21:03:08 <ttx> #startmeeting project 21:03:09 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Feb 5 21:03:08 2013 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:03:10 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:03:12 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'project' 21:03:13 <markmc> noooo.... 21:03:14 <markwash> mordred: true. . but I consider that bad for them and us 21:03:15 <ttx> Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting 21:03:19 * ttx takes a few red pills 21:03:20 * jgriffith is napping now 21:03:23 <mordred> markwash: me too! 21:03:36 <ttx> markmc, heckj, notmyname, markwash, jgriffith, vishy, gabrielhurley, danwent: let's do it 21:03:42 <jgriffith> ready! 21:03:44 <danwent> hello 21:03:45 <ttx> #topic General announcements 21:03:46 <gabrielhurley> oh, the rest of us get to talk now? 21:03:49 <markwash> o| 21:03:57 <ttx> I pushed a proposal for a limited StringFreeze for projects following the upcoming Grizzly feature freeze in Feb 19 21:03:59 <jgriffith> gabrielhurley: don't count on it :) 21:04:08 <ttx> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-February/005303.html 21:04:09 <heckj> o/ 21:04:13 <ttx> If nobody complains I'll document it so that it can take effect at FeatureFreeze 21:04:20 <gabrielhurley> +1 21:04:24 <annegentle> sounds good 21:04:24 <jgriffith> works for /me 21:04:29 <vishy> O/ 21:04:29 * heckj nods 21:04:34 <ttx> markmc, mordred, annegentle, davidkranz/jaypipes: Updates from Stable/CI/QA/Docs teams ? 21:04:35 <mordred> o/ 21:04:50 <mordred> uhm, things got shaky yesterday, but clarkb and fungi fixed everything 21:04:52 <markmc> 2012.2.3 released last week, no regressions reported AFAIK 21:04:58 <mordred> and I'm pushing through version updates to people 21:05:00 <davidkranz> Any feedback about turning on the full gate? 21:05:12 <davidkranz> ^^^ tempest 21:05:13 <mordred> markmc: I may need to add more more versoin patch to oslo 21:05:17 * jgriffith is happy about it so far 21:05:24 <ttx> mordred: was wondering how badly the new long tests will fuck the money time for feature reviews 21:05:28 <mordred> markmc: I found yet-another use case when upgrading glanceclient 21:05:28 <markmc> mordred, ok, what for? 21:05:37 <markmc> mordred, ah, I see 21:05:49 <markmc> mordred, thought you meant something for first oslo-config tagging 21:05:49 <mordred> markmc: glanceclient uses oslo-version in glanceclient/__init__.py :) 21:05:57 <ttx> mordred: do we have any idea of the impact on the number of commits per day, for example ? 21:06:11 <mordred> ttx: we don't - it shouldn't matter, we have zuul 21:06:26 <mordred> ttx: yesterday's problem was log files blowing out disks 21:06:30 <ttx> mordred: it shouldn't matter if we had no false negatives 21:06:33 <jgriffith> ttx: mordred It is going to be interesting when we hit the last week of the milestone 21:06:43 <mordred> ++ 21:06:51 <mordred> to both jgriffith and ttx 21:06:54 <ttx> unfortunately we don't live in that ideal world yet 21:07:00 <mordred> we never will 21:07:06 <ttx> so it does matter 21:07:11 <annegentle> I have a brief set of reminders. 21:07:31 <ttx> annegentle: shoot 21:07:34 <annegentle> Wiki migration going to 2/16, monthly doc team meeting 2/12, about to send a copyright guidance note to the -dev ML, operator's book sprint 2/24. 21:07:42 <annegentle> whew 21:07:44 <ttx> cool 21:08:13 <ttx> ok, anything else before we move to project-specific stuff ? 21:08:42 <ttx> #topic Oslo status 21:08:46 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:08:52 <markmc> oslo-config is ready to tag 21:09:04 <markmc> hope to move some/most projects to it next week 21:09:15 <ttx> markmc: oh, thought that was done already (tag) 21:09:16 <markmc> common-db is pretty close now, I think - did a bunch of work on it 21:09:25 <markmc> cfg-filter-view is new and I've a patch up 21:09:30 <ttx> that answers my two questions, thanks 21:09:45 <ttx> markmc: ETA to tag ? 21:09:46 <markmc> keyring might not make it 21:09:54 <markmc> I don't know what's stopping me, tbh :) 21:10:07 <ttx> markmc: do it in meeting. That's how I roll 21:10:12 <markmc> I haven't actually got a patch through gerrit for oslo-config yet 21:10:12 <ttx> Anything else on the oslo topic ? 21:10:18 <markmc> would seem odd to tag before that 21:10:25 <markmc> no, nothing else 21:10:32 <ttx> thx! 21:10:35 <ttx> #topic Keystone status 21:10:41 <ttx> heckj: o/ 21:10:45 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:11:20 <heckj> ola 21:11:23 <ttx> heckj/dolphm: Should 'default-domain' be considered completed now ? 