishy> jgriffith: it is definitely a useful feature
21:53:42 <vishy> but it doesn't really seem like a bug fix :9
21:53:47 <ttx> but a feature.
21:53:50 <jgriffith> vishy: Yes, I was just conerned about the large change at this stage for nova
21:53:57 <ttx> ok, punt it
21:54:00 <jgriffith> No... it's not a bug IMO
21:54:26 <vishy> it is well tested though :)
21:54:32 <vishy> yes grizzly imo
21:54:34 <ttx> vishy/jgriffith: ok for removing folsom-rc1 targeting from it ?
21:54:43 <jgriffith> sounds like it
21:54:45 <ttx> The rest are under review and looking good
21:54:54 <ttx> In the review pipe we also have what looks like a Cinder sync patch:
21:55:00 <ttx> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12575/ (markmc)
21:55:16 <ttx> If we want that in, we migth want to cover it with a targeted bug so that we can track it
21:55:21 <ttx> vishy: Anything else ?
21:55:30 <markmc> didn't we have blanket approval for syncing from cinder?
21:55:42 <jgriffith> ttx: markmc that's what i thought?
21:55:57 <ttx> markmc: not a question of approval, more a question of making sure it's in before we cut RC1
21:56:14 <vishy> i have nothing else
21:56:15 <jgriffith> and we (me) definitely want that one in.. just needs a A
21:56:16 <ttx> to find about it I had to look at open reviews
21:56:34 <ttx> I'd hate if we overlooked it and cut RC1 without it
21:56:41 <jgriffith> ttx: me too :)
21:56:43 <markmc> ttx, so a "sync from cinder to nova" bug ?
21:56:59 <markmc> because there is a bunch of todo items still there AFAIR
21:57:04 <ttx> markmc: yes, so that it appears on the "remaining tasks before RC1" list
21:57:05 <markmc> http://etherpad.openstack.org/cinder-to-nova-sync
21:57:27 <ttx> then we can list all the reviews there
21:57:28 <markmc> jgriffith, wanna file the bug - you know the status better than me
21:57:34 <creiht> jgriffith: I want it too :)
21:57:38 <ttx> Questions on Nova ?
21:57:40 <creiht> re: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12816/
21:57:52 <jgriffith> markmc: sure... but if someobdy wants to just approve it we can skip it for this one
21:58:00 <ttx> vishy: from the looks of it, looks like you may be ready for RC1 Friday/Monday ?
21:58:11 <vishy> yes
21:58:14 <jgriffith> markmc: I'll file a bug and modify the commit message
21:58:16 <markmc> jgriffith, we're talking about filing a single bug to track all cinder->nova syncing tasks
21:58:25 <ttx> #info Nova RC1 maybe Friday/Monday
21:58:26 <jgriffith> markmc: Ahh... k... on it
21:58:31 <markmc> jgriffith, wouldn't bother adding to the commit messages
21:58:41 <ttx> #topic Horizon status
21:58:45 <gabrielhurley> lol... next time nova gets to go last ;-)
21:58:45 <ttx> gabrielhurley: hey
21:58:52 <ttx> haha
21:58:56 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-rc1
21:59:07 <ttx> Looks like you're all set ? Anything we should wait for ?
21:59:08 <gabrielhurley> everything's closed and release notes are up: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/horizon/releases/2012_2.html
21:59:15 <gabrielhurley> nothing to wait for that I'm aware of
21:59:19 <ttx> gabrielhurley: OK, then we can cut the branch together after meeting ?
21:59:24 <ttx> Needs a bit of coordination between us
21:59:24 <gabrielhurley> whenever you like
21:59:33 <ttx> ok, will ping you in a few minutes
21:59:35 <gabrielhurley> k
21:59:38 <ttx> gabrielhurley: anything else you wanted to mention ?
21:59:43 <gabrielhurley> not that I know of
21:59:47 <ttx> Questions for Horizon ?
22:00:10 <ttx> #info Horizon RC1 probably early tomorrow
22:00:22 <bcwaldon> ttx: when do new PTLs take charge?
22:00:22 <ttx> #topic Other Team reports
22:01:13 <ttx> bcwaldon: they are the PTLs for Grizzly, so when Grizzly opens :) Then there is a grey area for current release
22:01:33 <ttx> where both people are PTLs
22:01:36 <markmc> ttx, wondering whether we should do a 2012.1.3 to close out stable/essex
22:01:41 <bcwaldon> ttx: ok, carry on
22:01:50 * markmc isn't fully on top of stable/essex status right now
22:01:56 <ttx> me neither
22:02:01 <markmc> but there's at least 10 fixes queued up in nova
22:02:07 <bcwaldon> markmc: I can find some for glance, too
22:02:09 <ttx> annegentle: wanted to do a doc update ?
22:02:13 <gabrielhurley> there's one or two queued for horizon too
22:02:15 <markmc> wait until after folsom is cut, then do 2012.1.3?
22:02:24 <ttx> markmc: sounds preferable
22:02:25 <bcwaldon> whatever you're comfortable with
22:02:29 <markmc> cool
22:02:39 <ttx> we can do it between release and summit
22:02:49 <ttx> #topic Open discussion
22:03:01 <ttx> #info Quantum PTL election under way, closing EOD Thursday.
22:03:08 <ttx> #info Remember to join the Foundation before the end of day Thursday if you want to be able to vote for the last three members of the Technical Committee
22:03:19 <ttx> Anything else, anyone ?
22:03:45 <ttx> #info summit.openstack.org is open for Design Summit sessions proposal
22:04:22 <ttx> #endmeeting