21:11:51 <dolphm> ttx: the last piece is in review 21:12:05 <ttx> dolphm: for some reason it's not linked. Ok 21:12:06 <heckj> ttx: will change to pending review 21:12:19 <ttx> heckj/ayoung: How are 'replace-tenant-user-membership' and 'trusts' going on ? 21:12:52 <heckj> ayoung was still asserting we'd get them in 21:13:08 <ttx> time is running low and tests running longer 21:13:21 <ayoung> 'replace-tenant-user-membership' is close 21:13:25 <ttx> heckj: could you elaborate on why pluggable-identity-authentication-handlers is blocked ? Is it technical or resource block ? 21:13:32 <ayoung> I'm down to about 6 unit test failuers 21:13:36 <ayoung> failures 21:13:43 <ttx> ayoung: good news 21:14:01 <ayoung> trying to get that closed out today...tomorrowish 21:14:10 <ttx> ayoung: would be great 21:15:04 <ttx> heckj: ? 21:15:35 <ttx> Didn't see a lot of help coming on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20524/ -- does that jeopardize stop-ids-in-uris ? 21:15:46 <heckj> we unblocked the authn/authz pieces for gyee, and he has implementation in progress (pending final agreement on the spec) - expecting that to move forward fairly agressively now 21:16:17 <heckj> ttx: if you'll look now, it's been approved - sorted through that with this morning's keystone meeting 21:16:28 <ttx> heckj: which one of those blueprints (if any) would you require a feature freeze exception for, if they don't make it in time ? 21:17:20 <heckj> most critical would be "Implement auth on Identity API v3" and "Token trusts", but I expect both to wing in under the deadline 21:17:40 <ttx> ok, good! 21:17:44 <ttx> Anything more about Keystone ? 21:17:56 <heckj> not from me 21:17:59 <ttx> #topic Swift status 21:18:04 <ttx> notmyname: o/ 21:18:15 <notmyname> here (as long as IRC connections are cooperating) 21:18:18 <ttx> Still can't find python-swiftclient 1.3.0 on PyPI 21:18:34 <notmyname> I poked mordred with a sharp stick last week about it 21:18:35 <ttx> Been complaining about that to mordred, maybe you can take the other 12-h nagging shift :) 21:18:49 <mordred> clarkb is aware of it now 21:18:49 <notmyname> :-) 21:18:58 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.8.0 21:18:58 <mordred> which means something might actually happen :) 21:19:06 <ttx> Do you expect that one to be the Grizzly one, or do you rather imagine two releases until common release, or no idea yet ? 21:19:53 <notmyname> that will probably be grizzly, based on when the cutoff will be 21:20:16 <ttx> ok 21:20:20 <ttx> Anything more on Swift ? 21:20:46 <notmyname> that will probably be grizzly, based on when the cutoff will be 21:21:17 <ttx> looks like the Network is not with you today, let's move on 21:21:22 <ttx> #topic Glance status 21:21:26 <markwash> hi hi 21:21:29 <notmyname> not from me. swift meeting tomorrow 21:21:30 <ttx> markwash: o/ 21:21:37 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:22:02 <ttx> Saw code being proposed for glance-api-v2-image-sharing, which is good 21:22:06 <ttx> Is the review progressing well ? 21:22:13 <markwash> it is, I have been in talks with iccha 21:22:16 <markwash> very good progress 21:22:28 <markwash> I expect it (and everything labeled Good Progress) to land in time 21:22:43 <ttx> I see api-v2-property-protection is not started yet -- do you still think it can make it in master in less than two weeks ? 21:22:54 <markwash> as an absurd optimist, yes 21:23:00 <markwash> but I've been in talks with bcwaldon about retargeting 21:23:12 <ttx> I'd rather get one in rather than target 2 and get none 21:23:23 <ttx> markwash: do you know if Brian got the answers he was looking for from other assignees ? 21:23:56 <markwash> I know that he got some, but we are still looking for info on common image properties 21:24:11 <ttx> ok... The last thing I wanted to mention are the late blueprints: iscsi-backend-store and its dependency, importing-rootwarp 21:24:11 <markwash> probably mostly proposals, rather than info :-) 21:24:22 <rainya> markwash, if you have specifics, let me know and i'll bug folks on this end :) 21:24:24 <ttx> I think jgriffith makes a really nice point in the first review: more generally piggybacking on cinder sounds like a hell of a better solution than reimplementing block storage drivers in Glance 21:24:39 <ttx> And that would benefit from some design discussion, like say at the Design Summit 21:24:44 <markwash> I agree with jgriffith, however. . 21:24:57 <markwash> I think I need to feel like its doing some harm before I could argue that it shouldn't be included 21:25:22 <jgriffith> markwash: ttx I'll yield but I think it would have made more sense to use cinder 21:25:25 <markwash> the way it looks to me, (apart from rootwrap which is fine) it is well contained 21:25:31 <ttx> markwash: you could argue that adding rootwrap for Glance is a bit of a large hammer for a weird nail 21:25:40 <jgriffith> markwash: ttx I also understand something is better than nothing, but I would definitely want to see it changed in H 21:26:01 <markwash> ttx: that may be 21:26:17 <ttx> jgriffith: I feel like accepting that is liekly to make the right solution[tm] harder to implement 21:26:26 <jgriffith> ttx: sadly, yes 21:26:32 <ttx> since we'll have to support upgarde scenarios etc 21:26:33 <markwash> hmm, you guys are speaking my language 21:26:58 <jgriffith> I can shift my priorities to try and have an alternative if folks agree with me on it 21:27:03 <ttx> sounds like something that could live in a branch rather than in a release 21:27:14 <jgriffith> ttx: +1 21:27:19 <jgriffith> I hadn't thought of that 21:27:20 <ttx> anyway, bcwaldon decides 21:27:26 <markwash> well, good feedback. I'll take it to bcwaldon and discuss 21:27:44 <ttx> Anything more on Glance ? 21:27:49 <markwash> not from me 21:27:56 <ttx> #topic Quantum status 21:28:04 <ttx> danwent: hi! 21:28:06 <danwent> hi 21:28:10 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:28:20 <danwent> yeah.... 21:28:31 <ttx> Not so much progress in stuff under review, afaict 21:28:33 <danwent> well, the good news is that all of our 'high' items have code posted. 21:28:47 <danwent> but for the overall bulk, very little progres over the week. 21:28:51 <ttx> Could you give us an update on how close we are to merging those ? 21:28:55 <danwent> yes 21:28:58 <ttx> (the high stuff) 21:29:07 <ttx> danwent: it's my understanding that you would require Feature freeze exceptions only for the 'High' priority stuff here, if it doesn't make it in time. Correct ? 21:29:13 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-v2-api-xml: very close. just minor design discussions. 21:29:46 <danwent> yes, that is correct. anything that is not high will be booted next week if not in code review, and booted completely the next week if it does not merge. no exceptions. 21:29:59 <danwent> i fully expect the majority of medium items not to merge. 21:30:23 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-security-groups-iptables-ovs . quantum code review is basically done. waiting on two nova issues. 21:30:41 <danwent> one is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1050433 21:30:44 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1050433 in nova "LibvirtBridgeDriver crashes when spawning an instance with NoopFirewallDriver" [High,In progress] 21:30:48 <danwent> the other is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/quantum/+bug/1112912 21:30:49 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1112912 in nova "get_firewall_required should use VIF parameter from quantum" [Undecided,Confirmed] 21:31:14 <ttx> vishy: ^ 21:31:53 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-scheduler . A lot of review progress on this. I am confident about this, though the dev will be out for a chinese holiday next week, which puts some pressure on us (though he said he will continue to work on this through the holiday) 21:32:13 <danwent> the last two blueprints are the LBaaS stuff, the second of which was just posted for review yesterday 21:32:18 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/lbaas-agent-and-rpc 21:32:20 <ttx> ok 21:32:24 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/lbaas-haproxy-driver 21:32:31 <ttx> Should https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/nvp-port-security-extension be considered 'Implemented' ? 21:33:17 <danwent> i'm starting to get a bit nervous about the lbaas stuff, as the original code was a fair bit different than what the cores where expecting. But we talked through it on IRC yesterday, so I think we're heading in the right direction. Definitely the one i'm most worried about though in terms of possibly needing a FFE. 21:33:45 <ttx> danwent: it's relatively self-contained I suspect ? 21:33:56 <danwent> ttx: looks like that BP should be implemented. i'll confirm with the dev and change it. 21:34:02 <ttx> Should I confirm the series goal for routed-service-insertion to "grizzly" ? 21:34:17 <ttx> (it's 'proposed' right now) 21:34:20 <danwent> ttx: yes, lbass is essentially entirely self-contained, which is nice from an FFE perspective, if needed. 21:34:27 <danwent> yes please 21:34:34 <ttx> willdo 21:34:41 <danwent> that one a new one (hopefully the last) 21:34:46 <ttx> Anything else on Quantum ? 21:34:55 <danwent> one question for the community 21:35:06 <danwent> we are looking at how to version our python-quantumclient stuff. 21:35:19 <danwent> i'd like it to be as inline with the rest of the community as possible. 21:35:29 <danwent> was wondering if there was a "standard" mechanism used by other projects. 21:35:38 <ttx> danwent: bcwaldon had a pretty strong feeling about that 21:35:57 <danwent> ok, i will loop him into the discussion with our sub-team lead for clientlib + CLI 21:36:28 <ttx> ok, moving on, answer on #openstack-dev to Dan's question on versioning 21:36:33 <ttx> #topic Cinder status 21:36:37 <ttx> jgriffith: hi! 21:36:40 <jgriffith> hey there 21:36:40 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:36:48 <ttx> Every week I discover more blueprints in here :) 21:36:55 <ttx> How is volume-backups going ? 21:36:56 <jgriffith> :) 21:36:59 <jgriffith> Good 21:37:06 <jgriffith> A few minor nits to fix up 21:37:08 <ttx> How about api-v1-v2-docs ? 21:37:21 <jgriffith> That's going well too... 21:37:27 <ttx> Do you think you need to drop anything early to focus review efforts on the priority stuff... or you can trust cinder-core to prioritize properly ? 21:37:42 <jgriffith> I'm fairly comfortable with what's left 21:37:53 <jgriffith> But I am worried about what the NFS folks are cookin up 21:38:07 <jgriffith> I fear a 10K line patch dropping next wed from them 21:38:22 <ttx> FYI you have 4 drivers + one other bp targeted to g3 which are not in the series goal: huawei-volume-driver, scality-volume-driver, coraid-volume-driver, glusterfs-support, volume-usage-metering 21:38:35 <ttx> this morning when I looked up there were only 3 :) 21:38:47 <jgriffith> Yeah, I'm not seeing good progress on those guys so I'm giving them til tomorrow then dumping 21:38:56 <ttx> it's high season for surprising code drops 21:39:07 <jgriffith> I need to catch up with eharney on the gluster patch 21:39:07 <ttx> Do you see anything in there you'd request feature freeze exceptions for, if they would not make it by grizzly-3 ? 21:39:23 <jgriffith> The only one is my AZ/Aggregates BP 21:39:31 <jgriffith> the rest I personally think I can live without 21:39:49 <ttx> jgriffith: which one is that ? 21:40:00 <ttx> jgriffith: could you prioritize it at least to 'high' ? 21:40:10 <jgriffith> will do 21:40:19 <jgriffith> TBH, I can call that a bug anyway if need be 21:40:24 <ttx> Anything more in Cinder ? 21:40:33 <jgriffith> Nope looking ok 21:40:36 <ttx> #topic Nova status 21:40:40 <ttx> vishy: o/ 21:41:06 <ttx> russellb is down, Flusdem got him 21:41:15 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:41:38 <ttx> do we have vishy ? 21:41:39 <rainya> get down get funky 21:41:59 <ttx> gabrielhurley: around ? 21:42:03 <gabrielhurley> hi 21:42:08 <ttx> #topic Horizon status 21:42:12 <ttx> let's do horizon first 21:42:17 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:42:18 <gabrielhurley> on the blueprints: 21:42:20 <gabrielhurley> The 7 in code review will likely all merge this week. The 3 in "good progress" I've got updates from the assignees and they should be up for review soon. The 2 that are "started" are both in good shape and I know where the authors are at but they're optional for the release; if they don't make it no harm is done. Lastly, I am worried about the two related to file/image uploads. Saw early code and progress, but haven't g 21:42:30 <gabrielhurley> Overall, anything I don't see code for by next week I'm going to untarget. 21:43:04 <ttx> gabrielhurley: Do you see anything in there you'd request feature freeze exceptions for, if they would not make it by grizzly-3 ? 21:43:14 <gabrielhurley> the image uplaod stuff would be the only one 21:43:18 <gabrielhurley> I'd really like to see that happen 21:43:24 <gabrielhurley> but I need more info 21:43:40 <ttx> hmm ok, would be really good to see progress on that then 21:43:47 <gabrielhurley> agreed 21:43:47 <ttx> Anything more on Horizon ? 21:43:50 <gabrielhurley> I'm trying to follow up 21:44:03 <gabrielhurley> nope, that's it for this week. thakns to everyone who got code up since last week! 21:44:23 <ttx> (the file upload stuff is a bit disruptive to land after g3, so it better be very close) 21:44:32 <vishy> sorry back 21:44:37 <ttx> #topic Nova status 21:44:39 <gabrielhurley> duly noted 21:44:41 <ttx> just in time 21:44:45 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:45:11 <ttx> vishy: Should instance-actions be considered Implemented ? 21:45:21 <alaski> not yet 21:45:30 <alaski> needs an API extension which I'm finishing up now 21:45:41 <ttx> Looking into the High-prio stuff now... 21:45:48 <ttx> vishy: Are the db-* blueprints making good progress ? 21:46:10 <vishy> no 21:46:17 <vishy> well i don't think they will be "complete" 21:46:30 <ttx> ah. I see what you mean 21:46:52 <ttx> Guess we'll just split them 21:47:08 <ttx> though db-archiving would be nice 21:47:16 <vishy> yeah 21:47:24 <ttx> that's "completeable" I guess 21:47:28 <vishy> we'll just have to see how it goes 21:47:35 <ttx> Is no-db-compute still on track ? 21:47:52 <ttx> i.e. all code proposed, just churning through reviews now ? 21:48:22 <vishy> yes i think it is really close 21:48:27 <vishy> like one review away 21:48:27 <ttx> vishy: which one of those blueprints (if any) would you require a feature freeze exception for, if they don't make it in time ? 21:48:41 <ttx> no-db-compute, db-archiving ? 21:49:18 <vishy> no none of the db ones 21:49:21 <vishy> i would consider https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-quantum-security-group-proxy 21:49:28 <vishy> no-db-compute isn't at risk imo 21:49:33 <ttx> ok 21:49:44 <vishy> i would also consider https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/improve-block-device-handling if it gets really close 21:49:54 <ttx> multi-boot-instance-naming still needs some assignee and love 21:50:08 <ttx> or should we abadon it altogether at this point ? 21:51:16 <vishy> i think it is going to get abandoned for grizzly at this point 21:51:20 <vishy> since no one wants to take it 21:51:34 <ttx> ok, will move it off if nobody takes it this week 21:51:38 <ttx> or yo can beat me to it 21:51:43 <ttx> You also have your share of last-minute grizzly-3 suggestions: migrate-volume-block-migration, user-locale-api, encrypt-cinder-volumes, libvirt-aoe, pass-rxtx-factor-to-quantum 21:51:52 <ttx> Some of those sound quite complex to me to be introduced from scratch at this point in the cycle 21:52:16 * ttx would like an ideal world where all blueprints are submitted before the design summit 21:52:33 <vishy> i'm going through those 21:52:43 <ttx> and flying cars, too 21:52:50 <rustlebee> i tried to start commenting on some of those, saying code better show up asap to have the slightest chance 21:53:01 <ttx> rustlebee: you're alive ? 21:53:12 <rustlebee> just a little 21:53:22 <rainya> i totes want flying cars 21:53:24 <ttx> Any question on Nova ? 21:54:20 <ttx> #topic Incubated projects 21:54:37 <ttx> Any Heat/Ceilometer folk around ? 21:54:39 <sdake_z> hi 21:54:45 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/heat/+milestone/grizzly-3 21:54:58 <ttx> sdake: Do you plan to have a strict feature freeze at grizzly-3 ? 21:55:08 <sdake_z> not much progress last week, 80% of the devs were at conferences 21:55:11 <sdake_z> yes strict feature freeze 21:55:13 <ttx> You'll have to enforce it without my help, can't spread too much 21:55:16 <sdake_z> we may bounce blueprints if they dont make 21:55:26 <sdake_z> if they dont make it 21:55:37 <ttx> it's just a question of teaching core reviewers what's acceptable or not :) 21:55:39 <sdake_z> heat is usable as is 21:55:45 <ttx> How are those resource-type-* blueprints progressing ? 21:55:51 <sdake_z> yup i'll speak about it this week 21:56:00 <sdake_z> well we are blocked because we are having trouble with quantum 21:56:13 <ttx> glad to see I'm not the only one 21:56:13 <sdake_z> but again devs out of town so only 1 day spent on unblocking so far 21:56:27 <ttx> ok 21:56:36 <sdake_z> main focus really for g3 is fixing bugs ;) 21:56:40 <ttx> that's all I had :) 21:56:46 <sdake_z> want heat to work well for features we have 21:56:47 <ttx> nijaba: around ? 21:58:26 <ttx> I guess not 21:59:06 <ttx> nijaba: my only question was about feature freeze, if you planned to align it with the common one 21:59:16 <ttx> that will be for next week. 21:59:18 <ttx> #endmeeting